Category: News

Alisha Horton said her best work gets done at 5:30 each morning, while her baby and toddler are still sleeping. 

When 11-month-old Octavia and 3-year-old Matthew wake up between 7 a.m. and 8 a.m., Horton feeds them breakfast and prepares for her morning meeting. Hopefully Octavia is back to sleep by then, Horton said, and Matthew is occupied with a quiet activity like Play-Doh or coloring. 

But “toddlers are toddlers,” she said, and it doesn’t always go the way she plans. As a work-from-home parent of two, Horton said, virtual meetings are her biggest challenge. 

“I’m trying to have a conversation with an adult about something at work, and he’s kind of tugging on my arm. ‘Mommy, can I do this? Mommy, can I do that?’” Horton, a consultant for an insurance company, said. “He’s used to having me available to him at all times.” 

Horton, who lives near Nashville, Tennessee, is one of thousands of parents who work from home without traditional child care. With child care costs skyrocketing at nearly twice the pace of inflation – and child care for two kids outpricing rent in all 50 states, according to a 2023 report by the nonprofit Child Care Aware of America – many families are staying afloat financially by keeping their kids at home during remote work.

In a series of surveys by the U.S. Census Bureau in 2024, about 1 in 10 adults with kids said their household did not have child care because options were “closed, unavailable, unaffordable” or unsafe. Of those parents, nearly one-third said they supervised their kids while working. This includes people who work at home and those who take their kids to work with them. On any given day, that’s true for an estimated 2.3 million American workers.

More: Raising children is expensive. Some parents want it on the ballot

Some parents say juggling work and kids have made them master multitaskers and even believe their commitment to their jobs makes them better parents in the end. But what’s best for kids?  

“Young children aren’t really designed to sit aside you while you do an hour Zoom call with other adults,” said Chad Dunkley, CEO of New Horizon Academy. New Horizon has child care facilities in Minnesota, Idaho, Iowa, Colorado and Kansas. Dunkley is particularly worried about parents who distract their little ones at home with electronic devices. 

Even so, Dunkley said, he understands that many families can’t afford child care and that some parents who can afford it simply prefer to have their kids at home.

Susan Wood, a mortgage loan officer in York, Pennsylvania, said she was making just $18 an hour when she gave birth to her daughter in 2023. A single mother at the time, she debated taking an office job with slightly higher pay. But no amount of money, Wood said, would have been worth the time she got to spend at home with her newborn. 

“I wanted her here with me,” Wood said.

Working while parenting: A juggle and a luxury

Horton always saw herself being a stay-at-home mom. But that’s “just not doable” in today’s economy, she said, especially with the student loans she and her husband are still paying off. She likes her work and keeps her job to help support her family. But even with a child care discount through her employer, she and her husband found it would cost about half her salary to send their son to day care. 

And anyway, Horton would rather be near her kids. She’s there when Matthew completes a new puzzle for the first time and when he learns how to write a new letter. These days, she’s watching Octavia learn to walk. 

“I get to watch them grow and learn in real time,” Horton said. “And I think a lot of moms miss out on that when they’re working.”

This juggle, while exhausting, is a luxury. Remote work “isn’t really a possibility” for a lot of low-wage workers, said Katherine Gallagher Robbins, senior research fellow for the National Partnership for Women & Families.

People in the food and service industry, for instance, can’t work from home. And on top of earning low wages, these parents have the burden of finding and often paying for child care. These jobs typically don’t come with paid leave, either.

In the Census Bureau surveys, most of the parents who supervised kids while working because they found child care unattainable were white, and the majority had a household income of $75,000 or more.

Remote work led more women to enter the workforce, Robbins said. But women in the U.S. still trail peer countries like Canada and Germany in terms of workforce participation.

“The research shows that people would like to work at home more than they are able to do,” Robbins said.

‘I feel like my son is missing out’ by staying at home

Not all parents who work remotely want their kids to stay home with them.

Rebecca Hernandez is a single mother who works remotely from her South Florida home while caring for her 2-year-old son, Anthony.

There are “a lot of distractions throughout the day,” she said. She’s often coordinating changing Anthony’s diaper and signing in a meeting on time. Her family lives out of state, and she doesn’t have a strong support system nearby. If she could, Hernandez said, she would send her son to a child care facility at least a few days a week. But child care is expensive, and her salary is just over the threshold to qualify for Florida’s child care assistance program.

“I don’t make enough, and I make too much,” Hernandez said.

She feeds Anthony on her breaks and tries to get him out to the park when she can. She finds moments throughout her work day to teach him about colors, shapes, numbers and letters.

But she worries her son isn’t getting what he needs, educationally or socially. She wishes the government would look at individual families’ situations to determine who gets child care assistance.

“I feel like my son is missing out on so much,” she said.

