<p>
<a href=“http://m.seattlepi.com/news/us/article/NJ-student-s-feud-with-her-parents-headed-to-court-5282575.php”>http://m.seattlepi.com/news/us/article/NJ-student-s-feud-with-her-parents-headed-to-court-5282575.php</a>
This will be an interesting one to watch…</p>
<p>The reason that some states continue support until college is because when a family breaks up, the courts want to make sure that the impact is as low as possible on the children. I know that if you have children in private school, for instance, at the time of a divorce, most all courts will insist that the child stay in that school unless BOTH parents agree that s/he be moved and that payments for that cost are made part of the settlement. If you are not divorced, you can insist that your kid leave private school and go to the local public, and refuse to pay for the private costs. But once the marriage is broken, what was happening is that too many parents would punish the other parent by refusing to pay for things like private tuition, so the courts do take certain customary expenses that the parents were paying and insist that they are continued so that some stability and consistency can be given to the children. The same with the family home–the onus is often there (and not always to anyone’s benefit) that until the children reach a certain age, that the family home be maintained and the custodial parent stays there with the children. </p>
<p>So it goes with college costs in some states. IF a parent has the ability to pay for college , it’s considered part of the divorce package that he is on the hook for at least some of the costs whereas an intact family can decide not to pay, It’s to counter the very prevalent “Frigg You” attitude that some parents take, particularly the non custodial ones as they want to wash their hands of any and all commitments made while married. The marriage is gone, but promises and commitments to the kids, the courts try to keep in place. </p>
<p>So that’s a whole other situation than parents putting their hands up and refusing to pay for college or support or anything for a child who reaches age 18 and won’t live by house rules when the home situation is not found to be abusive. Otherwise the line of kids leaving home and want that support over all kinds of battles would be long indeed. </p>
<p>This is interesting to me, because friends of ours went through the same situation, though it did not go so far, when their daughter got into a battle with them,moved out, actually got an attorney and threatened to sue for support. That cost her a year and a half of college that the parents would have gladly paid, just out of principle. Things reconciled, but it did cost the young woman terribly. It never went to court, but our friends would have taken it there before paying penny one of what they felt was extortion. </p>
<p>I have friends whose DD married a man with a child from a prior marriage. The child is approaching college age and the stance that they are taking is that Dad will pay the amount of local community college COA for two years and then two years of what a state university would cost, on an annual basis and that’s it. The case may end up in litagation, and his attorney feels that this is what would probably be a go in the courts. The divorce decree did not specifically agree how much of college costs would be shared when drawn up 10 years ago. I don’t know how that handles child support and college obligations in divorce situations. I do know that in PA at age 18 or the day the student graduates from high school, all child support obligations end. My friend unsuccessfully sued her well to do ex for college expenses and got zip. He didn’t have to pay penny one after that date of grad. He was so sore from having to pay for private school for them that he refused to pay for private college. Whether he would have paid anyways, who knows? </p>
<p>From: <a href=“http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-familyfeud-newjersey-20140304,0,6612381.story”>Chicago News - Chicago Tribune - Chicago Tribune;
<p>“A New Jersey student who says her parents abandoned her when she turned 18 lost a first round on Tuesday…He set another hearing date for next month.”</p>
<p>"Family law experts in New Jersey say Canning’s case might set legal parameters on whether non-divorced parents in the state are obligated to pay for their children’s college education and provide other financial support after the child has left home.</p>
<p>New Jersey is one of several states that require divorced parents to pay for their children’s education through college, or legal emancipation, said William Laufer, a family law expert in New Jersey. So far, there is no parallel decision for intact families."</p>
<p>“In New Jersey, emancipation is not contingent on becoming a legal adult at age 18 but instead requires a young person to obtain “an independent status on his or her own” - such as graduation from college, obtainment of employment or marriage.”</p>
<p>So, it does not seem that the issue is yet fully resolved…</p>
