WSJ Article on Sorority Dues and Child Support
 

I don't know who reads The Wall Street Journal on this board, but I found an article about how divorced parents in some juristictions are shelliong out money for the entire college experience. This is because in some states, child support extends beyond age 18. In at least 16 states, divorce court judges are allowed to direct parents to pay their kids' college tuition. In most cases, it means tuition/living expenses. However, some other places it is extended to other things, including clothes (Virginia) and GLO dues (Mississippi). In a recent case in Iowa, the state Supreme Court decided that college isn't just about classroom learning, but also a cultural experience, which will cost more for students.

What do people think? Should parents be responsible to help their kids with their GLO dues?

I don't necessarily think "responsible", but my parents did and I will help my future children if they choose to become a member of one.

I think the point is more that parents should realize that college does extend beyond books and tuition and that there is a price for it. Which is probably hard for parents, especially parents of 1st generation college students, to understand. In my opinion the Iowa Supreme Court was right in ruling that college is a cultural experience. That is the best way I can think of to describe it. I have not read anything about it and I am sure some of the legal minds here will have some input on it.

Personally, I think it's pretty sad when people in GLO's have their parents pay dues for them. Being in a sorority or a fraternity isn't like getting an education or having clothes to wear. It's not a necessity. No one ever tells you you absolutely HAVE to join a sorority or fraternity. It's a choice that we all made. If you want to be in a GLO, you know that you have to pay dues, and you should assume financial responsibility for it. GLO's are supposed to teach us to be mature, responsible adults, so how can we do that if we have to come to our parents and ask them to pay for our dues? I admit that I'm pretty spoiled and my parents pay for a lot of stuff, but they would never pay for my sorority dues, and I don't ask them to. I have a job, and pay them out of my own money.

That's a damned big assumption.

Lots of kids do things for their families that prohibit them from working over the summer, and many parents would rather pay for their kids' college (and other expenses) than have the kids be working jobs at all hours and have no free time to study.

I don't see how paying GLO dues is any different than parents paying for new clothes every week or a car. You don't "need" either of those things in college either.

ok, so the fact that my parents wanted to pay for my sorority dues is sad? i'm definitely going to have to disagree with you on that. i didn't ask my parents to pay for anything, they wanted to. they didn't have that experience and they wanted me to get out of going away to school, everything that i possibly could, including being in a sorority. i'll also admit that i'm very spoiled, but i don't think that the fact that they paid for my sorority dues is a bad or sad thing.

Depending on where you go to school there's a very big difference. Where I go to school, there's pretty much nothing around, and the only way to get anywhere is to drive. As soon as kids are allowed to have cars on campus, they bring them up. It's hard to find a job on campus or across the street, so in order to have a job while at college, people pretty much need cars here.

I can't believe they are being required to pay GLO dues. Yes college life is an experience, but there are certain things that a student should be responsible for on their own. If a parent chooses to pay your dues, consider yourself fortunate. But to REQUIRE that a parent pay for this is pretty extreme. I am a 1rst generation college grad, my parents still do not fully understand the significance of the college experience. They provided me with a small savings account, but told me that if I wanted to go to school, get a job. I am very proud that I worked my way through school. If I have children, I plan to give them more financial support than I received, but I would definitely not foot the entire bill.

And from all of the schools I have visited, you are required to wear clothes to class. So I would say a car and clothes are in fact necessities.

When I went to college, I realized that I was an adult and I wanted to be treated as such. I paid for 99% of my expenses when I was in college by myself. I think that if someone wants to go Greek they should have the financial means to do themselves, without relying on someone else, including their parents.

I said "new clothes every week" not clothes, period. Please read before posting...kthxbye.

There are people who live their entire lives and never own a car. Cars are not a necessity for everyone. A lot of people just like to make believe that they are.

:rolleyes:

I never made my parents pay my dues. They paid them because they wanted to.

That's dumb........my parents paid because they knew it made me happy. I also worked and made extra money so I would be able to help with whatever little bit I could.

It's unfair to say that all students should pay their GLO dues. What if you're at a school where you live in the chapter house and also have a meal plan at the house? Those are necessities.

