Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

creekland

21 Year Old Sues Parents for College Tuition and Wins

Recommended Posts

This court case could set an interesting precedent.  I'm finding myself hoping it gets overturned in court.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/21-year-old-sues-parents-for-college-tuition-and-104767331362.html

 

I'm pro parents paying for college when they are able and assisting when they can't cover the whole thing, but I'm not sure the courts should ever be involved and according to this article:

 

https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/dad-speaks-out-after-21-year-old-sues-him-to-pay-104864515872.html

 

Dad has offered to pay for in state tuition even after his daughter has had issues elsewhere.  It's not like he has totally said no (as some parents do).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think, once you're adult you pay for your own stuff.  If your parents help, then you're blessed.  If they don't, then ...  well, welcome to the world little one.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dad's argument seems suspect to me...Temple's tuition for out of state is the same as Rutgers in state...his dd could have found much pricier schools.  And she did go to CC for the first two years without any help from the parents (she is suing to recover that?).   I doubt she is eligible for much financial aid, since she is the child of two well paid professionals (my teacher married to teacher friends don't even bother with FAFSA -- NJ teachers are near NY teachers in terms of compensation).  I would like to have seen their post-high school plan for her...was she supposed to join the military? Work a $10/hr job until she saved up enough to finish the last two years of college away from home? Or, my personal fav, marry and give the college bill to hubby?

 

I do think dd needs to face the financial consequences of moving out though.....the gps should have offered to pay for those consequences, rather than advocating suing the parents if they are the ones behind the decision.Sounds like she's already faced the consequences of underage drinking and learned from that.

 

The rest of it seems typical teenage needs for independence...her parents want more control over her than most parents have over their dorm students. And the car? Very typical for her family's level of affluence..kind of wonder what the backstory is...wouldn't be surprised to hear she was given one at sixteen but wrecked it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think, once you're adult you pay for your own stuff.  If your parents help, then you're blessed.  If they don't, then ...  well, welcome to the world little one.

I wish we as a country could decide on the age of majority. Is it 18? Is it 21? Is it 25? There's got to be a time when parents are no longer financially responsible for their child. Supposedly at 18, a child is considered an adult. He or she can fight for her country, and die. Except people this age still can't drink alcohol. At 21, a person can drink alcohol, work a 40+ week full-time job, and own property…but, no matter, the parent is still on the line for the FAFSA. If a student is married, though, then the parent is off the hook for FAFSA, right? It's just all so weird to me. Either a child is a full member of the adult club or is not. And the rules shouldn't depend on whether or not the parents are still married. The rules need to depend on the child's age, not the parents' marital status.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am for a clear definition of financial responsibility. Some states do enforce the fillial responsibility statues...this gal won't be paying her parents' expenses when they are elderly and indigent, since they have adequate pensions w/health insurance, but many others will.  It is tough when you have to pay for parents who had the income to provide for themselves, but chose to spend it all on nonessentials rather than provide for their retirement needs. I have relatives whose parents are in homes, but since they didn't support higher education...their children are still paying off their college bills, leaving less for the elderly support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish we as a country could decide on the age of majority. Is it 18? Is it 21? Is it 25? There's got to be a time when parents are no longer financially responsible for their child. Supposedly at 18, a child is considered an adult. He or she can fight for her country, and die. Except people this age still can't drink alcohol. At 21, a person can drink alcohol, work a 40+ week full-time job, and own property…but, no matter, the parent is still on the line for the FAFSA. If a student is married, though, then the parent is off the hook for FAFSA, right? It's just all so weird to me. Either a child is a full member of the adult club or is not. And the rules shouldn't depend on whether or not the parents are still married. The rules need to depend on the child's age, not the parents' marital status.

Yes, this ambiguity drives me bananas.

 

Age 16 = you can drive a car, hold a job, and pay taxes

Age 18 = you can vote, enter the military, get married

Age 21 = you can finally have a beer

Age 26= you can finally rent a car and get off mom and dad's health insurance plan

 

It's ridiculous, really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the original post/news article...

 

It is my understanding (and I could be wrong) that when the parents divorced, part of the financial settlement included a provision for the daughter's college expenses.

 

It sounds to me as if the daughter is entitled to that money, based on what was agreed upon at the divorce, but the parents are arguing with each other over who will pay, even though it was spelled out in the divorce settlement.

