It's fair to split the cost of college equally. Period.

I'm with Sieryn, My husband and I both work hard. Just because we have more money, does that mean we should pay for more??? I don't think so. Of course, my SD's BM does think so. She doesn't even feel obligated to pay a penny in support, let alone worry about her child's college. In fact, when they went to court for support last year, the judge actually admonished her because she's claiming that she's been working on her AA degree for over five years... and if you look at her divorce papers filed 11-12 years ago, she was also claiming at that time that she was a college student. She's been EMT certified and supposedly in a two year nursing program for over five years. Yet, if SD happens to be living with her when she is ready for college and her income is 'considerably less' because all these years, we have been working and she hasn't, then that's just too bad. She has an equal responsibility to her child.

Just as a NCP that makes less would still be obligated to pay their half (or third), even if CP's income kept them from getting aid and they all had to split the actual cost of school.

Because it is using all your available resources and strickly speaking it makes good business and money sense... And I would say that no matter if it was dad who had the lower income or mom. It doesnt matter. I think the most important part is that everyone is working together on an agreed upon plan. The parents don't HAVE to contribute anything if they don't want to. And really what should they do use the higher income and then split the cost equally?? I am a firm believer in everyone do their part so if both parents want to pay for college then both parents should contribute equally. I would say the only change would be if (for example) I make vastly more money than my ex and decided you know what I can afford it I think I will pay x over what we agreed upon. It is my decision and something I want to do. I should not, however be forced to do so.

"JNM, with all due respect the cost of college can be vastly greater than vacation."

Of course it can. My point was that if the money is there it can be spent however she chooses when the time comes. If toward college isn't her choice she could go on vacation - a really LONG and expensive one.

"I dont see it fair if the mom makes considerably less, for the money to be split 1/3, etc. You are willing to take advantage of her making less to get aid, but not to split costs?"

They are HER kids. Why shouldn't she pay a third? We're not ""taking advantage of her making less to get aid." It's the LAW in our state that whichever parent the child lives with the most is whose income should be reported on the FAFSA. It's not our fault that SHE makes less than we do. That's entirely HER fault. She has two college degrees...that's one degree more than both DH and me. She needs to get a better job. Instead, she went back to college at age 45 to become a teacher. Starting teachers make about $30k in our state. Again...her choice.

"All of these discussions are very sad. Children of divorced parents have lower college attendance and graduation rates. So sad."

That's BS. My parents are divorced. I have one college degree; my brother has four college degrees. We fully intend to help DH's sons with college...but we believe in them helping themselves too.

What's sad is your comments. I get the feeling you have no experience with divorce.

I'm a stepmother of 2. They come EOW and i had an issue with both parents regarding this. In my culture we open bank account as well for the children we have and we pay for school. When my son was born, i opened a bank account, an RESP (for education) and i applied for grants which i've already recieved and he is collecting interest) I was completely stunned! to find out that my Skids 10 and 13 do not have bank accounts of their own. THey 'share' with their mom...in other words. its her money...MyDH refuses to open one for them. I've heard the have an education fund open for them by their aunt.
So i'm just galled! that both these parents will not do this for their kids.
Either way, i am not putting any money in for them. After alot of consideration , i think its up to the parents to do this for them. And i have to take care of my child.Cause my DH was shocked that our son has a bank account and an resp. He says, why can't we use that money? I told him, lay your hands off that money! Its our sons! Not mine , not yours! I will have to even now go to an attorney to protect that money against his own father. Its Awful! i love my Dh but he doens't think of any futur for any of the kids....i just do not understand.
But no, i wont put away for his two kids. THeir aunt has started, thankGOd for that but i will not. I have my own expenses to pay and i put away for my child now and for my futur child that i will have.

Terrig,

"All of these discussions are very sad. Children of divorced parents have lower college attendance and graduation rates. So sad."

That's BS. My parents are divorced. I have one college degree; my brother has four college degrees. We fully intend to help DH's sons with college...but we believe in them helping themselves too.

I dont think your immediate family is enough to control average rates across country.