The largest chunk of my dues are for room & board and my meal plan at the house, and my parents pay that. They also pay for my chapter dues. I have two jobs and spend that money on clothes, food, etc.

I guess I'm in the "pretty sad people in GLO's" group. My mom worked extremely hard through high school and got tons of scholarships so that her family wouldn't have to pay tuition. She paid for everything EXCEPT GLO, because that was her mom's gift to her through college. And now, I worked extremely hard through high school to get my scholarships and last time I checked it was my bank account that covers the rest of tuition. So really, I don't think i should be considered "sad" because my mom wants to pay for dues.

No, I don't believe parents should be held responsible for their children's GLO dues. Joining a GLO is a choice made by the young man or woman, and the young man or woman should accept all the obligations that come with that choice - including financial ones. If the parents choose to help out, great, but it shouldn't be forced on them.

If a court has ordered that parent(s) pay for room and board, and the young man or woman joins a housed GLO and lives in house, it shouldn't matter that the "room and board" check is going to XYZ Fraternity/Sorority rather than the university - the parents should still pay for the portion related to room and board. But things like regular dues, initiation fee, badge fee - things that each member would have to pay whether the chapter had a house or not - should be the young person's responsibility unless the parents offer to pay.

If you live in the house and have your meal plan through that, your parents should pay that. I just don't see why parents need to pay for things like badges, initiation fees, mixers, formals, chapter dues, etc.

My parents don't pay my dues for either of my organizations.I'm on scholarship for school so my parents feel like I should be mostly responsible for extras. They DO chip in every once in awhile if I'm short :)

Personally, if your parents choose to pay, I think it's great- especially if you're on a campus where dues are ungodly expensive. Does it mean you're a sad, lazy, human being? Nope. You are very blessed to have parents who want to do so.

My parents don't pay my dues, then again they are only 35 a quarter, so I'm good to go. I'm technically paying for my school...I earned 17,000 in academic scholarships that I have to work to keep and I have my loans that I will end up paying for.

It's very unlikely for any kid at 18 (unless they have a trust fund) to have the money to pay for college themselves while they are attending school full-time. While it isn't anyone's duty to pay for school, I think parents that don't help their kids out the best they can are putting their kids at a disadvantage, and I don't think that's right. My uncle refused to pay for some of my cousin's college, and because you can't "refuse" according to the federal government, she didn't get any need-based scholarships. I fully intend to support my children thought college, including GLO dues, new clothes once and again, books and food.

My parents pay for my sorority dues. I worked very hard to get my full tuition waiver scholarship. My parents expect me to do well in college. They feel that if I had a job during school, it would take away from my studying time. Since they really don't have to pay for anything else due to my scholarship, they offered to pay my dues. They aren't forced to. While some people aren't as lucky as I, and have to work their way through college, that does not mean I am any less deserving to be in my sorority, or any less responsible than those that do pay their own dues.

I do, however, think that it is wrong that parents should be forced to pay dues. Greek life is an option, not a necessity.

It's not unlikely at all. There are many people who do it.

-Rudey

My parents saw college as a privilege, it wasn't something that my sister or I had to do. We were expected to pay our own way through, just like my dad did when he went to school. My parents paid my first semester dues (before I moved into the house) and I paid for the rest of the semesters. I'm still paying for them and will be for quite some time - ie. student loans. I don't see anything wrong with people whose parents pay for their education, that's their choice. If I have the ability when I have my own kids, I will be helping them out.
As far as sorority dues and child support go, I think it would all depend on how the child support is stipulated. ie. If the non-resident parent providing the child support has to pay X amount of dollars per year and those funds cover dues, I don't have an issue with it. One of my sorority sisters education was funded because her dad had to pay whatever the instate tuition in her home states public school(s). This allowed her to go out-of-state.


ETA: Needed to correct a grammatical error.

I don't think that any support beyond high school graduation should be ordered. There are a lot of parents who can't pay for their children's college education. Why should divorced parents be held to a higher standard?

Dee

Like she said, in some states child support extends beyond 18. I'm guessing that in those states the parents are held to that if they are still married as well - i.e. if the kid still lives under their roof they must support him.

