<p>The child support ends when she graduates from high school, I am not complaining about the 1500.00 per month child support. I wanted to know if his income would hurt the financial aid. But it would be awesome it he would contribute to her college expenses. I am a very practical person. The schools we are interested in are 3 state schools, University of Texas, Texas A&M and Texas Tech (where we live). If she attends Texas Tech she can live at home. She is wanting to attend Texas A&M, (to spread her wings). </p>
<p>Those three state schools require the FAFSA only, I believe, as financial aid application forms. However, for her first year, those child support payments will be included in your financials on the forms for the full year. And her second year, the payments from January to June will be included. Your former husband’s income and assets will not be included on the FAFSA at all.</p>
<p>I don’t know about any low income aid for the state of Texas. In some states, their grants for lower income students (state awarded grants…like the TAP in NY) require information from both parents.</p>
<p>It sounds like you live in Texas. Las year the child support cap was raised from 1500/ month to 1710/month for one child. You are very fortunate that you have some excellent in-state options.</p>
<p>I agree with thumper, if your ex is entrenched in his position that he is not paying for college and in some states he does not have to when support ends at 18; be proactive now divert those funds in to a college fund, 529 plan to start saving for college. $1500 x12 months x 6 years = 108,000 (by the end of your D’s senior year) for you to help pay for your daughter’s college. this could make a big dent even if she attends one the state flagship schools (if she get merit or a full tuition scholarship, then you would be set to fully cover the cost of her attending college).</p>
<p>You and he are first in line when it comes to paying for college. For schools that use the CSS profile/NCP or their own documents, if he refuses to give his information (remember giving his information does not obligate him to pay), your child will not receive any financial aid from these schools. While he is not obligated to pay, if you have no way to make up what he should pay, the school is not a financially feasible option for your child.</p>
<p>If it means that you have to retrain to upgrade your skills by going back to college, change jobs or work 2 jobs, you should entertain to learning how to support your child on your income alone. If you have a really low EFC, the only federal aid you are guaranteed is small grant and a 5500 loan. Failure to plan, is planning to fail. Start working your plan, to ensure that you are in a position to to help finance college for your daughter.</p>
<p>all the best</p>
<p>1500 a month is low for a doctor</p>
<p>I did a quick google search and that is what it is (it does not matter how much you make or if you can afford to pay more). Op could involve the AG office if her ex is uncooperative to get it raised to $1710/mont (it does not happen automatically)</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.gotexaslaw.com/child-support.html”>http://www.gotexaslaw.com/child-support.html</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>D is in a somewhat similar position (his income isn’t very high but he’s form-averse) so her two safeties are Us that give guaranteed full-tuition merit for her stats, and allow Pell and Stafford to stack on top of that (to cover R&B if necessary). It may be that her NCP does what he needs to do, but I feel better knowing these options are there for her if he doesn’t and waivers or other scholarships don’t come through. It might be a viable option for you also.</p>
<p>Yes, the child support will affect financial aid in that you will have to report it as income for the years you receive it. Thumper has pretty much covered how that will work. Also any money he gives to the child or as child support during the college years will count as income, or what he pays to the school and can reduce aid. </p>
<p>Currently (rules change) if your income is less than $24K a year and your can flie a short form 1040 like the EZ and there may be other requirement–you have to look this up, your FAFSA EFC would be an automatic zero regardless of assets. If you can have child support sent to the child as the child’s income, maybe, maybe–gotta research it, it may not count as your income for that auto zero. If you make over that amount, you don’t qualify and your child’s income over $6K or so is hit at 50% for EFC. </p>
<p>The fact of the matter is that even with a zero EFC, you are looking at a max of $5700 Pell grant and up to $5500 in loans for the student as an entitlement, and none of the schools you’ve listed guarantee to meet full need–few do. Don’t know how the low income fund works for TX–find out what the rules are , and you gotta keep up with all of this because it can change year to year. </p>
<p>Hopefully you are also making plans as to how you are going to support self and child when these payments stop. It can be a rough landing I have seen, with many of my friends who have to make this transition. </p>