 

If that is the case, then yes, I believe the daughter had the right to sue and win the money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dad's argument seems suspect to me...Temple's tuition for out of state is the same as Rutgers in state...his dd could have found much pricier schools.  And she did go to CC for the first two years without any help from the parents (she is suing to recover that?).   I doubt she is eligible for much financial aid, since she is the child of two well paid professionals (my teacher married to teacher friends don't even bother with FAFSA -- NJ teachers are near NY teachers in terms of compensation).  I would like to have seen their post-high school plan for her...was she supposed to join the military? Work a $10/hr job until she saved up enough to finish the last two years of college away from home? Or, my personal fav, marry and give the college bill to hubby?

 

I do think dd needs to face the financial consequences of moving out though.....the gps should have offered to pay for those consequences, rather than advocating suing the parents if they are the ones behind the decision.Sounds like she's already faced the consequences of underage drinking and learned from that.

 

The rest of it seems typical teenage needs for independence...her parents want more control over her than most parents have over their dorm students. And the car? Very typical for her family's level of affluence..kind of wonder what the backstory is...wouldn't be surprised to hear she was given one at sixteen but wrecked it.

 

1. Teachers aren't paid all that much. Fafsa limits are fairly low.

 

2. As teachers in the state, they likely receive a discount for their children at state universities. That would make the comparison to an out of state school much different than what you are seeing. It is a substantial discount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt this will set a precedent for most college students.

 

I suspect is that there was a plan for college fees written into the child support decree, and that is why she has grounds to sue.

 

Many states now require child support to continue through the college years in situations of divorce.

 

While our ambivalence over the age of majority drives me crazy, I do think forcing financial planning to continue through the college years makes some sense in cases of divorce. I had several friends left in a lurch when money they thought they had coming for college suddenly dried up when dad remarried.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, this ambiguity drives me bananas.

 

Age 16 = you can drive a car, hold a job, and pay taxes

Age 18 = you can vote, enter the military, get married

Age 21 = you can finally have a beer

Age 26= you can finally rent a car and get off mom and dad's health insurance plan

 

It's ridiculous, really.

 

Just expanding on the list.  Age for a job varies a little so do the rules for driving.

 

Age 14 = hold a job, and pay taxes

Age 16 = you can drive a car

Age 14-17 = Charged as an adult if you commit a crime

Age 18 = you can vote, enter the military, get married

Age 21 = you can finally have a beer

Age 25 = No longer require you parents tax information for the FAFSA

Age 26= you can finally rent a car and get off mom and dad's health insurance plan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...At 21, a person can drink alcohol, work a 40+ week full-time job, and own property…but, no matter, the parent is still on the line for the FAFSA. If a student is married, though, then the parent is off the hook for FAFSA, right? It's just all so weird to me. Either a child is a full member of the adult club or is not. ...

As a side issue, I do think parents should be responsible for giving info for the FAFSA until a reasonable typical college graduation age plus a year or two (so 25?).  I think parents should expect to contribute what they can financially before asking the neighbors (the taxpayers) to contribute. And I think it's appropriate for the neighbors (the taxpayers) to say "hey, we only have so much money to go around, we want to make sure your parents are kicking in too if they can; here's how much we think is fair".  The FAFSA is a rough and imperfect attempt to put a number on the parents' expected contribution.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just expanding on the list.  Age for a job varies a little so do the rules for driving.

 

Age 14 = hold a job, and pay taxes

Age 16 = you can drive a car

Age 26= you can finally rent a car and get off mom and dad's health insurance plan

 

In the middle of the US (farm country),  we have 14 yr olds (+ 2 months) driving on school permits & learner permits issued at 14 yrs old. (I'm not sure if they have to have an adult in the car with them if they are just driving to & from school.) 

 

I started filling out a tax return at 11 because of my paper route. Not sure how that works nowadays, though.

Also, you can rent a car before age 26, but usually have to pay some sort of underage fee

 

I double-checked the marriage ages and was shocked to see that some 18 yr olds have to have permission from their parents to marry.  :confused1:   :ohmy:

Agreeing that this spread of 'rights' is insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of a sillier story. I googled 'spoiled brat Morristown' and the first link popped up, lol. Second link is an update.

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/n-honor-student-sues-parents-cut-age-18-suit-article-1.1709440

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/rachel-canning-boyfriend-choked-article-1.1877130

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The mom wanted her to work full time, help with chores and do 3 summer classes. That's a lot. I'm not surprised the girl said no to the summer classes on top of a full time job. It would be hard to get good grades with that kind of work load and could affect her transfer options.

