Another entitled kid.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

6abc.com/education/young-nj-woman-sues-estranged-parents-for-college-tuition/392148/

The judge has ruled that parents must pay $16K this year for tuition, but doubt that this will come close to paying expenses as an out of state student at Temple.

[Lizard Queen]

A 21 year old?     Lawmakers have to figure out once and for all what age constitutes an adult and be consistent about it.  If they're kids, then parents have a say in their lives.  If they're adults, then parents shouldn't have to pay anything for them.

[Deleted]

It's law here that divorced parents have to cover their children's post secondary education. Until the child stops going. If they take a year off they are SOL if they decide to go back. I've always found it odd since parents that stay married do not have the same legal obligation.

[Waffle]

From the article : It's interesting to note that her paternal grandparents, who she is living with, were the ones who hired her attorney to sue their own son.

That is one messed up family.

[Deleted]

Nov 13, 2014 13:27:45 GMT -5 Waffle said:

From the article : It's interesting to note that her paternal grandparents, who she is living with, were the ones who hired her attorney to sue their own son.

That is one messed up family.

[justme]

I could maybe see stipulating parents help out, but it should be like state school tuition not a blank check. Though I'm not sure it should be a law.

[Deleted]

At least they only awarded in state tuition rate, but I would be pissed as all get out if the state told me I HAD to pay my adult child's tuition. 

[justme]

Whoops, guess I should have read the article.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

Nov 13, 2014 13:34:18 GMT -5 minnesotapaintlady said:

At least they only awarded in state tuition rate, but I would be pissed as all get out if the state told me I HAD to pay my adult child's tuition. 

This is where I'm at.  

Temple University's tuition for a non resident, full time undergrad runs about $25K/year and does not include living expenses.  Add those in and you're likely looking at about $35K or so.  OUCH!

[wvugurl26]

I think it's a messy situation. However, unless you are 25, in graduate school or have a child, your financial aid is based in large part of your parent's tax return.

I don't know the details of this ruling but I did have friend who was independent and not claimed on parents tax return and still couldn't get financial aid. One parent was dead, other was a waste of air. Student was 100% self supporting and had a huge uphill battle to get aid.

I realize if it was easy parents would tell their kids to claim that to get more money. At the same time though we create these situations when we stipulate a person isn't independent for financial aid purposes until 25.

[mmhmm]

Nov 13, 2014 13:21:16 GMT -5 laterbloomer said:

It's law here that divorced parents have to cover their children's post secondary education. Until the child stops going. If they take a year off they are SOL if they decide to go back. I've always found it odd since parents that stay married do not have the same legal obligation.

That is odd! I wasn't aware of that. Thanks, laterbloomer, for giving me an example of another country's oddities to ponder.

[zibazinski]

Nov 13, 2014 14:10:44 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Nov 13, 2014 13:21:16 GMT -5 laterbloomer said:

It's law here that divorced parents have to cover their children's post secondary education. Until the child stops going. If they take a year off they are SOL if they decide to go back. I've always found it odd since parents that stay married do not have the same legal obligation.

That is odd! I wasn't aware of that. Thanks, laterbloomer, for giving me an example of another country's oddities to ponder.

Um, it happens in the US too.

[mmhmm]

Nov 13, 2014 14:14:07 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

Nov 13, 2014 14:10:44 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

That is odd! I wasn't aware of that. Thanks, laterbloomer, for giving me an example of another country's oddities to ponder.

Um, it happens in the US too.

I don't find the happening odd, zib. I find the fact that divorced parents are required by law to pay while married parents aren't.

[billisonboard]

Nov 13, 2014 13:21:16 GMT -5 laterbloomer said:

It's law here that divorced parents have to cover their children's post secondary education. Until the child stops going. If they take a year off they are SOL if they decide to go back. I've always found it odd since parents that stay married do not have the same legal obligation.

I know that a divorced parent can be required to continue to pay child support payments as long as the child stays in school which makes total sense if we are talking those who turn 18 during their high school years. I think that it plausible for that stipulation to include years beyond high school if the now adult is enrolled in school. Being forced to pay "whatever" college costs doesn't seem reasonable.

[Deleted]

Nov 13, 2014 14:18:24 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Nov 13, 2014 14:14:07 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

Um, it happens in the US too.

I don't find the happening odd, zib. I find the fact that divorced parents are required by law to pay while married parents aren't.

It's part of the divorce law. I think it's called the Family Act or something like that. It's been a while since I looked at it.

