My graduating brother moving out at 17?

[Kagomenesan]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[Kagomenesan]

My brother is graduating in June, and has decided to move in with me and continue going to college. My father however is refusing to let him move because he changed his college plans. So now he's threatening police on me and my little brother. I'm wanting to know if he can move out with me without getting police involved. I always thought that at 17 years old that you were able to move out and in my brothers case he's already graduating high school so he won't be missing any school and he's not gonna be turning 18 until October. My brother already has a part-time job too and will be on my lease.

 

[eerelations]

Your brother cannot legally move out of his father's house until he is at least 18 years old. Depending on the US state your brother is in, the legal age for moving out is either 18 or 19. And yes, if your brother runs away from home before he is legally allowed to leave, and you allow him to move in with you, you can get into fairly serious trouble with the law should your father decide to call the police on you and your brother.

 

[quincy]

My brother is graduating in June, and has decided to move in with me and continue going to college. My father however is refusing to let him move because he changed his college plans. So now he's threatening police on me and my little brother. I'm wanting to know if he can move out with me without getting police involved. I always thought that at 17 years old that you were able to move out and in my brothers case he's already graduating high school so he won't be missing any school and he's not gonna be turning 18 until October. My brother already has a part-time job too and will be on my lease.

What is the name of your state, Kagomenesan?

Police in many (most?) states are reluctant to get involved if the "runaway" has graduated high school and is not living on the streets or endangered.

 

[CdwJava]

Kagomenesan, in a handful of states, the police are legally unable to compel a 17 year old to return home even if they are still a minor. In others, they might have little or no choice but to do so. This is why it is important to know what state you live in.

 

[quincy]

... This is why it is important to know what state you live in.

Or what states are involved, if Kagomenesan lives in a state different from her father.

 

[CdwJava]

Or what states are involved, if Kagomenesan lives in a state different from her father.

True. Though, the laws of the father/brother's state would tend to take precedence, but the laws of the residing state might limit the actions of the police absent a court order for the seizure and return of said child.

 

[quincy]

True. Though, the laws of the father/brother's state would tend to take precedence, but the laws of the residing state might limit the actions of the police absent a court order for the seizure and return of said child.

Your latter point is what I was considering.

It seems unlikely whatever the state that a 17 year old, who has graduated from high school and is turning 18 in October, will be forceably returned to his parents, unless there is a reason more compelling than a decision by the teen not to go to college.

 

[cbg]

There is no state I know of where a parent is compelled to allow a 17 year old runaway to remain outside the home. Whatever restrictions might be on law enforcement, a parent is still allowed to go get their kid.

 

[CdwJava]

There is no state I know of where a parent is compelled to allow a 17 year old runaway to remain outside the home. Whatever restrictions might be on law enforcement, a parent is still allowed to go get their kid.

The rub might be if the child refuses to go with the parent. The parent could be subject to battery charges, maybe even kidnapping, if they forcibly remove the child. In at least two states, the laws that govern juveniles appear not to apply to 17 year olds. While I think it's ridiculous, I have read about parents frustrated and threatened by arrests in these two states when they try and nab their kids against their will. It seems the epitome of stupidity to require the parent still be financially and legally responsible for a child that they cannot legally control.

 

[quincy]

... It seems the epitome of stupidity to require the parent still be financially and legally responsible for a child that they cannot legally control.

Adult children can be legally and financially responsible for their parents in some states, even when the adult child cannot legally control their parents. It can fall to the family to support those family members who cannot support themselves - this so the state doesn't have to provide the support.

In this described situation, though, the brother has a job and is on the lease with his sister and does not appear to be seeking financial support from his parents. I see nothing wrong with a high school graduate heading off on his/her own, as many 17 year olds do just that when they leave home to attend college.

The fact that the parent does not approve of the brother's college plans is not, in my opinion, a legitimate reason to force his return.

 

[CdwJava]

And, in some states, the parents will STILL be civilly liable for any debts accrued by said minor and any penalties relating to criminal and non-criminal activity all without the benefit of oversight. Frankly, if a parent will be liable for the actions of their child, they should have the legal ability to take some measure of control of the child. This is not true in some states, however, and to me that's a sad state of affairs.

 

[quincy]

And, in some states, the parents will STILL be civilly liable for any debts accrued by said minor and any penalties relating to criminal and non-criminal activity all without the benefit of oversight. Frankly, if a parent will be liable for the actions of their child, they should have the legal ability to take some measure of control of the child. This is not true in some states, however, and to me that's a sad state of affairs.

A sad state of affairs? Maybe.

The goal of most parents is to raise their children to the point where they are capable of living on their own. It appears the brother has reached that point.

And that the brother wants to move in with his sister and his sister wants him to move in with her shows the children have a close relationship. That appears to be a positive.

 

[CdwJava]

It may well be. But, we don't know. I DO know that sometimes kids - even at 17 - cannot make the most rational decisions. The parents may know more than we do - and more than the kid does. I would think that if this child were bright, mature, and on top of things, the parents might be all for his moving on and along ... the fact that they do not appear to be supportive could indicate that the child is not as mature and bright as might be implied.

Again, depending on the states involved, the parents may have all of the liability and none of the control, and that can be a scary state of affairs.