[nmh]

What a load of crap!

"His mother Leila Levi, a single parent, says she cannot afford the more than $9,000 it costs to attend UCLA each year and filed a lawsuit in February of 2004 in Sacramento Superior Court. She argues her son is of mandatory attendance age, and the California constitution requires he be provided a free education."

If your son is so brilliant how did he manage to have YOU as his mother?

It's not MY fault you don't have 9K to send your precious son to a university. We spend as much on private school for a VERY bright child. We don't present lawsuits to have OTHERS pay OUR tab. Get real! Pay your own bills.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Do you know the circumstances surrounding the mother?

Maybe she was in a long-term relationship and the guy up and left her.

This isn't about the mother, it's about the kid. If L.A. can give each kid $12,000 a year to basically sit around and do nothing or skip school and hang out with gangbangers, then surely they can give the kid the money to attend UCLA.

[Squawk 8888]

Actually nine grand is not unreasonable- I'm betting the school board spends at least that much per high school student.

[dogbyte12]

How did he not get a scholarship? Wouldn't a kid who started college at 9 be a poster child? There has to be some scholarship money around if he is so exceptional.

An alternative could be that he is brilliant and lazy. If he is 14 now, it was five years from the time he started junior college until he went to UCLA. What was he doing for 5 years? Taking 2 classes per semester?

[FauxBlonde]

Oh, come on, that's a lot of money! Just because you have an extra $9000 a year, doesn't mean everyone does. Who ever DREAMS their children would need money for college at that age?

[mike70]

If, indeed, this kid is as bright as the article indicates, he at least has the potential to contribute significantly to society. And public high schools just won't cut it.

My nephew, a very bright young man, got so fed up and frustrated with public high school, he dropped out at sixteen. After getting a GED he bummed around for a while, until he decided to go to college (at around 20). Now he's a mechanical engineer (and a good one). His mother, a single parent) could not afford college.

[bordergal]

She apparently has enough money to pay a lawyer.....and I can't imagine that he couldn't find some kind of grant or scholarship assitance.

[MEGoody]

We don't present lawsuits to have OTHERS pay OUR tab.

So you aren't in favor of an educational voucher program of any sort? I'm just trying to make sure I understand your position.

[pierrem15]

From the article, unless the kid is in a state program of some sort, he will be considered truant and his parents criminals since he is under 16.

If the state makes these rules and also stipulates that the state must accomodate the special needs (however that's defined) of students in its programs, then the state should pay.

[Mrs. Don-o]

You make a good point. However, the compulsory attendance law in California requires this child to go to school to receive an appropraite education. It's a true dilemma. A kid with University abilities can't be compelled to go back and sit with the Happy Bluebirds Phonics Reader circle.

[Liberty Tree Surgeon]

Right, you spend a lot on private school because the public schools don't meet your child's needs. The question is: shouldn't the public schools meet those needs, rather than focus large amounts of money on "special" education or ESL? By paying for private school, don't you, in effect, give the public schools a complete pass on providing the education they're mandated to provide? It works great for them - they get your taxes and never have to see you at a PTA or school board meeting complaining.

[jocon307]

You have the 9 grand, maybe she doesn't. Your child could presumably get an education at a public school at no cost to you, this child cannot. It's the same as if he were disabled, he's just over-abled (to coin a phrase). I think she's got a good case.