unusual question

[stealth2]

I read it completely wrong - I was thinking it was your ex w/the benefit. NM...

(and my typing was atrocious!)

 

[Zigner]

We never had a support order we agreed for him to stay with dad when I moved an hour away and we split the costs like I said dad and I have a good working relationship. I still live in the same state so out of state is not an issue. It's all about using my husbands(the step fathers) education benefits through his work and about nothing else.

You aren't going to be able to get an order now that the child is 18.

 

[justalayman]

I presume your son has a driver's license. Have him obtain his Indiana driver's license showing your address. Make sure he has some mail with him as addressee at your address.

Then speak to the benefit administrator and explain to them the courts are not going to enter an order of custody for an adult child but you do have proof of residence which matches your address.

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

They are correct in that support in Indiana goes to either 21 or 22 when college is involved. Were there any custody papers ever drawn up?

 

[LdiJ]

They are correct in that support in Indiana goes to either 21 or 22 when college is involved. Were there any custody papers ever drawn up?

Its not automatic anymore Tink. They changed the law a couple of years ago. Its possible to still get support through college, but the default now is age 19 instead of 21.

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

Is it 19 or graduates from HS? Child is 18.

 

[justalayman]

They are correct in that support in Indiana goes to either 21 or 22 when college is involved. Were there any custody papers ever drawn up?

but the court cannot assign custody of an adult. The court can enter the order based on residence but not custody since neither parent has legal custody of the child once they turn 18. They are adults. The child is free to live with whichever parent they wish to live with or anywhere else if they so desire.

Once a child hits 18 the support order is only good as long as the child willingly lives with whatever parent it was based they live with.

 

[CJane]

the courts cannot require an adult child to live with any particular parent. The court can deem there will be no child support if the child does not live with one parent or the other or anything else but the court cannot make a custodial decision on an adult child. At best they can enter an order based on the child's residence, which is 100% up to the child once they reach 18.

I never said she was required to live with me. I said that my address is designated as HER address for mailing and school purposes. Since child support continues to 21 only if she's in college, she will have a designated address for mailing and school purposes until she's 21 or leaves school. That is, and will continue to be, reflected in our court order. If she moves out of my residence permanently (as opposed to just for the school term), child support would then be directly paid to her, and my address would no longer be her residence.

 

[justalayman]

I never said she was required to live with me. I said that my address is designated as HER address for mailing and school purposes. Since child support continues to 21 only if she's in college, she will have a designated address for mailing and school purposes until she's 21 or leaves school. That is, and will continue to be, reflected in our court order. If she moves out of my residence permanently (as opposed to just for the school term), child support would then be directly paid to her, and my address would no longer be her residence.

You said this:

The way this was explained to me is that the court DOES have jurisdiction to make custodial decisions on people 18 and over, as long as child support is still in play.

but the fact is; they don't. They cannot assign custody of an adult, (for the sort of issue at hand)....PERIOD! They are making an order contingent upon the child living with, or at least claiming residence with, the one that would be considered to have custody if it was a minor child.

 

[CJane]

You said this:



but the fact is; they don't. They cannot assign custody of an adult, (for the sort of issue at hand)....PERIOD! They are making an order contingent upon the child living with, or at least claiming residence with, the one that would be considered to have custody if it was a minor child.

Well then. You'd better call the judge in my case before she signs off on her order, and tell her she's wrong.

Because it DOES say "Joint Legal And Physical Custody of BOTH CHILDREN (XXXX, and XXXXX) is awarded to the parents." It ALSO says "The non-custodial parent (Petitioner Father) shall blah blah blah, and the custodial parent (Respondent Mother) shall blah blah blah."

Later, it addresses the fact that there is no PARENTING PLAN for the 18 year old, and only the 15 year old shall be obliged to visit the NCP. However, CUSTODY is mentioned several times in relation to the 18 year old. And she'd been 18 for a month when we went to court. She is even still obligated to attend therapy sessions with her father until August 1.

I am obligated to provide him with EOBs if provided to me after a doctor's visit. SHE is obligated to provide him with her grades and enrollment status every semester. She is obligated to designate him as someone who is allowed to access both her medical and educational information.

 

[justalayman]

CJane;3322319 Well then. You'd better call the judge in my case before she signs off on her order, and tell her she's wrong.

why?

Because it DOES say "Joint Legal And Physical Custody of BOTH CHILDREN (XXXX, and XXXXX) is awarded to the parents." It ALSO says "The non-custodial parent (Petitioner Father) shall blah blah blah, and the custodial parent (Respondent Mother) shall blah blah blah."

wow, the courts have somehow stripped your adult child of their Constitutional rights without due process. Amazing what the courts can do nowadays.

Later, it addresses the fact that there is no PARENTING PLAN for the 18 year old, and only the 15 year old shall be obliged to visit the NCP. However, CUSTODY is mentioned several times in relation to the 18 year old. And she'd been 18 for a month when we went to court. She is even still obligated to attend therapy sessions with her father until August 1.

How did the daughter become a party to the action resulting in this order? Simply being a child of the parent's who are parties to the action does not make the child a party to the action.


and required to attend therapy sessions? Has the child has somehow come under the control of the courts (is she mentally incapacitated?)

as to calling it custody; doesn't make it so. A parent cannot have legal or physical custody of an adult that is not required to have a guardian. It is a violation of the child's rights. I think the 14th amendment to the Constitution addresses it:

S

ection 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

first, attempting to give an adult's custody to another party without the the adult (child) having a right to contest the matter is denying them equal protection. It also deprives them of their liberty without due process.

of course unless there is something more that has caused your daughter to become a party to the action behind the order, then that is a different story.

I am obligated to provide him with EOBs if provided to me after a doctor's visit.

what does that have to do with the child? That is an action imposed on you.

That is a matter between only you and the father. It does not act to control the child.

SHE is obligated to provide him with her grades and enrollment status every semester.She is obligated to designate him as someone who is allowed to access both her medical and educational information.

again, unless she has somehow come under the control of the state, that is not enforceable. She is an adult so she simply does not have to provide mom or dad with any private information. Now, of course a judge can predicate child support payments on the disclosure but that is not really controlling the child but the parent.

while a court can say anything, it doesn't mean it is legally enforceable. If people acquiesce to the order without question, well, that's their choice.

 

[Astrolink]

I'll add my 2 cents from a case from MA a few years ago. An adult child moved from the custodial parent's home (mom) to the non-custodial (dad) at age 21. He had been paying child support but was not able to get support from her as custody could not be changed as the child was over 18. He was able to get his child support payments stopped.

At age 22, the adult child moved back into mom's house. She was able to get child support reinstated.

It appears that whoever has custody before the child's 18th birthday is "locked in" as to eligibility to child support. I assume this is because of the issue in this thread: that you can't change custody of an adult. As a disclaimer, I'm certainly not an expert!

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

In the case of CJane, TECHNICALLY, the child who is no an adult, does not HAVE to comply per se, but if this same child wants a FINANCIAL contribution from the NCP, then that child complies with what the court order states.

Back to the OP from this minor hijack - what is the college/ university asking that be produced?

 

[justalayman]

In the case of CJane, TECHNICALLY, the child who is no an adult, does not HAVE to comply per se, but if this same child wants a FINANCIAL contribution from the NCP, then that child complies with what the court order states.

that is what I said.

 

[CJane]

that is what I said.

No, you said that a court CANNOT ASSIGN CUSTODY of a child over 18. A court CAN, obviously, and WILL, when it's deemed appropriate.