Let me repeat myself since you apparently overlooked the question:
Why should she be responsible for knowing finances if nobody bothers to tell her?
I don’t see what it really matters that she didn’t know then. She knows now, right? Being ignorant in the past doesn’t entitle her to a lifetime of indifference to her father’s financial problems.
I question the idea that she absolutely had no clue her college choice would’ve put a strain him, though. Is this detail in the OP? And if she had known as a kid this choice would have put him debt, does that change the assessment about whether she should help him with the loan?
True, and note that he wasn’t in such a financial predicament when the decision on where to attend college was made.
The father’s financial predicament started becoming apparent after Joan’s second year of college, when he decided to sell the marital home in the thick of the housing crash. He assumed the house would sell quickly for x dollars, because that was the appraised value 3 short years ago when he chose to buy out his wife’s half …and then stubbornly refused to take it off the market or lower the price long after it became apparent that it wasn’t going to sell at that price. He and Joan spent countless hours over that first summer painting and stripping wallpaper and decluttering a decade of crap, but in the end nothing mattered but the price, which after paying off the HELOC, left him upside down in equity.
To worsen matters, instead of living in that house until it sold, as soon as it was listed, he signed a lease on a “New house, new life” rental condo in a trendy area of town. That decision sank him even further because he had to pay rent AND a mortgage for 18 months before finally unloading the home at a loss. And, of course, he rented a 2 bdrm because he wanted to have a place for Joan to stay, even though she could have stayed with her mother for free, so that cost him extra, too.
Sadly, had he waited just 2 more years, the pre-crash values would have returned, but he had no way of knowing that then…and that is another source of his bitterness!
So, at the time she opted to attend the out-of-state school, Joan had no way of knowing that her tuition would be such a burden to her father, because it wasn’t apparent to anyone, including him, how difficult the next decade would be on him.
I can see the argument “Joan should help her dad out if he’s struggling”, but I don’t see the fact that it’s “her” student loans that put obligation on her, any more than she’s especially obligated because he kept the house at first “for her” and got a bigger apartment later “for her”. Giving generous gifts and then blaming the person you gave them to is terrible behavior that shouldn’t be indulged.
I’d feel differently if the OP hadn’t opened with the fact that the dad harps on the issue constantly. And I’m all for helping out family. But I don’t think Joan did anything wrong when she believed her parents that they could afford this, and that the father has done something wrong by shaming his child over a gift he gave her.
Kids have a general idea of family finances. As an adult she can also ask and have a full discussion with her parents about the issue.
Moderator Warning
I’m not sure where this is coming from, but enough of it. Your…creative extrapolation, to put it generously, is out of line. Stop the personal attacks and stop derailing the thread.
What did she actually go to school for that the expensive out if state school made more sense than staying home for the full ride?
I’m actually giving my opinion about the situation. I think the daughter is at fault. My apologies to Manda Jo who can her opinion about the dad.
Because her parents were involved in a bitter divorce, a family had been traumatically blown apart, both parents were behaving badly, possibly trying to use her as an emotional pawn.
She chose to go away from them, quite possibly, to protect her own mental health and find calmer waters to pursue her education. Making her the most mature of the bunch, by all appearances.
It doesn’t sound like him paying her college expenses was a gift. It was part of the divorce settlement that was presumably negotiated through lawyers and the court. Generosity very well may not have had anything to do with it.
It sounds like Dad (and his lawyer), at the time the settlement was made, was financially situated such that he didn’t foresee problems with carrying this loan. Then he took some major hits during the economic recession that he still hasn’t recovered from, and the loan became a hardship. It seems like he had good intentions with the properties he tried to buy and rent, but things didn’t work as he had hoped.Layered on top of his woes is psychological baggage from his failed marriage and subsequent divorce, which was the catalyst for his bad financial status.
So he gripes to whomever will listen to him. Included in his gripes are gripes about the debt he’s carrying for his daughter’s college expenses. Poor form, I think we all agree.
But he remains active in his daughter’s life and they have a close relationship, according to the OP. This tells me that his griping is within the norm of run-of-the-mill flawed human behavior. He’s imperfect but is not a monster, and thus, is not undeserving of a windfall himself.
This is how I see the situation. Do you see anything in my analysis that you disagree with?
