<p>“It is hard to believe this is not a ■■■■■ since this woman shows little regard for her daughter from, I’m afraid, the very start of her life. Putting an infant into childcare for years and years while the mother both attends college and works seems a difficult path, especially with no other parent around.”</p>
<p>Wait MadBean- I hope I misunderstand your post. YOu are certainly not saying that women who put their children in day care so they can go to school and work are showing little regard for their children…are you? If so there are thousands (millions) of women everywhere who are in the same boat. </p>
<p>I don’t have a problem with the OP using day care while she advanced her career. Especially in her case, what else could she do except accept aid? My problem is that once the OP did advance her career-quite successfully it appears- she now is leaving her daughter completely on her own to get through college, and her reasoning doesn’t seem to make sense. Many of us here arranged day care for our children while we worked. My children were in day care from the age of 3 months old, and I certainly never felt like I was putting myself before them. </p>
<p>Fendergirl- I agree there is nothing wrong with making kids contribute to their educations, and definitely their cars. We have paid the majority of our kids educational costs but they have all contributed in some way financially. They have also paid the majority of their costs in purchasing cars as we always felt they would take more “ownership” that way. I do think things have changed significantly in the college cost arena in the last 10 years and that it is significantly more difficult and more expensive to get thru college now- especially in comparison to the change in the cost of living over the past 10 years.</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone has an issue with “I’m full-pay and want to maximize my child’s chance at merit aid or athletic scholarships because I want to conserve family resources for other purposes.” And the other point of the initial post–essentially, You can get the same education anywhere! There is no reason to pay extra for Harvard!–is a long-raging debate on this forum that has proponents on both sides.</p>
<p>This young woman would have gotten a very different response if she’d left out the biographical details.</p>
<p>DeskPotato - not from me. She said she won’t contribute at all to her D’s education.</p>
<p>I take issue with that if she has means. I get not paying for all of it and requiring the kiddo to pull scholarships, work, even take out loans - but college is expensive. I feel sorry for those kids that don’t get any parental support at all.</p>
<p>I am also in the camp that says that a degree from a state school is great. The fact that mom went to Ivy league doesn’t matter to me. That’s not what the daughter wants anyway.</p>
<p>Wow, madbean-- are you one of those people who if a poor single mom stays at home with her kids “WELFARE QUEEN GET A JOB!!!” but if she uses daycare and works “HORRIBLE MOTHER!!” ? Yikes.</p>
<p>Cromette-
I agree with the bulk of what you say but I have to add that an 8th grader is unlikely to have any idea what kind of college she’ll want to attend. A state U. or other school may serve her extremely well but I’m doubtful that she can make that determination at her age. At 13 one of my children asked “Is Harvard a good school?”, despite having parents who attended Ivy League grad schools and friends who I anticipate may be applying to Harvard one day. We joke about it now, but it’s an illustration of how little most kids know about college in middle school.</p>
<p>I’ll add about finances-my husband likes to travel to a certain special event with his buddies and he has a trick-ask years in advance and the answer is likely to be yes. We’ve both learned that the answer to the question, “Do you mind if I take next week to go on an expensive golfing/hiking/climbing trip?” will be much different from the same question asked about a trip years in the hazy future. Telling this child she’ll be responsible for coming up with a quarter of a million dollars may sit well with a kid who’s never even earned a paycheck, but it might not be so palatable when the reality is staring her in the face four years from now.</p>
<p>If the child resides with the father greater than 50% of the time the calendar year prior to her high school graduation and on…the father would be the custodial parent and it does NOT matter who declares the kiddo on their taxes for the FAFSA. The father in this case would be the only one listed on the FAFSA. HOWEVER, any child support is required to be listed on that FAFSA as well.</p>
<p>FAFSA only schools do not guarantee to meet full need for all accepted students.</p>
<p>For Profile schools, if the child resides primarily with the father, then HE would complete the Profile and the mom the NCP Profile of required. Some schools do not require this form. Again, tax filing status has NOTHING to do with financial aid filing status. For schools requiring the NCP Profile, the mom would complete that. Schools using Profile have varying ways to deal with the NCP and college aid.</p>
<p>Some schools use their own financial aid form to gain information about the NCP.</p>
<p>BUT…it was my impression that this OP was hoping for Merit based awards based on her daughter’s academic achievements and ECs. To be honest, that would be the best plan as it does not rely on fluctuations in income from year to year to keep the same aid. Student would need to maintain a certain GPA…which the OP feels is a reasonable expectation.</p>
<p>My suggestion…wait until the end of tenth grade and see where this student is. It is very possible that she will continue to excel and scholarships of some amount will remain available to her.</p>
<p>I know the custodial parent is not necessarily the same person claiming the student on tax returns - however, it stands to reason that it normally would be, and it might stave off a lot of questions. Also, I don’t think the mom should be getting tax breaks on the daughter’s college tuition if she’s not contributing at all and is overseas somewhere.</p>
<p>In 2006, USC offered all NMF admits 50% tuition merit awards. Noticing 2013, only some NMFs (I know several well qualified NMF rejected from USC over the past several years) are admitted and even fewer get ANY merit awards. Cooper Union used to offer free tuition to all its students and is now indicating it may no longer be able to do so in the near future. The times are changing and Ed expenses just keep rising!</p>