Child care costs are only going up, Dunkley said.

“We kind of have a ‘Your kids are your problem’ approach,” Dunkley said. “But in reality, society is better off when children are thriving.”

‘Why are we asking parents to deprioritize their children?’

Many parents who were able to work from home during the COVID-19 pandemic are being asked to return to the office, even though nearly half of remote workers say they’d leave their job if they had to go back to fully in-person work, according to a recent Pew Research Center survey. Some employers worry that too much flexibility could reduce productivity, and others believe employees should be able to rearrange their schedule to fit their way of living.

“The pandemic taught us that we trust our people,” said Amy Bouque, chief people officer for Kelly, a human resources consulting company. Kelly offered remote-work options for low-wage employees long before the pandemic through its call center, which employs about 3,000 fully remote workers. The company prides itself on creating workplace options for women. 

When expectations are clear and employees hit their goals, they don’t need to be “bound to a clock,” Bouque said. Flexible work hours aren’t just helpful for parents working remotely – they’re a necessity.

Michael Perry, who lives in Santa Barbara, California, was an executive at Shopify when his first son was born. Of the first four months of his son’s life, Perry said, he was gone for two of them.

Perry realized that working parents don’t have close to enough support culturally, in the private sector or through government policies. He left his job and developed an app, Maple, that he hopes can alleviate at least some of the stresses working parents face each day. Maple is an organization tool that helps parents manage schedules and household chores. 

It’s about much more than a business venture for Perry, though. Through Maple, he is on a mission to change the way society talks about working and parenting. He doesn’t want to just normalize the integration of work and family life – he’s advocating for government and industry leaders to help make life easier for working parents.

“Why are we asking parents to deprioritize their children?” Perry said. He suggests managers use the money set aside for company happy hours and coffee runs to send their workers lunch at home. Workers shouldn’t feel awkward sitting with their child on their lap during a work meeting, he said. And people should be able to step away from a work call to care for their kids without feeling guilty.

Parents who work remotely don’t end up working less, Perry stressed. Instead, they spread their work hours outside the traditional 9 to 5.

“The work will always be there,” Perry said.

Lauren Ezzell, head of family experience for Maple, said working from home has made her a better parent: She’s more focused and productive during her “on” time for work, and more present when she has dedicated time with their children. Still, it isn’t easy, she said.

“There is no mute button for a toddler throwing a tantrum while you’re on a client call.”

Madeline Mitchell’s role covering women and the caregiving economy at USA TODAY is funded by a grant from Pivotal Ventures. Pivotal Ventures does not provide editorial input. Reach Madeline at memitchell@usatoday.com and @maddiemitch_ on X.

A mother of a baby boy who was found dead in a woodland in 1998 expressed her feelings of “relief” at her arrest, conceding that carrying the secret of killing him had been a burden for twenty-five years. Joanne Sharkey, 55, from Liverpool, was identified in 2023 when advanced DNA analysis linked her older son to the national database.

Initially charged with murder, the charge was dropped as prosecutors accepted a plea to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility due to severe post-natal depression. In Liverpool Crown Court, it was revealed that Sharkey had concealed her pregnancy from her husband, Neil Sharkey, who remained unaware he had fathered a second child until police arrived this year.

Superstar Mahesh Babu is admired not only for his box office dominance but also for being a devoted family man. His bond with his daughter Sitara often grabs attention, and their latest photoshoot has now taken social media by storm.

Mahesh, known for his stylish brand promotions, recently did a modeling shoot with Sitara, and the pictures have left fans in awe. In one set of images, Mahesh looks dapper in a pink shirt and white pants, while Sitara stuns in a trendy denim shorts outfit.

Also Read – No X Factor, Rajamouli Must Work Something Else!

Another set showcases Mahesh in an all-black ensemble, exuding charisma, while Sitara shines in a floral dress, looking elegant and poised. Their effortless chemistry in these photos has made them go viral beyond just a brand endorsement.

Fans are pouring in love for the duo, with many playfully calling them “brother and sister” due to Mahesh’s evergreen looks.

Also Read – Tamannaah’s Odela 2 to Be Summer Treat

Some even joked that Namrata should ward off the evil eye from them. Meanwhile, many are already predicting a massive fanbase for Sitara, hinting at her potential future in films.

While Mahesh is busy with SSMB29, his public appearances with Sitara are adding to the excitement. Whether she enters films or not, this stylish father-daughter duo continues to win hearts!

Also Read – Lokesh Kanagaraj on Ram Charan: Fan Wars Started

A Milwaukee woman who was deported to Laos by the Trump administration earlier this month is deeply “shaken” by the prospect of spending more than a decade away from her partner and five children back home in Wisconsin, activists helping the family told The Independent.

Ma Yang, a 37-year-old Hmong-American, has been living in a government facility outside the Laotian capital of Vientiane for the past couple of weeks after being forced to leave her family and friends in the U.S.

