- A “child of the marriage” can include an adult child over 18 who remains dependent due to full-time pursuit of education, illness, disability, or other cause.
- Ontario courts commonly apply the “Farden factors” — a framework originating in BC case law but widely used here — to assess whether support should continue for a child in post-secondary education.
- Support for a child living away at school is often adjusted rather than paid at the straight Guidelines table amount, reflecting the different, often reduced cost structure of a child not living full-time at home.
- Courts weigh factors like the child's enrolment status, career plan, ability to contribute through work or loans, academic progress, and the parents' pre-separation expectations.
- Not every factor needs to be satisfied — courts look at the overall picture, not a rigid checklist.
- This is a genuinely fact-specific area — get legal advice rather than assuming support automatically continues, or automatically ends, at a certain age.
The Short Answer
Not necessarily ending at 18 — a child genuinely pursuing full-time post-secondary education can remain a “child of the marriage” for support purposes well past that age. The amount, though, is often adjusted from the straight Guidelines table figure to reflect the realities of a child living away at school.
“Child of the Marriage” Isn't Just About Age
Under the Divorce Act, a “child of the marriage” includes a child under the age of majority who hasn't withdrawn from parental charge, or a child at or over the age of majority who remains under parental charge but is unable to withdraw or support themselves “by reason of illness, disability, or other cause.” Courts have interpreted “other cause” to include genuine, full-time pursuit of post-secondary education — this is the statutory basis for support continuing beyond 18.
The Farden Factors
Ontario courts commonly apply what are known as the “Farden factors” — originating from Farden v. Farden, a 1993 British Columbia decision, but routinely used as a starting-point framework here as well — when assessing whether support should continue for a child in post-secondary education. Typical factors include whether the child is enrolled full-time or part-time, the child's career plan and whether it's reasonable, the child's ability to contribute through part-time work or student loans, academic performance and progress, the parents' pre-separation expectations and plans for the child's education, and the child's willingness to remain accountable to the parents about their studies. Courts have held it's not necessary to satisfy every single factor.
How the Support Amount Is Often Adjusted
Courts commonly depart from the standard Federal Child Support Guidelines table amount for a child living away at school, since a child who\'s no longer living full-time at home has a different cost structure — some costs decrease (day-to-day household expenses) while others emerge (tuition, residence or off-campus housing, books). The specific approach and calculation method varies with the family\'s circumstances, and can factor in the child\'s own financial contributions, scholarships, and both parents\' financial situations.
A child moves away for university, living in residence for eight months of the year and returning home for the summer. Rather than continuing the same table amount as when the child lived at home full-time, the parents (or the court) adjust support to account for the actual, different cost picture — factoring in tuition and residence costs, the child's own summer earnings, and time spent at each parent's home.
What Courts Actually Look At
- Genuine, full-time enrolment — not simply nominal registration
- A reasonable career plan connected to the education being pursued
- The child's own ability to contribute — part-time work, summer employment, student loans
- Academic progress — genuine engagement with the program
- Pre-separation family expectations about the child's education
When Does Support Actually End?
There's no fixed age or automatic cutoff. Support for a child pursuing post-secondary education generally continues as long as the underlying basis — genuine full-time pursuit of education, or another qualifying circumstance — remains true, and ends when the child is no longer a “child of the marriage” under this framework, whether that's graduation, withdrawal from studies, or the child becoming self-supporting.
Common Mistakes
A child genuinely pursuing full-time post-secondary education can remain eligible for support well past that age.
Courts commonly adjust the amount to reflect a child's different cost structure while away at school.
A child's part-time work, summer earnings, or student loans are often relevant to the overall support calculation.
A support arrangement that made sense at 18 may need updating as the child's education, income, or living situation evolves.
Have a child in or heading to post-secondary education? Call our Toronto family lawyers at 416-274-2222 for a free consultation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Not necessarily. A "child of the marriage" can include an adult child over 18 who remains dependent due to full-time pursuit of education, illness, disability, or another recognized cause — support can continue well past 18 if this applies.
A set of considerations Ontario courts commonly apply — originating from a BC case, Farden v. Farden — to assess whether support should continue for a child in post-secondary education, including enrolment status, the child's career plan, their ability to contribute financially, academic progress, and the parents' pre-separation expectations for the child's education.
Not always. Courts commonly adjust the support amount for a child living away at school, reflecting that the cost structure is different from a child living full-time at home — this can mean a different calculation method rather than the straight Guidelines table amount.
This is one of the factors courts consider — a child's ability to contribute through part-time work, summer employment, or student loans can factor into the overall support analysis, though it doesn't automatically eliminate a parent's support obligation.
This can affect the analysis significantly — courts generally focus on genuine, full-time pursuit of education as the basis for continued support, so a gap year or part-time enrolment is a relevant fact that could change the outcome depending on the full circumstances.
Yes — courts consider what the family's plans and expectations were regarding the child's education before the separation, as part of the overall picture in assessing whether continued support is appropriate.
This is a genuinely fact-specific and sometimes contested issue. The relationship between the paying parent and the adult child can be relevant to the analysis in some circumstances, but it doesn't automatically eliminate a support obligation — get legal advice on how this applies to your specific situation.
There's no fixed age — it depends on when the child is no longer genuinely engaged in full-time education (or another qualifying circumstance) and has become able to support themselves. This is generally assessed on the specific facts as your child's situation evolves.