"why is it fair to use the mom's lower inccome on the FAFSA, and then split college costs equally"

Nothing is ever fair.

LIFE ISN'T FAIR.... That's the first rule of LIFE

It's fair in the case that the mom's lower income as reported on FAFSA reduces the overall expected family contribution, so everyone benefits. You need to look at the big picture here.

Let's take an example:

College costs $20K/year

Scenario 1: Mom's income is $40K, assets are $10K
Mom files FAFSA: expected family contribution = 0
Kid attends a college that meets 75% of need
Family must come up with 75% of $20K = $5000/year
Split 3 ways that's $1666/year for kid, biomom and biodad

Scenario 2: Dad's income is $100K, assets are $50K
Dad files FAFSA: expected family contribution is around $33K
Family must come up with $20K/year
Split 3 ways that's $6666/year for kid, biomom and biodad

Using Mom's income has saved everyone $5000/year, or $20,000 over the course of 4 years.

FAFSA is imperfect, inequitable, and in some cases unfair, however it's the name of the game. Better to understand now how the game is played, LEGALLY, than to get caught up in an emotional situation where ultimately the kid is the one who loses.

I agree, never ever lie to IRS, on FAFSA form etc. Life to short. My point is Dad saves $$$ becuase of moms low income, I dont think the % split is necessarily fair.

To which, Ima replies life isnt fair. I think that type of response is what drives people to retaliate. Like mom and kids tell DAd, oh we got the aid offer back, it was a little less than we expected.

I think a lot of people would say where Dad makes a lot more, he should contribute more.

and to which I say, parents are equally responsible. If dad quits his job or intentionally makes less (as in TOS's situation), the dad should still pay half, even if the mom makes more.

Maybe a lot of people (mom's with custody that make less than dad) might say if dad makes more, he should pay more. But what if mom with custody makes more, should dad pay less and mom pay more because she makes more? Or is it just one sided in your eyes???

I think if either parent earns more (or in TOSs case) could earn more, he/she should pay more.

The problem is college is expensive. This just isnt a tit for tat thing, this is, for a lot of kids, whether they can go at all.

well, is it the parent that does earn more or the parent that 'could' earn more??? That matters because my SD's mom 'chooses' not to work, and if she hasn't lied about how long she's gone to college, she has more college than me and my husband.

In theory, the courts can impute income to a parent (custodial or not) who earns less than he or she is qualified to earn. I just wish they would actually do so more often.

Many NCP and stepparents are unwilling to contribute anything at all toward college. My exH took me back to court to fight paying $1000 toward our child's tuition at a state university. The lawyer probably cost nearly that much.

Well, theotherside, I completely agree with you. I am a custodial parent and a custodial step parent. None of the non custodial parents are doing what they should. and yes, sometimes it cost more than you would get, to go back to court to fight for what you should get. So, I'm assuming that you agree my SD's mom is also a deadbeat? Perhaps, worse than your exH? after all, she doesn't even work, yet she claims to have several years in college and no children at home to care for, nothing really to prevent her from working and making more than I do.

I'd love to know your views on a custodial parent that does make more money, should they pay more than a non custodial parent if that NCP is doing the best they can??? or is it assumed that a NCP could always make more money than a CP?

No it is not "assumed" who can make more. Work history, education,etc. If you put "claim" before college, I assume you doubt it.

I think the courts should decide if the parent is earning as much as they are capable of earning - and that is usually based on what they were earning just previous to the divorce. It would not be reasonable to say that if the person had, say, majored in engineering instead of English, they would have been earning twice as much, and therefore they should be paying more CS/receiving less.

The NCP does, usually, have the ability to earn more than the custodial parent, because their job flexibility is not limited by child care issues. Sometimes there are exceptions of course - the NCP might have other children, might be in chemotherapy, etc.

Well, I don't doubt she's gone to college for more than five years, but I am not certain she has any other goal than to be a 'student' so she doesn't have to work. She's has worked as an EMT and can earn an EMT salary (she doesn't have children at home so she can work a flexible schedule) but the court only imputed minimum wage, which she could easily earn in a fast food job. (she tried to get the court to use her actual income of zero)

So, are either one of you prepared to call her a deadbeat yet???