<p>I’m not sure if it’s still this way or not, but in Texas, child support has been/was long capped at a percentage of a max income of $60K, I think it was. Something rather low. So it wouldn’t matter if OP’s D’s father made $500K or $200K or $60K, the child support for one child would be the same. Unless things have changed in the past half a decade or so. It’s really sucky legislation, imo. </p>
<p>Another thing that I was set on bringing up as I read this thread, though the OP eventually revealed her exact situation and I learned that my “caveat” did not apply to her, was that, in Texas, and likely in other states, if a person agrees to a child support amount in a mediated settlement (as opposed to ordered by the court), that person is arguably bound to that settlement amount regardless of large changes to the NCP’s income. I learned this the hard way. I agreed to way less than the court would have ordered, had we ever had an opportunity to get in front of the court for a final hearing. I agreed because I thought that almost 6 years tied up in conflict in the Texas court system was probably long enough – for me, and more importantly, for the kids. So, I slowly but surely settled for just about every single demand he ever made, many of which were unreasonable. But it’s only money. My sanity and potential peace in my kids’ lives were worth far more than getting blood from a stingy, misguided turnip. </p>
<p>Also in Texas, child support ends at age 18 or graduation from high school, whichever is later. Period. Unless the couple wants to make some other voluntary arrangement. There is no consideration for college. And, as one can see by reading threads like this, there are plenty of people who, mysteriously, aren’t interested in serving the best interests of their children. </p>
<p>My kids fared more than fine, as it turned out, with merit scholarships galore. (Thank you, God!) But years ago, I was writing threads just like this one. </p>
<p>My kids were also able to get every single college to discount their NCP’s income in all calculations during the admissions process – yes, even those private universities that pretty much solely relied on the CSS Profile to determine aid. But it took various amounts of extra paperwork that often amounted to LOTS of extra paperwork. In his case, he wasn’t in the children’s lives at all. As in, they still haven’t seen him or heard from him since they were middle schoolers. </p>
<p>I think it is sometimes hard for people who have not lived with this sort of conflict or immersion in the court system to understand that courts and legislation are not “fair” or even logical at times. It was easy for me to understand and believe that this OP was stuck with her child support amount as I read along. But I could see that, because it is unfair and somewhat nonsensical, several of you couldn’t believe that the OP had already exhausted all avenues for more support. </p>
<p>This sort of thing happens every day. Parents are, unfortunately, not all imbued with a sense of responsibility for their children. </p>
<p>My heart goes out to you, OP. Keep plugging along. It all, miraculously, worked out for my kids. I hope you can say the same in 10 years or so!</p>
<p>All my best to you and yours! </p>
<p>You and your kids were fortunate to get NCP waivers even though your husband was paying child support. That is the deal breaker on a number of such waivers. They tend to ask the question as to whether child support is being paid. If so, and within a certain period of time, that’s it.</p>
<p>My friend is running into this with her nephew. Though the young man’s father hasn’t seen his son in many years, and he has zilch in terms of an contact or anything, court ordered child support is given through the state up until the month the young man graduated (May), and he did not get any waivers. The answer to that question was the killer for another friend of mine. Father refused to give out any of his financials, not that it would have made any difference if he did, since he made way to much for the kids to get fin aid, but he also refused to pay for college. Again, support ended as soon as he did not have to pay which was the month of high school grad. </p>
<p>Huh. That’s interesting, cptofthehouse. Perhaps I did not realize just HOW fortunate we were! Colleges did ask that question, right up front, and my kids WERE getting child support, through the state, right up until the month they graduated from high school. But still, every single college patiently explained the exact procedures to waive the NCP data, and each school, for each kid, ultimately issued the waiver.</p>
<p>I actually remember reading other peoples’ responses to other OPs that there’s no use in trying to fight the system, colleges weren’t going to issue NCP waivers if the kids were getting child support. I would sometimes chime in and say, basically, “Oh, yes, they will … sometimes!” And sometimes well-meaning people would argue with me that this couldn’t be true. But it was and it is. </p>
<p>In my kids’ cases, every school wanted, at a minimum, copies of the pertinent pages of the divorce decree, child support, and child custody orders. Some wanted a lot more than that, to include notarized letters and other stuff. I think that all schools wanted a letter from the kid in question, if I remember right. At any rate, my kids each wrote them to each school. And all wanted a written statement from me, summarizing the issue. </p>
