Rachel Canning, the 18-year-old who is suing her parents for financial support, may have lost a court hearing this week, but she isn't backing down from her belief that her parents should be providing for her. On the Facebook page Education For Rachel, which Rachel told the Post she set up and maintains, there's a new post which puts the blame squarely on her parent's generation for being selfish: "Suburban baby boomer types are the spoiled lot, they make massive amount of money a year, they are used to flying to luxury destinations when they want, and buy things that they don't need, people should be inclined to see things Rachel's way."

Here's the rest of that Facebook post:

We have been stunned by the financial greed of modern parents who are more concerned with retiring into some fantasy world rather than provide for their children's college and young adult years.

In today's economy there are no more meaningful jobs and without family help it's usually military or bust. We see parents like this every day, children were always an accessory to them and nothing more, once that accessory grew up and went out of fashion, much like a marriage that people allegedly commit to, the child becomes a throwaway, that's just how it is.

While it's possible that someone other than Rachel wrote the above screed, every other post on the Facebook page was written in the first person, and the 'about' section reads: "This page is dedicated to support my cause for legally requesting my education tuition to be fully paid by my parents." In addition, the NY Post has slightly different quotes from the screed: they imply that Rachel re-edited the page and took out all the first person pronouns, making it third person to distance herself from it.

One hour before that post, Rachel also wrote:

In New Jersey (as in most states) parents are required to support their kids through high school unless legally emancipated, which I'm not. This means that they can NOT put conditions on me being at home, which they did. They can't get out of this. The fact that they cut my tuition was also clear bad faith, and a breach of contract with the school. What did they expect me to do, drop out? I am absolutely amazed at some of the cruel (and legally ignorant) comments I'm reading here.

To recap: Rachel contends that her parents kicked her out and now refuse to pay for her high school and college tuition. She also alleges they are controlling and abusive (she had an eating disorder) and wants them to pay for all medical and legal expenses as well. Her parents, Sean and Elizabeth Canning, counter that Rachel refuses to abide by their rules—citing her alleged drunkenness and partying, bullying of siblings—and ran away to a friend's house, thereby emancipating herself from their guardianship. [Legal experts suggest that by running away, Rachel may have essentially declared herself emancipated.]

The friend's house she ran away to belongs to attorney John Inglesino, who is paying for Rachel's legal fees. The Cannings blame Inglesino for getting Rachel drunk for the first time, and generally encouraging her worst instincts: "Rachel came home bragging saying that during the limo ride to N.Y., Mrs. Inglesino gave all the girls wine coolers to drink. This type of behavior we did not condone," Sean Canning said, referring to his daughter’s first experience with alcohol was at the Inglesino house.

He added that had the Inglesino family not "enabled this situation to an absurd level, Rachel may have actually learned a life lesson and returned home and kept our family whole. Instead, the Inglesino family has made a difficult situation horrible and broken apart a family. Under the guise of good intentions, they have arrogantly placed themselves in our stead an operated under the belief that their parenting style is somehow superior to our own."

According to other court documents, when Rachel was a 15-year-old freshman, she got so drunk on vodka at Inglesino's house, she vomited all over the sidewalk and into a garbage can after her father picked her up for a basketball game.

The Inglesinos say they decided to help Rachel "because she is a terrific, extremely bright young lady who is committed to her future. Rachel will be a contributing member to our society and I believe she deserves an opportunity to realize her goals and her potential."

A judge ruled against the emergency order that would have forced the Cannings to give Rachel $654/week, but another hearing is scheduled for April 22. However, that judge previously said, "The child thumbs her nose at her parents, leaves the house and turns around asking, 'Now you have to pay me money every week.'… A kid could move out and then sue for an XBox, an iPhone or a 60-inch television."