It was my understanding that Ashley's mother wanted her to stay in Narconon, and refused to be involved in her leaving. It was the mother of a friend that got her out.
Tory has not been specific yet on the details.
I totally get that, Smurf.
I think that you're combining a few different legal concepts here.
Ashley is legally an adult. The law gives her the right to leave a drug abuse treatment facility - even a legitimate one, and even if it is a spectacularly bad idea for her to do so. And yes, even if it is a condition of her probation (although if she hadn't checked herself into another facility, she might have had consequences for that, like incarceration).
Ashley's mother has absolutely ZERO obligation to help her leave a facility. That she wasn't involved in her escape is wholly irrelevant to Ashley's legal autonomy to leave a treatment facility at will.
Ashley's mother also had ZERO RIGHT to arrange for her to be taken against her will and transported across state lines to Narconon. Again, because Ashley is legally an adult, she is free decide where she receives treatment or even IF she receives treatment. She is free to suffer the consequences of a probation violation if she chooses not to receive treatment.
Ashley's mother is also free to decide what she does with her money. She can tell Ashley she will pay for any treatment center. She can tell Ashley she will pay for no treatment. She can tell Ashley that she will pay only for Narconon, and to take it or leave it. She can enter into whatever agreement she wants with Ashley (e.g. "I will pay $27k for a month in Narconon. If you leave before the month is up, you owe it to me. If you complete treatment and remain sober for x months, I will waive your obligations with respect to this loan."). It's basic contract law, and adults (under most circumstances) are free to enter into both good and spectacularly bad contracts. But that's between Ashley and her mom.
Ashley's mom and Narconon also entered into some contract - who knows what the refund policy is there, and who knows how Ashley was a party to the various and sundry contracts - I've heard that the payer sees one version and the patient sees another. I'm not going to attempt to analyze that tangled web. I will only say that it would be interesting to see how the quality of care is represented, particularly since Narconon claims to be a secular treatment facility.
Again, none of this tangled contractual web should have any bearing on what the rescuers did. Think about the legal implications of this - everyone who agrees to give an adult a ride from point a to point b would be risking lawsuit from their parents if they thought that their adult child was making a bad decision.
The Co$, of all things, should be wary of arguing any precedent that would allow parents to overrule the decision of their adult children. Think about that....