Screwed?

Paying for College
41

<p>This is a checkmate problem.
You cannot get enough loans w/out co-signers to go to school. Even if you could, you would graduate with substantial debt. If you are not in school, then you have to pay room, board, insurance, which would require a full time job, which you do not yet have the credentials for. Those expenses would also prevent you from saving for college.</p>

<p>Go talk the Army/Air Force recruiter and ask about language school in Korean. Plan to enlist for 4 yrs, and maybe even do a tour in Korea. Expect to pay for college when you get back using military benefits.</p>

<p>Then go present this plan to your parents and say that it is the best alternative you can devise to the checkmate you have collectively created. And sincerely apologize for your role in the escalatory spiral that has gotten you all to this point. Then wait about five days before you go sign the military paperwork so you can all think it over.</p>

<p>I am completely serious about this plan. I know a retired well-regarded academic who got his start going to US Army language school in Russian, then GI billed American University, and got his Ph.D. from U of Michigan. He spent much of his career on the faculty at Duke.</p>

42

<p>the above solution is a very good one. It would give the poster an opportunity to work with benefits, live in desired country and pick up language skills which are a very “hot” commodity in the military right now. With the GI bill veterans’ benefits then the student could go to college with very little/possibly no debt. And perhaps even with foreign language certification compliments of the Department of Defense.</p>

43

<p>UW tuition is $7692 for the upcoming year. If you can live at home free, a $6500 stafford loan would cover most of the tuition and a job would cover the rest, plus books, etc. You only have to pay for the first quarter in a few months (so a third of that amount), not the whole year. You would pay the next quarter in Dec or so and the last quarter in Feb/March.</p>

44

<p>The parents were wrong to tell this adult child that he could not go. They overstepped their boundaries.</p>

<p>An adult is not running away when he takes atrip that he won. The parents are being very shortsighted and, frankly, ridiculous.</p>

45

<p>I would ask these siily parents to think ahead about 10-20 years and think of how their silly decision will affect the long term relationship with their child. It will be bad, so will it be worth it??? No, they will forever regret their stubborness.</p>

46

<p>I agree with cap. There’s only a $1200 difference between tuition at UW and the Stafford loan – call it $3500 with textbooks and commuting costs. A summer job and 10 hours of work a week during the school year (and possibly a job during at least part of winter break) will earn enough to continue at the University if he has room and board covered. </p>

<p>This was an expensive lesson. I hope the OP thinks that the almost-free trip was worth what it is going to cost him.</p>

47

<p>Mom2collegekids, I respectfully disagree. We don’t know the reason for the parent’s refusal I suspec there is some history to this. </p>

<p>Regardless, I don’t consider someone an adult when they are totally financially dependent on their parents. With financial dependence comes the cost of listening to your parent’s wishes.</p>

48

<p>The parents were short-sighted because they created a scenario where no matter which way the student chose, the parents would be LOSERS.</p>

<p>This is why…</p>

<p>If the student had gone with the parents’ choice, and had given up the fab opportunity of essentially a free trip abroad, the student would have held a grudge forever. If you don’t believe me, look over a few past threads from parents who harbor anger at their parents for being stubborn about other similar “demands” that were not going to cost the parents anything.</p>

<p>If the (adult) student did not do what his parents wanted, then he goes and loses his college education. In that case, the student STILL will forever hold a grudge about his parents’ strong-arming and pulling rank (where they really don’t have rank). </p>

<p>So, the parents (stupidly) created a lose/lose scenario for themselves. Not a bright move.</p>

<p>Parents who are paying for education for their adult children do NOT have carte blanche over EVERY decision in the adult child’s life. I will be helping my son thru med school. THAT DOES NOT give me the right to interfere with decisions that have NOTHING to do with any of that. </p>

<p>You seem to think that an adult gives up his right to make all personal decisions when parents are paying for college. NO. If parents are paying for college, they can’t abuse that with strong-arming. If paying means strong-arming is ok…then…that implies all sorts of problems.</p>

<p>You seem to think that such an adult child should “respect his parents wishes” for everything? So, does that mean…</p>

<p>If your adult child is dating someone that you don’t like, it’s ok for you to withhold tuition because he/she won’t break up with him/her? </p>