Well both bioparents in my case are high school only graduates. I went to college and university. i paid my way through both with no help from anyone.
I know this is a discussion about the parents and all but lets also consider responsibility on the childs part as well. How about 1/3 split?
I know by divorce contract, the bioparents did not discuss anything about college and university. so basically they both wiped their hands clean. And even if it went to court, laws here in quebec will take into accoutn their education level. THey salaries and yes they will make the child in question apply for grants, work a part time job etc.e.tc...they make sure the child has to prove that she or he is serious about this and just doesnt' drop out aftera year when the parents spend so much money in court. For education , i've looked at the rules and rulings and it looks pretty fair. alot of angles are considered.
So in the end, if somone makes more that is not the issue. The child is old enough to work and take some of that cash load on. And please dont give me that bs that a kid can't work and study! I worked 2 jobs and went to university. I paid all expenses and worked my Tail off!

Ima, yes the mom should try to do more

Organic

"I know by divorce contract, the bioparents did not discuss anything about college and university. so basically they both wiped their hands clean." -- sometimes people overlook things, doesnt mean they are "wiping their hands"

Once more, to hone in on the central issue:

-Let's say SK's third is already in the bank
-Let's say DH's third is already in the bank
-Let's say BM is hit by a truck, dead, leaving no assets to speak of, which frankly is just as likely a scenario as anyone being able to get any $ out of her, even if court rules all her $ goes to OP/SK... b/c, again:
-"GOOD LUCK COLLECTING"
-So let's consider BM hypothetically DEAD AND PENNILESS.
-There's STILL ONE-THIRD MISSING from college fund for deserving child.

QUESTION IS: Who should be most ethically obligated to pay the missing third THAT WILL NEVER COME FROM BM: child who's already saved his/her third like they were supposed to and doen everything right; SP with no legal obligation to contribute anything; or DH, as the child's parent, even though he's already saved his third?

My personal opinion is ---again, this is presuming BM is off the face of the earth with no penny to her name, GOODBYE!--- that the responsibility in this actually reverts back to DH. Not SK, who has done everything expected of him/her per fairness, responsibility and realism of divide-in-thirds agreement and to whom being suddenly told to cough up an extra third would be akin to *punishment* for being a model child. Not SP who has no legal obligation to chip in and understandably might feel resentment at having to cover what their spouse (and spouse's ex-spouse) can't cover, and without the natural tendency to make the sacrifice which comes more with child being one's own biological child. If the SP is super-nice and willing to be extra-supportive of SK & DH, SP can chip in, but this is pure generosity and not really SP's responsibility.

Agreed: "life isn't fair". And when it isn't, say, because of tit-for-tat squabbles and retaliation between a child's parents that ultimately hurts the child, then THE *OTHER* PARENT simply has to be THE *BETTER* PARENT in order to be a *RESPONSIBLE* PARENT and do right by the child they brought into this world (who has done right by them). If this means **DH** has to take a second or third job, or take out a second mortgage, or start scrimping & saving on certain things, so be it. IMHO.

Sucks that both parents can't be fair & it would have to come to this, but who said life was fair?

"I dont think your immediate family is enough to control average rates across country."

I never said that it was.

ok parents promise promise promise ... college is yours "no matter what" ... one parent ends up dead, the other has severe medical issues can't work no income relies on SP for support ... should SP also support college fund? and risk any monies they might need later on ... because afterall its just a SP child is under no obligation to support a SP who may in the future become ill and need to be tended to.

Too many variables.... do what you can if you can do more great if you can't, oh well "we'll" figure out a way for you to go to college.

In this situation neither parent is making any provisions for THEIR children ... OP wants to help but feels like why should she pay it all.... if the parents don't care why should she.

So again....Lots2give ... its YOUR MONEY do what YOU want to do with YOUR money....

Lets put this situation into variables ... neither parent has made any provisions for their childrens education along comes SP who has a couple bucks she would like to see her SC go to college BUT she doesn't want to pay all of it .... what to do what to do??