<p>Yeah. The judge did not rule yesterday that the parents have no obligation to pay for college or for Catholic school. He ruled that there is no emergency that requires they be ordered to pay the school and the colleges pending a full hearing in April and more extensive briefing. And the real issue probably turns out to be not whether they have that obligation, but whether the daughter’s conduct forfeits any rights she might have.</p>
<p>Either the NJ Girl leaves home because she doesn’t like the house rules or her father kicked her out for not following the rules. She is suing him to force him to pay for her college expenses. </p>
<p>I suppose he will have to provide financial information for the FAFSA no matter what he thinks of his daughter, but does anyone have to pay for an adults expenses? Can a court force someone to spend money on someone else (once they are 18) when there is no court order in place such as a divorce agreement? It should be interesting to watch how this one turns out.</p>
<p>
</a></p>
<p><a href=“http://www.cbsnews.com/news/nj-teen-sues-parents-claims-they-kicked-her-out/[/url]”>http://www.cbsnews.com/news/nj-teen-sues-parents-claims-they-kicked-her-out/</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Court documents:</p>
<p><a href=“http://cbsnewyork.files.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2014/03/rachel-canning.pdf”>http://cbsnewyork.files.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2014/03/rachel-canning.pdf</a></p>
<p>On page 61 is the transcript of a voice message Rachel left for her mother. Gives you an idea of what the parents have been putting up with. Unbelievable. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Per the court documents submitted by the parents, that’s exactly what they did. They paid their fall tuition, and per their contract with the school, were within their rights to voluntarily withdraw her. They gave 2 months notice.</p>
<p>No, the case is not fully resolved. Judges often do this. They make a ruling just addressing the immediate paret of the case. At this point the girl has her tuition covered as the private school has agreed to let it go, so no harm done there. That she is with another family that is willingly taking care of her expenses makes it non urgent for any immediate payments to have to be made. I think this is putting pressure on the girl to reconcile with her parents. As to those folks who have enabled this young woman, I hope they do not get penny one reimbursed.</p>
<p>The part of this case that is of particular interest is regarding whether the parents who are intact in marriage are obligated to pay for their daughter. The college part is an issue that often arises in questions from kids on this forum. What to do if parents refuse to pay for college up to the ability that the EFC says they should? What if the parents are making demands that border on abusive? Making conditions that may not be abusive but are unreasonable? What constitutes reasonable? </p>
<p>My cousins, withdrew their commitment to pay for one of their son’s college when he got into trouble senior year for the second time. They gave him clear warning with the consequences and he still continued his behavior and got caught again. So instead of going away to state u that fall, he did a year of community college. I don’t know who suffered the more, because the parents were frankly eager to be rid of him. It was a very tense year and it could have ended differently, but he did do well enough at CC to transfer to state uni where he lived and the parents paid with the stipulation that a certain GPA, certain progress towards a degree, a certain time limit, staying out of trouble with the law and the college, no illegal findings, a certain set dollar amount, were all spelled out. He did make his marks and even graduated early. But it doesn’t always turn out that way.</p>
<p>I personally came very close to cutting off sleep away college for one of my kids who managed to toe the line when the ultimatium was drawn, and then did the same again in college and had to be issued another warning. Had I not already paid for the term in college, he would have sat that one out, but things did work out, by the skin of his teeth. </p>
<p>To insist that parents have to pay would really cause problems in such situations. It’s unfair as it is that in divorce situations parents have to pay in cases where intact families can issue ultimatums and set reasonable conditions, but the problem is greater that some parents just won’t pay to be onery or because they simply don’t have to do so, as my friend’s ex did in a state that had no such requirements, hamstringing the kids as well since the more generous schools won’t give aid with a parent that has the financial resources to pay. On the other hand, to open the door to any number of half baked adults who want power and independence without conditions, is a whole can of worms that I wouldn’t want to see opened. A lot of parents would be in trouble if forced to pay their EFC, I can tell you.</p>