<p>If your adult child has a few friends that you don’t like, it’s ok for you to withhold tuition if they continue the friendship?</p>

<p>If your adult child “comes out of the closet,” it’s ok for you to withhold tuition unless he/she agrees to be “straight”?</p>

<p>If your adult child refuses to let you read his/her emails and text messages, it’s ok to withhold tuition payments?</p>

<p>Do you see how ridiculous this could get? (That could also extend to paying for a child’s wedding. Does the parent get to make all the decisions since the parent is paying??? No, that would not be a good idea. The parent can set a budget, but not make the decisions. Nor should a parent say, “you’re going to have your reception at XXXXX otherwise I’m not paying” or that sort of nonsense of “pulling rank”.</p>

<p>Parents who pay tuition need to know that there are some boundaries. Yes, you can withhold tuition if the student is wasting time partying or using drugs, or not getting decent grades. But, parents need to be VERY CAREFUL about using their wallets as some kind of harness to control and dictate.</p>

49

<p>You are taking argument to absurd extremes. I stand by my opinion. With financial support comes “say”.</p>

<p>My guess is that this is not an isolated incident. There has to be history that caused the parents to react like this</p>

50

<p>No, most of my examples aren’t any more extreme then demanding an ADULT student give up a free trip abroad. How is that any less extreme than demanding that an adult child stop dating a GF/BF that the parents don’t like?</p>

<p>BTW…the way to illustrate absurdity is with absurdity. The argument was that the parents are paying therefore they have the right to have “say” over the adult child’s life. I just demonstrated how absurd that can be if that were true (which it’s not). </p>

<p>With financial support, the “say” a paying parent has is very limited. The “say” should be related to educational issues, not the adult child’s summer activities that are legal and ethical and don’t cost the parents anything. (and even educational “say” is not carte blanche.)</p>

51

<p>At some point, a parent using their money to compel/coerce the behavior of their children ceases to be “parenting” and becomes “controlling and overbearing”.</p>

<p>Age 19 seems to be at or beyond that point to me.</p>

52

<p>Once a child is 18, a parent has to be VERY careful about control issues, because it will backfire…oh yes, it will backfire big time. Parents have to be very careful to choose their battles. It’s one thing to tell a minor that he can’t go on a trip (but even that is a bit iffy when the parent isn’t paying, but still within parent’s rights), but it’s quite another to tell a child over age 18 that he can’t go and then use tuition as a hammer.</p>

<p>Parents aren’t obligated to pay for college, but once they’ve agreed to pay, they should only withhold payment for reasons that are sound…such as the child is not getting good grades. You don’t withhold tuition because of a summer activity that has nothing to do with school or with doing anything unethical.</p>

<p>the parents in this case may think they’ve won the battle, but they’ve lost the war…and there will be consequences. </p>

<p>the parents are saying that they’re not angry anymore, but they still won’t pay. Gee, how nice that THEY aren’t angry anymore. Guess they have no clue that their child will be angry for a very long time (and then the parents won’t be so “not angry anymore” - instead they will be “quite regretful” for being so short-sighted.) Do these parents really think they can cut their child off and the child isn’t going to “cut them off”? </p>

<p>I saw a similar thing happen to my best friend in high school. She was cut off tuition-wise over a similarly small deal. The dad was a high school principal - you’d think he would know about kids - but he was stupid in this area. His daughter (my BF) retaliated and cut them out and they’ve never seen their grandkids or her again. Gee, was it worth it? Heck no. Parents, don’t be stupid.</p>

53

<p>Notrichenough - "At some point, a parent using their money to compel/coerce the behavior of their children ceases to be “parenting” and becomes “controlling and overbearing”.
Age 19 seems to be at or beyond that point to me. "</p>

<p>I don’t necessarily agree with that. If a parent chooses to not fund college because a student hasn’t gotten the agreed upon grades, I don’t see that as being “controlling and overbearing”. Similarly, parents might reasonably require that a student earn a certain amount towards college expenses, or not drive under the influence of alcohol, or not use drugs at home, or …</p>