#1 She says ok I am going to fund 3 children through college who cares if their parents don't want to help I know I am doing a good thing.

#2 She says well I will give them each a chunk see where it goes ... but wait one SC is a pisser... just outright a complete jerk to SP so she only funds 2 of the 3 ... hmmmm. Bigger chunk for the other 2

#3 She gives each an education ... years later ... she needs money (pick a reason) ... do her SC owe her anything? do they help her out when she is in need? or do they walk away?

#4 Dad says ok mom cannot help with your education takes a second mortgage on house with current wife ... working 2/3 jobs gets hit by a bus but not dead but might as well be who pays the mortgage?

Too many variables ....

"I think a lot of people would say where Dad makes a lot more, he should contribute more."

Well, first of all, my DH does not make "a lot more" than BM.

Secondly, why should he pay more when BM is perfectly capable of getting a good-paying job as well? She is not disabled in any way whatsoever. She has two college degrees and work experience. Why should we pay more just because BM chooses to work in a lower-paying career?

Let me tell you what my DH and I pay for now: $650/month in child support + we have the boys EVERY weekend (Thursday evening through Sunday evening meal and extra time on holidays); ALL of their health/dental insurance ($1350/year); three-fourths of all their medical/dental copays and uncovered medical/dental/vision expenses; and half of all other expenses including clothing, shoes, school supplies, etc. We also pay ALL of his younger son's cell phone expenses and auto insurance (about $700/year), and right now, some of his gas until he gets a job (BM has never paid for any of these expenses). We helped older son buy his first vehicle; we paid half, he paid half with a measly $100 kicked in by BM. We paid his auto insurance until he turned 18; he pays it now.

IMO, my biodad already does more than his fair share. It's only fair that the boys' mother pay her fair share for their college education, even if that means she has to take out a loan to do so.

BTW, BM spent three weeks in Scotland a year ago. She can afford to go to Scotland but not pay for her children's education???

IMO, in any of the above situations the only person's responsibility to pay for college is the person actually attending college. We are not talking about minor children here. And, it is not like people across the world don't figure out how to pay for college everyday on their own. There are sooo many resources out there if you are really interested and really want to put the time in. And, if you dont end up with all of the money... well then you cut back and go part time or one class at a time if that is all you can afford. Granted in a lot of the situations or variables... it would be nice to have dad pay for the rest if mom died... or sp pitch in if the money isnt there. But, the reality it is NO ONE's responsibility except the person choosing to go to college. College is not a requirement. There is an adult making an adult choice to further their life and career potential by attending college and pursueing higher education. It is NO ONE responsibility except the person who is making that decision.

Now, that being said I am all for parents helping their kids out and as a step parent and bio parent I will do everything in my power and finances to help my children out with college. I know how difficult it is to pay for it on your own... I know I am doing it... with four kids and full time career. But, it is no one's responsibility but my own to pay for and work out my own decisions.

Question for all of those who say that college is not a requirement:

Is child's attendance at high school a requirement? Are any of your kids or SK's opting get their GED's instead?

Yes, a child's attendance at high school is a requirement ...by law or they can stick my butt in jail. Until they are old enough to be considered an adult and/or get there GED or high school equiv and a job along with it, high school is a requirement. And, to be perfectly honest, there is a really good chance that the oldest will opt to get his GED ... both his mother and his father dropped out and got their GED... I work day and night to try and encourage him to do better but (a realization had via an emotional break down last week which I plan on posting about later) you simply can not MAKE a child care and put effort into their education.

Well, High school is a requirement. There are laws that say minor children have to attend school. What difference does it make if they get their GED's instead???

My son didn't get his GED, but when he was 16, he took the CHSPE and passed. He could have stayed in high school or not. He chose to leave high school, worked the next semester and started college the following semester, when he was 17. He's gotten straight A's in college. He's 18 now and took this last semester off (well, he took one class so he can work and save up money). My husband and I have helped him with tuition, books, and transportation (although he got his first car a few months ago, which is why he took the semester off to work & pay for it.) We will continue to help him with tuition and books as long as his grades are good. We will continue to give him a place to live, as long as he abides by the rules.