<p>There were a few things that likely made our case different than most, as I consider all of this so many years later. And one of them is quite significant.</p>
<p>Dad lost access to the children, by court order, and that was (obviously) documented in the child custody agreement and other documents. We had <em>joint custody</em> (which is actually a series of legal rights to oversee and act upon their health, education, etc, and NOT what most people assume to be “custody”), but we did not have <em>joint access</em> (which is what most people mistakenly call “custody”). I was the custodial parent and had unlimited access. He was the NCP but had court-ordered loss of access to the kids themselves, yet full rights and access to their education, healthcare, and other records until they were 18. I was told that judges will sometimes restrict access in order to protect the children, but they’ll stop short of removing legal “custody” (the parent’s legal rights) because that is a far harder legal hill to climb. </p>
<p>I rarely reveal private details like this to anybody, much less on a public forum! But what the hell … it’s years after the fact, less freaky this many years later, and the specifics of our private experience may help others who are in similar situations. BUT, I do still feel compelled to add (to complete strangers!) that I did not ask for this arrangement – lest anybody jump to the conclusion that this was a matter of systematically “alienating” a dad from his children, or any other “game.” This order was issued by the judge years into a long conflict, without my request and without my input.</p>
<p>The children wanted and needed the restricted access and expressed as much to each college.</p>
<p>Perhaps this is the sole difference that set my kids’ cases apart. </p>
<p>I don’t want to say a whole lot more than that.</p>
<p>Our diligence and willingness to jump through a large assortment of hoops to provide every single piece of requested documentation could not have hurt. </p>
<p>I do not mean to imply that this was a simple process, but it certainly seemed reasonable and fair from the very start. We felt as though we were treated very respectfully and very fairly by each school. Each school made the process straight forward.</p>
<p>To others out there, if this is similar to your situation, I suggest you apply for the waivers. We found it to be a fair system. </p>
<p>If your family has not suffered through a similar experience, I hope you won’t use this knowledge of my family’s very personal experience to attempt to falsely request your own waivers. We had to provide a great deal of legal documentation to back up our claims. You likely will, too.</p>
<p>All my best to all of the families that have to face this whole uncooperative-NCP issue. It’s so unfair to the kids! But I also understand why schools supposedly issue so few waivers. There are uncooperative custodial, married parents, too! Why might divorced parents have more “rights” to be “uncooperative” for financial advantages than still-married parents? It’s all very complicated! If only parents would just take care of their kids. Problem solved! </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is the biggest reason why you were able to get a non-waiver. Your situation is more of an exception, because you did have some extenuating circumstances, where the court deemed that it was in the best interest of your children that your ex not have access to them. </p>
<p>I agree with Sybbie. Though some, in fact most, of the dads in the situations I knew and know have deserted their children in all ways other than the court ordered child support, they have no legal injunctions in place about having a place in their children’s lives. It’s all because they WANT no contact,not because it was court ordered. The same situation occurs with student ndependence. IT cannot be a voluntary giving up of the child to a guardianship but a court ordered termination of parental rights and access for the student to get this. Doesn’t matter if mom/dad refuse to give penny one and won’t even give an address where they live, doesn’t matter if they are sitting in jail, or a crackhouse, if there isn’t an order in place removing child from the situation, it doesn’t happen except under professional with everything laid out and verified on a third party basis. </p>
<p>In one situation, my son’s friend’s mother willingly signed her son over to her sister as a legal guardian, but because it was a free will thing, not ordered by the court, not only did PROFILE have to be completed for her, but so did FAFSA. That the sister pretty much raised the young man, paying for everything for him, made no difference at all. The custody chain had to be directed from the court, not simply signed over. Makes sense,. Anyone can sign a guardian ship that can be taken back for a relative, a friend. Heck, I had the paperwork temporarily for my niece and nephew for when they stayed with me for just a few weeks, from my brother. A whole other thing when it’s court ordered.</p>
