Page 50 - August 2016 Newsletter

College expense responsibility
With the cost of college tuition on the con- stant rise, parents of minor children are often left feeling uncertain as to how these expens- es will be assigned and allocated in a divorce proceeding. Many divorcing couples, especial- ly those with young children, fail to take into consideration who will pay for their children’s post-high school education. While the parties may stipulate to whatever terms they agree upon, courts do not necessarily require parties
to make such a determination in the parties’ divorce de- cree.
assumption is incorrect however, because under Illinois statute, the court may require a supporting parent to con- tinue supporting a child who has reached the age of ma- jority if that child is still attending high school. Further- more, the court has the power and may order the parties to pay for their children’s post-high school education ex- penses. These expenses may include, but are not limited to, room and board, tuition, transportation, books, fees, registration and application costs and medical expenses, including medical insurance. These sums may be ordered payable to the child, to either parent or to the education-
RACHEL JOHNSON
The parties, pursuant to section 513 of the Illinois
Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act, often
reserve the issue of higher education cost to be determined by the parties and the court at a lat-
er date. It is vital to note that if a parent wishes to LAW obtain the maximum financial contribution from
al institution either directly or through a special ac- count or trust created for that purpose, as the court
sees fit.
Furthermore, it is common for parties to spec-
ify, and for courts to allow for the provision, that post high school educational support will cease if the child fails to maintain a certain grade point average (usually a C average). In making a determi- nation, the court shall consider all relevant factors that appear reasonable and necessary, which may include the financial resources of both parents, the standard of living the child would have enjoyed had the marriage not been dissolved, the financial resources of the child and the child’s academic performance. Lastly, the court’s authori- ty under the statute terminates when the child receives a
the other parent, he or she should petition the court sooner rather than later. The Illinois Supreme Court ruled in, In re the Marriage of Petersen, that a party whose di- vorce decree reserved the issue of college expenses but who later petitioned the court for contributions for col- lege expenses, could not obtain contributions for any of the expenses that predated the petition.
This is important because, all too often, many parents who pay child support assume that their financial obliga- tions terminate when their children reach 18 years. This
Family
Bachelor’s degree.
CONTINUED ON PAGE 54
CHICAGO LODGE 7 ■ AUGUST 2016 49