Conference quokka::non_custodial_parents

    
    This one is a bit beyond my personal experience, but I do know that
    just tuition/books at a cheap state college will run about $3K/yr.
    Tuition/books/room/board will run you about $7k/yr. I do not recall any
    child support _plus_ tuition orders.  Most states that I know of will
    allow child support to be continued through college to help pay for
    college, but not in addition to college.

    Some states, however, the child support laws are so loosely worded
    that the kid you've never seen in 15 years can basically pick a 
    college and send you the bill.  So you'd probably be advised to
    seek professional advice on this one, or at least go check out the
    child support laws at the library.  May want to look into the 
    child support being sent directly to the child while you're at it.

    fred():

	My divorce stated I was responsible for one half of tuition for
both children, as well as books, living expenses, application fees, etc
based on financial situations.

	The tables have been modified greatly, as I am the custodial parent 
and have been for the last four and a half years.  My oldest leaves in 3
weeks for college.  When my daughter was going through the hassles of 
applying for schools my ex refused to provide information 
(living/financial) for the application.  She told my oldest that
since she lived with me, I would be responsible for all costs. As she
was financially unable to pay for this.  

	I checked with a lawyer who informed me that it wasn't worth 
the court battle over something like this.  The judge would only rule 
in favor of the ex, stating that she was not financially secure, citing
disparity in salary as a major issue.  And he stated in most cases this
will occur.  But there is always that outside chance.

	Don't know if this helps/hinders your request.

	 

	I
[Posted by WWW Notes gateway]

    I don't know.   I have a friend right now trying to buck having to
    pay half his son's tuition.  
    
    Tell me this, you've been paying child support for however many years.
    That's not cummulative money.  It pays for clothes and food and bills
    needed to support the child (and most cases these days - daycare).
    
    You've got a kid now that wants to go to college.  Why are you fighting
    helping him/her out?   If you were still married would you be telling
    your wife or husband to pay for it all?   I don't understand copping
    an attitude when this is something your child wants and hey, may
    benefit from.  It seems too many people are looking at this as a
    personal issue between ex's.   If they were stating you had to pay
    ALL of it, then I could understand this.
    
    Just my humble opinion.
    						cj *->

        re .3

    What .0 is objecting to is paying "child support" *AND* paying for 1/2 of
    college.  What expense does the CP have if the child is away for
    college?  What would happen in this case is that "child support" ends
    up paying for the CP's half, the the NCP has to pay the other half.
    I doubt that the court would agree to such arrangement.  The court 
    ordered my brother _and_ his ex to pay child support directly
    to their son to help pay for college, but not in addition to other
    college payments. (Except she has never paid a dime and so far the
    court has let her get away with it).

    fred();

    I do not see that the child (hmm...college age...maybe we shouldn't
    be saying child?  :-) , is away at college in .0.   If he is, what,
    if any, is insurance coverage?  Do you still insure your child if
    they are a student?  I haven't had to deal with that yet, so I don't
    know.
    
    I know in the case of my friend, we are talking his son is still at
    home, attending college.  Expenses are still incurred on top of
    tuition.   And even with a part-time job, providing they get one,
    parents still dish out some dough.  Maybe reduced support payments
    may be in order, if the student is working part time,  but I can't 
    see them being stopped in lieu of 1/2 tuition.  
    
    							cj *->

    
    In most cases I've seen, the justification by the states for continuing
    child support beyond the 18-19 year old age was to provide support for
    college.  Now to come back and request specific college payment on top
    of that seems to be a bit of a double-dip.
    
    fred();
    

    Cj, Most insurance policies will cover a full time student to the age
    of 23.
    
    Roberta

    It would be ridiculus to expect anyone to pay 30% of his gross income,
    (often close to 1/2 of the net) for child support, plus pay 10-20 
    grand per year for college.  The child support in Mass was extended to 
    help pay for college, not aside from it. The ncp would have no money
    left! 
    