I don't think college is a requirement. It is for some careers but not all.

Serenity, I'd like to know your definition of a 'deserving child'?

Ima, by "deserving child" I just mean a kid who has done all that can/should be expected of him in terms of making grades and doing his part towards his college expenses within realism and fairness. Sounds like your son is doing a great job, and you are helping him. he is "deserving" and you are supporting that, which is great and how it should be. For the standard high-school diploma route, I'd define "deserving" as:

-getting good enough grades to be accepted to college of his choice, which matches his aptitudes & needs
-juggling hitting the books & getting good grades with having some means of earning some money, whether it's a job outside the home, chores within the home or both
-taking a big chunk of all his earnings and putting them away for savings
-doing at least some of the research into scholarships or other forms of financial aid
-filling out the necessary forms & applications on time with little or no prodding from parents
-studying/for & doing well on the SAT's
-these days, they have to have *at least one* school-sanctioned club or extra-curricular activity to be good candidiates for admission or scholarships
-planning ahead for all the above, which is *no small feat* at age 14 or however old you need to be these days to get a jump on getting in & funding college. That shows a lot of maturity, discipline and responsibility at an age where kids are barely pubescent, barely done playing hide & seek.
-In general, meeting his 1/3 of the deal financially and 100% of everything beyond just that, school-wise.

All of the above should be encouraged and rewarded by the parents (or parent) by chipping in their share. Especially if the child has shown himself to be "deserving" of a college education and has kept up his end of a three-way bargain, then come hell or high water the other two thirds need to be taken care of by the parents. Unless, among them all, they TRULY, LITERALLY ***can't afford it*** NO MATTER WHAT. There should be no other reason besides abject poverty to break the bargain with the child who has worked so hard and done everything expected of him. It just would not be fair.

And if it really is a situation of abject poverty, unless the NCP has money, there will be financial aid available. College or technical school of some kind IS a requirement.

In the job I do (legal support services) and the job my husband does (auto part sales) and the job my dad does (business owner: rental store) and the job many of the people in the community do, college or technical school is not required. When I was younger, I went to one of those 'technical' schools. They called themselves a 'private' college and had short term programs. Have you ever heard the commercials, BE IN DEMAND!!! GET YOUR DEGREE IN SIX TO EIGHT MONTHS!!! Blah Blah Blah. It cost almost ten thousand dollars (with $7k in a student loan that I had to pay, the rest in a grant because I was a single mom) for a six month program. There were 30-40 other students in my group. There were 4 groups. The program was broken down into four 'quads' with one graduating every month. So, every month, one quad graduated, a new quad took their place and each quad advanced to the next level.. kinda like high school. Well, in a community of 40,000 people, how many 'computer business' jobs do you think there are when a private college is releasing 30-40 newly trained people out into the workforce? That was a quick lesson in 'higher education'. I think it's good to be educated, but spending $20K or more on an education doesn't guarantee success in life. It doesn't even guarantee a job or career. I'm not against college, but if you ask to see my degree, I don't have one. But, I do have an education. I have gone to book stores, thrift stores and I buy text books that interest me. I read for fun. I love to learn and study things. I don't need to sit in a classroom to be educated and I don't need to spend $20K to learn what I want to learn.

Now, maybe if I were going to apply for a 'prestigious' job and/or work for someone else, it might help to have a degree. But, I own my own business. Anyone can do what I do. (although it does take some business sense) I've considered going to law school because I would need to in order to become an attorney. But, I can say with some confidence, there are many things (law related) that I can do now, that many lawyers cannot, fresh out of law school.

That kinda reminds me of my days back in social services. A new supervisor was hired because he had a college degree in business. (most supervisors were promoted, but this one, they decided to hire into that position). Well, I (without my college degree) was given the task of training him and teaching him all I knew. So, yep. I'm sure a college degree is beneficial. but it's not a requirement.