 

The fact that her grandparents took her in and helped her lawyer up (to sue their own son) tends to make me think the parents are at fault. They apparently have provisions in their divorce agreement to pay for college and are trying to avoid that obligation. The whole thing is a mess. I'm glad she at least has her grandparents to help her out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since it was in the divorce settlement, I agree with the ruling here.  Otherwise I find it crazy.  I was told I would get NO college help.  My professor (well paid, too) stepfather wouldn't even sign the form for me to get reduced tuition in state.  So I would not have been able to afford to go to school, even in state living cheap with student loans.  I suppose luckily for me, I became a parent at 17 so I got a chance to go to school.  Even then, I was accepted at Duke and they refused me financial aid because at age 23 and a married parent, I could not provide my father's name.  It had to be real father.  I did not know it! There's nobody even written on my birth certificate!  I was so upset. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Dad has offered to pay for in state tuition even after his daughter has had issues elsewhere.  It's not like he has totally said no (as some parents do).

 

He didn't offer to pay all of it, though, just "help" with tuition — and only if she lived at home while attending. I can understand why a 21 year old who does not get along with her parents would turn that down.

 

Apparently the reason she moved in with her grandparents was that her mother was requiring her (at the age of 20?) to live at home, work a full time job, abide by a curfew and take three summer classes. That seems overly controlling and burdensome to me.

 

If paying for college was part of the divorce agreement, then I agree with the judge. If not, then although I'm very sympathetic to the girl, I don't think the parents should be forced to pay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My parents divorced. They had college savings for my sister and I. After the divorce it was gone. Neither can tell you what happened. I lived with mom who was poor and paid my own way. My sister had college paid by dad. It wasn't fair, but guess who still doesn't have her life together at 40?? I learned early on how to manage my life. My sister still needs money help fromtime to time. Dh had no help. We aren't paying for college. We will be trying to save for retirement!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If paying for college was part of the divorce agreement, then I agree with the judge. If not, then although I'm very sympathetic to the girl, I don't think the parents should be forced to pay.

I agree. My divorced cousin has to pay for his kids tertiary education all the way until they graduate and have their bachelors. That includes tution, dorm/hostel and child support (which helps for food, transport and books). It was in the divorce decree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused about why parents should be required to pay for college in any case? I think it is typical for parents to help, I think it is kind, and generous, but I am really confused about how anyone can be compelled to pay. I can understand paying child support, but I'm not a fan of adult support. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you agreed in your divorce decree to pay for college, then you are required to do so. Period. End of discussion. This does not set a precedent, because it involves a divorce decree. Any ruling in this case applies only to this particular case. It will not impact on anyone outside this family.

 

These types of agreements are very common in divorce decrees, and they are a very good thing. Research shows that parents' contributions toward helping their young adult children with college drop off precipitously after a divorce and stay at that low level even after the parents remarry and sees their respective incomes rise to pre-divorce levels. I have seen so many good college kids get cut-off financially by their wealthy parents, because they don't want to take any money away from their "new family."

 

I am also skeptical about the story being given here. We are only hearing the parents' side, and they seem to be resorting to character assassination. Clearly, the girl must be on track and making good choices or she wouldn't have gotten into Temple. The fact that the paternal grandparents are supporting her against the parents and the judge has ruled in her favor speaks volumes. There must be more to this story. If the parents were already failing to pay her modest community college tuition (assuming they were required to by the divorce decree), then clearly this isn't really about her choosing one college over the other or about being kicked out of Disney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and I don't think much about the accusation of getting kicked out of the Disney internship. You are required to live in Disney housing, and Disney is notorious for their strict rules and zero tolerance policies. You don't have any control over who your roommates are, but can be kicked out if they break the rules. One of my siblings did that internship and had stories of whole apartments being kicked out, because one roommate was caught drinking. It is one of the quirks of the Disney internship and causes a lot of fear among the students participating. So, maybe this girl was kicked out for drinking or maybe she was kicked out because a roommate was drinking. I'm going to take that one with a grain of salt.