    Sharon

    My husband pays healthy child support to his ex until the youngest is
    out of college, PLUS 2/3 of tuition and related expenses.  We live in
    Massachusetts and I believe this is a fairly typical arrangement.

In my case in NH, I will pay child support until my son is 18 or
graduates high school (whichever is later), then 2/3 of reasonable
college expenses for not more than 4 years. The arrangement was agreed
to in mediation and then approved by the marital master and the judge.

-stephen

    I don't believe they can MAKE you pay more than the standard percentage
    of child support whether the kid is in college or not.  The 'standard'
    is often plenty more than 1/2 tuition anyway.  If you decide to pay
    more so your ex will have extra spending money, then I'm sure they'd be 
    more than willing to write up the agreement. 
    
    Sharon

    Not sure, I got any answer from anyone that would give me real life 
    specific examples of decisions the Mass. court system comes up with. 
    This problem is only four years away.
    
    
    Ref: .3: I am not and will not refuse to pay what is fair, but
    	     would fight any semblance of "double dipping".
    
    I have two kids I am paying child support for. What I had proposed
    	to ex, was following formula:
    
    		a) assume that 1/2 of child support payment goes 
    			to first child attending college 
    
    		b) prorate the remaining balance based on our salaries:
    
                Example 
    		say: college cost is 20K
    		     NCP pays 12K in child support for two kids
    		     salaries: CP: 30K ; NCP 40K (57% of boh incomes)
    
    		     Tuition source: 
    
    				From 1/2  child support : 6K (14K left)
    				From NCP                  8K (57% of 14K)
    				From CP			  6K (43% of 14K)
    							-----
    							 20K
    
    	Numbers, are just examples to desmonstrate formula. The logic
    	was pretty fair to me, but I guess my ex saw it otherwise: 
    	"I see you pay REVISED CHILD SUPPORT, PLUS 1/2 college tuition,
    	
    	I am not claiming that life is financially easy for her (or for
    	me), but if ex's proposal came true (thru court decision), 
    	it would be disastrous.  
    
    	Again, our divorce agreement just says that we will contribute
    	according to our financial means, and really I would not even 
    	be able to afford what I am proposing without borrowing. 
    
    	What could the Mass courts force me to do???? 
    
    				 
    
    		     
                                    

    Maybe I'm reading this all wrong.  What is suggested here, when
    college begins, child support is no longer an issue for the NCP.
    If they are willing to pay half the college tuition, and no support,
    the CP should also pay 1/2 the tuition and now all living expenses?
    
    Again, are you baseing this arrangement on the child getting a job
    and paying all his own living expenses?  I realize a lot of support
    arrangements state "until the child is 18", but what if they become
    a full time student and can only manage a part-time job, which we
    all know cuts into their studying time and probably couldn't support
    a fly.  If NCP is paying 1/2 the tuition only, then CP is taking up
    the slack AND 1/2 tuition.  
    
    Is this a common settlement?  And further, a *fair* settlement?
    
    Please feel free to *gently* correct my reading of this situation.
    I'm am only looking to get educated here, not beat to death :-).
    
    						cj *->  
    

    .13: 
    	My divorce agreement states that I have to pay child support 
    	until my two kids are 18 if not going to college, or until 21 if they
    	do. Assuming they go to college, and are unable to work, I think
    	it would only be fair to count  1/2 of the child support payment
    	towards my total tuition share, and prorate as I described above
    	the remaining between ex and myself based on income? response 
    	from ex on this was that she wants me to pay full child support
    	plus 1/2 collge tution: her reasonning therefore assumes, that
    	as soon as my 15 yo son starts college, her home expenses wont
    	decline...still 4 years away....would bet you that court will side 
    	with her, 'cause of course this will end up in court.
    
    
    
     

    College 'board' includes room, board, meals, books and there's usually
    a  recommended amount of spending money. The state support guidelines
    usually provide well over 1/2 college board in a good out of state
    college 20+k and over a full payment of a good local state college
    ($6000), which is the only place my  kids will have a chance to go
    because I get no support (at least none in the past 2 years, another
    story).

