I am shocked--shocked that SC doesn't require the noncustodial parent to pay for college for their

[raccoon]

kids.

I mean, when you consider how red and conservative SC is, and how conservatives claim to be in favor of "family values"
(which means whatever the speaker wants it to mean, as Humpty Dumpty said to Alice in Wonderland.).

What about your state?

[newfie11]

1. I am curious

Does any state require a noncustodial parent to pay for their child's college.
I thought once the child turns 18 that was it.
Just curious as I have no children/grandchildren in this position.

[pnwmom]

28. Individual judges can and do order it, when the non-custodial parent has assets

and raised the child with the expectation of college.

Why should the child be penalized not be able to go to college simply because the parents' marriage broke down?

[Sheldon Cooper]

37. Why should divorced parents be mandated to pay for college, when still-married parents aren't?

[pnwmom]

42. The still-married parents who don't probably haven't raised that child to expect college.

But when a parent does, they shouldn't punish the child because of a divorce. And, according to one of the posters in this thread, in a third of the states, the law allows judges to make that determination.

I'm proud to be living in one of those states.

[Sheldon Cooper]

44. Ridiculous.

[pnwmom]

50. Read this and weep:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=edit&forum=1002&thread=3413217&pid=3415236

[Spider Jerusalem]

2. I rather doubt any state does that

going to college isn't a requirement but an option; first-year college students are generally 18, which is the age when child support stops in any case.

[pnwmom]

29. States may not but individual judges can and do.

If a child has been raised by parents with the expectation of a college education, and the non-custodial parent has the assets, why should the child be punished for the parent's divorce?

[Orrex]

41. Why should the parent be required to pay for an adult's education?

"The expectation of a college education" is not a legally binding condition. If the child has reached the age of majority by the time of college enrollment, then strictly speaking it's the child's responsibility to pay. One would hope that the parents would assist with college expenses, but that's not a matter of law.

I expected to get a car after graduating from high school. Can I sue my parents because they didn't give me one?

[OnlinePoker]

60. In BC, in most cases, non-custodial parents must continue to pay child support after age 19...

...if they are going to college. There is no mandatory requirement for a parent to pay for college, though if the child is getting a student loan, both parents incomes are calculated into how much they can receive (the parents are expected to fund a portion of the expenses).

[Socal31]

82. I read a set of divorce paperwork pretty much every single working day.

I have yet to see mandatory support ordered once a dependent turns 18, or through the age of 19 if they are still in High School.

[MineralMan]

3. Do they require custodial parents or

married couples to pay for college for their children? I know of no such laws in any state.

[raccoon]

4. Not to my knowledge. I found this on the subject of paying for college when parents are divorced.

Paying for College When Parents are Divorced


Can a court require divorced parents to help pay for their child's college education? It depends on which state you live in.

Child Support for College Not Required

States are divided on whether courts can order child support after a child reaches age 18 or 19 to cover college costs. Some states don't allow courts to order such support.

(snip)
Courts May Order College Payment

On the other hand, a third of the states have laws or case law giving courts the power to order divorced parents to pay college expenses. Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Utah and Washington all passed laws to allow child support orders to cover at least some higher education. Iowa's law allows a court to order child support for full-time college students between the ages of 18 and 22. Other states allow child support to cover higher education until the child turns 21…

In other states, including Alabama, Mississippi and South Carolina, no law specifically addresses child support for college. Yet, courts in those states can order a divorced parent to pay for his or her child's college education as part of the court's general authority to make child support awards.

http://family-law.lawyers.com/child-support/Paying-for-College-When-Parents-are-Divorced.html

[knitter4democracy]

5. Michigan doesn't by law.

Once a child is 18 and/or graduated from high school, he or she is no longer a ward of the court, and the court order for that child no longer applies. You can't even put it in divorce orders.

[pnwmom]

76. In Michigan support can go to age 19 and a half for a full time student.

Michigan Sec. 552.16(a)(1) states that a court may order support for a child after child turns 18, but only until child reaches 19 years and 6 months of age. Agreements between the parties are enforceable. It is necessary for the child to be a full-time student to qualify for post-majority support. Rowley v. Garvin, 562 N.W.2d 262 (Mich.App.Ct. 1996).