 

Either way, it has nothing to do with the parents following the divorce decree. Any dad that leads with that type of character assassination doesn't sound like an easy guy to deal with. I wouldn't want to live with him either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was seven, some family member died and provided 10,000 dollars to many of the younger children in family specifically stated to be "for college." I was not just handed ten grand because of my age. It went to my parents. My father and I had a very nasty and dysfunctional relationship. At 16, when I moved out and turned down a scholarship to the college he wanted me to attend, he disbanded the protections for this money that was still legally in his care and the money was gone. At eighteen I sued him for college tuition and won. Well, I won up to ten grand. It is a specialized case, but as far as I understood at the time it actually happened quite a bit that parents were sued by their children over money which was entrusted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused about why parents should be required to pay for college in any case? I think it is typical for parents to help, I think it is kind, and generous, but I am really confused about how anyone can be compelled to pay. I can understand paying child support, but I'm not a fan of adult support. 

 

I am confused about this also. In the case, I quoted above, the parents were not divorced, iirc.

 

Found this

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/12/caitlyn_ricci_college_tuition_lawsuit_divorced_parents_are_obliged_to_pay.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of a sillier story. I googled 'spoiled brat Morristown' and the first link popped up, lol. Second link is an update.

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/n-honor-student-sues-parents-cut-age-18-suit-article-1.1709440

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/rachel-canning-boyfriend-choked-article-1.1877130

The lawsuit was dropped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was seven, some family member died and provided 10,000 dollars to many of the younger children in family specifically stated to be "for college." I was not just handed ten grand because of my age. It went to my parents. My father and I had a very nasty and dysfunctional relationship. At 16, when I moved out and turned down a scholarship to the college he wanted me to attend, he disbanded the protections for this money that was still legally in his care and the money was gone. At eighteen I sued him for college tuition and won. Well, I won up to ten grand. It is a specialized case, but as far as I understood at the time it actually happened quite a bit that parents were sued by their children over money which was entrusted.

When parents are custodians of finances/investments, there are both ethical and legal arguments as to why the money must go to the children.

 

I think these kinds of news articles provoke fear in parents who either cannot or will not save in advance for college. But IMO the fear is misplaced. It's about money already earmarked for the kids being taken from them. Or, in the case of divorce, parents backing out of a legal agreement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but the question lives on, and other lawsuits -- perhaps with a more sympathetic student -- could turn out differently. 

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/06/us-column-weston-lawsuit-idUSBREA2524M20140306

Meh.

 

If this is a large concern, then never have a joint account or custodial account with a child, and never act as a trustee. And don't get a child support decree.

 

Otherwise I don't think there is much legal basis. (Though I am not a lawyer and concede I could be misreading the news articles.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds like in this case, the parents' financial responsibility had already been established in the divorce decree. Still, I wish people would just do the right thing (in general) so laws about family responsibility wouldn't be necessary.

 

I understand the frustration at the differing levels of legal adult independence. At the same time, the idea of a young person having no rights, no freedoms, and no responsibility suddenly becoming a full-fledged adult overnight is equally ridiculous. It makes sense to be given adult privileges and responsibilities in stages. Ideally, this would happen within families based on the maturity, development and background of each individual.

 

I chose to marry at 18, during my 1st semester of college. My parents calmly and logically tried to talk me out of it, but I was blinded by love :) They could have said, "Yoy made your bed, lie in it," and let dh and I scrape by on minimum wage jobs, likely drop out of school, etc. Instead, they realized that, while I was legally old enough to marry, I still needed their support and guidance to establish my adult life successfully. They paid for my college (as planned) and let dh and I live with them until we graduated. I worked a few hours a week to pay for car insurance and gas, etc., but school was considered my job. Marrying the man I did when I did was a determining factor in having a successful, happy life and family, but my parents' wisdom in giving me the freedom I needed while providing the safety net necessary to get my feet on the ground was at least as influential.

 

My ds turned 18 last week. He is still my dependant child, nothing has changed. We will support and guide him through all the bumps in the road to adulthood until he is capable of making it on his own. Especially in the current economic climate, there is no arbitrary age for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused about why parents should be required to pay for college in any case? I think it is typical for parents to help, I think it is kind, and generous, but I am really confused about how anyone can be compelled to pay. I can understand paying child support, but I'm not a fan of adult support. 

Because kids are dumped out of childhood with no money and expected to pay exorbitant costs to attain a job.  Even tech courses for working class jobs can cost thousands of dollars right off the bat.  Our kids are not prepared by society at 18 to jump into an apprenticeship or occupation.  I much prefer the way it is run in other countries with tracking and free or affordable college educations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a side issue, I do think parents should be responsible for giving info for the FAFSA until a reasonable typical college graduation age plus a year or two (so 25?).  I think parents should expect to contribute what they can financially before asking the neighbors (the taxpayers) to contribute. And I think it's appropriate for the neighbors (the taxpayers) to say "hey, we only have so much money to go around, we want to make sure your parents are kicking in too if they can; here's how much we think is fair".  The FAFSA is a rough and imperfect attempt to put a number on the parents' expected contribution.  

