What a greedy child

I regularly receive e-mails with legal questions, even though I am on a sabbatical from lawyering and have only limited time available due to my studies of Philosophy and Development & Economics. No problem with that; if the person sounds nice and they have an interesting legal problem, I am not disinclined to help – time permitting.

Last week I received an e-mail from someone in the Philippines who not only reminded me 3 or 4 times after I didn’t reply immediately (never a strategy to endear yourself to me), but who displayed a disturbing level of greed and a misguided sense of entitlement:

My German father is paying child support until now (I’m 21 years old) as I am still in college. After graduation, I will enroll in a Review school yet to prepare for the board exam. I live a and study in phils. I  would be lucky to get an apprenticeship related to my job after I graduate as my aim is to be employed abroad. I would probably be self-sufficient and can stand on my own in 3 years time.

So he wants to receive “child” support until he will turn 24. He goes on to explain that his father has now retired and he would like to garnish the retirement pay.

But then comes the second question:

Another question, is it true that I can claim Lump Sum Inheritance even if my dad is still alive? If so, how is the amount determined? Most importantly, how is this process done?

I was speechless. This child really just sees his father as (1) a provider of income and (2) as standing in the way between him and greater riches.

And of course the answer to the second question is “No”: Without someone’s death, there is no role for inheritance law. (“Ohne Sterben kein Erben” as we rhyme in German.)  This is quite logical, as there is no guarantee that any money or property will be left when the father dies. Also, the child might well die before the father’s demise – maybe from too much greed.

Another reason not to have children.

About Andreas Moser

Travelling the world and writing about it. I have degrees in law and philosophy, but I'd much rather be a writer, a spy or a hobo.
This entry was posted in Family Law, German Law, Germany, Law and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to What a greedy child

  1. John Erickson says:

    Oh, Andreas, this child isn’t greedy or evil. He’s showing the fine influence that the US has had on the Philippines. After all, if you get paid for NOT working (unemployment insurance), why should you WORK? If you can pop out a couple of kids and get food stamps, why try to improve your situation? After all, this boy worked HARD to get the money he has so far accumulated. (Hey, German fathers don’t grow on trees.) And I’m sure he spent whole seconds, maybe even a whole minute or two, to find you on the Internet. How much more work do you want him to do? He even took the time from his busy schedule to harass you for the unforgivable crime of not dropping everything you were doing and pay full attention to HIS problem! This poor child – we should all send him at least $100 a week. Perhaps then he can become “self-sufficient” and live off all his hard work.
    And people wonder why I have dogs and not kids……

  2. Phil says:

    Your indignation and conclusion is embarrassing on so many levels.

    • Do you mean me or John?

    • Ada C. says:

      For Andreas and John Erickson. I would agree with Phil above that your “indignation and conclusion” is embarrassing on many levels.

      You do not have sufficient knowledge of the whole situation so, do not label people names. And John Erickson, do not be sarcastic and make a mockery of this child. You do not know anything ! Considering your level of thinking, you deserve dogs and not human beings !

    • John Erickson says:

      First, Ada C., I have dogs because my wife was FORCED to have a hysterectomy to save her life. To attack my wife is REALLY tacky and small minded. Chew on that for a moment.
      Second, the kid is TWENTY-ONE! Time to cut the cord and be a MAN. Do YOU still have twenty-somethings living at home? How long are you going to wet-nurse them? 21 is the age of majority around the world. The “kid” is a man in the eyes of the law, yet he is INSISTING his father, who HAS paid full child support all those years (re-read the post, please) continue to support him. AND he has the gall to ask for his inheritance BEFORE the father has even died!
      And you SUPPORT this?
      Read ALL parts of a post before you respond. And don’t accuse people of making unwarranted attacks, and then make attacks yourself.
      My apologies, Andreas, for being less than polite to this person. I don’t care if people attack me, but I refuse to be nice to a self-centered ignorant twit attacking my innocent wife. Sorry! :)

  3. Ada C. says:

    C’mon guys (Andreas and John Erickson) ! You attacked the child but not the father ! If you have fathers who loved you and nurtured you and sent you to school, then, this poor child is way much unfortunate to have a father who is otherwise !

