17 Year Old Refuses to Move Out of State with Family

Quote:

---

Quoting cbg

---

I will address the health insurance question only.

Unless the friend's parent's insurer is remarkably and much more than usually agreeable, there would have to be a court-ordered guardianship before they would be permitted to put him on their insurance, and even then it's not a 100% guarantee. You could certainly include him on yours but you would need to ensure that your network included both Illinois and Georgia. This is definitely something you will want to clarify before you make a final decision.

---

Of course a private policy for the child is also an option.

I said presumably. Would you care to link the State Board of Education rules for enrollment that support your contention there is definitely not going to be a violation of school rules by leaving the 17 yr old behind or him being in violation at 18, not living where the parents do?

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

That is not correct. He would not be prohibited from remaining in school if he continues to live in IL. Just because he parent moved to another state after the school year started doesn't mean that he would be illegally remaining in school.

---

Quote:

---

Quoting Disagreeable

---

I said presumably. Would you care to link the State Board of Education rules for enrollment that support your contention there is definitely not going to be a violation of school rules by leaving the 17 yr old behind or him being in violation at 18, not living where the parents do?

---

*sigh* she won't.

Quote:

---

Quoting CourtClerk

---

*sigh* she won't.

---

I know we used to go "round and round" on another site about the same issue.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

Of course a private policy for the child is also an option.

---

True but that's likely to be more costly than including him on a group policy that's already in effect.

Quote:

---

Quoting Disagreeable

---

I said presumably. Would you care to link the State Board of Education rules for enrollment that support your contention there is definitely not going to be a violation of school rules by leaving the 17 yr old behind or him being in violation at 18, not living where the parents do?

---

Its very simple...the boy's residency will not have changed. He would be remaining a resident of the school district. He is not required to be in the physical custody of his parents if his parents choose to place him in the physical custody of a responsible party. His residency does not change because his parent's residency changes.

It also would not be state laws but school district rules that would apply. Schools receive their funding allotments for students after "count day" and therefore students are allowed to finish the school year.

State law determines how they must proceed. Some laws, such as in OH, require the student be living with their parent or be self supporting. Here, you go dig through them and see if you can climb back out of the hole you fell into:

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs...p?ChapterID=17

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

Its very simple...the boy's residency will not have changed. He would be remaining a resident of the school district. He is not required to be in the physical custody of his parents if his parents choose to place him in the physical custody of a responsible party. His residency does not change because his parent's residency changes.

It also would not be state laws but school district rules that would apply. Schools receive their funding allotments for students after "count day" and therefore students are allowed to finish the school year.

---

Quote:

---

Quoting Disagreeable

---

State law determines how they must proceed. Some laws, such as in OH, require the student be living with their parent or be self supporting. Here, you go dig through them and see if you can climb back out of the hole you fell into:

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs...p?ChapterID=17

---

While it's great you brought up the whole thing, this might be a smidge easier to wade through...

http://www.isbe.net/pdf/guidance_reg.pdf

LOL, I was curious I already found the disclaimer for temporarily transferring custody from here:
http://www.isbe.net/pdf/guidance_reg.pdf We must have both been looking at it at the same time.

Quote:

---

If an adult has been granted short-term guardianship, then the pupil is a resident of the district in which
that adult lives,
as long as the pupil is not living with the adult for access to the educational programs of
the district
. An adult’s written appointment of short-term guardianship is sufficient to enroll a student
under 105 ILCS 5/10-20.12b of the School Code. The adult is required to obtain a court order granting
permanent guardianship within 60 days of enrollment of the pupil; however, failure to do so shall not be
grounds to disenroll the pupil

---

- - - Updated - - -

It appears illegal for both the child to stay temporarily and at age 18. The first link does provide fraud is a misdemeanor so that would get the parent and the 18 year old child. Each under the correct circumstance.

Here is the one they say is a catchall that should apply at 18:

Quote:

---

(v)
If the pupil lives with an adult who has accepted responsibility for the pupil and provides a fixed
nighttime abode for the pupil, then the pupil is a resident of the district in which that adult lives,
as long
as the pupil is not living with the adult for access to the educational programs of the district
.

---

- - - Updated - - -

I know I apologize to all for getting snarky. As you know I just finished a 30 - 40 post back n forth on another forum over a simple matter of another poster making a simple error they did not want to admit and they continued demeaning and harassing me through 2 threads, until I stopped being polite about their error.

Quote:

---

Quoting Dogmatique

---

While it's great you brought up the whole thing, this might be a smidge easier to wade through...

http://www.isbe.net/pdf/guidance_reg.pdf

---

Quote:

---

Quoting Disagreeable

---

State law determines how they must proceed. Some laws, such as in OH, require the student be living with their parent or be self supporting. Here, you go dig through them and see if you can climb back out of the hole you fell into:

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs...p?ChapterID=17

---

So, you are saying that children in foster care or children who are in the custody of a relative (a couple of examples) are not allowed to go to school in Ohio because they aren't in the custody of their parents or self supporting?

I am not going to read through the entire code to find something that won't back up what you are saying.