 

The reason why parental info to FAFSA isn't 'fair' is because it can't actually "make sure your parents are kicking in too" -- parents are not forced to pay for college just because someone said 'this is what we think you can afford'.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason why parental info to FAFSA isn't 'fair' is because it can't actually "make sure your parents are kicking in too" -- parents are not forced to pay for college just because someone said 'this is what we think you can afford'.   

 

I recognize that it's not fair to students whose parents won't fill in the forms, or those whose parents won't contribute (assuming the student is academically and otherwise worthy of such parental support and worth the investment, which of course is a judgement call).  And of course some parents simply don't have the money the FAFSA process seems to think they do.  

 

However, I think asking students to go to their parents first for funding, and asking parents in general to contribute to the best of their ability, is fair to the student's neighbors, the taxpayers - the ones who are funding the scholarships accessible through FAFSA.   It's not a perfect system, by far, and there are students who have had their access to higher education severely limited because of parents who won't help them for one reason or another.  But on the whole, I think it works well for the majority of students.   

 

Unless, of course, we want to change the rules so that federal financial aid is available to all students regardless of their parents' income.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, this ambiguity drives me bananas.

 

Age 16 = you can drive a car, hold a job, and pay taxes

Age 18 = you can vote, enter the military, get married

Age 21 = you can finally have a beer

Age 26= you can finally rent a car and get off mom and dad's health insurance plan

 

It's ridiculous, really.

 

Kinsa - You said, "26= you can finally rent a care and get off mon and dad's health insurance plan".  I don't think you understand how this works.  At 26, you are not allowed to be on your parents' insurance plan anymore, but there is NOTHING that says that you HAVE to be on their plan until 26.  We have several under-26 aged children.  Some have jobs which allow them to pay for their own insurance.  One is self-employed, just getting their business going, and our contribution to that is to have them on our insurance and provide them with a bed and the occasional meal.  One is a student and on our insurance.  ALLOWING children to stay on their parents' insurance helps families significantly.  A child who takes a gap year stays insured.  A child who decides not to go to college but is still living at home getting established in some other sort of job, or doing some other sort of training, stays insured until they are self-supporting.  A child who has to take time off from college because of health problems stays insured.  We have noticed that most of the young people we know need help until they are about 25 and are fine after that, so I think this is a good number.  Why should it be all one number?  Whether you can fight or whether you can drive or whether anyone is willing to hire you for a living wage all varies.  I think the switch to 26 helps families rather than hurts them.  And I don't know about you, but when I rent a car, I'd rather the rates were cheaper because I wasn't helping to pay for those risky under-25's, as inconvenient as we've found this rule upon occasion. : )

 

Nan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno, this kind of thing makes me wonder if these young people have any idea of how many folks have no hope of ever hitting up their parents for money.

 

A 21yo should be able to make his/her own way in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am also skeptical about the story being given here. We are only hearing the parents' side, and they seem to be resorting to character assassination. Clearly, the girl must be on track and making good choices or she wouldn't have gotten into Temple. The fact that the paternal grandparents are supporting her against the parents and the judge has ruled in her favor speaks volumes. There must be more to this story. If the parents were already failing to pay her modest community college tuition (assuming they were required to by the divorce decree), then clearly this isn't really about her choosing one college over the other or about being kicked out of Disney.

 

It's almost as if there's a fear in society that assumes the nation is going to hell in a hand basket because the younger generation is [being too gay/playing too many video games/dissing Jesus/not staying off my lawn/fill in personal worry here], and media is playing into it for fun and profit. After all, a peaceful, sedate community isn't as profitable a consumer base as a riled up one. Facts are boring, secret conspiracies are not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
y

My professor (well paid, too) stepfather wouldn't even sign the form for me to get reduced tuition in state.  So I would not have been able to afford to go to school, even in state living cheap with student loans.

 

I did, and we are a high COLA state.

 

I get it--it was hard. And I am sorry you faced that. But saying what you could and could not have done, that is something none of us can do.

 

I did it three times: I did it in CC, working at cafes, I did it at university for undergrad, also working two jobs, and finally I did it with kids as a working adult. I did qualify for much more aid the third time, obviously.