    Have you even wondered in the first place why this father was brought to court to force him to face up to his responsibilities towards this child that you labeled “greedy” ? Most probably because he is irresponsible and does not want to pay ! This no good father is capable of bringing a human being into this world but is not capable of supporting this human being , and he does not want to be responsible for this child that he created so that this child would turn out to be a good person and would be useful to society. What kind of father would that be ? He should be burn ALIVE !

    And, hey ! no person in his right mind would go through the hassles and the stress of a court case if this irresponsible father had paid support VOLUNTARILY , isn’t it ?

    You are in no position to pronounce “judgment” to this child most especially if you do not know of the background of this child and the circumstances of his existence so, do not label him anything, ok ?

  4. Ada C. says:

    Andreas, I am a friend of the family and I know the kind of “hell” that they have been through because of this irresponsible father !

    John Erickson! I did not attack your wife because in the first place, I didn’t know that you have a wife, ok ? You’re not very good in analysis ! Who has a “small mind” now ? You implied that you have dogs instead of children which could only mean that you prefer dogs to children. Again, I have no inkling that you have a wife who could not have children. I am just giving my replies BASING on your sentences.

    So what if the kid is 21 ? He is not finished with school and further training for God’s sakes! Is that hard for you to understand ? If you were the kid, would you STOP going to school and work your ass to feed yourself because you are already 21 and has to stand on your own ? What a “small mind” you have ! Obviously, you are “ignorant” of the laws of child support ! Stop “barking” and make a research before you attack me, ok ?

    For your information, Mr. Erickson, in some countries, education (especially university education) would take as much time until you are 27 years of age to finish. And please take note Mr. Erickson, this father did not voluntarily paid support. He has to be brought to court for him to pay child support.

    Mr. Erickson, you do not have complete knowledge of the whole circumstances of this child. The reason why the subject of the “possible lump inheritance’ was brought up” was because this information was conveyed by the lawyer when the case was finished that the child could possibly ask for a lump sum inheritance I supposed with the agreement of the father even if he is still alive.

    So, Mr. Erickson, I hope I had made a “rebuttal” to all your accusations towards me !

    Andreas, you are making a mountain out of a molehill. The child was just asking a question and you just have to answer it like what a straightforward regular lawyer do. It is not for you to ANALYZE, INTERPRET or ASSUMED what is behind the question and worst, declare JUDGMENT on what kind of person the child is !

    • John Erickson says:

      You attacked both me and my wife by with-holding YOUR knowledge of the subject. You were an insider but didn’t state that.
      Small-minded? You’re crying over ONE case you know about. How about the thousands of children out there who NEVER see child-support owed them? How about the children of poor parents who could never go to college due to lack of funds? I crammed courses in to graduate in three years, not four, to lessen the burden on my parents. And I had a job within 6 months of graduating. Some courses take until age 27? That’s the kid’s problem – if he wants to spend his life in school, HE should pay for it.
      You gave replies based on my information, or lack thereof. If I made a bad or “small-minded” move, you are no better as you did the same. I assumed that if Andreas was aware of any extenuating circumstances, he would have informed me. If that is my error, I will apologise for ONLY that.
      Don’t bother responding to me, because I don’t really want to hear more insults. I didn’t personally attack you – extend me the same courtesy. Otherwise, rant as you want – from what I read here, you’re a bleeding-heart enabler, assisting this child in coasting as far as he can in life with minimum effort. I currently live in rural Ohio because I had a major health crisis, and did whatever it took to take care of my family – including leaving my parents behind in Chicago to live in a tiny house in a poor town, just to keep going. I have sacrificed far too much in my life to be preached to over a spoiled child trying to pry every last dime out of his parents.
      That’s where I’m coming from. If it offends you, so be it. You offended me – touche.
      Once again, Andreas, my apologies. I withdraw from further discussion as it is pointless in this case.

