On the other hand, if you've already set aside the money to pay for their college, why does it matter when they decide to go? You were presumably going to use it for their benefit, so why wouldn't you want it to be used for that same purpose, just in another way or at another time.

Not to imply a parent is obligated to pay, but parents aren't really obligated to pay when their kid is 18 either. It shouldn't affect retirement savings, unless spending increased in the intervening years and ate into the investment they had planned to make in their offspring.

College costs continue to rise. And predictability of retirement funds are important as well. Did his parents know after 8 years he had an expectation they would be asked to pay for college?

Even though we have saved for my youngest to go to college we are expecting her to apply for many merit scholarships and we expect her to help with some expenses using summer internship earnings. The more she contributes the better her chance for ownership over the college outcome.

I mean to say that I don't think there's a universal standard for when parents are or aren't obligated to pay for their kid's college. Some might have alternatively chosen to invest the money in their children another way, like using it to start a business or starting a stock/bonds portfolio. In that sort of scenario, tuition inflation would mostly mean paying a lower portion of the costs than would have happened 8 years prior.

In the case described, I somewhat question the motives, since (s)he described "screaming and yelling" over the choice of a different career, which seems to imply they sought a degree of control over his/her future. Keep in mind both were Ivy League PhD's. So perhaps they didn't see it as money set aside as an investment, but more as something they'd donate with conditions. Not wanting to pay could also be a way of punishing their children for not pursuing the career paths they'd wanted.

The problem in this case, imo, is that there wasn't an understanding between them about whether paying for college would still be an option in the future. Since that's an attitude that will differ from family to family, it doesn't seem unreasonable to think a given family would need to work it out for themselves ahead of time.

My comments we not meant to defend the parents. I should have been clearer on that matter. And yes there should be conversations about funds for college and any conditions that apply.

>Some might have alternatively chosen to invest the money in their children another way, like using it to start a business or starting a stock/bonds portfolio.

I strongly support this for families where this works out. There is never one model fits all.

It amazes me how self-centered this comment is. It's your kids education you're taking about here.

You are welcome to your opinion. Some parents choose to make their kids pay for the entire education even when they can afford to pay for college. They see it as a ownership and responsibility lesson. I've seen that work very well for several.

I don't see parenting as providing your kids with everything. I see it as provide your kids with the tools they need to be successful in life. Sometimes the hard way is the better way.

When a child is ~26 then hopefully they can be on their own.

I'm not sure how you can judge me self centered when I provided for the education of one child already and am ready for the 2nd one. I was pointing out that there are many dimensions of being a parent and providing for college.

In this case the "kids" are at least 26. At that point surely we can expect them to be able to fend for themselves?

Only 26? Surely not. Why, at that age he might not even have a master's degree yet!