Yang was born in a refugee camp in Thailand but gained legal status as a permanent U.S. resident until she pleaded guilty to cannabis-related charges and served 30 months in federal prison. Having taken a plea deal mistakenly believing that her green card would not be at risk, she is now one of the “millions and millions” of people Donald Trump pledged to kick out of America during his re-election campaign.

The Independent traveled to Laos this week and spoke to a Hmong rights group that has been advocating on Yang’s behalf, as well as activists and lawyers with knowledge of her case. Tammie Xiong, executive director of the Hmong American Women’s Association, said it was providing support to her family in the U.S., and that she was still processing what had happened to her but “doing OK for the most part.”

Yang declined to be interviewed for this piece and has not spoken out since her story was featured in her local newspaper, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, last week. Despite her ordeal, Yang and her longtime partner, Michael Bub, “have been advised to not talk to anyone,” another Hmong-American rights activist said, until she has more clarity about her fate.

Yang claims to have never been to Laos or known anyone from the small landlocked Southeast Asian country, nestled between Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam and a world away geographically, culturally and linguistically from the United States’ midwest.

Her life in America unraveled last month when, more than two years after serving her time in prison, she was told to report to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in Milwaukee. She was detained upon arrival and sent to Indiana, then Chicago on commercial flights, and finally shipped off to Laos. After being held in a rooming house for five days, a military officer in charge of her situation told her she could leave the facility if she wanted.

Sources told The Independent she has stayed on at a government facility, branded a “school” or “re-education centre” by the Laos authorities, as she is afraid of stepping outside alone in a country of six million people and few English speakers, not knowing who to contact or where to stay. Yang was taken to a military hospital on Monday night by the Laotian authorities after staying for days without insulin for her diabetes and running out of her medication for high blood pressure.

While the road ahead in Laos remains deeply uncertain, what’s clear is that it will be a long and difficult legal battle for her to return to America and be reunited with her family.

Immigration lawyer Jath Shao told The Independent that even if she is successful in overturning her deportation through the U.S. legal system, she would most likely not be allowed back until at least the 2040s.

“She would have to wait for at least 10 years outside the U.S. to apply for an I-212 waiver of inadmissibility to come back based on extreme hardship to her U.S. citizen spouse or children,” Shao said.

He says because the waiver is discretionary, “unless something crazy happens like marijuana becoming federally legal with retroactive effect, she probably has no realistic way back to the U.S. Even if she did, it might be into the 2040s,” he says.

In her interview last week to her local newspaper, Yang said the Trump administration had “sent me back to die.”

“How do I rent, or buy, or anything, with no papers?” Yang said. “I’m a nobody right now.”

It is not immediately clear why Laos accepted Yang’s deportation despite her not being from the country.

The Laos national assembly is in the process of debating changes to the constitution to formally recognise the Lao diaspora, thereby strengthening ties with those who have acquired foreign citizenship after leaving the country during historical migrations. Though still at the draft stage, it could offer Yang a route to documentation in Laos at least.

Kham S Moua, the national deputy director of the non-profit Southeast Asia Resource Action Center (Searac), criticized Yang’s deportation, saying that such extreme measures not only harm the individuals involved but tear apart families and disrupt entire communities.

Yang’s deportation will force her young children in the U.S. to live without their mother. “Ma should have been given a second chance after she served her sentence. Instead, because our enforcement system has few restraints, she was deported and her family shattered,” Moua told The Independent.

He added: “We must remember that Hmong Americans, like other Southeast Asian refugees, live in the U.S. because our families sacrificed their lives to support this country during the Secret War in Laos and the Vietnam War.

“Southeast Asian Americans of refugee backgrounds continue to face significant socioeconomic challenges and their convictions are often directly tied to the barriers they face as survivors of ethnic cleansing, genocide, and war while trying to live the American dream.”

The Trump administration in 2019 made a verbal agreement to deport a “significant number of individuals” with final removal orders to Laos, according to Searac, although there has been no formal written deal on deportations between the both countries. That year, the Trump administration deported five people to the Southeast Asian nation.

America has previously funded a reintegration program in Laos for deported individuals who do not speak Lao or have family connections through USAID — though it isn’t clear whether that is still operational given the Trump cuts to the agency.

Others could be destined to follow in Yang’s footsteps; more than 4,800 Lao nationals are among the over 1.4 million individuals with final deportation orders in the U.S., according to a November ICE report.

“I hear all the time from people that ‘Trump is only after the criminals’ but if you look at the system, only 11,500 of almost 4 million people in deportation are ‘criminals’ – that’s 0.3 per cent of people in deportation compared to one third of American citizens having a criminal record,” says Shao.