<p>This category of student is one not addressed as a pitfall of the fin aid system. Parents who are alive but refusing to pay when they can, or even release financial aid info, which then prevents those kids from getting aid. As generous as Harvard might be, they won’t give if an absentee parent refuses to pay/give fin info unless it’s a court ordered stay away order.</p>
<p>@simplelife I appreciate you sharing your story, thank you.</p>
<p>@sybbie719 - is non-payment of court-ordered child support often/ever grounds for a waiver in your experience?</p>
<p>^^^
I agree with Sybbie.</p>
<p>Normally, paying child support negates getting a waiver, but when the NCP loses access to the kids (for some kind of inappropriate behavior, I assume), then his obligation to pay support doesn’t cease, but a college would understand why a waiver would be needed for college-aged kids. </p>
<p>Most states base child support on the relative incomes of the two parents. However, it is set independently in each state. For example, if CP has income $50k and NCP has income $75k, the NCP will likely pay different amount of CS depending on which state the lawsuit is filed in - it is not uniform.</p>
<p>CS, like custody, is “infinitely reviewable.” The suit can be re-heard at any time, for any reason. This is a very effective way to transfer all available money from both parents to their attorneys, and to stir up bad blood. It does not generally appear to be effective at having more money actually spent on the child.</p>
<p>Most states do NOT require either parent to pay for college. The rationale is that they do not require parents to pay for college if the marriage is still intact, and it is not equal treatment under the law for divorced parents to be forced to pay for college when married parents are not required to do the same. However, some states DO require divorced parents to pay for college. Check your own state’s laws.</p>
<p>If you want the other parent to pay for college - or to feel any obligation to support his/her child in any way after age 18 - try sending the child to live with the other parent for his/her final year or two of HS. The lifelong benefits the child would reap from such a goodwill and cooperative effort between the parents could be HUGE. (And please don’t anyone throw out any red herrings about “abusive” parents; the vast majority of parents are NOT abusive, and there are criminal courts and CPS to handle those very few who are.) This is generally phrased as: can you love your child more than you hate your ex? The savings in attorneys’ fees alone could be enough to cover all college costs.</p>
<p>@SimpleLive Why do you say you didn’t ask for the Court to decide matters? Courts do not hear custody cases sua sponte; custody is a civil matter, someone has to be the Plaintiff to file and prosecute the lawsuit for the Court to get it. Civil custody cases do not file themselves. (Incidentally, what you refer to as “custody” is what people generally call Legal Custody, and what you refer to as “access” is generally called Physical Custody.)</p>
<p>@FCCDAD,
Are you referring to this quote?:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I said it because it’s true. Think about it. If I didn’t ask the court to decide those matters … hmmm … how did it get in the courts? I do not owe you, a complete stranger, any further explanation than what I feel comfortable revealing.</p>
<p>In my state, in my county, in my own personal court documents, and in all discussions in my own family’s personal matters, what I referred to here as “custody” is what the people involved in my own family’s case referred to as “custody.” And what I referred to as “access” is what the people involved in my own family’s case referred to as “access.” I used the terms that were “officially” used for years by people involved in my own family’s circumstances. And they are the same terms that are in all of my official documents. That is why I chose those words.</p>
<p>Texas does not/or didn’t use to use CP income to determine child support. I believe the OP was talking about Texas, but I could be remembering wrong.</p>
<p>If you settle out of court, in a mediated settlement, child support may be technically “infinitely renewable,” (in fact, I was under the informed impression that it was), but it is not practically infinitely renewable. If you agree to a particular number in a mediated settlement, you will be hard-pressed to change that number. That’s the way it works in the location where my case was settled.</p>
<p>One of the downsides of revealing personal information on CC, particularly if what you reveal is not commonly experienced, is that strangers are sometimes tempted to jump in do a little naysaying as though you don’t know what you’re talking about or as though you didn’t say it right. But, oh well. I hope the information I provided is helpful to somebody at sometime as they navigate their way through NCP waivers for their kids.</p>
<p>Yes, that quote. You don’t owe me anything, but you are certainly making public statements that are quite questionable. </p>
<p>If you didn’t take it to court, then your ex must have. Custody is a civil matter, and courts don’t create their own cases.
