Is a child going to university still a child of the marriage if they...
- Thread starter KW_Divorced
- Start date
OntarioDaddy
New member
That was my question.
Last school year, child and friend moved into their own place together.
This year, child and extra special friend moved into their own place together.
The timing makes it hard. How do you show it's going to be long term this time and not just like every other school year. A letter from child in love about the future?... It's hard to show something has changed until it has. Once child doesn't come home as usual, then you would have more of a stance.
... This is all going on the assumption that the CP needs some sort ofongoing support while child is at University.
Last school year, child and friend moved into their own place together.
This year, child and extra special friend moved into their own place together.
The timing makes it hard. How do you show it's going to be long term this time and not just like every other school year. A letter from child in love about the future?... It's hard to show something has changed until it has. Once child doesn't come home as usual, then you would have more of a stance.
... This is all going on the assumption that the CP needs some sort ofongoing support while child is at University.
If the child doesn't intend on moving back, well, it is time to put on their adult pants and learn to live like an adult. I mean, isn't that how they are acting with their decisions? Like an adult?
Even in the offside chance that c/s would continue, it would be substantially reduced because the costs associated with the child would otherwise be covered under s7 expenses. So the CP would receive a marginal amount, even if they were successful in challenging it.
The CP holding a room on the off chance the kids relationship may go south during the school year, is nothing more than wishing on a star. The result may happen, it may not. C/S should not continue based off of maybe's, especially when all intentions point in another direction.
I see where you are going, but your position is based off of assumptions. And should your assumption be wrong, should the NCP be reimbursed for C/S paid during the period where the child removed themselves from the care of the parents? Do you believe that most CP's would willingly reimburse the NCP should the child never return? I doubt it. And that is why C/S should cease when the child expresses their intent to remove themselves from their parents charge. If it happens they come back, c/s would resume. Because if they don't, the NCP just donated thousands of $$ to the CP for nothing.
Even in the offside chance that c/s would continue, it would be substantially reduced because the costs associated with the child would otherwise be covered under s7 expenses. So the CP would receive a marginal amount, even if they were successful in challenging it.
The CP holding a room on the off chance the kids relationship may go south during the school year, is nothing more than wishing on a star. The result may happen, it may not. C/S should not continue based off of maybe's, especially when all intentions point in another direction.
I see where you are going, but your position is based off of assumptions. And should your assumption be wrong, should the NCP be reimbursed for C/S paid during the period where the child removed themselves from the care of the parents? Do you believe that most CP's would willingly reimburse the NCP should the child never return? I doubt it. And that is why C/S should cease when the child expresses their intent to remove themselves from their parents charge. If it happens they come back, c/s would resume. Because if they don't, the NCP just donated thousands of $$ to the CP for nothing.
Rioe
New member
Going back to the original post, I've bolded the key ideas.
I don't understand how ANYBODY could be arguing that this 21-or-so-year-old, renting a place of her own, in her final year, not in need of financial support from her parents for her expenses, and not intending to move back home after graduating, still triggers a CS obligation from one parent to the other.
The parents are no longer required to maintain a room for her in their houses, no longer feed and clothe her, no longer pay her tuition. CS is over. This is so black and white I can't believe you are all trying to make it grey again.
Has failure-to-launch become the norm in society now that we assume a child will boomerang back to a parent, to the extent that the other parent still has to keep paying CS even though the child has clearly permanently moved out?
I don't understand how ANYBODY could be arguing that this 21-or-so-year-old, renting a place of her own, in her final year, not in need of financial support from her parents for her expenses, and not intending to move back home after graduating, still triggers a CS obligation from one parent to the other.
The parents are no longer required to maintain a room for her in their houses, no longer feed and clothe her, no longer pay her tuition. CS is over. This is so black and white I can't believe you are all trying to make it grey again.
Has failure-to-launch become the norm in society now that we assume a child will boomerang back to a parent, to the extent that the other parent still has to keep paying CS even though the child has clearly permanently moved out?
OntarioDaddy
New member
I'll say again that I agree cs should stop, but I'm playing devil's advocate here...
I certainly don't see this as simply black and white.
CP has been maintaining a room for kid for years, so there is nothing new there.
Each year kid moves out to go away to school.
Each year kid moves back home for summers. CS has always continued.
This year, child says they won't come home when school finishes (8-10 months from now).
CS would normally continue until the child graduates. Possibly longer if they continue on for a degree.
Whether this is the final school year, is a guess.
Whether child comes home in 10 months, is just their guess.
Whether CP is still supporting child, is just NCP's guess. (I'd assume they will argue this)
I certainly don't see this as simply black and white.
CP has been maintaining a room for kid for years, so there is nothing new there.
Each year kid moves out to go away to school.
Each year kid moves back home for summers. CS has always continued.
This year, child says they won't come home when school finishes (8-10 months from now).
CS would normally continue until the child graduates. Possibly longer if they continue on for a degree.
Whether this is the final school year, is a guess.
Whether child comes home in 10 months, is just their guess.
Whether CP is still supporting child, is just NCP's guess. (I'd assume they will argue this)
Child of the Marriage Definition