“Given that they’re firing immigration judges left and right, it does not seem realistic for them to be able to mass deport millions (the highest ever in a year is less than half a million) within 4 years unless they trample all over the constitution and human rights.

“That’s why they are trying to do things like we see in the cases of Mahmoud Khalil and the Venezuelans deported to El Salvador for having tattoos — to eliminate due process and appeals and people’s rights.”

It could also become increasingly difficult for Yang’s children and other family in Wisconsin to visit her here in Laos going forward, with reports suggesting Trump is mulling a new travel ban on more than a dozen countries. Laos is one of the five countries that could face partial suspensions that would affect tourist and student visas as well as other immigrant visas.

Slate Plus members get more Care and Feeding every week. Have a question about kids, parenting, or family life? Submit it here!

Dear Care and Feeding,

I’m not a mom (yet) but many of my friends have young children (ranging from newborn to 8 years old). I love my friends dearly and I love their children! Watching my friends become mothers has been one of the most beautiful experiences of my life. But there’s one big exception…

I have a dirty mouth. I love my expletives. They are always used in moments of inconvenience or hyperbole (think “[beep] the mother [beeping] wind today!”) and never out of genuine anger or, God forbid, toward anyone—and certainly never toward a kid. But in moments where a four-letter (or ten-letter) word reflexively escapes my mouth, my friends (who still themselves curse, mind you!) have started saying, “Mind your language” to me when their kids are around.

I’ve tried playing it off, especially when the kids in question are very young (“They won’t remember,” or “They don’t know what it means”) but I know my friends are right that kids will pick up what they hear as they get older, and that they’re prone to repeating what they’ve heard. So I’ve apologized a few times, but it left, pun intended, a bad taste in my mouth.

The thing is, freedom of language and expression is something I feel strongly about. I don’t want to apologize for it! I’ve known these women since we were teens, and my mouth was just as filthy back then as it is now. They know who I am and that my heart is as pure as my words are nasty. Part of me feels it’s incumbent upon them as parents, when the lesson becomes relevant and if they feel it’s necessary, to explain to their kids that some people (like their wacky aunt) swear a lot, but it’s not something they want them to do for whatever reasons they’ve deemed moral and necessary. I know if I choose to die on this hill, I might end up less involved in these adorable children’s lives than I want to be, but … maybe that’s a sacrifice I’m willing to make, to protect my [beeping] right to [beeping] talk however I [beeping] want to. If you do think I ought to restrain myself, any tips for doing so when the urge strikes?

—Cursing Until the Cows Come Home

Dear Cows Come Home,

Look, I’m a fan of a well-placed four- (or better yet 12-) letter word myself. I have also never seen the harm in children hearing such words. It’s easy enough to teach a child that some words are used only in some settings, or that some words are widely considered to be impolite or, if invoked, will get them in trouble or simply upset someone. But it should be fairly simple for an adult to learn that lesson too. If I had friends I loved dearly who didn’t want me to use Kamala Harris’s (and my) favorite curse word in front of their kids, I wouldn’t. Nor would I ever do so in the presence of my sweet mother-in-law, genteel Southern lady that she is. (Hell, I don’t even say damn in front of her. Or hell, for that matter.)

Adjusting one’s language depending on the audience is not an infringement of one’s “free speech.” It’s just polite and practical. (I don’t know what kind of work you do, but since most work environments do not encourage freeform cursing, I’m guessing that there are some occasions on which you keep your filthy mouth in check.) I don’t have any tips for how to do that except to remind yourself that you’re a full-grown adult person who certainly can restrain herself when necessary. The only question is whether your friendships are important enough to you to make this small sacrifice.

—Michelle

More Advice From Slate

My mom is on a fixed and limited income, so to help her cover expenses my husband and I supplement her income in exchange for childcare. Our kid gets to spend time with his grandmother while we work, and she gets compensated financially. We have a clear schedule that we all agreed on (five hours/weekday). In exchange, we cover a large portion of her expenses. If my husband and I had to pay for alternative childcare, we couldn’t also afford to supplement her income, so we are offering the best solution we can. However, there seems to be some resentment.

A lawyer who represents a number of Lucy Letby’s bereaved victims has shared his clients’ agonising ordeal as the Thirwall Inquiry concludes, asserting that they should have been told their babies had been murdered ‘much sooner’

The lawyer for some of Lucy Letby’s victims’ families has spoken of his clients’ anguish upon learning their babies had been murdered after being kept “in the dark”.

Having initially believed their children had died of natural causes, the bereaved parents were in for further agony after learning they’d been murdered by former neonatal nurse Letby.

In August 2023, the now 35-year-old was convicted of murdering seven babies and trying to kill seven more between 2015 and 2016 at Chester’s Countess of Chester Hospital, where she earned a grim nickname among junior doctors – Nurse Death.

