Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

With Student Loan Debt being brought up in another thread then this story coming across the way it seemed it was time to hash it out.

I knew parents were responsible for the kids primary education but did not know they were legally obliged to pay for something as optional as college. Many parents do, and college is a good thing but forcing them seems a bit strange. At that age (21 in the article) the parents have no say in much of anything and are a glorified ATM that pays tuition no matter what, which seems off. I was curious what others thought.

Parents are not required to pay for college. Occasionally some hackney judge has said one parent had to keep paying, but its unusual.

As I told the kids when they turned 6. Once the clock hits 18 you're out the door you little money pits! Now get back in the coal mine and make daddy some bank!

EDIT: I see this is from New Jersey. New Jersey...the New Orleans of the North.

It's a tad bizarre to be honest. I mean I'm not really that well placed to comment though as our Uni/College tuition gets paid for. Mind you, because I've fethed around a lot, I had to pay for my first year in my current course. Then again I do have a job and had saved up prior to going back to uni.

People citing family circumstances are a bit off and surely there's no basis in law as soon as you become an "adult" regardless of where you live. If you're a legal adult living at home be prepared to be thrown out on your ass at any time or show your parents/their home a degree of respect.

Once you are 18, you are legally responsible for your decisions. That includes any loans you might want to sign and the reasons why are irrrelevant.

Parents should only be on the hook if the cosign the loans. Should they cosign loans? Impossible to say, it's specific to every family dynamic. Most financial advice I have seen is to never cosign on anything, ever. But this it outside my area of expertise.

 Ouze wrote:
Parents should only be on the hook if the cosign the loans. Should they cosign loans? Impossible to say, it's specific to every family dynamic. Most financial advice I have seen is to never cosign on anything, ever. But this it outside my area of expertise.

Anecdotally to my family, I would never have been able to get a car loan had my father not cosigned for me the first time. Without a car, I would never have been able to go to college. I understand the risk it posed for him though.

My parents paid some of mine. I paid the rest by working. I volunteered to now pay off my sister's for them. I don't give a damn about responsibility or who's "job" it is to pay for things. You just lend a hand if you have the ability to do so, because that's just what you do.

The "article" just makes me hate everyone involved.

There are a lot of factors at play in creating the current situation. It's very difficult to pin it down to any one thing...

Banks are responsible for suckering ill-informed adult children into making poor financial decisions.

Institutions are responsible for accepting student loans and jacking up tuition to fit.

Parents are responsible for pushing their children to go to college, even if their aspirations don't require a college education.

Pop culture is responsible for promoting the "college lifestyle" as a life of partying over learning.

Employers are responsible for giving preference to employees with college degrees, even if the education is completely irrelevant to the job.




Ultimately, the "kids" are responsible because the burden will fall on them, and nobody held a gun to their heads and forced them to go off to college. Hopefully they've studied something useful that will one day pay the bills and allow them to pay off their student loans.

 daedalus wrote:

The "article" just makes me hate everyone involved.

You ain't kidding...

College isn't a right.

My folks didn't pay gak and I'll be paying my loans for 20+ years.

I'm saving for by boy's college, but:
1) it'll only "defray" a portion of the cost
2) they don't know I'm doing this
3) it will be understood, that they'll have to earn it their own way

The real issue here is New Jersey's child support laws, under which the parents can be held responsible for a child's education even post 18. That is what actually drove the issue in the OP. Is that a problem? I dunno, but that is where we are.

As I noted. Its New Jersey, the Pittsburgh of...er well...er...Hey Look a distraction!

 Ouze wrote:
The real issue here is New Jersey's child support laws, under which the parents can be held responsible for a child's education even post 18. That is what actually drove the issue in the OP. Is that a problem? I dunno, but that is where we are.

Is it a problem?

Abso-fething-lutely.

Pfft, the govt is paying your education.
Yay, Handouts


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
The real issue here is New Jersey's child support laws, under which the parents can be held responsible for a child's education even post 18. That is what actually drove the issue in the OP. Is that a problem? I dunno, but that is where we are.

Is it a problem?

Abso-fething-lutely.

Xehhh, you can't get a job straight outta highschool anymore that can support you. Even vocationalike programs at jc take 3 years. Just because you can vote, doesn't mean you are an adult financially.