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/washington/wa_art02

[knitter4democracy]

84. As far as I know, that only applies to high school.

Students in Michigan can go to high school to the age of 19, 21 if they have IEPs that allow it.

All I know is that I tried to get the order to say that my ex-husband will have to pay and ran into every roadblock possible.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

7. College aged = adult

I'm curious to know which state requires child support for adults.

[pnwmom]

30. Lots of them give judges that power. Are you aware that federal college aid forms

require parental financial information till a young adult is 24?

Even if a young person is completely self-supporting, he has to be 24 or the aid formula will expect a parental contribution.

[Sheldon Cooper]

38. The law may expect a parental contribution, but it doesn't mandatte it.

There is a huge difference between the two.

[pnwmom]

40. But a judge can mandate it in many states.

And that's fair when a parent has raised to child to plan on a college education. It's not fair to punish that young adult because of the parents' divorce.

My father put three of us through college, but he left my mother when the youngest was a sophomore. Would it have been fair if he'd said, tough luck, son -- you're 19 now so you're on your own!

[Sheldon Cooper]

43. That is a ridiculous point.

No adult is owed anything, and if a judge can force divorced parents to pay for things that married parents are not required to provide, that is wildly unequal under the law. The young ADULT in question will have to adjust their expectations - it happens every day and people survive.

It's too bad about your father, but your story changes nothing.

[pnwmom]

46. Of course it wouldn't be fair for the youngest child of a well-off parent to be the only sibling

denied college, simply because the parents divorced. You can't get around that by calling it a "ridiculous point."

Fortunately, it's not ridiculous to the lawmakers in a third of the states. I'm happy to be living in a state that recognizes that, insofar as possible, young adults shouldn't be punished for their parents' divorce.

Different families have different expectations about college and ability to pay -- so yes, the law is wildly unequal in that respect. Some kids get help from their parents for college and some don't.

But, given adequate parental assets, there's no reason help for college should be wildly unequal between siblings in a divorce.

[Sheldon Cooper]

51. Your little brother's story changes nothing, as I've said.

I'm done talking about this - your point is not rational.

[pnwmom]

55. Your stubborn insistence does nothing to change the fact that it is COMMON

in many states across the US for judges to order non-custodial parents to pay for college, and this is fully supported by state laws.

[Orrex]

53. In fact, it is a ridiculous point

What is the justification for legally requiring an adult to pay for another adult's college tuition? Why should the child's "expectation" count for anything at all? Unless the child can produce documentation of the parent's stated intent to pay for college, I can't see how there's any way to justify such a requirement.

IMO parents should assist their children with college costs, and I fully intend to do so when my children reach that age, but that doesn't make it legally binding.

[pnwmom]

66. When a student is already a sophomore in college at the time of the divorce,

already having been supported by the parent until then, how could a letter provide a clearer statement of intent?

Despite your opinions, in many states divorcing parents with assets are expected to pay for college, and judges may order them to do so.

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/washington/wa_art02

[Orrex]

70. Thanks again for the link

What if the divorced parent dies, and the will makes no provision for the child's tuition? Can the estate be compelled to pay?


What if, following the divorce, the custodial parent loses the home to foreclosure despite the non-custodial parent's payment of mandated support. The children clearly have an expectation of housing--can the non-custodial parent be compelled to provide such housing in excess of payments already mandated?


From the dozen or states that I've now read, one conclusion is inescapable: the law is wildly inconsistent from one state to the next. What if, immediately post-divorce, the non-custodial parent moves to Pennsylvania? Can he or she be forced to pay tuition for the adult child in Illinois?

Such inconsistency helps no one.

[pnwmom]

71. I agree that the state laws are all over the place.

Divorce law is also all over the place, and judges are often asked to change decrees to fit changes in circumstances.

I guess that's why these lawyers make the big bucks.