 

But saying it's impossible does no favors to the thousands upon thousands who do it and are doing it right now in colleges across the country.

 

It is possible and people ARE doing it. I work in education and I literally see them doing it every day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because kids are dumped out of childhood with no money and expected to pay exorbitant costs to attain a job. Even tech courses for working class jobs can cost thousands of dollars right off the bat. Our kids are not prepared by society at 18 to jump into an apprenticeship or occupation. I much prefer the way it is run in other countries with tracking and free or affordable college educations.

Ah-yep. My parents divorced when I was 19. All the money that was supposed to go toward college for my sister and I poof! Vanished into thin air. I dropped out And went to cosmetology School And even that had to Be paid out of my pocket.Parents immediately moved either out of state or into a new family. And wondered from afar why I was struggling so much, with three part time jobs And cosmo school Full time, and an internship.... And no Family Support. Derp.

 

Not that that has any bearing or relation to the case in the op, but you really *can't* just dump kids off at a certain age and tell them "see ya later Alligator," And expect them to just be peachy keen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did, and we are a high COLA state.

 

I get it--it was hard. And I am sorry you faced that. But saying what you could and could not have done, that is something none of us can do.

 

I did it three times: I did it in CC, working at cafes, I did it at university for undergrad, also working two jobs, and finally I did it with kids as a working adult. I did qualify for much more aid the third time, obviously.

 

But saying it's impossible does no favors to the thousands upon thousands who do it and are doing it right now in colleges across the country.

 

It is possible and people ARE doing it. I work in education and I literally see them doing it every day.

Some people can, And some people can not. All you're doing here is countering a personal anecdote with another. There are tons of factors at play. I know you know that. The "thousands upon thousands" don't need favors, Evidently. But saying that some people can do [whatever....go to college, lift heavy things, raise kids....] with no support, is not the same as saying everyone can do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, it's anecdotal. But though one anecdote doesn't make a rule, it can disprove a rule.

 

I'm only claiming that it's not impossible. I think that's important because there are people reading this right now thinking, "How the heck will my kids do it?" And I'm trying to be encouraging.

 

There are many reasons someone might not be able to do it, and I get that. I'm not saying this to make anyone feel bad.

 

 

I'm not trying to claim that 100% of people should pay for college themselves. What I'm trying to say is--if you're having a tough time, don't give up.

 

If you chose not to suffer early on but instead make a family, awesome. That's great. I believe there are HUGE benefits to having young parents and these are often underestimated in our society.

 

But don't say that you couldn't have done otherwise simply because your parents wouldn't pay. That is not fair to those who are facing that as a necessity. They should be encouraged, not told it's impossible.

 

 

You want studies, though, and I appreciate that, because I'm just one person and my family is a small sample. But I know I'm not alone:

 

http://news.byu.edu/archive12-apr-payingforcollege.aspx

 

"One-third of students received little or no financial support from parents."

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2013/01/16/want-your-kids-to-succeed-dont-pay-for-their-education/

 

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100952906

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not want studies. I want people to be believed when they say that THEY could not do it without help, not have it pointed out to them that its not a completely impossible , insurmountable problem. Duh. But there are a ton of reasons individuals can't do things alone, that other people can do alone. Like, oh I dunno...homeschool, For example. Some people REALLY can't do it, for any number of reasons. I wouldn't be a helpful Hatty if I was like, "well *I* do it. Its not impossible."

 

Maybe you had a natural birth. I wanted a natural birth. But I didn't have one. You telling me after the fact that natural births aren't impossible would do me no good, you see.

 

People aren't going to tell you their whole life story. If someone **you Dont know** tells you they couldn't do it, then they couldn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am very sorry it sounded like I was saying that she could have done it.

 

I was trying to say that not having parental support in and of itself does not mean you can't go to college.

 

I was not trying to suggest her life could have been otherwise, but that other people's lives could be otherwise, since parental contributions are not the deciding factor--they are only one part. It was the phrasing.

 

I wouldn't have posted the studies if you did not claim that my experience was not a valid response.

 

"Maybe you had a natural birth. I wanted a natural birth. But I didn't have one. You telling me after the fact that natural births aren't impossible would do me no good, you see."

 

But don't you think if someone said, "I'm 5 feet tall, so I couldn't have a natural birth," someone else saying, "Wow, that sounds tough--I'm also 5' but I did, and though it doesn't happen for everyone it is possible" is helpful to others on a message board?