    Of course my husband just finished paying the big bucks the state
    requires so his daughter (who says we embarrass her because all her
    friends parents are doctors and lawyers, and who hasn't spoke to us for
    3 years) could go to  the best of schools. 
    
    Who says that because a kids parents are divorced it entitles them to a
    free  lunch, what does that teach them?  My kids are 15 and 17, they
    both have part  time jobs, the 17 year old has bought her own car, with
    her own money. Yes, it's a clunker, but she glows with pride when she
    talks about it, there's no free lunch that can teach her that self
    sufficiency.  She'll work her summers to make spending money for
    college, and come out with a lot more character and  guts than the kids
    getting the free lunch. 
 
    There's no kid on earth that costs as much as the state guidelines call
    for.  When I am getting support I get $80 per week, I put $40 away for
    college when I get it.  There's NO reason any mother getting $300 a
    week couldn't put 1/2 away. Or is that supposed to give the mother a
    free lunch too?  I do believe it is, it keeps her off welfare, but she
    can't start working or her support will  be lowered, humm, sounds like
    our welfare system. Encourages people to live off the system, then when
    the kids go to college she hasn't built an income and can't afford to
    pay half.  

    I guess I wasn't gentle enough, 
    Sharon

        re .13

    I'll try one more time.  Child support agreements are probably the
    easiest part of a divorce decree to get "modified" regardless of
    what the parties agreed on and regardless of what the original
    decree stated.  Most states will now allow child support to be
    extended beyond the 18-19 year age to help provide money for college.
    The child support beyond 18 *is* the money for college because the
    child may not be able to fully support him/herself during that 
    time.  I know of no state that orders extended child support
    _and_ additional money for college unless the "guidelines" allow
    the college tuition to be figured into the "formula" for determining
    the amount of support ordered (and every state, it seems, has a
    different formula).

    I'd also try to get the support transferred to go directly to the child
    or, if possible, paid directly to the college.

    fred();

    BTW.  I've so far received a total of less than $400 in child support.
    All of which was put away for college.  I'm now owed well into five
    figures.  I have a daughter that will be a junior in college this 
    year, and two more coming up.

    cj, I think there's a little bit of a disconnect between what you
    asked and what some folks have experienced.

    Your assumption is that the college student is still living at home
    and commuting. 

    Others are replying as though the student were living on-campus, which
    is an entirely different arrangement.

    The other thing that I keep looking at, is that many divorce decrees
    state that the NCP is REQUIRED to pay <insert the percentage here> 
    of the college tuition/fees/etc, yet if the family were still intact,
    no one would have that requirement.  And certainly not court-ordered
    under severe penalties.  Throw into the jumble the fact that many
    NCPs are financially supporting something-more-than-1-and-less-than-2
    homes, and money gets tight real fast.

    Just my opinion, of course.

	    - Lorri

    
    As someone who grew up in a "non-divorced" home, I have a few comments
    to make regarding this tuition stuff.
    
    My family was pretty middle-class; we had enough to survive (with a few
    extras) but not enough for us to go to a far-away college.  My college
    options were to go to one of the local county or state colleges and
    live at home.  Even doing that I had to pay 1/2 the tuition and my
    books.  Needless to say, I had to work.  I went to college for a year
    full time and then let my employer(s) pay for night school.  It was THE
    ONLY OPTION I HAD.  It took me 15 years, but I got my degree.
    
    On the other hand, I went to school with a lot of kids from divorced
    homes (also, not really wealthy).  Those kids got everything and didn't
    appear to appreciate much.  "If Mom won't give it to me, I'll get Dad
    to", etc, etc.  They never worked in high school (or college), got to
    go to camp for free every summer (we couldn't afford camp), got
    financial aid to go to whatever college they wished (and had Dad pay
    for much of the expenses and tuition).  Many of these children thought
    it was their "right" to be completely dependent on their parents as
    long as they could "milk it".  
    