<p>I don’t know what the OP’s parents had as issues with respect to him visiting Korea. It sounds like they are stubborn and he is too. But I can construct circumstances where a parent might be very unwilling to have a child visit a country where due to the child’s familial background there might be problems, or where circumstances at home (dying grandma, for example) would argue against it. Or it may just have been a power play. We don’t know.</p>

54

<p>I’ll go back to my question about the politics in Korea. Perhaps the parents do not agree with them. I have to wonder also why the OP wants to live there (I’m not saying it’s a bad idea…but I’d love to know what has made Korea such an interesting destination for him).</p>

55

<p>

I think I said this earlier, but yes I agree with this - agreeing to pay for college doesn’t give the kid carte blanche; I think it is reasonable for the parents to have conditions on paying for college such as maintaining a reasonable GPA, making adequate progress towards a degree that was agreed upon ahead of time, the kid doesn’t turn into a party-crazed dope fiend, etc. </p>

<p>But the hammer should be limited to school-related behavior and not be used to try to control any aspect of the kid’s behavior that the parents don’t like.</p>

56

<p>I think there is more to this story than we know…</p>

<p>BUT having said that…the money we’re talking about is the parents’ money. They can spend it any way they choose. At this point, they have chosen NOT to fund this student’s college education. That is their decision.</p>

<p>I would hope that this student has a discussion with his family about his future…it would be interesting to know what the parents expect this kiddo will do IF he does not return to college. </p>

<p>In addition, there needs to be some give and take here…we are hearing the student’s version of this story. There is also the PARENT’s version of the story…and then…as they say…there is the truth.</p>

57

<p>BUT having said that…the money we’re talking about is the parents’ money. They can spend it any way they choose. At this point, they have chosen NOT to fund this student’s college education. That is their decision.</p>

<p>Yes, it’s the parents money to do as they want. No one thinks they have a legal obligation. </p>

<p>However, once parents agree to pay, it’s not wise to take that away without a reason other then a desire to control an adult child. Such parents run the risk of permanently destroying their relationship with their child. This isn’t a situation where the parents can afford to pay or never agreed to pay. </p>

<p>It’s almost unethical for the parents to do what they’re doing. The child is mid-education. That would be similar to a situation where the parents agree to pay for a wedding and then midway thru the plans, the parents take back the agreement to pay because the bridal couple has been offered a free honeymoon to Korea and the parents don’t want them to go there.</p>

58

<p>Talk things over with your parents: present them with plans for making your school work (getting summer job and stafford loan, or talking to a recruiter). Personally, I think talking to a recruiter, telling them your desires and asking them to help map out a plan for you would be very good. Or, alternatively, you could join ROTC at UW. As UT says, this will allow you to get out of the “checkmate” situation (and even with room and board, you’ll still have other costs, in addition to books, like gas and clothes and whatnot. So you’d need to be able to make at least a few thousand per year, including over the summer). But most importantly of all, do what you didn’t do about your trip: talk it out with your parents, in detail. Go to them with a plan, ask them what they expect you to do, ask them to help you plan out your future.</p>

59

<p>

</p>

<p>There is nothing “unethical” about this at all. They have changed their minds about funding this kid’s education. That is not unethical. It could be viewed as unkind, perhaps…but not unethical. And it was not unprovoked. </p>

<p>Sorry…there is more to this story than was posted here. Just my gut feeling. He says his mom HATES Korea (for whatever reason) and yet he entered a contest where the prize was a trip to Korea. There could very well be a good reason why these parents do not support their kid’s decision to go to Korea now or in the future. We don’t know…we’re hearing one side of the story. Gotta wonder what other conflicts there have been.</p>

60

<p>The parents can do whatever they want, but they also have to be prepared to deal with the fall-out - which may be life-lasting. I’ve seen that happen. </p>

<p>the parents say that they’re not angry anymore…of course they’re not. That doesn’t mean that the child is not going to be forever angry. I hope these parents think long and hard before they follow thru with this.</p>

<p>I think sometimes it’s hard for reasonable parents (like many here on CC) to imagine that there can be parents who would do this over such a minor thing, so they think there must be something a lot more significant. There may be…but there may not be. In my best friend’s case (and I did hear both sides), the parents had no good position. They were just being control-freaks. And, they lived to regret it. </p>

<p>Yes, there are some incredibly unreasonable, control-freak parents out there.</p>