Will parents save enough to retire if their adult child is slow to grow up?

IT does not happen often but occasionally a piece of legislation sits unnoticed and uncontroversial for ages before flaring up unexpectedly.

So it proved recently when a son invoked a rarely used proviso in the Women's Charter to sue his 60-year-old father to part finance his study overseas. What's unusual about this case is that the son - who had been brought up solely by his mother after his parents divorced when he was eight - was already 22 in February when he applied to the court for maintenance. Under the charter, parents are legally bound to maintain their offspring until he or she turns 21, upon which their obligation will cease. However, it also provides for certain exceptions for children who have turned 21. These include those who suffer from physical or mental disabilities, who are or will be serving fulltime national service, and still schooling or undergoing training for a trade, profession or vocation.

In this particular case, according to Straits Times reports, the son graduated with a polytechnic diploma in 2018 but could not find employment as his results were poor. To improve his prospects, he sought to further his studies by pursuing an undergraduate journalism programme but found he did not qualify for direct admission into any of the local universities. He then looked overseas and was accepted into a four-year degree programme in Canada. The father, on the other hand, believed the son's overseas pursuit was more for a lifestyle experience.

The court ruled in the son's favour but felt a more reasonable judgement would be for the father to bear 60 per cent of the costs, with the mother covering the remaining sum to pay for the tuition fees, accommodation and other expenses. While the case may have divorce as a backdrop, the right of a child to maintenance does not hinge on his or her parents staying married.

The ruling has wider ramifications as it can potentially impact anyone who has a child. It raises questions about retirement adequacy as a lawsuit of this sort can unravel years of careful retirement planning by the parent who is being sued just when he or she is nearing the end of work life and facing declining earnings.

If a child struggles in the local education system and decides he or she is better off studying at an expensive college in America, are the parents obliged to finance the dream? What if the epiphany comes late, say, when the child is 25 or 30? The older a child gets, the older his parents will be. The situation is compounded by the fact that Singaporeans are marrying and having children later, with the median age of a man and woman in a first marriage at 30.2 and 28.5 respectively, in 2018.

Yes, the law provides for a court to take into account the financial circumstances of parents in maintaining their dependants. But in practical terms when such a case comes before the court, the judge in assessing a fair amount would not be expected to dwell at length into the retirement needs of the parents.

Fortunately, while the recent court ruling may open up a legal Pandora's box particularly among those in estranged relationships, it is unlikely to become a common recourse. Just as the introduction of Maintenance of Parents Act in 1995 has not led to a deluge of cases of parents suing their offspring for financial support, most children can be expected to work out, within their own family, how best to finance their tertiary education - without resorting to legal action.