Why are Children from divorced homes treated as second class citizens?

Home Forums Controversial Topics Why are Children from divorced homes treated as second class citizens?

Viewing 14 posts - 101 through 114 (of 114 total)
  • Author
  • #1588841


    a mamin

    Dear single mom; may I ask the following question; what is your relationship with your ex husband vis-à-vis your children ? Have you maintained a peaceful relationship so that your children don’t suffer? Have you brainwashed your children against their father ? Those children who came from divorced homes where the parents use them as a pawn against their ex spouse do suffer. That fault is totally the parents and not society ! Sit back and think about it ? Hopefully this does not pertain to you but maybe one single mom will rethink her priorities.

    Neville ChaimBerlin

    Wait a minute, back up. Joseph works at a public school?


    The age of 18 as demarcation of adulthood in America is a modern invention in response to the Viet Nam War.
    In the 1960s and early 70s war protesters and drafted soldiers argued: “Old enough to fight, old enough to vote!”
    The Federal Voting age was lowered to 18, and in many states such as Connecticut the chant included “old enough to fight, old enough to drink” and the drinking age was also lowered to 18 (as it was in NY).
    BUT, lowering voting age did not actually lower the age of majority in all things. In some states that remains 21.
    The 18 year old, who can vote and sign contracts in CT, cannot legally buy alcohol or get a gun license.
    The Family courts still consider support and education and medical support through age 21. Child support may end at 18, BUT not the 18th birthday, the order will extend until the end of the school year in most cases.

    Because, the FAFSA system considers parental income for live at home children in awarding college Financial aid, our courts may obligate divorced parents to contribute to educational costs.

    I recently won $100,000 judgment against a divorced spouse who had not paid his half of the 2 daughters college costs as ordered in the divorce back in 2007. He claimed he had no assets, but the judge agreed that we could attach his pension 100% and he could live on his Social Security or get a job. There was no reason his daughters should be saddled with huge student loans because he did not live up to his obligations.


    CTLawyer, I appreciate your taking the time to provide that response, but that didn’t really answer my question. In short, why are divorced parents held to a different standard than married parents? Married parents aren’t generally legally obligated to fund their children’s college or wedding expenses. Why if divorced should a parent be forced to pay for that if he/she wouldn’t have been had the parents remained married to each other.

    The little I know


    You wrote: “Why if divorced should a parent be forced to pay for that if he/she wouldn’t have been had the parents remained married to each other?”

    Excellent question.

    When this child will need funding for college and legal expenses, the divorced parents will play hot potato. They might be agreeable and on the same page that the expenses should be covered. But each will volley the burden to the other. And without an agreement, it will never end. The married parents (assuming a healthy relationship) who will agree have joint funds, and will make their decision on feasibility, not whether they agreed only if the other could pick up the tab. It is not about making a chiddush for divorced parents. It is about preventing a problem for the kid pursuing his career and family.


    The little I know,
    Cute, but they’re not responsible to pay for their child’s college education to begin with.


    That’s a reasonable explanation but it isn’t a legal explanation. The parent has no legal obligation to pay for an adult child’s college or wedding expenses. This is demonstrable by the fact that if the parents are married a court will not force them to pay those expenses, if the child sues the parent for giving him nothing for college or nothing for his wedding.

    So, even granting your explanation of the dynamics in a divorce, that doesn’t explain why a parent suddenly upon divorce becomes legally obligated to an adult child that he isn’t legally obligated absent divorce.


    Divorced parents aren’t being held to a different standard. The court is merely setting down in its order who will pay for what part of the college costs. I have had divorcing parents agree that neither will be paying for post high school education for the children and the court puts this in the order as well, so one spouse can’t come back after the other.
    Judges will look at the education and lifestyles of the divorcing couple. A judge will ask: Mr. X you have XYZ degree from ABC university, did your parents contribute towards the cost? and the same of Mrs. X. If the grandparents paid for parents’ college, it would be expected the parents pay towards children’s college.
    The orders for payment are for the net out of pocket after scholarships and student loans taken out by the children, NOT the amount colleges charge.
    In all cases, it is not about forcing the divorced parent to pay for what they are not legally required to do, but codifying what they have agreed to do to avoid later legal arguments and actions.

    In fact, it is the custom of the courts in CT to put in the divorce order that Mr and Mrs X agree that Mr X shall pay YY% of net college cost and Mrs. X will Pay ZZ%. Costs shall be computed based on the University of Connecticut tuition, room and board fees at the time child attend school.
    This way a custodial parent can’t stick it to the other by sending child to a $60,000yr private college instead of $28,000yr state university, just because 15 years ago the divorce order says daddy will pay for college.

    The divorce order is merely codifying the agreement made by the parties in a manner that puts the teeth of government enforcement in play to make sure people honor the agreements.


    Makes sense.


    CTL: A married parent can decide not to pay a penny towards college even if that parent went to Harvard, earns a seven digit salary and the grandparents fully paid his college in his youth. No court world generally force such a married parent to pay anything towards his children’s college.

    Now if that parent is getting divorced, his spouse can litigate into forcing him to be legally responsible for a portion of the costs even though absent the divorce he’d have had no such obligation. Even though right from the outset he states that he wishes to not pay a penny towards any of his adult children’s college. And he makes no voluntary agreement with his spouse agreeing otherwise.

    That demonstrates a different standard for married parents and for divorced parents.


    “The divorce order is merely codifying the agreement made by the parties in a manner that puts the teeth of government enforcement in play to make sure people honor the agreements.”

    I think CT’s point is this. When the parents agree to pay, the divorce order is used to make sure it actually happens. If the parents don’t want to pay to begin with, that’s fine as well.


    @singlemomof4 It pains me to hear of your Tza’ar.
    There is no good reason for you or your children to be mistreated due to divorce. Unfortunately there are people who are ignorant, stupid and self absorbed and therefore shun, alienate and degrade others. It’s totally inexcusable and I hope that this new year will bring your family comfort, Koyach, Hatzlacha, Simcha and Nachas!

    🍫Syag Lchochma

    “Wait a minute, back up. Joseph works at a public school?”
    Alluded to it and then allowed other’s to assume so. Although if he does it would most certainly mean he is surrounded by nivel peh, intermittent kol isha, and generally unIclad women. So… think what you wish.

Viewing 14 posts - 101 through 114 (of 114 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.