    Well, several of these kids never finished college or did it on the
    7-year plan because they couldn't handle the responsibilities.  It may
    have taken me a while, but I got my education the best way I could.  I
    never faulted my parents for not having money, they did the best they
    could with what they had.  I was jealous of these other kids while I
    was growing up, but in hindsight I pity them for not having the
    experience.
    
    Enough of my soapbox.
    
    Cheryl
    

    Well, finally, .17 and .18 are getting more to the point of what
    I am asking.  I am going on the premise that the child will not
    be boarding at school.  In that situation I agree entirely that
    support not be continued.  I just know many people, especially
    myself, will probably never be able to consider my child being
    able to go to a "top notch" school and/or board.  
    
    While I wouldn't expect the free-ride that was described in .18,
    I would not like see the child have to work so long and hard to 
    obtain something.  It seems there must be a mid-point.  Yes, live 
    at home, yes get a part-time job (but not working flat out
    so that studying becomes impossible and the school is wasted) to
    help pay for the car, clothes, occasional good time.  But in that
    scenario, there is still some money to be expended for living.  
    That kid needs to eat, they use water and electricity, and whatever
    heating source you have, they need to be insured.  Should the CP foot 
    all of that?  If so, I liked the looks of the NCP paying 2/3 of the 
    tuition.
    
    I wouldn't expect to foot every bill so my kid learns no
    responsibility,  but they need help.  I know our folks bought us
    bombers (cars) when we got part time jobs (we had to get a part time
    job in the summer as soon as we were sixteen), then we paid them back
    on a weekly basis.  Clothes, we bought ourselves, but you knew come
    Christmas and birthdays you got plenty to help subsidize the meager
    wardrobe you've been buying (granted, more often they were things
    you wouldn't be caught dead in :-) )  If we were strapped, there was 
    money to borrow and be paid back. (You just had to go through a major
    inquisition as to why you needed it :-).   And it was paid back.  There 
    was no "forgetting" about it.  
    
    When we worked full time, board was paid weekly to help with food
    and household expenses. The phone bill was split per call and even 
    the tax on the phone bill was divided up.    
    
    Now, all the above family life I've described is based on our having
    six kids in my family and only the first one considered college.  He
    went to the local university and got booted after two years (too much
    fun, bad grades).  The rest never wanted to go.  Had any of us decided
    to -  we could have, under pretty much the same "pay back" criteria.  Of
    course, we would probably still be "paying back" now, but I expect some
    of you still are :-).  
    
    Maybe I'm living in a fantasy world, but I'd like to see my child
    raised the same way.  Should she decide on college, I need help, and
    a Calgon bath isn't going to take that away.
    
    						cj *->
    

    re .19
    
    If the kid isn't going to college and is still living at home after
    age 18, should the NCP then be required to continue "child support"?
    When should the support stop? 21? 25? 30?
    
    Just because the kid is in college, should the NCP then be responsible
    for the home expenses, or shoud the kid (and CP) be allowed to just
    milk it for all it's worth by going to college on the, as one put it,
    7 year plan.
    
    fred();

    Hi Fred,
    
    If the kid is not going onto college, and assumably getting a
    job, I agree support should stop.  That only makes sense.  You
    wind up with a lazy kid (now really, young adult) that will milk
    you forever.   I don't think at any time I said support should be
    continued in those circumstances.
    
    But I wonder, why is it automatically the CP "milking" the NCP if
    they need help?  Just because it may have happened personally, or
    yes, maybe quite common?   Do you not see any mid-ground??
    
    Step outside whatever personal feelings you have and look at what
    I'm asking.  Or reverse it:  you've got custody, your kid wants 
    to better himself with college, you can't afford the tuition and
    the kid still living with you.  Just getting half the tuition does
    not cut the fact the kid is living with you.   Perhaps the CP should
    only now feed the kid what they can afford?  Only allow heat on when
    they can afford it?  Because they are now also footing 1/2 tuition
    too.  
    