 

Otherwise the other 5' people will think it's not possible.

 

I don't think pointing out that something is possible in general is hurtful, but I am sorry if that has hurt anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am very sorry it sounded like I was saying that she could have done it.

 

I was trying to say that not having parental support in and of itself does not mean you can't go to college.

 

I was not trying to suggest her life could have been otherwise, but that other people's lives could be otherwise, since parental contributions are not the deciding factor--they are only one part. It was the phrasing.

 

I wouldn't have posted the studies if you did not claim that my experience was not a valid response.

 

"Maybe you had a natural birth. I wanted a natural birth. But I didn't have one. You telling me after the fact that natural births aren't impossible would do me no good, you see."

 

But don't you think if someone said, "I'm 5 feet tall, so I couldn't have a natural birth," someone else saying, "Wow, that sounds tough--I'm also 5' but I did, and though it doesn't happen for everyone it is possible" is helpful to others on a message board?

 

Otherwise the other 5' people will think it's not possible.

 

I don't think pointing out that something is possible in general is hurtful, but I am sorry if that has hurt anyone.

You did nothing wrong. I know a lot of kids who are putting themselves through school. It s taking them a lot of extra time. Most do have Fafsa money. Things said/done with good intensions should be taken that way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's almost as if there's a fear in society that assumes the nation is going to hell in a hand basket because the younger generation is [being too gay/playing too many video games/dissing Jesus/not staying off my lawn/fill in personal worry here], and media is playing into it for fun and profit. After all, a peaceful, sedate community isn't as profitable a consumer base as a riled up one. Facts are boring, secret conspiracies are not.

 

But I can entertain conspiracy theories regarding Rupert Murdoch, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I have no experience with divorce settlements and had no idea that college was a part of it.

 

It isn't a part of most divorce settlements. It is usually only included when a divorcing couple mutually agrees to include it. I've never heard of a judge imposing such a requirement on a divorcing couple, though I'm sure it's possible in states like NY where child support is required beyond the age of 18. In most states, it is probably quite rare. My guess is that these agreements are most common among couples who were already planning to pay for college and have the means to do so.

 

That's why it feels pretty ratty when both parents get remarried and then suddenly have a dozen reasons why they can't/won't pay for college for their child from the first marriage. But . . . but . . . but she wasn't working full-time while going to school . . . but once she got drunk . . . but she wants to go to an out-of-state college . . . etc, etc. Call me cynical, but the real reason is probably the new spouse and new kids. That's why it was put in the divorce decree. To make sure that the parents continue to meet their obligations to the child from their first marriage. Good on the judge for looking out for the daughter's interests by holding the parents to their original agreement.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not want studies. I want people to be believed when they say that THEY could not do it without help, not have it pointed out to them that its not a completely impossible , insurmountable problem. Duh. But there are a ton of reasons individuals can't do things alone, that other people can do alone. Like, oh I dunno...homeschool, For example. Some people REALLY can't do it, for any number of reasons. I wouldn't be a helpful Hatty if I was like, "well *I* do it. Its not impossible."

 

Maybe you had a natural birth. I wanted a natural birth. But I didn't have one. You telling me after the fact that natural births aren't impossible would do me no good, you see.

 

People aren't going to tell you their whole life story. If someone **you Dont know** tells you they couldn't do it, then they couldn't.

 

 

 

I am very sorry it sounded like I was saying that she could have done it.

 

I was trying to say that not having parental support in and of itself does not mean you can't go to college.

 

I was not trying to suggest her life could have been otherwise, but that other people's lives could be otherwise, since parental contributions are not the deciding factor--they are only one part. It was the phrasing.

 

I wouldn't have posted the studies if you did not claim that my experience was not a valid response.

 

"Maybe you had a natural birth. I wanted a natural birth. But I didn't have one. You telling me after the fact that natural births aren't impossible would do me no good, you see."

 

But don't you think if someone said, "I'm 5 feet tall, so I couldn't have a natural birth," someone else saying, "Wow, that sounds tough--I'm also 5' but I did, and though it doesn't happen for everyone it is possible" is helpful to others on a message board?

 

Otherwise the other 5' people will think it's not possible.

 

I don't think pointing out that something is possible in general is hurtful, but I am sorry if that has hurt anyone.

I've had quite a few years teaching in higher ed and my observation is that how possible it is for an 18-24 year old to do it solo depends on the details.

