Tuition and single-income two-parent families

Atali

Thu, Jul 10 2008, 1:43 pm

This issue came up briefly as a tangent on the Kollel thread, but it is not specifically relevant to Kollel and I would like to see a larger range of responses.

I once read a letter to the editor that went something like this (I am paraphrasing it because I read it about five years ago and do not remember what it said):

Quote:

Dear Editor,

I have an issue that has been bothering me for a long time, and I would like to share my concerns with the community. My husband and I have five children, B"H, four of whom are school age and the other is a toddler. My husband and I both work full-time jobs, drive old cars, never take fancy vacations, etc., and sometimes struggle to pay our bills. But we believe that the most important thing is our children's education, and we pay full tuition for our four school-age children (and childcare for the youngest) despite the difficulties involved.

The issue that bothers me, however, is I know many families where the mother chooses to stay at home, but the husband does not have a good enough job to cover tuition on his own, so the family goes to the tuition committee, applies for a reduction, and gets it, which of course raises tuition for those of us who pay full tuition.

I have no problem with stay at home parents who can afford it, but paying for your children's Torah education is an essential expense, and I do not feel that it is fair for a family to rely on other families such as ours to cover their children's tuition so that they can stay at home. I would also love to stay at home with my toddler, but not at the expense of other struggling families in our community.

Sincerely,

Sensitive About tuition

It seems that "Sensitive About Tuition" has a very good point, to which Clarissa responded that at her children's school they artificially add some income to a stay-at-home parent's application (as if she were working, since staying at home is a choice) in order to make up for the discrepancy.

On the other hand, I could easily imagine someone in that situation writing a letter to the editor like this one:

Quote:

Dear Editor,

An issue came up recently that I would like to bring to the attention of the community. I am a stay at home mother and my husband has a decent, but by no means high-paying job. We B"H have five children, four who are now school aged and a young toddler. We live very modestly and managed to pay full tuition for our first two, got a slight reduction for our third, but now we cannot afford to pay anymore for our fourth child, who is starting school this year.

I went to the tuition committee to apply for a scholarship or at least a substantial reduction, and was told that we do not qualify. When I asked why, I was told that the school cannot afford to give so many reductions and that I would need to go to work or find some other way to pay for my children's education.

I was shocked. How can a Jewish school expect a mother to give up on the Jewish ideal of taking care of her own small children in order to afford a necessity like tuition? Jewish mothers should be at home raising their children. If this continues, all of the children in the community from newborns on up will be being raised by babysitters and have over-worked, stressed-out parents.

I understand that schools need money, but there has to be some other way.

Sincerely,

Wanting to Raise my Children

So, who do you think has the stronger point?

costanza

Thu, Jul 10 2008, 2:01 pm

This is a difficult topic with no right or wrong answers. If someone can pay full tuition and does so that is commendable. If someone earns less and has a wife who can stay home while the kids are young, that is also commendable and I think they should be entitled to some help.

It is up to the poeple who work on the tuition/subsidy committees of any given school to assess each situation on an individual basis and come up with a fair determination. No two people will interpret that decision the same way, some will think it is too harsh, others will think they let the peopl eoff scot free.

I can only do what I think is right for my family and know that I can go to sleep at night with a clear conscience.

red sea

Thu, Jul 10 2008, 2:08 pm

They both have good points although the first couldn't have made such a statement decades back, then it would be an absurd thing to say - you are making a choice not to work.

The second has another point, from an idelogical standpoint how can a torah institution make a policy - go to work, money is first, let your children be raised most of their childhood by non-jews?

Then you have all the good in betweens - wahm's or p/t while children are in school situations. But they are harder to get than f/t careers.

But truthfully, at an extreme, if theres mr millionaire who pays a bit extra on his tuition bill because tecnically some mr not quite earning enough to make ends meet needs it, it kinda like tzeddakah.

but then come the pple like letter # 1 and they want everyone to make the same choice as them, but you cant because the others have valid points too.

so the only pple that everyone really gets upset with is the wrongdoing, cheating, selfish, illegally accepting govt aid, only earning off the books pple who lie to the school & say they are poor when they really can afford way more tuition & they very well know it and that is why my tuition bill is higher & I am tight causers.

So as micfri said, you just do what you need to do and enjoy your clear conscience.

Last edited by red sea on Thu, Jul 10 2008, 2:11 pm; edited 2 times in total

Clarissa

Thu, Jul 10 2008, 2:08 pm

I've love to get financial aid, but I don't feel I have a right to it more than someone else, simply because she goes to work and adds $50,000 to her HHI, and I choose to stay home. Staying home is important, but it's also a luxury.

As I said in the kollel thread, it's complicated. For example, I have friends with cars, and they rent expensive garage space. I have friends who have standing babysitting dates several times a week. All of them consider these things luxuries, but some of them still talk about being stretched for money. If I said, "So get rid of the car and garage," they'd tell me how important it is to have a car, to go outside the city for shopping or visiting their sick parent or whatever. But I don't have a car, so should that be factored in when I apply for financial aid? What about clothes or food bills?

If the answer is that staying at home is more virtuous, then the same argument could be made for other life choices. Do they all get factored in to these equations? Do schools know that a family received, as a friend of mine did from her parents, $75,000 toward the purchase of her home?