Last July, Letby was given her 15th whole-life term for the attempted murder of a premature baby girl. This week, the Thirwall Inquiry, set up to examine how such terrible events could have unfolded at the Countess of Chester Hospital, finished taking evidence. Lawyers will now write a report, which is expected to be published later this year.

Lawyer Richard Scorer, who represents the families of multiple victims, told the Mirror how his clients should have been informed of the nature of their newborns’ deaths “much sooner”.

READ MORE: Attempt to stop Lucy Letby inquiry rejected as damning report reveals 14 missed chances

Mr Scorer, who is head of abuse law and public inquiries at Slater and Gordon, said: “Obviously, the families were kept in the dark for a very, very long time, and ultimately, what they learned about what happened, they learned through the police and the criminal justice system. They should have known much more, much sooner.

“If the candour within the NHS had been operating properly, then that would have happened. But that simply didn’t happen, and that’s why we need a much stronger duty of candour in the future.”

Serial killer Letby pleaded her innocence throughout her trial and beyond, and there are those who support her bid for a retrial. For Mr Scorer and his clients, however, there is absolutely no doubt that Letby carried out her malevolent crimes.

The lawyer also wholeheartedly supports Lady Thirwall’s decision not to pause the inquiry in light of new evidence presented by Letby’s legal team, who argued that there was no evidence that the former nurse had harmed any of the vulnerable infants entrusted to her care.

According to Mr Scorer, the “so-called new evidence” has only been “spun as new” when, in fact, it’s anything but. He’s also asserted that this evidence isn’t “significant”, despite the insistence of Letby’s legal team.

Remarking on the beliefs of Letby’s supporters, Mr Scorer reflected: “One of the problems here is that people have been reading about this case online but weren’t at the trial and didn’t hear all of the evidence. In order to have a proper understanding of this case, you need to understand the totality of the evidence.”

Evil Letby’s guilt is clear, but, as explained by Mr Scorer, “the blame and the responsibility for what occurred, obviously, is wider than that”. He explained: “Had the hospital operated the right procedures and had they acted in the way that they should have done, then her crimes would have been discovered much sooner.”

As set out during the inquiry, Mr Scorer believes Letby’s crimes should have come to light “no later than August 2015”, when test results relating to Baby F “indicated very clearly that there had been an insulin poisoning”, in a way that “clearly demonstrated deliberate criminality”.

The worryingly high number of serious incidents at The Countess of Chester in the years 2015 and 2016 did indeed spark concern among staff, while suspicions began circulating in regards to Letby, who was always present during the tragedies. Senior doctors tried to raise the alarm with management after noticing the sinister pattern, but they were not believed.

A second external review was carried out in February 2016 after the unexpected deaths of five babies on the ward in a little over six months.

A further six infants suffered near-fatal collapses. The review attributed the incidents to “significant gaps in medical and nursing rotas, poor decision-making, and insufficient senior cover”.

The death toll continued to rise, and following an internal review, Letby was removed from clinical duties and assigned to administrative tasks. The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health commissioned an external review, and all unit staff were placed on clinical supervision.

In May 2017, the concerns on the ward became a police matter, with Cheshire Constabulary launching Operation Hummingbird. On July 3, 2018, Letby was arrested at her home in Cheshire on eight counts of murder and six counts of attempted murder but was released on bail after three days, subject to ongoing inquiries. The following summer, on June 10, 2019, Letby was arrested for the second time on suspicion of eight murders and nine attempted murders but was once again bailed.

Letby’s third and final arrest occurred on November 10, 2020. The next day, she was charged with eight counts of murder and 10 counts of attempted murder and denied bail. As far as Mr Scorer is aware, the murderer has made no attempt to make contact with the families still living with the horror of her diabolical killing spree.

Although the traumatised families have received support throughout the inquiry process, Mr Scorer emphasised that this was not the case in the aftermath of their unimaginable ordeal at the Countess of Chester. Mr Scorer told us: “One of the big issues in the inquiry was the lack of support that was provided to parents after the deaths and injuries to babies.

“There was a wholesale lack of support, and just as importantly, a lack of candour and a lack of openness on the part of the hospital about what was going on. And that’s an important issue in the inquiry and one that I’m sure that the inquiry chair, when she publishes her report, will have things to say about.”

Going forward, Mr Scorer has called for a “much stronger duty of candour” within the NHS, noting that the inquiry has highlighted some “serious issues which need to be addressed and addressed urgently”. As “gruelling” as the inquiry has been for the families affected, they ultimately believe this has been a “worthwhile” process and “look forward to. reading the report and seeing the chair’s recommendations”.

Expressing his hopes that the “report is published as soon as possible” in the hopes of protecting other families in the future, Mr Scorer said: “What the inquiry has identified is failings which were, if they were occurring at the Countess of Chester hospital, are probably occurring throughout other parts of the NHS and therefore it’s important that those issues are addressed sooner rather than later.”