 

Here in CA, if a student qualifies for a Cal grant plus pulls in some combined need based/academic scholarships, it is pretty doable.

 

Student who miss out on the Cal grants and pretty much all of the better aid because parents refuse to file the FAFSA: different story. Students who don't qualify for any need based financial aid because parents make too much money yet are unwilling to contribute: again, different story. If students in either one of these categories attempt it, they are likely to end up with an excessive student loan debt.

 

I honestly think that for students who are attempting to do it without the financial aid, it is often better from them to drop out for a few years. Gasp!

 

Get a job in a large company that provides education benefits. Or, secure a work-study gig in one of the STEM fields. Or, work a job until age 24 and the parent income/assets are a moot point. Or, research the National Health Service Corps or other options that will pay expenses up front.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The fact that her grandparents took her in and helped her lawyer up (to sue their own son) tends to make me think the parents are at fault. 

I don't think this means much. We have family that is bsc and would have done similar carp just to make our lives miserable because they have a better idea. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still pondering the idea that we should be encouraging of students and honestly I am cynical enough that rather than encouragement, I think young adults need a spreadsheet and a budget and a way to make informed decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did, and we are a high COLA state.

 

I get it--it was hard. And I am sorry you faced that. But saying what you could and could not have done, that is something none of us can do.

 

I did it three times: I did it in CC, working at cafes, I did it at university for undergrad, also working two jobs, and finally I did it with kids as a working adult. I did qualify for much more aid the third time, obviously.

 

But saying it's impossible does no favors to the thousands upon thousands who do it and are doing it right now in colleges across the country.

 

It is possible and people ARE doing it. I work in education and I literally see them doing it every day.

 

Good for you.  Every case is different, though.  I could not do it.  And that is what I spoke of. Dh is a college professor and my own experiences with friends, family, and college shows me that you're not the norm, though.  It's incredibly hard to work your way through college.  I ended up doing it as a single mother of two and working in a high stress medical job.  Financial aid REALLY helped but I still only had about $300 a month to live off of for food, transportation, and any expenses outside of rent and school after all was said and done.  If my step-father would have just signed that paper, I would have had at least double that.  I'm not even going to talk about my crazy high student loans, either.

 

Some people can, And some people can not. All you're doing here is countering a personal anecdote with another. There are tons of factors at play. I know you know that. The "thousands upon thousands" don't need favors, Evidently. But saying that some people can do [whatever....go to college, lift heavy things, raise kids....] with no support, is not the same as saying everyone can do it.

 

:iagree:

I did not want studies. I want people to be believed when they say that THEY could not do it without help, not have it pointed out to them that its not a completely impossible , insurmountable problem. Duh. But there are a ton of reasons individuals can't do things alone, that other people can do alone. Like, oh I dunno...homeschool, For example. Some people REALLY can't do it, for any number of reasons. I wouldn't be a helpful Hatty if I was like, "well *I* do it. Its not impossible."

 

Maybe you had a natural birth. I wanted a natural birth. But I didn't have one. You telling me after the fact that natural births aren't impossible would do me no good, you see.

 

People aren't going to tell you their whole life story. If someone **you Dont know** tells you they couldn't do it, then they couldn't.

 

:iagree:

 

 

 

I've had quite a few years teaching in higher ed and my observation is that how possible it is for an 18-24 year old to do it solo depends on the details.

 

Here in CA, if a student qualifies for a Cal grant plus pulls in some combined need based/academic scholarships, it is pretty doable.

 

Student who miss out on the Cal grants and pretty much all of the better aid because parents refuse to file the FAFSA: different story. Students who don't qualify for any need based financial aid because parents make too much money yet are unwilling to contribute: again, different story. If students in either one of these categories attempt it, they are likely to end up with an excessive student loan debt.

 

I honestly think that for students who are attempting to do it without the financial aid, it is often better from them to drop out for a few years. Gasp!

 

Get a job in a large company that provides education benefits. Or, secure a work-study gig in one of the STEM fields. Or, work a job until age 24 and the parent income/assets are a moot point. Or, research the National Health Service Corps or other options that will pay expenses up front.

Exactly.  My parents made WAY too much for me to get aid, even though we lived in a state of poverty from financial abuse (long story).  And I'm not sure when the last person checked out Duke, but paying for that without a side job as a doctor or financial help?  Not happening.  I couldn't provide my unknown father, so they wouldn't give me ANY aid.  Yes, I could pick a different college, and I did end up doing so, but it still really sucked. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...