DocketNumber: Appeal, No. 375
Citation Numbers: 206 Pa. Super. 393, 213 A.2d 179, 1965 Pa. Super. LEXIS 815
Judges: Ervin, Flood, Hoffman, Hoppman, Jacobs, Montgomery, Watkins, Wright
Filed Date: 9/16/1965
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/13/2024
Dissenting Opinion by
I respectfully dissent. The record is unclear concerning the nature and extent of appellant’s disability,
I would also instruct the lower court to determine whether the amount of the monthly pension which appellant is receiving from the Veterans Administration is based upon a claim that he pays for the support of three children.
Should it appear that appellant’s disability in no way impairs his earning capacity, I would affirm the order of the court below. It is true that the duty of a parent to provide a college education for a child is not as exacting a requirement as the duty to provide food, clothing or shelter. A college education, however, may no longer be regarded as a luxury. It is of vital importance to our young people of ability who are seeking to assume a useful and meaningful role in our society. In my opinion, in the absence of undue hardship, a parent has the duty to provide his daughter not only with her present necessities but also with that training which will enable her to provide for herself in the future. I do not believe that it is unduly harsh to require that a father, who has a net income of $130 a week, pay $60 a week for the support of three children, if this will assure a college education for a daughter who has demonstrated scholastic aptitude.