Ima, "A new supervisor was hired because he had a college degree" - yep, thats the way it is these days. And I agree, if anyone is considering technical school, I would strongly recommend the public trade school or community college, NOT a private one. And as to your attending law school, I think your choice of law schools is going to be rather limited without a college degree.

And where I live there are plenty of jobs for people with college degrees, especially with masters or professional degrees. Expensive to live here, but plenty of jobs.

You really have to be careful with private, for-profit post-high school programs. I would also recommend a community college or other public or non-profit program.

The reason your new supervisor was a supervisor was precisely because of the college degree. That pretty much makes the point you were arguing against.

The 'supervisor' was a moron that had to be trained by me. I guess they don't teach you that in college. For two years, he came to me for answers to basic questions, he didn't have much common sense to go with his degree. I agree that some companies & agencies will hire a college graduate before a better qualified candidate. I can tell you that I make more money than he does now, without a college degree.

My choice of law school.... are you kidding me??? Who cares? Maybe a large prestigious law firm might care what school I went to or if I am the top in my class. blah hlah blah. But, when you pass the bar and hang out a shingle, who really cares what school you went to? I spent $17k on an idiot lawyer... I could do better NOW and I haven't been to law school. If you are good at what you do, that matters more than where you went to school. If you are happy in your life, that matters more than where you live, how much money you have, what kind of car you drive, etc. etc. etc.

You really come off as a snob sometimes, even if you don't mean to.

Ima, everyone is happy for your success, but I really think that many people will have an easier life if they go to college. Think how well you would have done in that social services job/field if you had a BA. Where I work they even pay for grad courses.

And as to choice of law school, I had assumed you didnt have as a goal to work for a prestigous firm, and while where I live there are very few unacreditted law schools, yes where you live there may be some, but I would question the bar passage rate. In any event, my goal is give my DD choices. Doesnt have to be a prestigous job as you say, but I want her to have choices.

You only have to look at census/DOl statistics to see that college graduates have better employment rates, better salaries etc.

I agree, some will have an easier life if they go to college. I'm not knocking it. But, some will finish college in debt (or parents in debt or using up years of savings for college) and still decide that they are 'undecided' on what they want to do with their life. A daughter that graduates college, may get married, have kids and never work. Sure, it may come in handy some day.. maybe. I can honestly say, if I had a BA in social services, it wouldn't have mattered. My step mom worked for the same 'agency' in a different county, but same rules. She got her Master's and was denied a raise. In fact, she was told that if she pressed the issue, all the other's that were getting paid more for having their Master's would be dropped down to a lower level pay, so everyone would be equal. She ended up with the same pay and in debt. Just before she had her aneurysm, she had opened her own private practice. The agency I worked for encouraged employees to pursue a degree but weren't going to pay a higher salary... talk about 'why buy the cow when you already get the milk'. But, life isn't fair. I left. She was going to leave. When you hit a roadblock, you take a detour. It also makes life interesting sometimes.

As for law schools, I live a few minutes away from three very good ones. I would think passing the bar has more to do with your academic ability rather than what school you attend. and I am not far from having degrees (one in administration of justice, the other in human services). I've taken all of the 'major' classes and have to take the graduation requirements (history, english, math) to graduate. (some law schools require it, some have exemptions for those over 35 with an AA)

I'm sure that statistically, college graduates have better salaries (if they get a job in the field that they have their degree.) I was making $13 an hour (when min. wage was 5.25) and before I started my business, I looked into going back to school for my degree in human services. I also looked into getting a job as a counselor in a rehab center. It required a BA and starting pay was $11 an hour. Why would I go back to college to make less than I was making without a degree? It may work out for some, but the only person I know (besides attorney's) that used the degree he got, was my uncle that has been an engineer for four decades.

Human services is notoriously low paying.

People with law degrees who have passed the bar are a dime a dozen, and an awful lot of them are unemployed. A law degree from a unaccredited no name school isn't any better than an undergraduate degree in social work from a no name school. It matters a great deal whether you graduated from Podunk U or Harvard Law.