<p>My observation over a lot of years is that parents who take this line (kid must fund 100% of college education) are often quite upset when child doesn’t actually get a college degree. Remember, these decisions go both ways. If you want your child to go to college, you need to plant that expectation, not plant the expectation that a college degree is an expendable luxury. If you don’t care if your child gets a college degree, that’s a different story.</p>
<p>IJustDrive, that’s a very good point. College expenses must be paid one way or the other. Based on my specific situation, where my child could not depend on public or private school for most of his education and I was raising him alone, I told him that I could provide that high level education personally but would sacrifice my career prospects, much of my expected income, and my retirement savings to do so. I told him I would do it with the understanding that he’d have to work very, very hard to get into the very best college available to support his choice of careers so that endowments and scholarships would likely pay for most or all of it. He agreed, albeit at an extremely young age, and I lost/invested seven figures financially to do it. He followed through and now has to bust his behind to keep up with the workload. That was our approach, but I had every reason to believe it was likely to be successful. Many students are not going to be able to depend on such an outcome and require full support of their parents in working out shared expenses. For example, in my view, parents should seriously consider expected college expenses when making lifestyle choices throughout their children’s childhoods and college years. Plan ahead. I invested massively, so I have a hard time empathizing with parents who don’t and then want their kids to do it all alone.</p>
<p>For now, Cooper Union will only charge tuition to graduate students, and students admitted this year were offered free tuition for 4 years. But that doesn’t include 4 years of living in NYC, for which there are few or no bargains.</p>
<p>■■■■■ is my vote. The student profiled in “MIT for TWO” cannot possibly be the OP-- First, the article is dated June 2011 and states the daughter is 13. Since it is now nominally 2 yrs later, the OP’s daughter would be 15 and in HS. Second, I can’t imagine the young woman profiled in that article would be so selfish toward her daughter, given the encouragement she herself received in HS. It just doesn’t add up.</p>
<p>Jaylynne–what? What’s with that welfare mom crack? I never said anything of the sort! My goodness, of course I believe in childcare. Moms have lives, go to school, work. Goodness, sorry if I gave off that impression. But being a parent requires a selflessness to the success of the family as a unit and the children, who are dependent, and I missed any of that longing to help her D in the OP. Of course, it doesn’t have to be financial–but nurturing comes in many forms and I guess I just didn’t hear it here. That’s why I mistrusted this was a real poster at all. Sorry for any misunderstandings.</p>
<p>My views, in fact, are that parents can do whatever they like with their money. Who can judge? But when a poster comes to CC and asserts their POV for discussion, I must admit, I’m baffled at the lack of empathy they display for their DD.</p>
<p>And I’m again really sorry for any misunderstanding.</p>
<p>Madbean-- your linking of “disregard for her daughter” and “years and years of childcare” made me think you perceive putting a child into daycare as a part of her disregard. I do not think I was the only person who felt this way. If I am wrong, I am wrong. I’m sorry.</p>
<p>In my book, sending your child to a less selective college that throws tons of money at her is far superior to sending a child to a highly selective college that will cost a quarter of a million or more to attend over four years. Obviously parents who can afford to do so are morally obligated to send their kids to college. Nobody is morally obligated however to send their child to a highly selective but very expensive private school, especially because at the undergraduate level, the education will be pretty much the same no matter where the child goes.I know that is heresy on this board where so many believe the highly selective schools are that much better. But I don’t believe that. I believe the Public Universities do a very adequate job of educating our children and it is up to each individual child to get as much out of their education as they choose.</p>
<p>I don’t believe that moral obligation is obvious or even true. We very much want to launch our children into adulthood with a solid education that will lead to economic stability with little to no debt.</p>
<p>But I wouldn’t say that we are morally obligated to do so. I definitely disagree that we would have any sort of obligation to fund four years of study in Russian Literature or something of the like.</p>
<p>The part of my post that you quoted was in response to OP’s cavalier statement that her 14 year old was “on board” with mom’s “I come first, you come second” plans. Regardless of what kind of education the girl may get at a school that gives her a free ride, I’ll bet dollars to donuts that by her senior year of high school, she won’t be “on board” and will deeply resent her mother’s decision.</p>
<p>To me it sounds like you’re a crazy person taking your “high income stress” onto your daughter. My family is on the wealthy side also and not once did they treat me and my sister like this.</p>
<p>“But I wouldn’t say that we are morally obligated to do so.”</p>
<p>Really? Where is the line where our morality and responsibilities end? It is one thing if you are unfortunate and not in any way can provide for what is increasingly an important prerequisite to have a chance at decent and productive lives. Just feed and clothes them so they can survive until the age of 18 year old? Then we can retire early and do whatever we want and the kids just need to fend for themselves after they finish high school? I guess your sense of morality an obligation is a lot different than mine.</p>
<p>I doubt that very much since I’ve devoted every day of the past 18 years to readying my children for a productive adulthood.</p>
<p>We’ve saved for college since their infancy and have taken total ownership of their education by homeschooling. Nobody has ever accused me of taking a laissez-faire approach to childrearing. ;)</p>
<p>But when you make it a moral obligation then the flip side is that not fulfilling it is sinful. Does the OP’s attitude sink to the level of sin? Possibly. I find myself horrified at her selfishness.</p>
<p>To make a blanket statement that all parents of some means are guilty of sin for not funding college is not a judgment I’m prepared to make.</p>