Over the past few decades, children’s options for high school completion have exponentially expanded. As just one recent example, during the Covid-19 pandemic, online courses became the norm for some period of time. As the pandemic ended, however, student attendance has continued to wane, affecting timely graduation rates, and prompting legislative intervention1. While this trend has significant effects on individual student’s lives, it can also affect child support payment issues statewide. This article will discuss the interplay of delayed high school graduation, whether due to pandemic related absences, a child’s special needs, or other factors, with the child support termination language as listed in Section 172 of a given Child Support Order.
At the present time, “standard” child support termination language in a court order is typically as follows: “Support must be paid for each child until the court signs a different order or when the child turns 18 or is no longer enrolled in high school, whichever happens last, unless the court makes a different order in section 183,4.” Older orders often put a “cap” on support, ending when the child turned age 19, or stated that support would end when a child was “no longer dependent,” but in this author’s experience such language is very rarely seen in more recent child support orders.
Historically, unless an order stated otherwise, child support terminates upon the emancipation of the child or the death of the obligor parent5. Emancipation occurs when the child reaches the age of majority (or earlier if an event ends a child’s economic dependence)6. While a child support obligation is based on dependency, not minority7, unless an order expressly provides otherwise, provisions for support of a child are terminated by emancipation8. A crucial factor for the court’s consideration is whether the obligor parent had notice in the order itself that support could extend past the age of majority9.
In recent years, many “alternative” high school programs have proliferated. For example, Auburn’s Green River Community College has an “Open Door” program which allows students between age 16 and age 21 to earn a GED, diploma, professional certificate, and/or an associate degree. For students aged 19 and older, the school also has a “Transitional Studies” program which provides a similar path to graduation, certification, and/or an associate’s degree. The State of Washington fully funds the Open-Door Program until a student turns age 21, while the Traditional Studies program has a low-cost per-credit fee for each student. Continuous attendance is not required and a student may take up to ten months off before being removed from the program.
Likewise, the Transition Academy, a program offered locally by the Lake Washington School District and many other school districts as well10, allows young adults between the ages of 18–21 that have developmental disabilities and have “finished” high school but not graduated, a three year transitional program where the students learn life skills, often in a real world setting. Such academies often focus in large part on “soft skills,” such as following directions and interpersonal communications.
Such alternative programs, which extend the time period prior to a child’s emancipation under the terms of a given child support order, can result in an obligor parent who expected to pay support for a set period of time, suddenly discovering that he or she has an uncertain termination date for this financial obligation. In such circumstances, judicial review may be needed to clarify the termination date of the order.
Interpretation of a child support order is a question of law presented for de novo review11. If a court order is ambiguous, the reviewing court seeks to ascertain the intention of the court that entered the original order and does so as a matter of law12. Intent may be ascertained using the general rules of construction applicable to statutes and contracts13. Contracts are construed to give reasonable, fair, just, and effective meanings to all manifestations of intent14.
The legislative intent in setting child support was to “insure that child support orders are adequate to meet a child’s basic needs and to provide additional child support commensurate with the parent’s income, resources, and standard of living15.” The overriding purpose of the child support schedule is to assure that children are protected with adequate, equitable, and predictable child support16. When an order is not sufficiently explicit, a parent may not have notice of the duration of support and, in such circumstances, extending support is unwarranted17. This author argues there is nothing equitable or predictable about a support obligation with an indefinite termination date, where a child may “attend high school” indefinitely and potentially obtain a college degree at the same time.
Further, although there are no reported Washington State cases involving “permanent” child support, spousal support principles may apply by analogy. Thus, in considering spousal maintenance, awarding maintenance for an indefinite duration is, with very few exceptions, reversable error18. It is “not the policy of the law, nor is it either just or equitable that a divorced wife shall be given a perpetual lien upon her divorced husband’s future earnings19.” Accordingly, this author argues that a “reasonable” child support termination date, as appropriate to the facts of a given case, would be warranted. Judicial inquiry as to these specific facts, perhaps with a consideration of the typical age — 21 termination date of many high school extensions programs, would then determine the appropriate termination date for a given case.