Well, like I said, if a lawyer is looking for a job with a law firm, the firm may care where they went to school and ranked. Is that something you would ask a potential lawyer? If you would, you are foolish. Does it really matter in the courtroom? If I need an attorney, I would sit in court and watch them at work. I wouldn't hire someone unless I had seen them in action or they had a great reputation and were recommended by someone who's opinion I trust. I know that not everyone has time to sit in a courtroom but if you are going to pay $300.+ an hour for someone to represent you, don't you want to see what you are getting before you pay? I do. I guess that if a potential client were more interested in what school I go to, I would just refer him to the Harvard attorney I hired. I was impressed with his "Harvard" law degree. I thought it meant I was getting 'the best', but instead, I got a guy that thought he would prove my son's father drank and partied in front of my son, by submitting pictures of two barrels filled with beer cans on the side of his father's house. All he proved is they recycle. I spent $17,000.00 on that dim wit. He's the guy I'd send anyone that didn't think my law school is 'prestigious' enough.

btw theotherside, did you have an attorney in your divorce? Was he from a 'prestigious' college??? bcuz the last I heard, the judge wasn't convinced that your ex should be imputed income based on his ability and past work history... a good attorney might have convinced the judge otherwise.

Not when my exH's lawyer was in bed (figuratively speaking) with the court. No, my lawyer did not attend a prestigious college or law school, although they were accredited. Obviously if I had it to do over, I would have hired a different lawyer.

Is your exH a lawyer? How could he 'be in bed' with the court? You are suggesting the court is corrupt? For a man that is as slimy as you describe your exH? Let's see, he has no money... oh his lover picked up his lawyer tab. Then he (or she) paid off the judge. I'm not buying it, but that's not what this thread is about. Obviously, college degrees are important to you, I don't think they are 'necessary' but can be helpful and are necessary for some jobs, but not all.

We're going to have to agree to disagree. I think we've both made our point here.

It's funny this should come up . . . I make more than double what my DH does - he with a college degree and me having never completed mine. We are both in the same field and worked for the same company for 10 years. He was actually my supervisor when we first met.

Just another illustration that the 'rules' don't apply to all . . . .

I said his lawyer was in bed with the court, not him. How did you get that out of it? His lawyer had previously worked for the court before going into private practice, so the good-ol' boy network was involved. I didn't say anyone bribed the judge.

College/techinical school is not a requirement. And, quite frankly is just not something that everyone can do or is capable of doing. School just is not for everyone and is not the right choice or answer for everyone.

I would have to ask people to look in their own heart and ask themselves:

1. If I went to college, am I glad I did (Ima has already answered).

2. Do I want my biological children to go to college?

The answer is ofcourse yes to both of those questions and as I have said repeatedly that I encourage and will support my kids as much as possible if that is what they choose to do. But, the simple fact is that college is not for everyone... college is not a requirement it is an idividual choice...one that each person must make on their own and commit to. Honestly, at this point and time I truly do not feel like our oldest will go to college... He is like his dad and a lot of other people in this world that simply don't do well in school enviroments and that will never be the right place for them. However, as I have said although I do intend upon supporting both my dd and skids if they choose to go to college and help them out as much as I can financially ... it is ultimately their choice and their responsibility to make it happen.

Well, I know I've already answered for myself, but yes, I'd want any child (biological, step or the kid down the street) to go to college if it is 'necessary' for their goal in life. If they aspire to be a entrepreneur, I would suggest a few business classes, not necessarily a 'degree' in business. There are other options, like apprenticing or starting from the bottom & working your way up. I'm sure that supervisor I trained years ago, well, If he were my son, it would be an embarrassment that I sent him to college for four years and he can't figure out how to use an index in a manual to look up a code. But, I'm sure he knows how to do something better than me. (I can't play golf very well)

I would be proud of my kids (step & bio) no matter what they do, as long as they are happy, do their best at everything they do, and don't make excuses or blame everyone else for their problems and mistakes. College or not.