I believe that here in PA you can be ordered to put students on your insurance if you have it and the custodial parent doesn't, but don't quote me on that. Maybe our friendly GC Law Team can help us out on this one. :)

I don't think parents should be required to pay GLO dues. Mine do, but they told me that my job while I'm an undergrad is to be a student and that they would cover it. I'm lucky in that respect. Some aren't. But the point is that GLO membership is voluntary, and parents should not be legally made to pay for it.

so i'm probably gonna get flamed for this, but...
 

While you "need" to wear clothes to school, not everyone goes out and buys new clothes every week.

I've worked my way through college not because I had to, but because I chose to. I hardly ever get to buy new clothes ... much less new clothes every week. If anything, I would treat myself at least once or *maybe* twice a month, but that's about it.

I think having parents be ***required*** to pay their child's dues is a little extreme.

If parents want to do it, fine. Mine said they didn't have a problem with it, but I worked to pay my own dues (in addition to other things like my cell phone, credit cards, rent, and even utilities). I paid my my own dues when I joined Delta Sigma Pi, and I paid my own way when I joined Alpha Delta Pi. When I joined both these organizations, I knew full and well what the financial responsibilites were going to be and I wouldn't have joined if I didn't think I could take on the financial responsibility myself.

Sure some parents throw money at their kids every week for new clothes, or whatever, but that's great. Not everyone wants to have money thrown at them. I can totally understand some parents not wanting their kids to work during college b/c it would "take away from their study time" ... because my parents didn't want me to work either, but I was a little realistic... how much of that time do people *really* use to study (you know.. besides the big cram the night before the test :p )

Re: so i'm probably gonna get flamed for this, but...
 

that's what I meant. You can come to college with a complete wardrobe and not need to purchase anything for the rest of the year.

If you really want to get technical on this, you could say that a child doesn't "need" to go to an expensive school like Harvard. There are other schools that offer the same majors and programs. So why should they pay that entire tuition - they should just pay whatever it would cost to go the cheapest school offering that program.

If someone could copy the article it would be really helpful - I feel like there must have been things said that we're missing in just the brief description of it.

Child Support for Sorority Dues? More Courts Are Saying 'Yes'
Jennifer Saranow. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Nov 17, 2004. pg. D.3

Divorced parents' support for children attending college may in some states mean shelling out for the whole undergraduate experience.

In Iowa, support may include a monthly cash allowance and sorority fees in addition to paying for college tuition, books, room and board, according to a ruling last week from the Iowa Supreme Court.

In the unanimous ruling, filed last Wednesday, the state supreme court found that a cash allowance, and in this particular case, even sorority dues, are expenses necessary for a student to participate in the outside-the-classroom learning experiences college offers.

The Iowa ruling is the latest evidence that courts are becoming increasingly sympathetic to the needs of college-age children. Traditionally, child support ends at the age of 18. Iowa is one of at least 16 states where divorce-court judges are allowed to direct parents to pay postsecondary-education costs. The norm for such costs is just basic education and living expenses. In recent years, a handful of other state courts have also expanded the definition of college costs beyond just the basic expenses.

"The reason the court and legislation have begun expanding this obligation on parents is that underlying most child-support laws is an assumption that a child should not suffer unduly from the divorce," says Mary Kay Kisthardt, a professor at the University of Missouri Kansas City School of Law and executive editor of the Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. "In other words, the child should be able to maintain the same standard of living he or she would otherwise have had."

Rulings in Virginia, for example, have found clothing to be a reasonable expense, while Mississippi courts have interpreted the costs to apply to education and sorority expenses but not allowances, says Laura Morgan, a lawyer in Charlottesville, Va., who specializes in child-support law and former chairwoman of the child-support committee of the American Bar Association.

In states where no postsecondary-education subsidy statute exists, parents can voluntarily enter into agreements to cover college costs. "In all those other states, the parents are absolutely free to fashion an agreement that would include or exclude sorority fees and allowance," Ms. Morgan says.

The Iowa case involved a disagreement over how to divide the college costs of a couple's second-eldest daughter. The couple, who divorced in 1992, had previously agreed to split their eldest daughter's college costs, including sorority fees. But that agreement had been made before Iowa law allowed a judge to mandate divorced parents to each pay up to one-third of a child's public state university costs, with the child paying the remaining part.