[Orrex]

74. LOL. Sad but true.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

78. Granting judicial discretion is a far cry from the sort of legal requirement to which the OP eludes

[Deep13]

8. AFAIK, no state requires that.

Not unless it is specifically in the separation agreement. This makes sense considering thaat married parents are not required to pay for college for their now adult children.

[pnwmom]

63. Some states actually do.

Why should a well-off parent who has raised his child to expect college punish that child at the time of a divorce? For instance, my father put three of us through college, but my brother was a sophomore when my parents divorced. Why should my brother be the only one without financial assistance for college, when my father could afford it?

Many states agree with me.

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/washington/wa_art02

[Freddie]

9. PA used to, no longer

Same reason as others mentioned--non-divorced parents can't be forced to pay for college either.
But you can get it in your divorce agreement if you have minor children.

[LiberalEsto]

10. I suppose education is not such a high priority there

OTOH, I would not be very surprised if noncustodial parents were required to provide their kids with pickup trucks equipped with gun racks and confederate flags.

[B2G]

31. Why are you singling out South Carolina? nt

[sinkingfeeling]

11. I was divorced in Ohio and there's no mention of college expenses in the

custody agreement. My son lost his custody battle and is the noncustodial parent and Arkansas didn't mention college expenses.

[Dr. Strange]

12. I'd be more shocked if a state required parents to pay for college.

[cbdo2007]

13. So.....they can pay for college themselves like the rest of us??

[hobbit709]

14. Day I turned 18 I was told it's YOYO time.

[treestar]

15. IMO make it between the student and each parent

Family Court has enough conflict. When a child is 18 and Family Court disputes can continue, that just prolongs the issues.

[jwirr]

16. For many years the noncustodial parent has been allowed to divorce his/her children as easily as

it is to walk across the street. My ex failed to pay child support until he owned some $20,000 back support and that was only for the disabled child. The other two never got any of the money he owed them. Nothing about this issue surprises me and the rw who vote red are the first to think this is okay.

After all isn't everything the woman's fault?

[Sheldon Cooper]

17. I don't think any state, conservative or liberal, should force

parents to pay for their adult children's college education. That goes for whether the parents are divorced or still married. When you're 18 you are an adult and no one owes you anything anymore.

[IdaBriggs]

18. I think helping to contribute to getting your child "launched" into adulthood

is the purpose of raising them; giving your children the best start in life that you can afford has been traditional for thousands of years.



Married couples will generally agree to use their resources to benefit their children, which may or may not include helping with college expenses. If divorcing couples, while dividing assets, share/give additional financial consideration to one party in exchange for "future" help, I have no problem with that. For example, "you can keep the house/won't have to sell it so I can get my share of its value, and in return, you agree to pay $XXX to benefit our child(ren) if/while they are getting additional education for their future careers past high school."

No one is *owed* anything except keeping these types of agreements; unfortunately, second (or third) families also want the limited assets, and the first ones usually end up short-changed. And since most people can't read the future, these types of agreements can also blow up if a high end earner ends up in trouble due to poor judgment or economic downturn.

But again, giving your child the best start you can afford is the best long term insurance policy for their financial well being, in my opinion, which benefits both the parents and future grandchildren. Choosing poorly in the spousal department doesn't change the requirement the children have; it just changes the pool of people using the limited financial resources.

My opinion, of course. YMMV.

[Common Sense Party]

33. Exactly. If you are able to help your child (read: you're very wealthy), great. Go for it.

If you're like the rest of us, your first priority is to save for your OWN retirement. The kids can work, get scholarships and take out loans.

There are no loans or scholarships for retirement.

The dumbest thing many Americans do is go deep into debt to send Junior to college.

[joeglow3]

45. Yah. Someone who gets it.

[pnwmom]

80. A student can't apply for Federal loans or grants unless a parent fills out financial aid papers

and agrees to pay the "parent's portion."

[kelly1mm]

19. The 'liberal' state of Maryland does not either. What is your point? nt

[kiva]

20. When states require parents who are not divorced

to pay for their kids' college education, then I'll support the idea that divorced parent (custodial or non) should be required to pay.