  5. Ada C. says:

    Andreas, children are a joy to parents. Sometimes, they give us problems but more often than not, the joy that children bring to the lives of the parents is immeasurable and unquantifiable ! Ask your parents about this, what’s the difference between having children and having none….

    Someday, when you become a parent, you will agree with me on this…..

  6. Ada C. says:

    John Erickson,

    Let me reiterate that I did NOT attack your wife because I have NO idea that she existed ! How else am I gonna make you understand this ?

    I “retaliated” yes, because you were the one who got nasty first, but not to your wife because you did not include her initially. See ? If you get nasty and sarcastic, you should expect to get the same reaction ! In every action, there is always an equal and opposite reaction !

    Yes, I am an insider but just the same, you are in NO position to make a mockery of the child because you have NO complete knowledge of what’s going on. You lack the necessary all too important data YET, you were already “brandishing” to the whole world about the negative character of this child !

    I am sure that there are thousands, maybe millions of children who are not getting support from their deadbeat dads. That is why laws are formulated to minimize if not altogether solve this problem and help this children. These laws are not the opinion of one person but are the consensus of many . These laws were deliberated …. debated…. and voted upon before it was passed .

    You see, fathers are hold responsible and are made to pay the amount of support by law basing on their income and financial capabilities. So, there is nothing unfair and unjust if the law force them to pay to be responsible to their children !

    Yes, there are courses that take even longer, past your 27 years of age. For example: Medicine consist of 4 years pre-med, another 4 years regular med, I think there is also a 2-year residency. Getting a JD also takes longer. You can ask Andreas about that. Some 4-year college courses needs additional apprenticeship after graduation.

    The point here is that, under the law, the father is OBLIGED to continue paying support until the child finishes his degree and apprenticeship/further training if need be.

    You are wrong in your assumption about the child. The child is innocent and did nothing wrong and all of the actions that were DONE in relation to this child support is WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF LAW …. nothing illegal …. and nothing unfair and unjust !

    If you insist in blaming this child – then, YOU SHOULD CHANGE THE LAWS !

    I hope this settles the MISCONCEPTION you have about this child.

    • John Erickson says:

      1. I never declared anything the boy did illegal.
      2. I made sarcastic humour. You launched PERSONAL attacks on me. YOU drew first blood.
      3. If the laws where you are permit a child to sponge until age 27. then so be it. I find it morally objectionable, in any case, for a child to sponge after age 21. If you don’t agree, so be it.
      4. Asking for an inheritance, before the parent is dead, is basically saying the parent should be killed immediately. That is even more reprehensible.
      5. If the boy grows up to cure cancer, or bring world peace, great. If, like so many “given everything” fellow schoolmates I’ve watched over the years, he ends up a bum or a low-level working stiff, just getting by, then you’ll understand the damage you’ve done by encouraging the child to always expect money to be there for the asking. THAT is the heart of my argument – the child has no reason to grow up, because in his experience, someone will always take care of him financially. It’s a mean world out there, and will only get meaner as world resources diminish. If you think I’m wrong in pointing this out, I hope and the child never lose your house (like I have), never become disabled (as I have), never have to seek charity to survive (as I used to do), and never have to choose between buying food or medicine or paying the bills (as I have).
      I’m glad for the child to have such a staunch supporter as you. Unfortunately, “enabler” and “supporter” are VERY close. I hope for all our sakes that I am wrong, and the child is a noble creature who will become a great man.
      But I wouldn’t want to bet on it. Human nature suggests I’ll be right.

  7. Ada C. says:

    I don’t know what happened to my reply here as it is gone!

    Anyway, once again John Erickson: The child is innocent and has done nothing wrong! All that were done in relation to this child support case is WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF LAW ….. nothing illegal ….nothing unfair…. and nothing unjust !!!

    If you insist in blaming this child – then, you should CHANGE THE LAWS !!!

    I hope you now understand the situation and your “misconception” about this child !!

  8. Pingback: More Pestering Questions from the Philippines | The Happy Hermit – Andreas Moser's Blog

Please leave your comments, questions, suggestions:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s