With her second daughter, the mother sought again to split the college costs with her husband and cover an allowance and sorority fees, as they did for their older daughter. The father, on the other hand, felt Iowa law didn't apply to sorority dues and spending money, says his lawyer Barry Kaplan, a partner at the firm Kaplan & Frese LLP in Marshalltown, Iowa.

The Iowa Supreme Court, however, ruled that the costs of attending college are more than just traditional educational and living expenses, as a college education isn't limited to classroom learning. College education also includes, the court says, social, cultural and educational experiences outside the classroom, which can mean additional costs for the student. The court also found that since the couple had agreed to split the costs of their oldest daughter's sorority dues, the parents had established such costs. The court wrote in its ruling that "a reasonable" cash allowance for the middle daughter would be $300 a month.

Patricia Shoff, the mother's lawyer, who is with Davis, Brown, Koehn, Shors & Roberts in Des Moines, Iowa, says the $300 subsidy has "precedental value" for the state of Iowa. More unclear, she says, is whether sorority- and fraternity-fee expenses will become generally applicable. Ultimately, whether Iowa parents have to pay such fees may depend on whether they have the means, she adds.

Another case is pending in Iowa court to determine how the couple will divide the college expenses of their youngest daughter, who is currently in college out of state.

I don't think dues should be included in parental payments.

I am paying my dues right now, although my parents occasionally put money into my checking account, so they are technically paying some of them. Hopefully the job I get this coming summer will pay for them in full with some leftover.

My parents told me not to worry about the money. They're paying for college, too. I have a chronic illness and was sick for a decent amount of HS/college and my parents wanted me to keep my focus on grades and keeping my health okay. They also appreciate my social needs and are very supportive about the sorority and thus tell me not to fret the dues. I, in turn, work during summers if I'm well and apply for scholarships.

I don't think parents should be forced to.

Earlier in this thread, someone said that by refusing to pay for things for their children, they are putting them at a disadvantage. The reason that I work 30 hours a week while attending school is because my parents don't have the money to help pay my way. I know that they would love to help me out, but it just isn't in the cards right now.

Just my 2 cents.

Not to jump down on you or anything, but your logic that "parents who don't help their kids out the best they can are putting their kids at a disadvantage" is a complete inaccurate. IMPO.

I come from a middle to upper class family, but my parents IN NO WAY could afford to pay for my college expenses (now if they had had the money they would have paid for it, that was their dream to pay for my college but they couldn't).

So there are these wonderful things called student loans that I had to get. In my eyes, I worked harder than some of my sisters who had mommy and daddy paying for everything. All they had to do was pick up the phone say "I need more money" and they would get it. Some of them never held jobs in high school, let alone college. They really didn't know how to "earn" their own money. I worked through high school and college to pay for the things I needed. I learned TONS about saving money and whatnot.

As for the sorority, again it was all on me. I CHOSE to join a sorority. It wasn't a NECESSITY. Plus, my parents didn't even want me to join, they were completely anti-Greek then.

So am I at a disadvantage because my parents didn't pay for my college? No, I'm not. In fact I think I'm at an advantage compared to some (not all) who have mommy and daddy paying for everything. IMPO it gives the child a disadvantage having their parents pay for everything, how will anyone really "learn" anything when everything is handed to you on a silver platter. (Now this is just my opinion and I am speaking strictly from personal experience with some of my sisters and friends from college, this is not to say that EVERYONE whose parents pay for stuff behaves this way).


As for the topic at hand I personally don't feel it is for a state to "order" a parent to pay for their child's GLO dues and fees. That child CHOSE to join so in essense the parents SHOULD CHOOSE whether they want to pay or not. They should pay for tuition and living expenses. Forcing parents to pay for their childs "extracurricular" activities is a whole other issue.

I definitely agree ASUADPi.

I honestly feel the same way. For many of my sisters or outside greek friends that never worked or payed anything, they had a big "oh no, what will I do after I graduate?" feeing. Not to be rude, but I have work experience and I know that will work in my advantage :p I also have budgeting skills because I'm used to living off my own paychecks as opposed to just picking up the phone to call the parents to tell them I ran out of money and need more. My parents are well-off, and they will chip in if I really need it (i.e. didn't make enough hours during the previous week for school or my cell phone bill was WAY higher than I thought it would be) but I'm glad that I chose to pay my own way b/c I definitely feel like I've learned a lot through it.