If you had no input, then you didn’t raise a defense. No testimony, no response to his pleadings. Nothing from you.</p>
<p>So you’re suggesting your ex sued you, went to court, you didn’t have any input, and… the Judge decided the best thing for the children was to cut them off from their own father? I find that implausible.</p>
<p>Re: Texas child support, I guess they simply aren’t one of the “most states” who consider both parents’ income. No conflict or contradiction in that statement. My statement that it is determined according to the state where the lawsuit is filed is also 100% correct. There is no national law to set child support amounts. What’s your point?</p>
<p>“Reviewable” does not mean you will get it changed. It means you can get the court to review it to determine whether they find it necessary to order a change or not. You’re talking now about getting the number changed; I said you could get the court to review it. (Also, I said “reviewable”, not “renewable”.) What’s your point? That you wanted to change it but the court, on review, found it was reasonable? That’s no contradiction to what I said. That you looked into going back to court but were advised not to bother? Again, no contradiction to what I said.</p>
<p>You seem to be suggesting that the terms you used did not have the meanings I understood them to have. Please explain to me how “custody” (as you use the term) is different from “legal custody,” and how “access” (as you use the term) is different from “physical custody”? Or, if you’re not trying to draw any distinction, what you find misleading about my statement?</p>
<p>I hope that kids can reunite with their parents after they age out of the court system; I think it’s better for the children to have good relations with their own parents, all their lives. I also hope children with real financial need are not prevented from attending college because the money went instead to a child who is simply estranged from his/her father.</p>
<p>The situations you allude to are all too commonly experienced, unfortunately.</p>
<p>@ FCCDAD,</p>
<p>The fact that you, personally, question my statements does not render them “questionable.” Perhaps you don’t have the experience or wisdom to know of possibilities beyond your limited view. Questionable is kind of an accusatory and derogatory term. In fact, your first post on this thread came across as a bit accusatory to me. I see that my initial read was on the mark.</p>
<p>My point regarding the “REVIEWABLE” child support (excuse me) was merely to explain that even though child support may be technically “reviewable,” does not mean that it will be worth one’s time or money to review, particularly if one has agreed to a mediated settlement as opposed to having the court assign an amount. No, a court did not review my own child support amount and deem it to be reasonable. I did not go back to court. More incorrect assumptions.</p>
<p>I didn’t find anything misleading in your statement regarding access and custody. Why did you think I found it misleading? You seemed to be attempting to educate me as to what my family’s arrangements were properly (“generally”) called. And I wanted to state that I was identifying our personal arrangements by their proper names the first time.</p>
<p>If you are addressing me in saying that you hope my kids can reunite with their father because “it’s better for the children to have good relations with their own parents, all their lives,” then I am left to believe that you are very misinformed on at least three counts. One, courts do not remove access willy nilly. Particularly in parochial Texas. Chances are good that the train for “good relations” left the station long ago, unfortunately. Two, you may need a refresher course on what’s really good for children’s emotional and physical health. Three, you are aware, aren’t you, that you know next to nothing about my children or their parents or their circumstances? It’s very far-fetched and presumptuous to think that you might possibly know what’s best for my kids or anybody else’s. </p>
<p>It’s odd that you should say that “the situations I allude to are all too commonly experienced.” I did not go back and re-read to be sure, but I was left with the impression that most, if not all, of the people who commented on my kids’ ability to get their NCP waivers said that our circumstances were unusual and that the unique aspects of our situation explained why my kids were granted their waivers despite the presence of child support.</p>
<p>Are kids ever “simply” estranged from their fathers, btw? And if they are, might they have some financial need after all?</p>
<p>I am left with the impression that you are projecting some of your own problems onto me and that it’s very important for you to be right. I didn’t do anything to you, and you know so little of who I am or what I represent. I merely posted our circumstance with the thought that others might learn from our experience. Believe what I said or don’t. But I hope you’ll stop your bullying in any case. We’re strangers, remember?</p>
<p>@SimpleLife You should consider switching to decaf, I hear many people find it just as good.</p>