Looking ahead to the report’s publication, Mr Scorer hopes that recommendations can “be implemented without delay,” with a focus on “improving safeguarding systems” that would enable police reports to be made “much sooner” should such horrors ever be repeated.

Mr Scorer argued: “We need regulation of hospital managers. At the moment, we have regulations for clinical staff in hospitals, but there are no regulations for hospital managers, so that needs to change.

“We also need to strengthen the duty of candour because, within the NHS, there is supposed to be a duty of candour, which means that when things go wrong, hospitals in the NHS generally are open and honest with families about the fact that things have gone wrong and about what’s happened. And that didn’t happen here.”

Do you have a story to share? Email me at julia.banim@reachplc.com

READ MORE: Lucy Letby hospital managers ‘missed 14 chances to stop nurse killing babies’

A couple has been arrested in Texas after being accused of shooting the father of their son’s teenage girlfriend.

Luther Madison II, 39, allegedly shot the dad of his son’s girlfriend with a gun facilitated by his wife Angelica Madison, also 39, during an argument as the parents met to discuss their children dating on March 17, Harris County Constable Mark Herman said in a statement shared on Facebook.

Police responded to an aggravated assault call about two men “fighting on the street and shots were fired” in the 24400 block of Osprey Point Drive. They arrived to find a male victim with “a gunshot wound to the chest.”

The victim reported to police that he and his wife had met at the location with the Madisons “to ask them for help in keeping [their] son away from their daughter as she is too young to be dating,” according to Herman’s statement. 

A fight between the men ensued before Angelica allegedly removed a gun from her pocket and handed it to her husband, who then shot the victim. He then “pointed the weapon at the victim’s wife and threatened her.”

The victim was transported by air to the hospital, Herman confirmed in another Facebook post. His condition is unknown at this time. 

Want to keep up with the latest crime coverage? Sign up for PEOPLE’s free True Crime newsletter for breaking crime news, ongoing trial coverage, and details of intriguing unsolved cases.

The couple were arrested and booked into the Harris County jail, according to Herman’s statement. Both were charged with two counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. 

Luther’s bond was set at $100,000 while Angelica’s bond was set at $25,000.

The couple is scheduled back in court on May 20, Law and Crime reported.

PEOPLE has reached out to the Precinct 4 Constable’s Office for comment.

Some situations are just extremely difficult to deal with on your own.

This is why this 17-year-old is asking for a second opinion on whether she’s in the wrong for not forgiving her stepmother (whom she calls ‘mom’) for throwing away things her deceased mother left for her.

Let’s analyze the situation.

I (17 years old, female) have two mom’s.

My first mom passed hours after I was born because of complications that got out of hand when she was pregnant and in labor with me.

Her mom was very special.

According to my dad and my aunt (my first mom’s sister) my first mom had a bad feeling she wouldn’t be taken care of correctly and could pass so she got things in order “just in case”.

They thought she was crazy at the time but she had multiple seizures in the hours after I was born and she died.

Not getting to know her mom colored her entire life, but she left mementos for her.

I was 7 hours old.

She never even got to hold me.

Part of her will included things I was to inherit.

Including two stuffed bunnies, two necklaces, a bracelet and her engagement ring, a scrapbook she made as a teenager and some charms and other stuff that were sentimental to her.

Her dad also knew how precious these items were for her.

My dad kept it in a safety deposit box for me.

He wanted them to be safe for me to claim when I got older.

When I was 4 my dad met my mom and they moved pretty quickly and got married.

They were dating less than a year.

Now my dad feels bad about it.

Especially because she was the only relationship he had other than my first mom.

Everything was going well so far, she had a mother figure.

I started calling her mom pretty quickly and we had a good family life.

I have younger siblings and we were all good.

When I turned 16 dad and I talked about me taking some of my first mom’s stuff.

I really wanted to see them and look through them but when he went to get them out they were gone.

Unfortunately, they were not there to be found.

After a few weeks of trying to figure out what happened we found out mom had gone and taken them out and threw them away.

She said she was jealous of the fact I had any interest in them at all, but she said the way I’d ask questions about them upset her.

The way my dad guarded them upset her too.

She said dad always said he’d love my first mom, but she got the feeling most of the time that he loved her more.

She wanted to put an end to the idea that she was any kind of mother to me.

Wow. That’s some evil stepmother ****.

I was so angry and hurt.

My dad was furious and he filed for divorce after weeks of arguing about it.

My mom’s family were furious that he’d take it so far.

And because of that they wanted me to stop being upset and angry and they wanted me to tell mom it’s okay.

They wanted me to make it clear she’s still my mom no matter what, because I started using her first name instead of calling her mom.

What she did is hard to forgive, if not impossible.