I don't know enough details of this case to make any strong judgement but it does sound kind. However what little information there is makes the parents sound like dicks so I'm not super eager to cry out injustice on their part.

More generally speaking I'm a big fan of education. I think we are all better off the more people around us are better educated about more things. I'm really of the opinion that access to all levels of education should be freely provided by the state to all citizens, provided they're academically qualified. I'm not a fan of putting knowledge behind pay walls. The whole system stinks and if one more person is getting a chance I think everyone should have I don't have it in me to rage too hard.

I wouldn't know. I went to college on the dime of the US Government

You socialists and your handouts.

 daedalus wrote:
You socialists and your handouts.

Snarky dude... snarky.

He earned it.

I never saw it as the responsibility of my wife and I to pay for our kids' college, though we did start up college funds for all three. These funds were never intended to pay for a full 4+ year education, and were NEVER promised to the kids (I call them my Shelby Cobra funds.)

Son1 had a lot of problems in high school. We encouraged him to get a job and take classes at the local college and let him know if he could get B average we would consider releasing some of the funds we had stashed for him. That never panned out.

Son2 did a lot better and got scholarships (to include a 4 year Army ROTC scholarship) and we allowed limited use of the college fund to cover some expenses.

Daughter is only in 6th grade...

With Son2, we strongly discouraged loans (and I was not gonna sign for one) and he made it through, barely, with no debt.

I think the student loan system is as fethed up as a football bat. I would never lend money to some kid with a C or even B average in high school who intended on taking a major with almost no real employment opportunity. The fact banks can do so is because us tax payers basically guarantee they will get their money. Hell, most student loans can't even be discharged via bankruptcy proceedings.

College is not a right, and if a kid wants to go, he or she should step up and do the right things. If a bank wants to invest in some kid's education via a loan, the bank should be able to insist on performance standards being met and certain majors being taken.

Just my 2 centavos.

 Frazzled wrote:
Parents are not required to pay for college. Occasionally some hackney judge has said one parent had to keep paying, but its unusual.

As I told the kids when they turned 6. Once the clock hits 18 you're out the door you little money pits! Now get back in the coal mine and make daddy some bank!

EDIT: I see this is from New Jersey. New Jersey...the New Orleans of the North.

Guess they're gonna have to change from The Garden State to The Chocolate State. I'm sure Christie can get that pushed through the legislature.

OT

Once you're 18 you're an adult and therefore are the only one who should be held to be legally responsible for you. Hopefully most parents love their kids and do their best to help them if they need it and have the parents have the means to provide it but that should be because the parents want to help not because of any legal obligation.

I bootstrapped my way through college! No loans. I had two full-time jobs and took over ull-time credits to make sure I graduated on time.

My GPA was gak, but you know what they call the college graduate at the bottom of their class? A college graduate! No one has asked about my GPA since.

As for responsibility. It is who ever signed the paperwork for loans.

Now saying all of that. I also find the price of "job training" ridiculous in this country. I find it funny that the Businss world won't put anyof their own scratch into the deal, but instead expect the potential employee to float the cost. However, that just speaks to the value of labor now-a-days. Little to no value.

 whembly wrote:

He earned it.

Yes. He did fulfill the necessary requirements to be eligible for it. (see what I'm doing? )

 whembly wrote:
College isn't a right.

Access to education is a right up to some level. At least it is in the UDHR.

Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 whembly wrote:
College isn't a right.

Access to education is a right up to some level. At least it is in the UDHR.

Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

He said college isn't a right. Your quote shows

technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

Equally Accessible based on merit =/= a right unless the UDHR has a strange definition of what constitutes a right.

Legally, the kid, moraly, i.e. if this was my kid, both the parents and the kid. You want your child to get the best in life (If you aren't an unlikable donkey-cave), and should help them, as they have not yet done anything like this before.

 Ouze wrote:
Once you are 18, you are legally responsible for your decisions. That includes any loans you might want to sign and the reasons why are irrrelevant.

Parents should only be on the hook if the cosign the loans. Should they cosign loans? Impossible to say, it's specific to every family dynamic. Most financial advice I have seen is to never cosign on anything, ever. But this it outside my area of expertise.