<p>My point about both custody and CS being infinitely reviewable did not relate in any way to what a court might rule. It was to draw attention to the fact that once you open these lawsuits, they remain open until there is no more child for the court to have jurisdiction over (barring tragedy, that means when the last child reaches majority). The point is that it is quite common, and in no way improper, for the litigation to continue that entire time. I have seen no more reliable and consistent way to make a lifelong enemy of someone than to file lawsuits against them. So: you want to spend all your money on attorney’s fees until the last child is grown? File lawsuits. Lawyers don’t make their money by telling you to go away and just learn to get along; they pay their mortgage with your conflict. No conflict, no income for them.</p>
<p>“My parents spent my entire childhood, and all their money on attorneys, litigating over me, and I’m so happy that they did,” said no one ever. “And now that I’m going to college, their lawyers’ kids have their educations paid for, and I got a nice card and $25 for graduation.” Successful outcome? Yes… for the lawyers. Not for the child.</p>
<p>I have heard about how backwards Texas is, but even there I don’t believe they will cut off children from a parent “willy nilly.” The “train for good relations,” as you put it, is on a track that the parents put the children on. When there is abuse, there is CPS and criminal charges. When there is not abuse, it is the parents influencing the children. Parents who don’t love their children don’t fight in court over them; they just go away. There are plenty of parents who complain about the other parent never seeing the children; those children (and parents) have a legitimate complaint. In such cases, the absent parent is most likely the one at fault for the poor relations.</p>
<p>No, I don’t “need a refresher course course on what’s really good for children’s emotional and physical health.” I tell you flat out: what is best for children is healthy loving relationships with both parents. Period. That should be the goal of anyone who has any involvement with children anywhere. (Except Texas, apparently. I shall concede your point that Texas is really f’d up.)</p>
<p>I am very sorry to hear that your children are uniquely allergic to having healthy loving relationships with their parents. I foolishly presumed they were normal children.</p>
<p>No, kids are not ever “simply estranged” from their parents. There is always a responsible adult, when the subject is a child. If the parent abandons the child and refuses contact, that parent is responsible. If the parent abuses or molests the child, that parent is responsible. But if the parent continually fights for his/her parental rights to raise his/her own children, is not abusive or a molester, then someone else is responsible for the estrangement - 99% likely it is whatever adult the child is around most often. </p>
<p>Does estrangement = financial need? NO. A child from an intact home cannot go to the FA office and say, “My parents have a good income but refuse to pay for my college; give me money.” The answer is, they are still your parents - if you cannot get them to pay, that doesn’t make you needy. The answer is the same for the from a broken home. If your parents have the money to pay, that’s what the FA office determines - NOT whether you are getting along with your parents.</p>
<p>When a child has been isolated from a parent, going to college is an ideal opportunity to reconnect with that parent. You want a parent to contribute to his/her child’s college costs? Try supporting them having a good relationship first. Let the motivation come from within.</p>
<p>Seeking an NCP waiver instead of reuniting the child with his/her parent is still an option if a person is a danger. If you need a waiver because the contact is too risky, you should also get a restraining order.</p>
<p>The vast majority of cases (and parents) are not of that nature. If you found it necessary to obtain restraining orders against your ex, then it was very easy for you to show why you needed a waiver. For most people, that will be of no help, and is likely to mislead them into maintaining or aggravating a bad situation. </p>
<p>You should really worry more about what is best for the children than about what you imagine my motives to be. But I shall tell you directly: my motivation here is simply to help people. Especially the children, who have the most need and least ability to understand the root causes of their problems and the most promising ways of addressing them. And I also tell you directly: perpetuating estrangement from non-abusive parents is harmful, not helpful.</p>
<p>You should also look up the definition of “bullying.” It does not mean what you seem to think it means.</p>
<p>FCCDAD,</p>
<p>You just lectured and lashed out at a total stranger, based 100% on your own assumptions, 100% of which were wrong. I didn’t need even one remnant of your “advice.” Your assumptions about what a court will and will not do are wrong. They’re just wrong. In all of your posts here, you have offered nothing new or revealing in terms of explaining the process or the law, and every bit of personal “advice” you spewed forth in a condescending, hateful manner, does not apply to me or to my family. We do not need it. I’ll remind you again that you do not know me. You do not know my children. You do not know my ex. And you do not know my family’s circumstances beyond what I have voluntarily revealed. You spent … how long? … lecturing a stranger for who knows what reason, and for “offenses” that you entirely presumed. That’s pretty crazy behavior, FCCDAD. And it’s bullying.</p>