I don't feel that GLO dues should be forced upon parents who pay child support. However, I don't understand the backlash against those people who do not pay their own dues. Does it really matter to you who pays? I admire those who work very hard to be able to afford fraternity or sorority membership. BUT if parents are willing to pay, what is the problem?

I have a job, and I work. I pay lots of bills for myself. My parents pay for my dues because they know that it's a large expense and they have seen the benefits of membership. I think it's ridiculous that those who don't pay their own dues are painted as moochers or lazy kids.

Also, keep in mind the wide variation between dues across the country. If my dues were $100 or less, I would be able to pay for them myself... but I'm sure that many more girls on GC pay much more money than I do.

Well, I'm not going to feel bad about myself because I had parents who wanted to pay for my expenses while I concentrated on getting an education and experiencing college for what it is - a chance in a lifetime. You do not get another chance to experience all that college has to offer except in those few short 4-5 years.

I understand better now why the Iowa court ruled the way it did. In this case it was because the Father agreed for one child and then did not want to do it for the other 2 (there's that precedence thing). I also agree that divorce should not have any inpact on the child and they should be afforded the same opportunities that would have been there if the parents were still married. In my case the courts did not rule that my father would have to do this, he just did because he is a good guy. But what about all those other non-custodial parents who are bitter about the whole child support thing and choose to drop their kids like a hot potato on their 18th birthday - and don't deny it doesn't happen. Obviously there has to be some method (formula) in place here to help decide how this would be applied as far as who can or cannot afford to pay for these expenses.

I don't think it's so much a "backlash"... but more of a topic that is related to the original one.

1. There was an article saying that some parents may be forced to pay their children's GLO dues

2. Some people said that parents should be forced to do it.

3. Some also gave the arguement that they shouldn't be forced to it because it is the child's choice whether or not to go greek. Some people go greek knowing their parents are going to foot the bill. Others go greek knowing they will be paying the bill either because their parents don't support them to that extent (i.e. paying for GLO membership) or because they choose to be financially responsible for the decisions they are making in college.

4. Some people said their parents pay their bills because they don't want their kids to work. I think when that whole "parents who don't support their children while in college puts them at a disadvantage" thing came up is when it became more of the dominant topic in the thread.... people (myself included) are just responding to that particular comment.

AOIIBrandi- please don't take this in a rude way, but no one asked you to feel bad because your parents paid for your college stuff? :confused: So I'm a little confused why that is even there? :confused:

I understand all of those things, and I even agree with you that having work experience is a distinct advantage. Actually, I pretty much agree with everything you've said in this thread. I also do not think that parents should be REQUIRED to pay dues.

However I do have an objection to other posters in this thread looking down on those who don't pay their own dues... particularly those who do not have to pay ANY national obligations.

I totally agree.

On a similar note- I have an objection to other posters looking down on people who are paying their own way either because they want to or there is no other way. For someone to say that parents are bad and putting their children at a disadvantage because they aren't supporting their children is pretty mean.

Not everyone *can* support their children the way they want to, and not every college student wants their parents to pay everything for them, because they might want to get a few extra life skills out of the whole college experience.

texas*princess: I think this was the point I was trying to make. I believe someone else said earlier in a post - and I'm paraphrasing - that those of us who did not pay our own way were "sad". I don't know about you, but when people make vitriolic comments like that it does have the ability to try and make some people feel bad about something they were lucky/blessed enough to have.

BTW, I do understand that there are plenty of people out there whose parents could not afford to do this for them, or they wanted to pay their own way. I do not in any way want to take anything away from people who do work hard for what they have.

Thanks for the clarification - I was confused where that 'sad' comment was coming from, but reading back I get it.

I think that's really what this is about. This is to assure the kids don't get screwed by whatever dispute the parents might be having. Anyone who's read Prozac Nation will remember her talking about her father refusing to fill out insurance forms that would have gotten her therapy paid for through his insurance - and he was doing it to hold it over her head and her mother's.

Everybody is getting hung up on whether PARENTS in general should pay their kids' Greek expenses, and that's not at all what the article was concerning.