This is pretty much where I stand on this one. I know that my parents would almost NEVER have cosigned anything for me. Hell, when I bought my first car, my dad was there to help negotiate, and make sure i didn't get screwed, but if they had came back saying he needed to cosign, we would have found a different place to buy from

It's one of the reasons why I went to the military: for the education benefits. With my parents' income, and my "social status" eliminating me from a ton of scholarship opportunities, combined with middling grades and a good but not absolutely stand-out stellar athletic "career" meant that we'd be paying out of pocket for college, placing me in a debt that my parents very strictly warned me against accruing.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
With my parents' income, and my "social status" eliminating me from a ton of scholarship opportunities...

This is worst now than even when *I* want to school...

 whembly wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
With my parents' income, and my "social status" eliminating me from a ton of scholarship opportunities...

This is worst now than even when *I* want to school...

Yeah, the annual FAFSA packets are a joke. Why the feth does MY income have anything to do with my son's eligibility for aid? Why do they demand MY tax forms? None of their damned business, especially if I am not paying the kid's way. None of what they ask for is able to determine I am keeping up two households because of geographic separation caused by military assignments, nor accurately determine my other financial burdens.

 CptJake wrote:
Yeah, the annual FAFSA packets are a joke. Why the feth does MY income have anything to do with my son's eligibility for aid? Why do they demand MY tax forms? None of their damned business, especially if I am not paying the kid's way. None of what they ask for is able to determine I am keeping up two households because of geographic separation caused by military assignments, nor accurately determine my other financial burdens.

No kidding. Not only all that you say, I recall that at no part did the numbers allow parents to even account for how many children they might be supporting in one household, let alone multiples. My dad made enough I didn't qualify for aid enough to cover college entirely even if they wanted to cosign all that they could.

 daedalus wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
Yeah, the annual FAFSA packets are a joke. Why the feth does MY income have anything to do with my son's eligibility for aid? Why do they demand MY tax forms? None of their damned business, especially if I am not paying the kid's way. None of what they ask for is able to determine I am keeping up two households because of geographic separation caused by military assignments, nor accurately determine my other financial burdens.

No kidding. Not only all that you say, I recall that at no part did the numbers allow parents to even account for how many children they might be supporting in one household, let alone multiples. My dad made enough I didn't qualify for aid enough to cover college entirely even if they wanted to cosign all that they could.

I suppose it is because one can't really prove that their parents aren't helping them and they need to get a sense of whether it is something they could do. The system was created when it was assumed families of a certain income level would almost certainly pay for post-secondary education at least partially. Does anyone know that if you've served that is still needed? I would think by the time one gets finished with their service to have time to go to a full blown university/college they would be considered independent and not need to put any other info.

 Ahtman wrote:

 daedalus wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
Yeah, the annual FAFSA packets are a joke. Why the feth does MY income have anything to do with my son's eligibility for aid? Why do they demand MY tax forms? None of their damned business, especially if I am not paying the kid's way. None of what they ask for is able to determine I am keeping up two households because of geographic separation caused by military assignments, nor accurately determine my other financial burdens.

No kidding. Not only all that you say, I recall that at no part did the numbers allow parents to even account for how many children they might be supporting in one household, let alone multiples. My dad made enough I didn't qualify for aid enough to cover college entirely even if they wanted to cosign all that they could.

I suppose it is because one can't really prove that their parents aren't helping them and they need to get a sense of whether it is something they could do. The system was created when it was assumed families of a certain income level would almost certainly pay for post-secondary education at least partially. Does anyone know that if you've served that is still needed? I would think by the time one gets finished with their service to have time to go to a full blown university/college they would be considered independent and not need to put any other info.

You'd have to appeal at the school's financial aids office. Sometimes, you may have to hire a lawyer to prove that you are indeed independent.

Not easy thing to do when the Dept of Education consider's that it's the parent's responsibility to pay for their children's education.

 whembly wrote:
You'd have to appeal at the school's financial aids office. Sometimes, you may have to hire a lawyer to prove that you are indeed independent.

Even if they served in the military already?

If I recall getting married is one way to no longer be considered a financial dependent.