[stevenleser]

36. I agree. I think this is an equal protection issue. I'm paying for my non-custodial daughter's

college now, but nothing is forcing me to do that. Unless you are going to force married couples and widowed parents to pay for college, you shouldn't force non-custodial parents to do so.

[kiva]

39. This is my take on it, too -

it's great when parents can and want to help with tuition but forcing anyone to pay for their children's tuition is wrong - if the relationship is so strained that parents don't want to help, or if their finances don't allow for it, that should be their choice.

[tammywammy]

21. Does any state force any parents (noncustodial or custodial, married or non-married) to pay that?

I'd be surprised if it did, since the majority of college students are adults.

[pnwmom]

81. Many states allow judges to decide whether a parent should pay for college costs.

They use their discretion as they do in all parts of settlement and custody agreements.

[cthulu2016]

22. Stop and think for a minute...

Are parents required by law to pay for college for their children?

No.

Are non-custodial parents parents.

Yes.

[DuaneBidoux]

23. No state requires any parent to support a child beyond 18.

Perhaps it is a good debate to have maybe when the child has been abused or suffered as a child because of parents actions that then later hurt the child as an adult but for the moment there s simply no such law anywhere requiring the support of a child (including child support by one of the parents in the divorce) when the child is a legal adult.

[lumberjack_jeff]

47. My state can and does exactly this.

In practice, a non custodial parent is still on the hook for "child" support if the child is enrolled in college.

Washington The Washington State Supreme Court ruled in Childers v. Childers, 89 Wn.2d 592, 575 P.2d 201 (1978), held that judges have the discretion to require a parent to support a child beyond the age of 18 if the child remains dependent on his/her parents for support. In 1990, the Legislature enacted RCW 26.19.090 governing post secondary educational support awards. Under the statute, the court will determine whether the adult child is in fact dependent and is relying upon the parents for the reasonable necessities of life. The court will exercise its discretion when determining whether and for how long to award post secondary educational support based upon consideration of factors that include but are not limited to the following: (a) Age of the child; (b) Child's needs; (c) Parent’s expectations for their children when they were together; (d) Child's prospects, desires, aptitudes, abilities or disabilities; (e) Nature of the post secondary education sought; and (f) Parents' level of education, standard of living, and resources.

In Washington, there is no statutory date at which you are no longer financially responsible for your offspring... provided you are his or her noncustodial parent.

[pnwmom]

52. Wrong. Many states either require support for college students or allow judges to do so.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=edit&forum=1002&thread=3413217&pid=3415236

[Orrex]

54. Link?

[pnwmom]

56. I put a link in my post. How could you miss it? n/t

[tammywammy]

57. Your link doesn't work.

Sends me to a page that says "You are not the author of this post."

[Orrex]

58. Whoa--that's what it said when I clicked on it, too!

We must be the same person!

[pnwmom]

62. Here's the direct link.

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/washington/wa_art02

[Orrex]

64. It's interesting that some states still think unequal protection is A-OK.

Thanks for the link.

[pnwmom]

68. It all depends on how you look at it.

Children in different families have never been treated equally. Some families have the money to send their kids to college and some don't.

But there's no reason a child in a particular family should be penalized with respect to college financing simply because his parents decided to divorce -- not if the parents have the means.

[Orrex]

73. "Children in different families have never been treated equally."

But we're talking about unequal under the law, rather than unequal from one family to the next.

But there's no reason a child in a particular family should be penalized with respect to college financing simply because his parents decided to divorce -- not if the parents have the means.

I simply don't see why an adult should be legally required to fund the post-secondary education of another. It would certainly be nice if the divorced parents would do so, but it makes no sense to me that it should be required by force of law.

[DuaneBidoux]

85. I'm the OP (for this subthreat). I'm happy to be corrected.

It is interesting to note (at least from what I was reading) that this seems to only have to do with divorce and ordered child-support.