    I'm trying to look at this objectively, not as every CP is a money-
    grubbing, bitter, b*tch or b**tard out looking to rook the poor
    NCP for every penny he/she has.  Take it from me, there are some
    CP's that have it quite tough too, but I don't sit and consider 
    every NCP to be cheap and trying to get out of his/her responsibility.
    Perhaps all NCP's are just hanging on until their little "burden"
    turns 18 and they can be "done with it"????

    Hmmmm, maybe I should have flamed on and off :-)   got a little
    carried away, sorry!
    							cj *->

    
    re .21

>    But I wonder, why is it automatically the CP "milking" the NCP if
>    they need help?  Just because it may have happened personally, or
>    yes, maybe quite common?   Do you not see any mid-ground??

    It is not me.  It is the respective state legislatures.  Child support
    is just that--Child Support, not CP support.  The justification for
    extending support is to provide money _for college_.

>    Step outside whatever personal feelings you have and look at what
>    I'm asking.  Or reverse it:  you've got custody, your kid wants 
>    to better himself with college, you can't afford the tuition and
>    the kid still living with you.  Just getting half the tuition does
>    not cut the fact the kid is living with you.   Perhaps the CP should
>    only now feed the kid what they can afford?  Only allow heat on when
>    they can afford it?  Because they are now also footing 1/2 tuition
>    too.  

    I _am_ the custodial parent.  Right now I'd be glad to get just about
    anything.  What do non-divorced parents and their children do?  Are
    they forced to provide money for college?  Are they forced to continue
    to provide living expenses?  If you _choose_ to continue support, or 
    the NCP _chooses_ (ohmygod I've become pro-choice 8^}) to pay additional, 
    fine, but at some point (around 18) the _forced_ obligation to provide 
    living expenses for the child has to stop.

    fred();

    Ok, now I see your point Fred.  It's the fact someone says
    you *have* to do it you object to.  Those that want to wash
    their hands of any responsibility for their offspring at 18,
    should be allowed to just do so.  And you know what, I guess
    I have to agree with that.  I just think it's lousy.
    
    If the child wants college, and the CP says, "Honey, I just
    can't afford to pay for it, and feed you, and clothe you, you
    just can't go", they probably also have to do it diplomatically
    so that it won't come out as "your @#$% (NCP) doesn't want to
    help us so you don't get to go, because no court should make (NCP)
    help.  So out you go, get a job, and be sure to call once a week.
    Maybe someday you can find a way to go and do it on your own".
    
    Perhaps I should face the fact that that is the Real World and
    pray my daughter follows another path or I find a way for her to
    go on our own. 
    
    						cj *->

When my daughter graduated high school two years ago (I was separated
from my ex-spouse, my daughter was living with me at the time), I
offered to provide room and board, a car and 2/3 tuition if she would
live at home and study locally. She turned it down and nows lives and
works out West. She was already 18 when she graduated and receives no
support from either parent.

My son will graduate high school in 3 years, but will be 18 between his
junior and senior year. He lives with his mother in AZ, and I pay weekly
child support according to the NH guidelines (17.5% of my gross, her income
is irrelevant). Our stipulation says that child support payments stop
when he graduates (or turns 18 if he were to quit school), but that I
will pay 2/3 of reasonable expenses for not more than 4 years of
college. It also states that he will contribute to paying his expenses
by applying for scholarships, loans, working, living at home etc.

If he continues to live with his mother while studying, I do not expect
to continue support payments while footing 2/3 of the tuition, but she
could clearly go to court and get an order to have the support
continued. With the support at over $12,000 per year, I don't think I
could afford paying both support and college expenses. I will make the
same offer to him, room & board, etc. to study locally (I don't expect
"custody" of an 18 year old to be an issue), as I can provide him
shelter in my existing home much cheaper than buying it elsewhere.

---

I guess my take on the financial side of the CP vs NCP issue is that
(fighting for and) taking custody of a child means taking responsibility
for him/her. If my son had chosen to live with me, I wouldn't be chasing
my ex- around to split every nickel and dime of expense. I am not
anxious to cut off benefits to my son, but I'd like to know that when I
subsidize my ex-'s lifestyle, he's getting something out of it, too.

