April 20, 2001

3:26 PM

The estate of a divorced father is freed from paying a failing son's tuition. Basically, the ruling establishes (at least in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts) that children have obligations to parents. OK, if you want your parents to pay for your college education, you should at least try to graduate. But what are the other consequences of this ruling? What's the point at which a child's bad behavior releases a parent from their obligations as a parent? If your divorced dad is the Great Santini, can he cut off your child support if you hit him back?
posted by dchase (2 comments total)

"What's the point at which a child's bad behavior releases a parent from their obligations as a parent?"

This is assuming that paying for your child's college education should be an obligation. I don't think it is.

We're not talking about a little child here.

Once a child is no longer a minor, the parent has every right to consider support a perk rather than a right. Sure, I wouldn't be this way with my own kids -- it seems a little too tough love for my tastes. But, I've known people who have paid for their own education and consider it one of their greatest achievements.
posted by mgtrott at 6:27 PM on April 20, 2001

It's not unheard of for non-custodial parents to put caveats into the language of divorce agreenents., and George, Sr.'s lawyer had his opportunity at the time of the divorce.......While Junior could probably use a good kick in the slats, if Senior wanted to place limits on his agreement to pay for a college education, he should have said so, even then, when the kid was five.........Why did BU let this lox stay enrolled, anyhow?
posted by perdido at 11:07 PM on April 20, 2001