I don’t disagree it’s crappy for him to lay guilt trips on her, but I don’t think calling this a “gift” is a fair characterization.
The beef is with his wife–and if he was bitching at her/about her, I think it’d be fine–as long as it wasn’t to his daughter. But I don’t think that college education debt is “hers” in any way shape or form. Presumably, the reason the divorce settlement included the clause is that through their married life, the mom and dad had an understanding that college was a thing they were paying for. I’m assuming the household income was significant, and that perhaps they mutually agreed to put off saving because they mutually agreed that they’d fund college out of income when the time came.
Now, I could buy an argument that MOM should have said “since I make 2/3 of the income, I’ll assume 2/3 of the college cost”, but that’s on mom, not Joan.
To me, this is exactly like if Dad had struggled to make child-support payments when Joan was young, and people are now saying she’s a terrible person if she doesn’t refund the child-support.
Now, I agree that she might want to help him, as any child might want to help a parent who was struggling. But I don’t think the obligation is different because the money was for “her” college. Do you think it is?
I didn’t do a close reading on any of the posts, so maybe I missed it. But who is really on the hook for the loans? Whose name is on the loans, and who gets the financial hits if they go into arrears or default? Are they already so? Can Joan even get a mortgage if the loan is not paid?
It sounds like the father needs serious financial education, and probably some counseling.
I do think it matters that it was for her college expenses, if we’re talking about ethics and fairness and differences between this particular debt and other kinds of debt Dad might’ve racked up. It comes down to me seeing free college as a luxury not a right. She also was a young adult–not a child–when he shouldered these expenses. Where she went also was under her control.
I don’t know whether I would say she is morally obligated to give him money, because that would mean I’d have to judge her as unethical or immoral for not giving him money. And that’s too strong for me. But I do agree with the poster who analyzed the options in front of Joan and determined that if she chooses not to share, to keep the peace it’s likely she will probably choose to hide or lie to her father about the inheritance. Lies and secrecy are generally considered unethical, especially if the motive is based more on selfishness (“I’d rather keep this money for myself and not deal with his hurt feelings”) than anything else.
The parents not only encouraged a college education, it would have been unheard of had Joan NOT pursued a higher education. Everyone (siblings and cousins) on both sides of the family holds either a Master’s or a Doctorate from a reputable university, and the grandfather taught at an Ivy League school for 40 years. So, yes, the parents were fully supportive of Joan’s school choice. Had she wanted to attend an Ivy League school, I have no doubt that they’d have sent her there with their blessing, no matter what the cost.
(Funnily, even though he’s poor as a church mouse, the father asks to be addressed as “doctor” even in non-academic settings, such as a wedding invitation or an airplane. My husband, who has “just” a Bachelor’s degree, but managed to pay for 2 kids’ colleges without stealing from them, thinks he’s as pretentious as they come. I understand his insecurity so I’m not as critical of him.)
CelticKnot, the loan is in the mother’s name. Joan’s name is not attached to it. It’s like a car loan. She who takes out the loan is on the hook for it no matter who drives the car.
I guess I feel like money is fungible. The reason he still hasn’t paid off this debt is he had all these other financial problems that he dealt with first.
Is it because the debt it still around that you feel like she owes it? I mean, what if he wasn’t in any debt at all, but bitched all the time about the reason he didn’t have the boat he always dreamed of was that he’d spent the boat fund on her college. If that were the case, would you advise her to go buy him a boat to keep the peace?
There is a huge difference between Joan eliminating this debt so he can move on and just buying him a boat.
But the reason it’s still debt is that he bought out a house he couldn’t afford, and then rented an apartment he couldn’t afford. If he hadn’t done those things, the debt would have been paid off. If he’d structured things differently, that debt would have been paid off, but he’d be living with the debt from the real estate disaster. If he’d done it that way–paid for her college cash, but he still had all this real estate debt that he took on because the cash went to her college–would you feel that she owed him to pay it off?
Yes, I do.
And if there was no debt, but he’d paid $X for her college education and is less affluent now as a result?
I’m not how far into the minutiae it would day. There are infinite scenarios that could have happened. Based on what the OP provided, I think Joan is a selfish, immature person who should help her father out.