But I told them I hate her for what she did.

That I can’t believe she stole that from me.

It only made her family angry at me because she has raised me since I was 4 and was mom basically all that time.

Now I put “some trinkets left by a woman” I don’t know ahead of the woman who raised me.

They said I’m prioritizing memories that aren’t mine and a woman I’ll never know, over a woman who has loved me every day since she met me (their words).

They told me she deserves better and for that to be forgivable instead of unforgivable.

AITA?

That’s a very difficult and hurtful situation to deal with.

But nobody is obliged to forgive anyone, especially in a situation like this, and that’s her decision to make.

Let’s see what Reddit has to say about this.

A reader shares their thoughts.

This commenter shares their opinion.

Yup.

Another reader chimes in.

That’s a possibility.

Yup, there is hope!

It’s worth looking for the items.

Her relationship with her stepmother is severed forever after this.

If you enjoyed that story, read this one about a mom who was forced to bring her three kids with her to apply for government benefits, but ended up getting the job of her dreams.

Adolescence is a chaotic, emotional and often dangerous time, where identity is in flux, peer validation is everything, and the battle between right and wrong is constantly being tested. 

The new mini series Adolescence, directed by Philip Barantini, has once again brought these questions into the spotlight, forcing us to examine the complexities of teenage life in the digital age.  

The show portrays the struggles of modern teenagers navigating a world that demands independence while offering little emotional guidance. 

It delves into issues of peer pressure, toxic masculinity, online radicalisation and the emotional turbulence of growing up, much like real-life incidents that have shaken society in recent years. 

The Bois Locker Room controversy (2020), for instance, was a shocking reminder of how digital spaces are shaping teenage morality in ways parents and educators are struggling to keep up with.  

Adolescence is a phase of transition, rebellion and self-discovery. It is the age where belief systems are formed, challenged and reshaped. 

A still from Adolescence.

But it is also the age where external influences – whether from peers, pop culture or social media – can take precedence over parental guidance. 

This fragile period has been explored in various narratives before, from School of Lies and Udaan in India to Elite and Thirteen Reasons Why globally. But with Adolescence, these discussions have resurfaced, making us question once again: Are we doing enough to guide teenagers through this critical phase?  

The television series Adolescence presents a stark and often unsettling portrayal of teenage life. It doesn’t shy away from the raw, unfiltered experiences of youth – peer pressure, toxic friendships, social media dangers and the consequences of impulsive actions.  

A key similarity between Adolescence and real-life incidents like Bois Locker Room is the depiction of online anonymity and its consequences. 

A still from Adolescence.

In the show, as in reality, teenagers often lead double lives – one in front of their parents and another on social media, where they push boundaries, indulge in risky behaviour and seek validation through likes and comments.  

Much like Thirteen Reasons Why, which sparked debates around bullying and mental health, Adolescence forces viewers to confront uncomfortable truths about teenage life. It portrays the ways in which schools, families and institutions often fail to recognise the warning signs of distress in teenagers.  

A still from Thirteen Reasons Why.

The Bois Locker Room scandal of 2020 was a wake-up call for India. An Instagram group chat, allegedly created by a group of high school boys from Delhi, surfaced online, revealing disturbing discussions about objectifying their female classmates, body-shaming and even casual talk about sexual assault. Screenshots went viral, triggering nationwide outrage.  

What made this incident particularly disturbing was the normalisation of rape culture among adolescents – something that had long been whispered about but never exposed so openly. The scandal revealed not only the dangers of unrestricted internet access but also the gendered socialisation of young boys, who learn from a young age that power and aggression define masculinity. 

The incident also exposed how peer validation can encourage morally reprehensible behaviour. In a group setting, especially online where consequences feel distant, teenagers often feel emboldened to engage in conversations and actions they wouldn’t in real life. The need to “fit in” and “prove oneself” can push adolescents to cross ethical and legal boundaries.  

Indian narratives have also explored the unsettling aspects of teenage life. School of Lies, inspired by real-life cases of misconduct in boarding schools, highlights how institutions often suppress the truth to protect their reputations. The show, like Bois Locker Room, exposes how unchecked privilege and secrecy allow toxic behaviour to fester.  

A still from School of Lies.

Similarly, Udaan, Vikramaditya Motwane’s hard-hitting 2010 film, portrays a teenager’s battle against oppressive parenting and societal constraints. While it doesn’t directly address cyberbullying or sexual misconduct, it sheds light on how extreme parental control can push teenagers toward rebellion, just as extreme neglect can leave them vulnerable to external influences.  

A still from Udaan.

Internationally, shows like Elite and Thirteen Reasons Why have delved into similar themes of teenage secrecy, power struggles and the dark consequences of peer pressure.  

