Must a "wallet dad" pay support to an adult child despite a complete breakdown of the parent-child relationship? (Photo courtesy of SXC; all rights reserved.)
According to a recent judgement, even though a man is “nothing more than a wallet” to his adult daughter, he must still pay for her education.*
After his eldest daughter cut him out of her life completely, the father in this case filed an application before the Ontario Superior Court to terminate his contribution to her university tuition.
Judge Gray of the Ontario Superior Court found that the father, while a sympathetic figure, hadn’t been completely blameless in the total ruin of his relationship with his daughters. The rather sad scenario had been the construction of both parents – the mother’s airing of financial grievances before the daughters and the father’s clumsy and rather inappropriate attempt to introduce his new girlfriend to his daughters when they were still children.
Under the Child Support Guidelines, parents who are separated from each other are generally obligated to support their adult children in full-time education, even when parent and child are estranged. At the same time, the judge may consider the factors that have led to a failed parent-child relationship before deciding whether the termination of support is warranted.
In the current case, the judge lamented that the rupture of the relationship was “irrational and could have and should have been avoided.” At the same time, the judge was of the opinion that the evidence fell short of justifying termination of the father’s support obligations towards his daughter. Nonetheless, the judge ordered the adult daughter to contribute 75% of her own income to her education.
Now I’m slightly concerned that, as a result of this order, the daughter will quit her job.
*Veneman v. Veneman, 2012 ONSC 6324 (CanLII) at para. 65
This blog is provided for educational purposes and for your reference. It is not intended as legal advice and should not be regarded as such. The law may have changed since the publication of this article.
@PSWLaw_TO
“Wallet Dad” Ordered to Keep Paying Tuition of Estranged Daughter
Must a "wallet dad" pay support to an adult child despite a complete breakdown of the parent-child relationship? (Photo courtesy of SXC; all rights reserved.)
According to a recent judgement, even though a man is “nothing more than a wallet” to his adult daughter, he must still pay for her education.*
After his eldest daughter cut him out of her life completely, the father in this case filed an application before the Ontario Superior Court to terminate his contribution to her university tuition.
Judge Gray of the Ontario Superior Court found that the father, while a sympathetic figure, hadn’t been completely blameless in the total ruin of his relationship with his daughters. The rather sad scenario had been the construction of both parents – the mother’s airing of financial grievances before the daughters and the father’s clumsy and rather inappropriate attempt to introduce his new girlfriend to his daughters when they were still children.
Under the Child Support Guidelines, parents who are separated from each other are generally obligated to support their adult children in full-time education, even when parent and child are estranged. At the same time, the judge may consider the factors that have led to a failed parent-child relationship before deciding whether the termination of support is warranted.
In the current case, the judge lamented that the rupture of the relationship was “irrational and could have and should have been avoided.” At the same time, the judge was of the opinion that the evidence fell short of justifying termination of the father’s support obligations towards his daughter. Nonetheless, the judge ordered the adult daughter to contribute 75% of her own income to her education.
Now I’m slightly concerned that, as a result of this order, the daughter will quit her job.
*Veneman v. Veneman, 2012 ONSC 6324 (CanLII) at para. 65
This blog is provided for educational purposes and for your reference. It is not intended as legal advice and should not be regarded as such. The law may have changed since the publication of this article.