[shanendoah]

When is someone an adult?
For living on their own, signing contracts, etc - 18
For being able to drink/buy controlled substances - 21
For being responsible for their own college tuition - 25
For being responsible for their own health insurance - 27


The FAFSA, which all students have to fill out, deems undergraduate students (full or part time) as DEPENDENTS unless they meet one of the following:
25+ years old
Married
Have a child
Were a ward of the state on or after their 14th birthday

However, becoming an emancipated minor at the age of 16 does NOT qualify you as independent. (Or at least didn't when I worked in financial aid. Try telling that 20 year old they have to get their parents tax returns in order to file for financial aid.)


If Temple works at all like Reed college does, it doesn't give any merit based aid, it is all need based. However, Reed considers the FAFSA figured "family contribution" to be inviolate. Families MUST pay what FAFSA says they can pay. If students come up with outside scholarships to cover the family contribution part, Reed reduces the amount of school based aid it will offer, bringing the student/family responsibility back to the FAFSA determined amount.

So yes, this girl is 21, and a legal adult by many standards- but not when it comes to paying for college. And the government is the entity that sets the amount parents are supposedly able to contribute.

[whoisjohngalt]

We'll be seeing more and more cases like this one.  And my guess is it won't be just about college tuition.  And you know what?  Those parents deserve it.  A kid doesn't wake up on his 21st birthday feeling entitled.  It happens gradually. 

[giramomma]

I suspect the real truth lies somewhere in between

"Caitlyn is a spoiled brat and that was the nicest thing any of them have ever said about Caitlyn,"

and

"Caitlyn really is a good girl. She is the nicest, sweetest girl. All she wants is to go to college," said Rochester.

Plus, I'm sure what ever fuel the grandparents are tossing on the fire aren't helping either. Note nothing was said about why the grandparents hired the lawyer. Were they acting in the best interest of their grandaughter? Are they just pissed off that they've been parents again and are wanting to stick it too their son? Who knows.

The judge should have ordered family therapy.

We're pretty hard on our kids, and I'm surprised at what they think their entitled to on occasion.

[Deleted]

I seriously cannot fathom suing my parents to pay for tuition and I can only imagine what kind of mess that would cause in the family relationships.  Christmas there is going to be pleasant! 

[Lizard Queen]

Nov 13, 2014 15:12:58 GMT -5 @tbird said:

Nov 13, 2014 13:19:26 GMT -5 Lizard Queen said:

A 21 year old?     Lawmakers have to figure out once and for all what age constitutes an adult and be consistent about it.  If they're kids, then parents have a say in their lives.  If they're adults, then parents shouldn't have to pay anything for them.

and they should inform FAFSA of their decision as well.

I realize there is the FAFSA, but I think that the cutoff for that should be the same.  Say, 21 for everything (except health insurance, that is a whole other can of worms).  I believe any downward pressure on tuition is a good thing.  (Other businesses find ways to be profitable without special treatment.  Schools would too, if they had to.)  So what if a student qualifies for more aid in their senior year?  

[justme]

Nov 13, 2014 15:24:44 GMT -5 Lizard Queen said:

Nov 13, 2014 15:12:58 GMT -5 @tbird said:

and they should inform FAFSA of their decision as well.

I realize there is the FAFSA, but I think that the cutoff for that should be the same.  Say, 21 for everything (except health insurance, that is a whole other can of worms).  I believe any downward pressure on tuition is a good thing.  (Other businesses find ways to be profitable without special treatment.  Schools would too, if they had to.)  So what if a student qualifies for more aid in their senior year?  

Qualifying for more aid won't put a downward pressure on costs. The influx of federal aid programs, or at least their increase, coincides with the step increase in tuition. Probably not the only cause, but definitely part of it.

[billisonboard]

Nov 13, 2014 15:56:34 GMT -5 justme said:

... The influx of federal aid programs, or at least their increase, coincides with the step increase in tuition. Probably not the only cause, but definitely part of it.

Drops in the percentage of operating costs covered by states from general funds is also a cause of increases in tuition.

[Lizard Queen]

Nov 13, 2014 15:56:34 GMT -5 justme said:

Nov 13, 2014 15:24:44 GMT -5 Lizard Queen said:

I realize there is the FAFSA, but I think that the cutoff for that should be the same.  Say, 21 for everything (except health insurance, that is a whole other can of worms).  I believe any downward pressure on tuition is a good thing.  (Other businesses find ways to be profitable without special treatment.  Schools would too, if they had to.)  So what if a student qualifies for more aid in their senior year?  

Qualifying for more aid won't put a downward pressure on costs. The influx of federal aid programs, or at least their increase, coincides with the step increase in tuition. Probably not the only cause, but definitely part of it.

