Parents may joke that their financial situation will improve once their kids turn 18 and they don’t have to support them. Yet, the reality for many parents (75%) is that they continue to provide support to their kids far past their 18th birthday.
This is likely due to what’s on the horizon for most young adults, such as going to college or finding their first apartment. So what happens when parents aren’t willing to offer financial support once their child legally becomes an adult? Without parental support, it will require perseverance and creativity to get started on their own.
This type of situation surfaced in a Mumsnet thread recently, which captured the tension families can experience when there’s a mismatch in expectations between kids and parents.
This article reports on that Mumsnet thread, breaks down the main arguments from both sides, and offers some broader context to help readers understand the real stakes of this kind of parental decision.
What the Original Poster Said
The poster shared their situation on Mumsnet under the thread title “Am I unreasonable to refuse direct financial support for my eldest?” They explained that they have two children and were divorced when the eldest was 14, who is now 18.
The youngest splits time between both parents, with child maintenance payments in place through the Child Maintenance Service. The eldest, however, chose to remain with the other parent in the family home and has had minimal contact with the poster since the divorce, meeting roughly two or three times per year.
The poster noted that the divorce was recently finalized, and the family home is now being sold. With university approaching for the eldest, the poster was asked to provide direct financial support to their eldest child, equivalent to the child maintenance they had been paying, somewhere in the range of £400 to £500 per month.
The argument from the other parent’s side was that since CMS payments would stop at 18, the same amount should simply continue in a different form, paid directly to the young adult to help with the cost of university. The poster asked the Mumsnet community if saying no to that request was unreasonable.
The Dominant Reaction From the Mumsnet Community
The thread generated 336 replies, and the overwhelming consensus was that the poster was being unreasonable. Commenters were blunt and did not soften their views much, with several pointing out that a child does not stop being a parent’s responsibility simply because they have turned 18 or because the family has fractured.
The phrase that appeared multiple times in different forms was a reminder that the poster divorced their co-parent, not their child.
Another commenter framed the refusal as a decision that could permanently damage any chance of rebuilding the relationship, writing that they did not know who the poster was trying to punish.
The breadth of responses, from parents who had been through similar situations to those sharing their own experiences as children of divorce, painted a picture that was difficult to dismiss as a simple social media pile-on.
Why Parental Support Does Not Automatically End at 18
One of the strongest arguments raised across multiple comments was the reality of how university funding works in the UK (where the family lives). Student loans in England are means-tested against parental income, which means the government assumes parents will contribute financially to a student’s living costs.
If a parent earns above a certain threshold, the maintenance loan a student receives is reduced, on the assumption that parents will make up the difference.
A parent who refuses to contribute is not just withholding generosity; they may be creating a genuine financial gap that directly affects their child’s ability to manage university life.
This is not a moral argument alone; it reflects how the student finance system is structured (a system that is very similarly structured in America). Several commenters reinforced this by stating that parents who are financially able to support their children through university generally do so, and that framing it as an optional act of kindness misses the structural expectation built into higher education funding.
The Relationship Damage Argument
Several commenters moved the conversation beyond finances and into the territory of long-term family relationships. The poster had already acknowledged minimal contact with their eldest, seeing them just two or three times per year since the divorce four years ago.
Many in the thread saw a refusal to support through university as the kind of decision that could permanently cement that distance rather than leave any door open for repair. One commenter who identified as someone whose father had refused to support them financially through university said, “I’ve never forgiven him. You do you, but you reap what you sow.”
Another commenter shared a similar experience from the parents’ side of a divorce, noting that their ex-husband had cut off all support as soon as he legally could and had contributed nothing to their daughter’s university years. The result, they wrote, was that the daughter now hates her father even more.
These are not abstract warnings. They come from people describing lived outcomes, and they suggest that the financial decision and the relational decision are deeply connected in ways that a purely transactional view of parenting does not capture.
Can the Amount Be Negotiated Rather Than Refused Entirely?
A smaller group of commenters took a more measured position, one that did not simply condemn the poster but offered a path forward.
Some pointed out that the child did not create the circumstances of the divorce and suggested that the specific amount could reasonably be adjusted based on factors like the student’s attitude toward money, their willingness to work part-time, and where they planned to study.
Some suggested offering a reduced amount while making clear that the other parent would also need to contribute. This is a practical and fair reframing that several people in the thread found more constructive than an outright refusal.
The distinction here is important. Refusing to pay anything sends a very different message than opening a conversation about what a fair and sustainable contribution looks like from all parties involved.
What Parental Obligation Looks Like After Divorce
Divorce legally ends a marriage, but does not end the responsibilities that come with being a parent.
Parents are not legally required to fund a child through university, but the practical and relational implications of not doing so can be significant. The Mumsnet thread made clear that many parents see university support as a natural continuation of care, not a separate category of optional generosity.
There is also the matter of what obligation looks like in a fractured family. The poster’s situation involved minimal contact, which may feel relevant to them as they weigh the question of continued financial support.
However, as many commenters pointed out, the reasons for the reduced contact are complex and likely tied to the divorce itself, not to any failing on the child’s part.
A Fresh Start Worth Considering
The Mumsnet thread may have started as a simple yes or no question, but the replies revealed just how layered it really is. University marks a significant transition for any young person, and for a child of divorce who has had limited contact with one parent, that transition is already more complicated than it needs to be.
How a parent responds in that moment can shape the relationship for years.
Refusing support outright closes a door. Opening a genuine conversation about what contribution is realistic, what the other parent will also provide, and what the student actually needs gives everyone a chance to move forward with more honesty and less resentment.
Read More:
A Married Woman in Her 40s is Wondering Aloud When Her Husband Got So Grumpy
Her Neighbor’s Dog is Always Yapping, Did Her Husband Go Too Far for Barking Back?