...but then again, that's easy for me to say. I'm a man, and I was
blessed with 2-3 times the earning power and potential...

-stephen

    re:21
    "or reverse it", if you reversed things, this country would be in riot
    conditions.
    The amounts (28% gross + more after the child is a teen) looks fine
    from the getting side, but figure out how much of your pay that will
    be, give it to you ex now, to do as he pleases.  He also gets to raise
    your child as he sees fit. He can be super strict, he can spoil them.
    He will have all the control, and can turn them against you easily.
    If you get a raise, don't tell your kids, they might tell him and then
    he'll be in back in court for more support from you.  He got the house,
    he got the kids, and he got almost 1/2 of your income.  You remarry,
    you want to buy a house, can you?
    Now the kid is 18, he wouldn't give you the time of day, and he doesn't
    have to because he knows you'll foot the bill anyway. after all, it's
    your responsibility to send him to college.
    
    Honestly figure out how much money you would pay, imagine paying it
    every week to your ex, who has your kids.  Do you REALLY think it's
    fair?
    
    Sharon
    

>    But I wonder, why is it automatically the CP "milking" the NCP if
>    they need help?
    
    In _this_ basenoter's example, where he proposes paying $20K/year total 
    in family child support plus tuition, to $6K/year from the CP, yet that's 
    still not good enough even given their respective incomes (57% to 43%), 
    "milking" doesn't seem a strong enough term.  When you put real dollar 
    figures to the test of "support PLUS tuition" (the debate here) it's 
    readily obvious that it doesn't fit.  And that is _not_ as you imply 
    due to any indifference towards the child's educational goals...
    
    Glenn
    

    RE .25
    
    No, I do not think the actual percentages and rates assigned in
    court settlements are fair.  I never have.  I've seen so many
    men burnt/raped/pillaged by the court systems.  I've gone out
    with much of the debris.   It is because of that, when I found
    myself in the situation I am now, I've done all I can to keep
    it out of court and keep the payments fair.   At the time, the
    NCP in this case was living at home, minimal car payments, no
    real responsiblities other than the baby.  He would have been
    slaughtered in the court system.  I set a support I thought I
    could live with, and he willingly agreed (who the hell wouldn't!
    from what I've seen and read in here, he's very lucky I feel
    the way I do about court settlements).  
    
    The exact case in the base note is not fair, and I agree.  It
    was the ensuing notes that scared me.  They tell me this, if 
    (and I've been told many times to do this) I have to take this 
    to court at some time in the future (and I really hope not), I
    have a lot I'm going to have to plan for.  
    
    Granted, I'm not very well (not at all) protected right now, but
    it's better than making some of the misery I see here.
    
    					cj *->

    
    
    Re: .26 ; right on!
    
    	What my ex has mentionned is obviously not fair, and if you 
        knew the kind of money she makes as a Lexington teacher, you 
        would conclude, that her request is not need-based, but 
    	a "grab as much as I can get away with".
      
    	Why should not she try to obtain to gain it thru the court 
    	knowing how NCP's are treated in court for
    	child support payments? 
    
    	Question is: 
    	
    	what could 
    	a Massachusetts court of law force me to do if ex presses such 
    	demands that are not seplled out in our divorce agreement, and
    	for which I believe there are no guidelines similar to child
        support tables.
    
    	 

        reply .28

    I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but...

    >	Question is: 
>    	
>    	what could 
>    	a Massachusetts court of law force me to do if ex presses such 
>    	demands that are not spelled out in our divorce agreement, and
>    	for which I believe there are no guidelines similar to child
>        support tables.