Tova

Thu, Jul 10 2008, 3:35 pm

red sea wrote:

But another peeve of many accountants I know is that the tuition committees dont seem to understand the difference between W-2 income and self employed income.

Huh? What is the difference? You mean because someone who is self-employed must pay twice the FICA of a W-2 person (he is covering the employer portion of it, but then gets this amount as a deduction in arriving at his adjusted gross income on his 1040)? It seems you are referring to something more, but I can't grasp it. I am a CPA, MST (masters in tax), and CFP (certified financial planner), so this is my bread and butter.

Here's a horrible story (in my opinion): An accountant I once worked for, let's call him Mr. X, was also at one time on the tuition committies for one of the yeshivas (names of those on the committee are not publicized). He is reviewing an application and sees the tax return included and knows something's not right! How? Because these people were clients of his! The next day in the office he pulls out the client file, compares the two tax returns, and indeed, the applicant used wite-out or whatever to "doctor" up the income and make him more eligible for a reduction. Meanwhile, Mr. X's signature was still on the return, as he had signed the original one! I think Mr. X took the matter to the Vaad Harabanim of the school...

red sea

Thu, Jul 10 2008, 5:11 pm

Tova wrote:

red sea wrote:

But another peeve of many accountants I know is that the tuition committees dont seem to understand the difference between W-2 income and self employed income.

because of all the deductions & expenses that are allowed to come off the business that if you w-2 are all paid out of your own pocket. should I list em? auto, mileage, office supply, cel phones, travel (read, add on a couple days for vacation), if you have a home office dont forget to add in a portion of rent/utilities shall I go on? Its a significant amount of money, then in certain business you got deducting of r&m, dont forget depreciation. Bottom line, self employed has much less expenses to be paid out of that dollar amount that you tell the school while a guy on a w-2 can earn number-wise twice as much and be exactly in the same place financially. Does this make any sense to you?

Atali

Thu, Jul 10 2008, 7:46 pm

I have been thinking about this today and although "Sensitive About Tuition" definitely has a point, I think that "Wanting" has the stronger point.

Although each family should do there best to pay full tuition and certainly not take vacations or buy fancy cars when they can't pay full tuition, I think that each family should be evaluated for tuition based on there current income and not what they could earn if they were to do something different.

I don't think that the tuition committee has the right to tell a mother that she has to leave her children to work, in the same way that I don't think that they should refuse to help a family with a high mortgage, saying that they could sell there house and buy a cheaper one, or tell someone that he needs to find a higher paying job if he is qualified for it.

However, I do think that the committee has the right to insist that a family not take on additional expenses (particularly luxuries), and that they can insist that a family with two unemployed parents look for at least one job.

Quote:

Tuition assistance is not a right, you know.

But I would think that the community is required to ensure that all Jewish children are able to receive a Jewish education somehow, including the poorest families. Which essentially makes it obligatory for schools to provide some tuition assistance.

Tova

Thu, Jul 10 2008, 7:52 pm

red sea wrote:

I don't really understand what you are saying, and I read it twice. Maybe I am just tired. Who are you saying is in a better situation finance-wise?

cassandra

Thu, Jul 10 2008, 8:17 pm

Atali wrote:

Quote:

Tuition assistance is not a right, you know.

But deciding who is among the "poorest" is the school's discretion. If you feel that you cannot reasonably afford tuition and the school feels otherwise either try another school or move to another place, or try to get on the board of the school and try to change policy that way. It isn't a given that everyone who feels they need assistance should get it, and I'm not just talking about the people who take expensive vacations and still want help.

I think Malki also raised a good point, and this whole thing probably has to do with the specifics of that community. If a school is catering to an educated parent body who have earning potential it is right for them to assume that should a woman choose to work her income would affect the bottom line of the household. Perhaps in other communities where it is not the norm for women to have advanced educations and work in professional positions and most women stay home there would be no hava amina to factor the woman working vs not working into the equation. Either way, who are we to criticize?

red sea

Thu, Jul 10 2008, 10:39 pm

Tova wrote:

red sea wrote:

I don't really understand what you are saying, and I read it twice. Maybe I am just tired. Who are you saying is in a better situation finance-wise?

I am saying that all in all they end up in pretty much the same situation finacially cash-wise say 45,000 /1099 versus 90,000 /w2 but the school says 45k gets a break, 90 pays full, so that the one earning 90 ends up tighter than the one earning 45. No, even if youre tired I tend s/t not to explain so clearly what I mean.

jba

Thu, Jul 10 2008, 11:01 pm

I just sort of spoke to DH about this in refrence to whether or not he felt/would feel that I was a burden b.c I don't have a career. (I currently work part time and have two little ones BH but my primary task is our kids - and DH and I feel that is what is right for our family) Anyway, I asked him if he felt it was wrong for me not to work and expect him to pay yeshiva tuition.

I can see both sides of the financial issue on the family vs. the community. I don't believe women don't work in order to not pay full tuniton. For most I assume it's a choice of what they feel they need and what is better for the family as a whole....On the other hand I know that my mother worked(s) full time- at times more than one job - solely in order to pay tuition and my family still got tuition breaks (embarassingly old cars, bad upkeep on the house and never a vacation (unless you count sesame place and motels)). That was what they saw as a primary need for our family.