<p>Rachel Canning wants to go to UDel, I notice. So does a niece of mine, from PA. My niece’s parents, intact marriage situation have said they will pay up to whatever it costs to go to Penn State or Pitt. They’ve given her that as the dollar amount and for her to go elsewhere means she has to somehow come up with the money and the parents are not going to borrow or cosign (which is the same as borrowing) for that gap. So UDel is not in the picture along with some other OOS publics she prefers to her state schools. How it would be considered reasonable for her to go to another state’s public, I don’t know. But whether the judge awards her any college money from her parents in a non divorce situation will be a new situation, and I’m watching this case for that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have a friend whose kid did something somewhat similar to this. A family took her in, enabled her, and did everything they could to prevent her parents from getting help for her. They encouraged her to become an emancipated minor, on the theory that she would get a free ride to college (it worked). This may have been her goal all along, since she expressed displeasure that her parents spent money on her sibling’s college education. She thought the money should all have been saved for her, because she was a better student. (Yes, really. BTW, her parents would have paid for her to go anywhere, but they expected her to contribute through a job.) I have eliminated details of what went on here for privacy reasons, but they would convince you. She is an expert liar and bamboozled a lot of people.</p>
<p>The enablers now refer to her as their D. They gave her a new car when she was in college, which she wrecked, naturally. They gave her another one. They refuse to acknowledge her stealing from people in their home.
They evidently enjoy regarding themselves as the “rescuers” of the little princess. (She is also very pretty.)</p>
<p>We all thought that if she didn’t get the emancipation, she would pull out the big guns and accuse her blameless father of molesting her. They were advised by experts they consulted to just let her go. At least their proceedings were confidential.</p>
<p>Rachel Canning received appallingly bad advice when she decided to file suit against her parents. One can only assume that it was the family that took her in. </p>
<p>Would love to see this on Judge Judy. Just sayin…</p>
<p>There are such parents. I ran into this on a mini basis. The parents involved caved very early in the process,but they were wiling to let my son stay with them when we wanted him home. I don’t understand the mindset, but yes, it happens. It happens in families too for a number of reason.</p>
<p>My neighbor wanted to take in her niece who she felt was the “Cinderella” in a household. The mom and remarried and had three children in a row with the girl from her first marriage much older, and she leaned heavily on the daughter for child care and household work. It got to the point that my neighbor felt that her niece and goddaughter was expected to do way more than was reasonable and was losing out on her highschool opportunities. Still they did not take it to any extreme.</p>
<p>When the young woman was accepted to colleges, her mother wanted her to commute so that she could stay at home and continue helping out. My neighbor offered to pay the room and board for her niece, and the girl did go away to college which created a huge rift that has yet to be repaired. Both sides have their stories. It was ultimately the girl’s decision IMO when she became an adult. But without her aunt’s paying the living expenses, she would have had to have commuted and her mother really wanted her to do so, and resented her sister’s intervention that allowed the girl to go away to college. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am one the parents who WILL NOT pay what the EFC says I could/should. First of all, I cannot pay my EFC without taking loans, which I don’t feel like doing. Second, there are other reasonable choices for my children, that do not require me forking my EFC.</p>
<p>My son who is a junior knows that I will be paying tuition in the in-state flagship (which is significantly less than our EFC). However if he gets rejected from in-state flagship, I will be paying for 2 years of community college and the next 2 years at the flagship, where he will have guaranteed acceptance if he takes certain steps (it is not that hard in my state - there are articulation agreements and GPA requirements are only 2.5).</p>
<p>Where we live, there are other choices in between in-state flagship and community college, but in my mind they are not worth it. If my son wants to pursue those he is welcome to take Stafford loans and figure out how to cover the difference.</p>
<p>My son also knows that I will not pay for dorm (he has a perfectly nice bed-room in my house) and he will be responsible for books costs (meaning keeping part-time job during school).</p>
<p>I feel I am well within my rights to set the parameters and courts should NOT have an authority over my decision.</p>