    As I have previously indicated, child support agreements are not worth
    the paper they are written on if one party or the other (usually the
    CP) decides to get them modified.  If the papers state that you agreed
    to pay support + 1/2 tuition, then the court may well enforce what the
    order states.  If those demands are not in the original order, then
    the court cannot order you to pay more than whatever the guidelines
    state.  Also depends on whether or not the college tuition is 
    allowed to be figured into the formula.

    fred():

>		If those demands are not in the original order, then
>    the court cannot order you to pay more than whatever the guidelines
>    state.  

Acording to my attorney, in NH either party can petition to have the
order brought forward and modified at any time, and may succeed, if they
can convince the court that there has been a substantial change in
circumstance and that the requested change is justified. The only part
of a divorce settlement which cannot be changed after the fact is the
property settlement, unless the complainant can demonstrate fraud
(hidden assets, etc.).

The orders *are* worth the paper they're written on if they are violated
and the other party complains. Non-payment of child support, for
instance, is a felony in NH.

-stephen

    
    re .30

>The orders *are* worth the paper they're written on if they are violated
>and the other party complains. Non-payment of child support, for
>instance, is a felony in NH.

    Maybe I wasn't quite clear.  The court will enforce what is in the
    orders (the support issues anyway), but modification of those
    support orders is the easiest part of a decree to obtain.  I 
    seriously doubt that the court can modify an order to include
    both support and college tuition.  The court can order continued
    support to help provide for college, but cannot order tuition
    on top of that.

    This is the back side edge of the move to "guidelines" in determining
    support awards.  Previously the court could order whatever it felt
    like.  Although the guidelines may seem rather steep, the court
    cannot go beyond them in most cases.

    fred();

          I'm currently working 2 jobs in order to make ends meet. In some
    ways it's a small price to pay for the quality time I enjoy with my
    children. As for college and being in a position to help. I'm paying
    40% of my gross in cs which comes to close to 60% of my net. While
    battling with my ex's lawyer on college even my ex finally had to shut
    him up by saying we'd try to pool our resources to help with college.
    Her lawyer insisted that I put away XXX dollars a month towards
    college. Even if it meant I had to work 2 or 3 jobs!!
          I can certainly jump on both sides of this issue as far as trying
    to be a good parent while knowing the financial realities of the
    future. Continuing education is a privlege not a right. Allowing
    your children or ex to take you to court to force payment of 1/2 of
    college expenses is ridiculous. It certainly wouldn't happen in an
    unbroken home so what makes it so different in a broken home?
    
       Bob 

    	I think it's a crying shame that we, as NCPs, have no say in how
    the outrageous amounts of CS that we pay to CPs are used.  In the last
    posting, Bob says he pays 40% of gross.  How much does it really cost
    to raise the children?  I'm sure it's not even close to that amount.  I
    am in a very similar situation, but in which the CP is remarried, and her
    new hubby refuses to work, since he doesn't have to with the income he
    now receives from ME!  When I expressed my concern that I did not
    believe the support I pay her is being used to raise my son, I was put in
    my place by her lawyer, who stated that she can use that money any way
    she deems necessary.
    
    I am also remarried, and have a daughter.  I have set up a college fund
    for her.  The amount that I put into this fund regularlyis only a fraction 
    of what I pay to the CP to raise my son.  I mentioned to her that she
    should be putting some of what I pay her into a similar fund for my
    son, since I cannot afford to set him up a fund AND pay CS.  Her
    response was that I can not tell her how to use the money, and that I
    have to pay for his college, anyway!
    
    I agree with the previous posting that college is a privilege, and not
    a right.  I worked damn hard to put MYSELF through college, and I am
    working damn hard to see that my daughter goes through college.  As for
    my son, I feel that the enormous amount of money that I am forced to
    pay for his support, if used correctly, can also see him through
    college.  But I am also forced to watch as that money is used to raise
    a family of 4(ONE of which is my son).  Then, later down the road when
    my son comes to me at age 18 and says "Mom says that you have to pay
    for my college", and I can't do it, I am labelled a DEADBEAT.
    
    I feel the courts, if they continue to force these outrageous payments,
    should better control how such monies are used.  
    