Notwithstanding the above however, the entire underlying order of child support should be examined in its entirety to assure that all provisions are adhered to and that an extended high school graduation date is not used in a “back door” manner to obtain (unordered) post-secondary educational costs for the child. Thus, if a given child support order reserved (or denied) allocation of any post-secondary financial obligations, a program such those provided by Green River Community College might circumvent the court order if the child attended to receive an associate’s degree or professional certification in addition to a high school diploma. In such circumstances, receipt of a high school diploma would logically require less time than receipt of a high school diploma and an associate’s degree. It would be for the court therefore, in examining the discrepancy between these two paths, to determine what portion of the program could legitimately be devoted to high school completion versus what portion would encompass the post-secondary studies not contemplated in the underlying order.
Although current child support orders will have whatever termination language was then negotiated by the parties or ordered by the court, the prudent practitioner should consider when drafting any prospective orders the availability of such alternate high school programs which could extend a child’s high school graduation to a potentially undefined termination date. If a child has special needs, such a scenario could be a distinct possibility which should be accounted for in any final order of child support. Such drafting considerations are thus a best practice which could serve to avoid later possible judicial clarification as to the termination date of child support as ordered and further save much uncertainty and future financial outlay for one’s client.
Kim Schnuelle is a senior attorney in the Seattle office of McKinley Irvin, PLLC. She has over thirty years of family law experience and her practice focuses on divorce, international family law issues, child support litigation, and complex parenting plan matters.
1 “After pandemic’s peak, more kids missed school; bill aims to solve that,” HeraldNet, Everett, WA January 20, 2024, “The Pandemic’s Missing Students, APNews.com, February 9, 2023.
2 Section 13 in older child support orders.
3 Section 18 of the current pattern form Order of Child Support concerns Post-Secondary Educational Support Obligations.
4 Termination of administrative child support orders pursuant to the Division of Child Support are governed by WAC 388-14A-3810, which states that a support obligation may continue until a child turns age 19 if the child is participating “full-time in a secondary school program or at the same level of vocational or technical training, as defied in WAC 388-14A-0005(1)(b). However, if the child has already met the requirements to finish the educational program, the child is no longer considered to be dependent. WAS 388-14A-3810(2).
5 Childers v. Childers, 89 Wn.2d 592, 596 (1978), RCW 26.09.170(3).
6 Marriage of Gimlett, 95 Wn.2d 699, 702 (1981).
7 The court can thus retain jurisdiction for an emancipated but dependent child, depending on the specific language of the child support order itself. Balch v. Balch, 75 Wn.App. 776, 780 (1994) (rev. den. 126 Wn.2d 1003 (1995), Marriage of Cota, 177 Wn.App. 527, 533 (2013).
8 Balch v. Balch, 75 Wn.App. at 778 (1994).
9 Marriage of Cota, 177 Wn.App. at 534.
10 The program names may differ between school districts.
11 Marriage of Sagner, 159 Wn.App. 741, 749 (2011) (rev. den. 171 Wn.2d 1026 (2011).
12 Gimlett v. Gimlett, 95 Wn.2d 699, 704-05 (1981).
13 Marriage of Thompson, 97 Wn.App. 873, 877-78 (1999).
14 Marriage of Nielsen, 52 Wn.App. 56, 58 (1988) (rev. den. 111 Wn.2d 1023 (1988)).
15 RCW 26.19.001.
16 Marriage of Oakes, 71 Wn.App. 646, 650 (1993).
17 See generally Marriage of Cota, 177 Wn.App. at 534 (2013).
18 Marriage of Matthews, 70 Wn.App. 116 (1993).
19 Marriage of Mason, 40 Wn.App. 450, 453 (1985) (citing Lockhart v. Lockhart, 145 Wn.2d 210 (1927)).