Elite revolves around a group of wealthy students entangled in scandals, manipulations and crime, much like School of Lies. It portrays how privilege allows teenagers to act without fearing accountability. 

A still from Elite.

Thirteen Reasons Why sheds light on bullying, sexual assault and suicide, similar to the real-life impact of the Bois Locker Room scandal, where a culture of casual misogyny had the potential to escalate into real-world harm.  

A still from Thirteen Reasons Why.

Euphoria, another bold depiction of modern adolescence, portrays drug abuse, identity struggles and the influence of social media, mirroring the kind of reckless behaviour seen in Bois Locker Room.  

A still from Euphoria.

Children start developing strong belief systems between the ages of five and seven, but it is during adolescence, between 10 and 18, that these beliefs are tested. The foundation laid by parents is now influenced by peer groups, media and online interactions.  

In a conversation with NDTV, relationship counseller Ruchi Ruuh explains that while inherent personality traits such as openness to experience or emotional sensitivity do play a role, the environment is often the stronger force in shaping a teenager’s worldview.  

“The formation of belief systems is influenced by both inherent personality traits (nature) and environmental factors (nurture). Some children are naturally more inquisitive, open to new ideas or resistant to change. Traits such as openness to experience, emotional sensitivity, and adaptability influence their behaviour. However, surroundings often have a stronger impact on belief formation. Parental beliefs and attitudes play a role, but as they grow, peer influence becomes increasingly powerful in shaping their perspectives as they seek validation and belonging,” she explained. 

This is why even teenagers from well-educated, seemingly stable families can develop toxic ideas if their digital world constantly reinforces them. The Bois Locker Room incident was a stark example of this. These were not boys who lacked access to education or a good upbringing. But in their online space, sexism and misogyny were normalised to the extent that they didn’t see anything wrong with what they were doing. Add to that the Andrew Tates of the world, whose idea of misplaced masculinity is also adding to the chaos that is the mind of teenage boys. 

According to Ruchi, teenage boys, in particular, are caught in a complex emotional storm. They swing between vulnerability and aggression, often without understanding why. This is due to a mix of biological, neurological, and social factors.  

The surge in testosterone during puberty increases impulsivity, competitiveness, and risk-taking behaviour. While some channel it into productive outlets like sports, others use it to assert dominance in harmful ways.  

Ruchi said, “Testosterone usually gets a bad reputation, but it amplifies existing tendencies, like some channelise this energy into sports while others may become more confrontational and rebellious. It’s a time when dopamine is also fluctuating, causing them to be more prone to mood swings, thrill-seeking behaviour and emotional extremes.”

“Neurologically, the challenge is that the part of the brain responsible for reasoning, impulse control and decision-making, the prefrontal cortex, hasn’t developed. Whereas the amygdala, which processes emotions, develops earlier, teenagers are more likely to react emotionally before thinking rationally. This imbalance makes it difficult to regulate their feelings,” she added.

One of the biggest concerns today is how social media fuels aggression and misogyny among teenagers.  

Online platforms are designed to maximise engagement, which means they prioritise content that provokes strong emotions – anger, excitement and outrage. 

A boy who starts watching self-improvement videos on confidence might, over time, be led to toxic content that promotes misogynistic ideologies. The algorithm rewards extreme content because it keeps users engaged.  

Ruchi explains how this creates a cycle of validation: “For example, a boy curious about masculinity and self-improvement might start by watching a self-improvement video but soon be exposed to misogynistic content that encourages polarizing behaviour and degrading the other sex. Over time, this exposure can desensitize teenagers to the consequences of sexism, violence or emotional detachment. Memes, jokes, and viral trends that reinforce harmful stereotypes in the name of everyday content.”

At the core of these adolescent struggles is an urgent question: Where do parents fit in?  

Teenagers today exist in a hyperconnected digital world, where social validation often outweighs parental guidance. The Bois Locker Room incident revealed how many parents remain oblivious to the secret online lives of their children. This isn’t just an Indian issue – globally, parenting styles have struggled to keep up with the rapid evolution of teenage culture.  

Strict authoritarian parenting, as seen in Udaan, can push adolescents into secrecy. On the other hand, excessive freedom, as seen in Elite, can lead to moral detachment. The key lies in open conversations. Parents must be willing to discuss uncomfortable topics – sex, consent, online safety – without shame or hesitation.  

A still from Elite.

Whether through real-life incidents or fictional portrayals, one thing is clear: Adolescence is not just about growing up – it is about shaping the adults these teenagers will become.  

When society turns a blind eye to toxic behaviours, it allows them to flourish. When parents dismiss teenage struggles as “just a phase,” they miss the chance to guide their children through critical years. 

The question isn’t whether adolescents will make mistakes; they will. The real question is: Who is teaching them what’s right and what’s wrong before those mistakes turn into irreversible consequences?

---

---

---

---