    Charlie

re 356.33

	OK, it sounds pretty clear you are angry about how your
ex spends the CS dollars you are required to pay.   Many NC fathers
have similiar complaints, but except in the case of gross negligence
the courts won't do anything about it.   And if you think about it
what could they do ... call your ex in for a daily explanation of
how each dollar was spent ??  They simply can't micromanage what she does.

	But you are also concerned about college.   A common situation
is that CS support continues until the youngest child graduates from
college AND you get to pay half or more of the college expenses.
That sure sounds like a crock !   What can we do politically now
to change this ????   I'd like to see the law changed so that
if the NCP pays half of college expenses, then once the youngest
is in college, no more CS.   Who wants to organize a letter writing
campaign ????

    I think a set percentage of all support should be forced to go in a
    college fund...but if the state agreed that this should be done, 
    then they'd probably just raise the guidelines to compensate :-(
    
    Sharon

.35  I think a set percentage of all support should be forced to go in a
.35  college fund.

	Every case is different.  Some families expect their children
to go to college, some don't.   Some families expect to help pay their
children's college expenses, some don't.   Divorce often leaves both
parents less able to contribute.

	If a single mother is trying to shelter/clothe/feed 3 children
on 1/3 of $25k/year, I can't imagine how she could set money aside
for college.   On the other hand if she is getting 1/3(tax free) of
$150k/yr I would think she should be able to save something.

	When the children leave for college, some of the custodial
parent's expenses change.  e.g. the weekly expenditure for food at
home decreases.   It may still be appropriate for the custodial parent
to maintain a bedroom at home for the child so maybe that expense
continues.   And the custodial parent may be paying half of
room/board/tuition.   Another factor is once the children leave
for college, the custodial parent can work full time.   Not an easy
thing to calculate.

    re .36
    -Can't the CP be expected to also contribute, why just the 1/3
     from the NCP supporting the kids?
    -The custodial parent can work full time after the kids leave for
     college?  Why can't she work full time when the kids start 1st 
     grade?
    
    Sorry, I don't think there's much excuse for her not working or
    contributing.  I've been there, you do it if you have to, you don't
    if you don't have to.  1/3 of 25k is enough if your accustomed to
    living in a 25k household, which is what the CP would have been living 
    in before the divorce.
    1/3 of 150k is just as easily spent if that's what scale you're used to.
    
    10% of what the CP gets is probably fair. If it's of 25K, 
    the kids will be able to get pell grants and go to a state school 
    like they would if the parents were still together. If it's of 150K
    then the kids would not be eligible for a Pell, but would likely be 
    able to go to an expensive college, like they probably would if the
    parents were still together.
    
    Sharon

    I am a single parent with one child in college. For a very long time I
    didn't get child support from the father. When the laws finally caught
    up with him - he owed an extraordinary amount. He was only ordered to
    pay $125 per month per kid (3).
    
    There were many years when I went through working and paying child
    care, braces etc...
    
    One of the biggest worries was college. My children are very bright and
    I really wanted to give them the opportunity to go to school.
    
    The solution that we came up with is:
    
    My son joined the National Guard.
    He applied for scholarships, student loans, local, state, fed financial
    grants.
    
    I try to help him buy books and I travel to get him to his obligations
    to the National Guard. He also works two jobs.
    
    It was a big effort on both our parts to figure out the routes to get
    him into school. It's only the beginning.
    
    I am extremely proud of my son.
    
    He goes to Westfield state. Is living in the dorms. Doesn't have a car
    and has to travel by bus to and from work.

    What did the national guard do for him? Does that help with college?
    
    ...Can girls join?
    Sharon

    re .39
    
    The National Guard does have some matching-fund program for college.
    There's also ROTC, and the regular military programs for college.
    Give them a call.  You will probably have a hard time keeping them
    _from_ telling you all about it ;^}.
    
    fred();

    Yes girls can join.
    
    If you go to a state school they waive the tuition.
    
    They also send a monthly check to help defray other costs.
    
    Let me know if you need more info