@DominoSubmarine:
Honestly I had thought that too, that there's a good case that bearing with it is the thing to do (minors basically having no rights and all).
Moreso that the tone of their conversation seemed completely wrong—it shouldn't have been the ultimatum that it was here; only the person being sent back home really knows what it's like there, that conclusion
has to be reached through a conversation where you at least go through the possible outcomes together, or so I feel. After
disagreeing on that maybe pulling out the "it's for your own good" is okay. But as it is here, it feels to me like:
A) He's got two people telling him to go home without talking it through with him. No one's offering to listen to him, with no power of his own he's got no practical say in the matter, and it would be really easy to feel like no really one's on his side. That's a really sucky situation to be in.
B) Without having that talk, if there's anything more serious going on—something beyond the emotional neglect and draconian life restrictions from his father—be it sexual abuse, feelings of suicide, anything—it's potentially going to be
really hard to bring it up now. That talk would have been
the time, were any such things at issue—but only if it had started as a two-way discussion, not a "this is what we're going to do" talk.
These are just my feelings on the matter, mind. Reasonable people can disagree on how reasonable the approach here was.