I guess it depends on the total approved to be given per year.  I assumed that it would be spread thinner.  I think making student loans dischargable (is that a word?) in bankruptcy would do far more for the cause.  There would have to be enough incentive to get into the lending business still, but some brakes put on for feasibility of amounts for the career prospects, etc.

[justme]

They used to be dischargeable. Everyone would declare bankruptcy as soon as they were done with school because their income was low. Doctors liked to do it because the first year of residency they're paid peanuts with six figure loans.

Opening private loans to bankruptcy might help, if you put min years payback on it, add lenders wouldn't want to lose money. Though a lot of poorer students sometimes rely on private loans, so doing that could adversely affect those that are poorer.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

Nov 13, 2014 16:08:48 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Nov 13, 2014 15:56:34 GMT -5 justme said:

... The influx of federal aid programs, or at least their increase, coincides with the step increase in tuition. Probably not the only cause, but definitely part of it.

Drops in the percentage of operating costs covered by states from general funds is also a cause of increases in tuition.

This is the major cause of increases in tuition.  Not many people pay attention to the state budget, unless you work at a university (and then you tend to pay very close attention to what happens in state budget sessions).  The last decade +, states have been decreasing the money they provide to state universities for their operating budgets - and it has not been by a little amount.  The money needs to be made up somewhere, so they try to pull it from a bunch of different sources, including raising tuition.

[Deleted]

Nov 13, 2014 14:19:06 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Nov 13, 2014 13:21:16 GMT -5 laterbloomer said:

It's law here that divorced parents have to cover their children's post secondary education. Until the child stops going. If they take a year off they are SOL if they decide to go back. I've always found it odd since parents that stay married do not have the same legal obligation.

I know that a divorced parent can be required to continue to pay child support payments as long as the child stays in school which makes total sense if we are talking those who turn 18 during their high school years. I think that it plausible for that stipulation to include years beyond high school if the now adult is enrolled in school. Being forced to pay "whatever" college costs doesn't seem reasonable.

doesn't matter if it seems reasonable or not.  My friend, who lives in FL, son attending a Florida state university, divorce granted in NJ, had a NJ judge order her ex to cover half of whatever tuition/fees/room and board wasn't covered by the florida scholarship and the stafford

[billisonboard]

Nov 13, 2014 18:36:43 GMT -5 @singlemominmd said:

Nov 13, 2014 14:19:06 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

I know that a divorced parent can be required to continue to pay child support payments as long as the child stays in school which makes total sense if we are talking those who turn 18 during their high school years. I think that it plausible for that stipulation to include years beyond high school if the now adult is enrolled in school. Being forced to pay "whatever" college costs doesn't seem reasonable.

doesn't matter if it seems reasonable or not.  My friend, who lives in FL, son attending a Florida state university, divorce granted in NJ, had a NJ judge order her ex to cover half of whatever tuition/fees/room and board wasn't covered by the florida scholarship and the stafford

Certainly a lot of unreasonable things are done.

[garion2003]

I agree the cut off of age 24 is pretty random. But it's a start. There's only so much Pell money to go around, if the eligibility is relaxed then either Congress would need to increase Pell funding to cover the newly eligible students, or else it will dilute the pool so the grant becomes meaningless.

The other issue is that Pell grants were designed for lower income families. Do we really need to give grants to the kid of millionaire?

I raise Pell because that is the program that more students would qualify for, under current rules, if the parental income were to be excluded.

[Knee Deep in Water Chloe]

Nov 13, 2014 16:45:29 GMT -5 The Walk of the Penguin Mich said:

Nov 13, 2014 16:08:48 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

  Not many people pay attention to the state budget, unless you work at a university for any agency supported by state funding (and then you tend to pay very close attention to what happens in state budget sessions). 

Fixed.

[Deleted]

Nov 13, 2014 18:36:43 GMT -5 @singlemominmd said:

Nov 13, 2014 14:19:06 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

I know that a divorced parent can be required to continue to pay child support payments as long as the child stays in school which makes total sense if we are talking those who turn 18 during their high school years. I think that it plausible for that stipulation to include years beyond high school if the now adult is enrolled in school. Being forced to pay "whatever" college costs doesn't seem reasonable.

doesn't matter if it seems reasonable or not.  My friend, who lives in FL, son attending a Florida state university, divorce granted in NJ, had a NJ judge order her ex to cover half of whatever tuition/fees/room and board wasn't covered by the florida scholarship and the stafford

This does not seem unreasonable. FL is the student's home, so they are attending at in-state tuition rate. Why is it bad that each parent covers 1/2 in-state university costs after tuition and scholarships?