R
rich
Guest
Please give me your take on this. I
went to court because my son's (my son
has a behavioral disorder called autism)
former foster parent refused to return
over $1000 worth of our property, after
the foster placement ended. The problem
was that instead of sticking to the
issue (which is, why aren't you
returning the property?), she kept
talking about my son's behavioral
outbursts, aggression, etc. The judge
didn't stop her from doing this. I
didn't respond to all her comments
because they seemed so irrelevant and I
didn't want to stoop to her level.
Should I have done otherwise?
Also, in her counterclaim--which claimed
that because of my verbal harassment,
she had to quit her job--she again
talked mainly about my son's behavioral
outbursts. Due to her own slip of the
tongue, she eventually admitted that she
hadn't even quit. Nevertheless, at the
end of the hearing for the counterclaim,
when I pointed outto the judge that all
the descriptions about the outbursts was
irrelevant, he said, "It's all
irrelevant, except or that one attack."
First, I don't understand how the
outburst of a boy with a behavior
disorder can ever be considered as
"harassment," especially since this
so-called attack occurred on the
premises of a school for the
handicapped. Second, how could any sort
of "harassment" any longer be an issue,
as the former foster mom admitted that
she hadn't quit? please advise.
went to court because my son's (my son
has a behavioral disorder called autism)
former foster parent refused to return
over $1000 worth of our property, after
the foster placement ended. The problem
was that instead of sticking to the
issue (which is, why aren't you
returning the property?), she kept
talking about my son's behavioral
outbursts, aggression, etc. The judge
didn't stop her from doing this. I
didn't respond to all her comments
because they seemed so irrelevant and I
didn't want to stoop to her level.
Should I have done otherwise?
Also, in her counterclaim--which claimed
that because of my verbal harassment,
she had to quit her job--she again
talked mainly about my son's behavioral
outbursts. Due to her own slip of the
tongue, she eventually admitted that she
hadn't even quit. Nevertheless, at the
end of the hearing for the counterclaim,
when I pointed outto the judge that all
the descriptions about the outbursts was
irrelevant, he said, "It's all
irrelevant, except or that one attack."
First, I don't understand how the
outburst of a boy with a behavior
disorder can ever be considered as
"harassment," especially since this
so-called attack occurred on the
premises of a school for the
handicapped. Second, how could any sort
of "harassment" any longer be an issue,
as the former foster mom admitted that
she hadn't quit? please advise.