CMS age limit

[RhaenysRocks]

First of all , can I plead that we keep this thread focused on the issue at hand, not all the other myriad "what about x" issues with CMS.
Currently, CMS ends when a child is 18 or leaves full time FE (but not HE). Given that very few people are now able to be financially independent of parents until at least early twenties, especially with the current situation with rents, zero hours contracts, difficulties for young people to get full time, decent employment, AIBU to argue that the rules around CMS should change. The devil is in the detail of course, but realistically, many RPs will be hosting their adult children for 3-5 years longer than traditionally was the case. If the NRP is not willing or able to have them stay 50/50 should there be an obligation to continue to support them in that case, even if it was a direct payment to the child from whom the RP then elicits rent? I really don't want a bunfight or a "I left at 16 and never looked back". It's 2025, the world has changed and even the brightest, most driven kids are often still at home beyond the age of CB.

Thank you.

She started volunteering in the summer she turned 14 and will continue doing so.

She's also thinking of finding extra opportunities to work/intern during 6th form.
Hopefully that will stand her in good stead 🤞🏾.

They need to look at the uni aspect or just make the loan the same regardless of parental income. Parents are expected to make a contribution if earning over the threshold. At the moment this is the household where the child lives and uses the RPs and their partners income. It doesn't seem fair to me.

But if they're not in education then surely they are working and can contribute to the household?

The point is though that the parent of the 23-year-old doesn’t have to do any of that by law, they do it because they want to. Would you be equally supportive of a law saying parents had to let their twenty-something adult children live with them and pay their bills? Presumably so, else adults whose parents were still together but who couldn’t have them living at home or fund university would be at a massive disadvantage compared to adults of divorced parents with a parent legally mandated to pay them support.

Just to be a spiteful little shit I’d happily have parents who opt out of being a parent pay the other parent until the kids are 25, just as a thank you for putting in the work they couldn’t be arsed doing 😁

In my home country CMS is paid to a resident parent for as long as the child is in education up to 25 years of age I think. Maybe that's a good idea?

It’s more about them being able to get their own job at that age. I am a single parent to a disabled child who will never be able to live independently or have a job. Should I get cm payments forever? Wouldnt want them anyway as he only has to pay £28. There’s lots of things I would change about the cms but this isn’t one of them.

The difference is between choice and necessity. It is entirely necessary to support children financially because they cannot support themselves. Supporting adult children is a choice.

I do think there’s an argument for CMS to continue throughout education though, especially given the expectation of parental support and the impact it has on a students ability to access funding.

No they aren't. He is spending his time filling in applications and doing online courses to fill out his CV.

So when a now adult can get a job and earn their own wages the (usually dad) is still expected to pay maintenance? lol joker

That would be fine..and less contentious clearly, but it does rely on the young person being prepared to pay rent if asked for it.

He could spend that time working in a part time job to earn extra cash though. It wouldn’t be a dream job, but it’s a job & it’s money.

When a now technical adult is living at home and earning less than full minimum wage because they are under 22 and one parent is still financially supporting them out of necessity then yes the other parent should be doing likewise. Or offer them a home. It's not really a choice to boot them out is it? I seriously doubt many on this thread would in actuality put out their 18-20 yo with no support and just assume they'll get on with it. We just expect the RP to continue what they're doing. In an ideal world the NRP will willingly contribute but clearly they don't.

He's looking for anything but you can't be at work and be applying at the same time. It's a time consuming process. The danger is you get trapped into low wage long hours so don't have the time to do the training or applications for anything better.

Same here. If the child goes to university the child maintenance still applies. We don't have a loan system here but any grants are means assessed (and parents are expected to contribute) so I think it's only fair that both parents support their children in their education. Why should the nrp get off scot free on this?

But that’s quite a luxurious position to be in, isn’t it? Most people have to work to have money coming in, that’s life.

I worked part time in a pub while at uni getting my law degree, that was long hours and low wage, it was also essential to keep me ticking over while I studied and now I have my “dream” job I suppose you could say. The skills I developed working in that pub did more for my CV & interview competency examples than any online course ever would have done.

I think it's a dreadful idea.

Both my children are ND but I made it abundantly clear that when they left education they would be expected to contribute to the household, job or no job. Universal credit for an 18 year old isn't much, but it is still there and having to live off that (including paying rent) focuses the mind on getting a job.

The NRP should not be obliged to provide anything that the RP isn't obliged to. The RP chooses to allow their YP to still live there without contributing.

So by your logic anyone with a job can’t get another job / better job because applying for jobs is so time consuming?

have you got any more excuses for him?!

Of course you can. Isn't that normal to apply for other jobs while still having one. And if it's 16 hours that can be done around college or other training

I hear what you are saying, but many 18-year-olds are fully independent. They can work - and should be paying their way if they are living at home (eg. their own food, transport and other living expenses). If a young adult with a job lives with a parent and has no (or highly subsidised) rent, they are better off than many. The purpose of a student loan is to enable students from all backgrounds to study at university. A financially independent student would need a part time job to support themselves, but that is more than doable.

From my own experience - I moved out when i was 18 and worked three jobs initially. I had my own flat. If I was in the same position today I would be considering a flat share rather than my own place. Yes, the world has changed but it is still possible to be financially independent. There isn't an easy option. It was hard work for me 10 years ago, heck when my parents were just starting out they had an airbed on the floor of a run-down flat for a few years. I think there should be more done to address the housing crisis. I think their should be more support for young people, single parents. (Let's face it, one person's salary especially when just starting out, is not enough to afford rent and living expenses unless you are in a low cost of living area)

I joined the military and in doing so set myself up financially. This route is still open today.

Work experience will help him get a job more than additional courses if he already has a degree. Too many graduates have no work experience and plenty of education.

I agree Sunny - dd moved out/away aged 19 her college course was 3 years and it was also in the middle of covid. She moved to London for work/further study and went into a house-share. She did return home after 2 years but that was her/our choice and she paid rent to us from her full time minimum wage job and covered all of her own expenses before going to uni as an independent, mature student.

She is/was an adult

Every 18-25 year old should be fully independent. Just because the world has changed and getting on the property ladder ladder is harder doesn’t given an excuse not to be independent.

Giving money after a child turns into an adult should be at the individual parents discretion. Not everyone has the luxury of being able to fund another human beings life forever.

Very few responders on this thread have taken aboard the point that part of the recent restructuring of benefits is to say that young people under 22 cannot claim benefits that over-22yo are entitled to - ie their parents still have to look after them. The lovely privileged bubble of mumsnet forgets that only about 40% of 18-21yos go to university. About 13% of young people in this age group at NEET (Not in Education, Employment or Training) - compared to 4% of the general working-age population, and if they aren't going to be entitled to benefits then their parents will have to support them. BOTH parents. The fact that a lot of nice well educated young people in this age group do thrive, get jobs and qualifications, and don't need that support is irrelevant to the question - if an 18-22year old isn't in that category anfld is still requiring support, shouldn't that come from both parents?

How recent is this? My daughter claimed Universal Credit between the ages of 19 and 21. (claim ended in 2023) She didn't get much and it varied month to month depending on how many hours she worked, but it topped her rent up.

I'd like not to get distracted by the 23 yo I mentioned and focus on that 18-22 slot that, as a pp mentioned are now not able to access the same UC as older people. With the rise of ND issues, EBSA, poor educational outcomes coupled with the CoL and rent rises etc it's not unreasonable to suppose that a greater number of young people are not going to be able to manage without parental support. The q is should that come from one or both parents? Things are changing fast and what was possible even a couple of years ago may not be, not for everyone.