<p>I similarly feel regarding non-custodial parents rights and responsibilities. It is one thing to insist that non-custodial parent pays their fair share of tuition of the local in-state options, it is quite another to demand payments for sleep-away experience, out-of-state public or private colleges. </p>
<p>I definitely understand all the intricacies of single parenting and support. I’ve been the single parent of my son for over 16 years and FOUGHT every step of the way for what HE was legally entitled to in spite of the hurdles and HEADACHES. I know more than a few single mothers that have just given up on ever getting support for their children and several others who’ve definitely discoverd that having a court order doesn’t guarantee any type of collection.</p>
<p>I also work in a very male dominated field and have several very close male friends. I’ve learned that many very caring, concerned, involved fathers are very bitter and resentful about paying any type of court ordered support. They don’t mind buying things for their children or spending time with them, but as soon as they have to send a check to their ex who then has control of those funds, they feel ‘shafted’.</p>
<p>So, I understand the rationale for why courts rule that single fathers have an obligation to provide support including college costs in some states, but that leaves the door open for a situation in which a single father who feels he has already paid his ex a sufficient sum of money and who has an estranged relationship with his child and has a new relationship with children and a new spouse that feels their new family should be receiving 100% of his time and income from going into court and arguing that he had indeed set aside money to assist his eldest child, but set rules that had to be followed. Since the child had gotten into trouble, chosen not to live by their rules, and does not have a solid relationship with them, he should be able to withhold those funds. How does the judge then rule? That as a single parent he’s obligated to pay? Or as a parent he’s allowed to put conditions on the funds? In this country, we’re big proponents of ‘equal treatment under the law’, whichever way the judge could rule it sets a precendent that is going to have a substantial impact.</p>
<p>The best alternative is definitely for a mediator to settle this without making a ruling, but it is very intriguing to watch it play out…</p>
<p>One interesting thing regarding my friends and their D: at some point they sat down with a family therapist or court-appointed mediator --can’t recall which-- who informed my friends that it was important that the D who accused them of abuse and sicced law enforcement on them–for which they could have gone to jail–share equally in any inheritance! </p>
<p>They were incredulous. </p>
<p><a href=“http://cbsnewyork.files.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2014/03/rachel-canning.pdf”>http://cbsnewyork.files.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2014/03/rachel-canning.pdf</a></p>
<p>$654 weekly support to the host family? Thanks to the poster above who linked the pdf. I only got as far as the $/wk on pg 5 before my eyes bulged out of my head…</p>
<p>Sad all around, and unfortunately it is a he said-she said kind of thing. I would tell you what any therapist reading this would say, that whatever the facts in this case are, whether the parents threw her out or she left, whether she is a rebellious teen or they have a couple of screws loose as parents, that something like this doesn’t come out of nowhere., and it says there are very real issues in the relationship between her and her parents, and it probably isn’t the kid is some spoiled brat alone. If it gets to this point this was a lot of years coming. What makes this so striking and odd is that the daughter doesn’t seem to fit the profile, in the sense that she is an honor student who seems to have half a brain, usually kids that rebellious IME usually have a long string of issues with them, doing poorly in school, acting out in school…not usually someone planning to major in bio med engineering, something doesn’t add up.</p>
<p>Mind you, I am not blaming the parents, I am just saying that something wasn’t right for a long time for it to escalate to something like this. I am sure on certain radio talk shows some are ranting about liberals breaking up families and so forth, but something was broken there a long time before this. The family needs serious family counseling, that is for sure, I doubt very much this is the golden child abused by evil parents or the child from hell mad at her virtuous parents, I suspect there is a lot more to this then either of those say, elements of both. Based on my own experiences of parenting, I kind of wonder if there wasn’t always this power struggle between the child and parent that never worked out right, but who knows?</p>