I guess the key factors here are:

-what the kid expresses aptitude and desire to do
-what the kid has worked very hard to do his/her part for
-the financial ability on the parents' part to contribute to their kids future goals

It's one thing to say "college isn't a necessity" when the kid hasn't expressed an interest or aptitude for it and you want to postively affirm the kid and encourage him that he still has options. But it's a totally different statement when the kid has expressed clear desire, aptitude and ability to work and save for college. ***When the parents can afford to help***, in the 2nd scenario, then to say "college is not a necessity" as a rationale for not helping is just plain unsupportive. Simply put, it would be like saying: "You've wasted time and energy the last 4 years of h.s. busting your butt trying to get good grades and save for your part of college expenses because you don't need college and I'm not going to chip in for it. Now, why don't you go ahead and consider all that college prep a waste and just go figure out something else to do with your future. Or, if you still insist on going to silly ol' college, go ahead and waste some more years working full-time and going to class part-time so you can pay for it all yourself."

I totally agree with the statement that "college isn't for everyone" (or, more specifically, as in my case, "not everyone's ready for college at 18"), but that can't always be a blanket statement or excuse, and it needs to be said to a child for the right reasons. It has to take into account what the kid has demonstrated (or not) as their life path. At the evry least, if you're going to tell the kid "college isn't a necessity; ergo I'm not chipping in", than at least make sure the kid knows this well in advance so s/he can figure out some other life paths or how the hell s/he's going to pay for it all alone.

Again, if it REALLY is the case (and I mean REALLY) that the parents have zero dollars to put towards the kid's college, then yeah, I guess he'll have to find a way to pay it all himself if he wants to go. And to this hypothetical scenario, many parents (bio or step) might say: "so if it CAN be done when the parents have no money to contribute, then why should WE have to pay, just because we can afford to? If he wants it bad enough, he'll find a way to pay the whole thing himself!"

But this isn't usually said in families where there has been no divorce. Sometimes, maybe, but not usually. I think it really does become an issue when there's a divorce, and this is how it happens that there is a much more rigid standard and set of expectations for a child of divorce who wants to go to college vs. a child in an 'intact' family ***where the parents can afford to chip in***. (btw, I know all this because I have known countless friends and their college payment situations as well as having worked in a University for the last 12 years. My boyfriend, in addition, works in Admissions and deals with financial aid as aprt of his job.) BELIEVE YOU ME, the VAST MAJORITY of these kids at my University are getting most if not all expenses paid by their (married, never divorced) parents. There are plenty, too, that have part-time jobs to chip in. There are plenty, like me, who are older than college age who work full-time for the university in order to get the free tuition. But there is no student of ***typical college age (18-22)***, to MY knowledge, that is covering it all themselves. At least not here. Other schools/condtions may be different... not claiming to know all the stats in all cases, just what I have observed in relation to the upper-middle-tier state University I work at as well as various others that friends have gone to, more or less comparable. I'm not saying ALL expenses should be covered by parents (I don't believe they should), but just that in my experience, they often are. For whatever reason, a very large number of parents are willing to chip in to (if not cover totally) the bills... So perhaps the more interesting question is why aren't more of them insisting the kids pay for it all themselves? Is it because that isn't very realistic? Or is it because these parents are so excessively indulgent? Or what?

To clarify, b/c I think this is an imprtant point taht none of us have youched on yet:

When I say "college expenses", I am not only talking about tuition, but housing, meals, books, and lab & other fees related to going away to college. (Arguably, some moeny could be saved by the kid going to a school close to home, where he can live rent-free, but that doesn't sound like a very popular idea on these boards...)

If they are divorced parents is a way for one to still get back at the other.

KKny,

They did wipe their hands clean. Spoke with myDH last night. THey purposely left that out of the contract. Neither one of them wanted to discuss about any money for their kids for school.
And if the ex tries to go to court about that, she and her husband already set the precedent. On top of it. My Dh doesn't have much left over and struggles to give her money for extracurricular activities even after his wages are garnished. So good luck to try and get it. It wont happen, unless you can squeeze wine out of a lemon!
So my point. Not all bioparents are superstars. There are quite a few losers!
And my DH for the subject on education is a loser along with his ex.