Is this the case anywhere when a child grows up in a non-divorce situation?

[pnwmom]

61. Sorry, it's post #48, way down at the bottom.

[Go Vols]

24. In Mo.

5. If when a child reaches age eighteen, the child is enrolled in and attending a secondary school program of instruction, the parental support obligation shall continue, if the child continues to attend and progresses toward completion of said program, until the child completes such program or reaches age twenty-one, whichever first occurs.

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c400-499/4520000340.htm

[exboyfil]

27. Secondary is High School

This sets up a perverse incentive for the custodial parent to hold back graduation as long as possible (for example keep failing required courses for graduation). In Iowa the maximum age for non-special education students is 21. If the variable cost of having the kid live at home is less than the support, then the parent has an incentive. The kid has the advantage of maintaining his/her current lifestyle. The resources of his custodial parent and himself/herself might not be sufficient to maintain such a lifestyle. Might work particularly well if the child is estranged from the non-custodial parent. A chance to get back at the "old man" for taking up with a newer, younger spouse/girlfriend.

[Go Vols]

32. I was responding to the claim

that child support ends at 18 in every state.
But the next sentence in the link I posted says

at an institution of vocational or higher education and achieves grades sufficient to reenroll at such institution, the parental support obligation shall continue until the child completes his or her education, or until the child reaches the age of twenty-one, whichever first occurs.

Its not paying for college,but is child support for those in college.

[exboyfil]

49. Thanks for the clarification

I just don't think it is right to put a burden like this on a non-custodial. Once you finish High School you should be on your own. Each parent should then judge the reasonableness of additional support (irrespective of marital status).

I am actually happily married and contributing the bulk of the funds for my children's undergraduate education through a state 529. I would not be happy if I was compelled to do this though.

[pnwmom]

59. In Missouri non-custodial parents can be required to pay for college costs, too.

Missouri Sec. 452.340.5 states that "if the child is enrolled in an institution of higher education . . . , the parental support obligation shall continue until the child completes his education, or until the child reaches the age of 22, whichever occurs first. In Sinclair v. Sinclair, 837 S.W.2d 355 (Mo.App.W.D. 1992), the court held that a father had a statutory duty to provide child support until his son completes his education, is no longer a student, or attains the age of 22. Moreover, college expenses are properly considered as bearing upon amount of child support that is reasonable in determining whether support award should be modified. Weber v. Weber, 804 S.W.2d 756 (1990).

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/washington/wa_art02

[Silver Swan]

25. When I divorced in Illinois

My attorney said that children of divorced parents have more rights than children of still-married parents because a divorce decree could provide for payment of such children's college tuition.

My former spouse and I agreed to pay for college and graduate school for our two children until age 27. We split the costs in proportion to our individual income.

I know most people are neither willing nor able to do this. We were fortunate. (And college costs were much lower back then...)

[appleannie1]

26. As soon as my grand daughter turned 18 her father quit paying anything for her in Virginia. My

daughter is paying for her college education over whatever scholarships and loans she can get.

[Common Sense Party]

34. I am shocked--SHOCKED--to find anti-Southern, bigoted flamebait on DU.

[Yo_Mama]

35. It's not that common unless one party is pretty well-off

If you are not divorced, no law in any state forces you to pay for college for your adult children.

Generally, the point of child support and divorce agreements is to make sure that the children are not unduly financially harmed by their parents' split. So the times when such support is ordered for the children will be limited, and I believe law even expressly forbids it in some states.

Sometimes I think DU has a strong upper-class bias. There are tons of very good parents out there who could never afford to pay for their kid's college, and I don't think that is changing for the better. Parents who can afford it generally do try to help. Many families can't afford it, and they should not be looked down upon for that.

[pnwmom]

77. The case law in my state came about because of a father who could easily afford it

and tried to pull the financial rug out from under his children at the time of the divorce.

If the parent is a college-educated, well-to-do professional who raised his children to expect college, I'm glad that judges in my state can force him to make good on his promises and not punish his children at the time of a divorce.