<p>I feel for the judge in this case, family court is one of the sadder things around, and a case like this has to affect anyone with an ounce of empathy. The law in NJ does cover paying for college in divorce, but it also does not as others have said mandate parents paying for college, or being forced to. Colleges kind of treat it as if that is the case, that unless a child is legally emancipated at 18, gets no support from the parents, they treat it like it is a legal mandate, but it isn’t. I suspect that the judge in this case will not rule that the parents have to pay for college (the tuition at the high school is another matter, if the parents signed the contract, they are liable, and the judge would probably frown on them not paying it, because doing this in the middle of the school year is disruptive, even if the school won’t expel her). </p>
<p>My guess is he might order arbitration, or if it is in the scope of his power (don’t really know), order counseling. Quite honestly, if I was in the position of the other family who took her in, I would be encouraging the girl and her family to get counseling to work this out; I would also like to know why the girl’s therapist thinks that the girl was abused, despite what some say, therapists in general are pretty sharp, and they know that what they hear in therapy is one sided and they usually are pretty good at reading between the lines, and would know the difference between a petulant teenager and someone with real issues…</p>
<p>I will add reading this that I personally would never use paying for school as a punishment, it is just too important to the kids future, and even if I had gotten divorced I would do my best to make sure I could pay for his education (if in fact that is what her parents did), but that is me, I cannot and will not judge others decisions in situations like this. It is just plain sad that it got this far, all I can hope and pray is that when the facts come out, that the judge is able to do something to make this work, because all around this is a no win situation. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t blame them. </p>
<p>No one is entitled to an inheritance. Instead, it’s a gift the bestower is entitled to give or not as he/she is inclined before the gift is made as reflected in expressed wishes in the will or some other legally valid document. </p>
<p>I don’t understand the mindset of “therapists” or others who feel parents should still maintain equal inheritance for all children when one or more of the children did something which displeased or in this case, could have been harmful to the parents. </p>
<p>Many wills have family members named with a stipulation that a suit for more would result in a loss of the inheritance amount in order to ward off the expense and trouble of lawsuits when the possibility of such is there. Peter Falk, of Columbo fame did that with his daughters with his estate, One of them sued him for college payments–she was going to UPenn, and for whatever reason he refused to pay. </p>
<p>There is that category of shaftee NCPs or just any divorced parent who HAS to pay college money despite their kids’ behaviour which is the loss of parental privilege of an intact family Usually, the court ruling makes the it a requirement to pay if both parents cannot come to an agreement otherwise, so if the exes can put their heads together on the situation and the kid is being egregious in behaviour, payment could be set aside. </p>
<p>I’ve seen both sides of this. I have friends who married SOs with chlldren from prior marriages. In one case, the child refused to have anything to do with the father despite repeated entreaties, and the father had zero say on anything, wtih advice and ideas immediately taken off the table for many years. Then when the college years arrived, the child wanted the money and wondered why neither dad nor step mom were particularly eager to pay. My one friend paid exactly what the attorney felt would be upheld throught the courts and not a penny more though she and her DH could have paid full freight for any college and are now doing so with their kids. It’s a shame this situation occurs, but it’s the reality.</p>
<p>But for kids having the entitlement of college funds… who is to determine how much? FAFSA EFC? PROFILE conribution amounts? State school, communitycollege, room and board, private? </p>
<p>Yesterday the judge used the phrase “slippery slope” and I see that very clearly here.
Can a court really compel a family to pay for a four year school straight out of high school, instead of two years of cheaper community college, followed by two years at a local four year school? Can a court compel a family to pay for an on campus experience instead of having a child commute, or compel a family to pay for a state flagship instead of a state directional with a full ride?</p>
<p>If–as I have seen reported–the student was engaging in behaviors that indicate a good chance that she might not be able to handle the freedom of college (e.g., having just been suspended from high school for attendance problems; drinking; etc.)–can the court compel parents to send their child to college?</p>
<p>Just think of all the threads here on CC–the child is not yet ready to handle the business end of college? then bring him home/don’t let him enroll?</p>
<p>is this situation really any different?</p>