As the battle of an 18 year-old's battle against her parent over a contested emancipation unfolds in the media, one could not help thinking about how authorities have thread carefully into a teenager's claims of emotional abuse from her legal and biological guardians. When laws and systems are set up in place to protect children from getting abused from oppressive, authoritarian figures, the Canning case provides insight on how the laws and the current justice system in American protects parents when tables are turned.

A blog entry on Death and taxes challenges Canning's attitude towards upholding her rights to basic needs from her parents as every child in the world. Her lawsuit against her parents Sean and Elizabeth revealed that Rachel allegedly received emotional abuse while at home, and especially the time leading to her 18th birthday, which was on November 1 last year. Canning said that her mom called her fat and that she received threats from her dad about getting beaten up. However, the Death and Taxes blog said that the Division of Child Protection and Permanency in New Jersey concluded that upon their visit at the Cannings' home and Rachel's siblings that there was no emotional abuse that had happened other than her parents' insistence that their daughter should come home at a reasonable time.

On the other hand, the blog said that Canning's decision to file a case against her parents might have been a result of her being spoiled since childhood, of which Sean and Elizabeth had said in their countersuit. Moreover, the demand to pay for college education is not required in the US, although Rachel could have gotten her parents to pay it off if she were a little bit more accommodating to their requests.

The presiding judge also explained that despite the fact that he could have force Canning's parents to comply with her demands, it would set a precedent to future cases wherein children would sue their parents for wants like iPhones and Nintendos.