[pnwmom]

48. FYI. Here is a list of child support requirements for college by state:

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/washington/wa_art02

No uniform policy exists regarding post secondary educational support. As a result, each state treats the issue differently. In some states, post secondary educational support is disallowed. In others, post secondary educational support is explicitly provided for by statute. Finally, many states have treated post secondary educational support on a case-by-case basis, and accordingly, developments in the appellate arena dictate the nature of support to be ordered, if any.

This article attempts to provide a state-by-state evaluation of post secondary educational support. The purpose is to provide a wake-up call for noncustodial parents who believe that they can bid their child a fiscal farewell upon their exit from what is commonly regarded as childhood. In doing so, perhaps both parents can better plan for the futures of their children, and, a result, the emotional trauma often associated with post secondary educational support requests will diminish.

SNIP

(A list by state follows)

Alabama Courts continue to follow Ex parte Bayliss, 550 So.2d 986 (Ala. 1989), which states that the trial court may require parents to provide post-minority support for their children's college education. See also Butts v. Butts, 600 So.2d 1038. Courts do not use the normal child support guidelines in determining the amount of post-secondary educational support. Instead, courts evaluate the reasonable necessaries for the child to attend college after reaching majority. Thrasher v. Wilburn, 574 So.2d 839 (Ala.Civ.App. 1990). The adult child or custodial parent needs to give notice that the child seeks post-majority support before reaching 19 years of age. Newman v. Newman, 667 So.2d 1362, 1367-8 (Ala.Civ.App. 1994). Where a child leaves home and becomes emancipated, no support is required to be paid. B.A. & E.A. v. State Department of Human Resources, 640 So.2d 961 (Ala.Civ.App. 1994).

ETC.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

65. Corporations haven't figured out how to make a buck off it yet.

When they do, ALEC will be on it like white on rice.

[Carolina]

67. I am a reluctant

transplant here for 2 reasons I won't belabor, but suffice it to say conservative repukes are liars and hypocrites. And in SC, that goes double!

Look at the prime examples in the 1st Congressional District who just put Sanford back in office... a known, exposed liar, cheater and abuser of public funds who was derelict of duty as governor because he was chasing Argentine tail! Literally, no one (Lt Gov, State Police, etc) knew where this father of 4 sons was when he disappeared with his Argentine soul mate on Fathers' Day weekend. Sheesh

There is no obligation of a parent, custodial or not to support a child past age 18! Keep 'em dumb sheeple votin' gainst their best interests.

I live here but I will NEVER be from here, and I can't begin to fathom some of the idiocy.

[pnwmom]

69. Actually, a judge in South Carolina MAY REQUIRE a parent to pay for college.

And the "exceptional circumstances" aren't very exceptional.

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/washington/wa_art02

South Carolina The Court of Appeals of South Carolina in West v. West, 309 S.C. 28, 419 S.E.2d 804 (S.C. App. 1992), held that jurisdiction of the family court is vested in cases of children over 18 years of age where exceptional circumstances warrant it. A family court judge may require a parent to contribute that amount of money necessary to enable a child over 18 to attend high school and four years of college, where there is evidence that: (1) the characteristics of the child indicates that he or she will benefit from college; (2) the child demonstrates the ability to do well, or at least make satisfactory grads; (3) the child cannot otherwise go to school; and (4) the parent has the financial ability to help pay for such an education.

[Carolina]

72. "may require"

is the key phrase. There is no legal obligation here or in many other states to support an adult child; and one is considered legally adult at age 17 here. Not trying to be contrary... just sayin'

[pnwmom]

75. You're right. In most states there isn't a blanket requirement -- it's up to the judge.

But many posters here incorrectly think that there is an absolute end to child support (for non-disabled offspring) at the age of 18.

But judges can and often do require able parents to pay for college.

[Recursion]

79. There are states that require parents to pay for college for their kids? I had to pay for mine

and I'm still paying the loans down.

[taught_me_patience]

83. Why should ANY parent be required to pay for their kid's college?

Paying for college is a voluntary act of parents in support of adults.