The Philippines follows a civil law tradition under the Family Code (Executive Order No. 209, as amended), which imposes on parents an absolute, continuing duty to support their children. While the age of majority is 18 (Republic Act No. 6809), the duty to support a child who is pursuing higher education does not automatically terminate upon reaching 18. This principle is expressly enshrined in the law and consistently upheld by the Supreme Court.

Primary Legal Provision

Article 194, paragraph 2 of the Family Code is the cornerstone provision:

“The education of the person entitled to be supported referred to in the preceding paragraph shall include his schooling or training for some profession, trade or vocation, even beyond the age of majority. Transportation shall include expenses in going to and from school, or to and from place of work.”

This single sentence makes Philippine law unusually progressive in the Southeast Asian context: parental support for education has no fixed age ceiling. It continues for as long as the child is actually pursuing a course in good faith and has not yet completed the degree or training.

Scope of Support for College Students

Support under Article 194 is comprehensive and includes:

Tuition, matriculation, and all mandatory school fees
Books, school supplies, uniforms, and other academic requirements
Board and lodging (dormitory or apartment rental if the school is away from home)
Daily allowance (baon) for food, transportation, and other necessities
Medical and dental expenses
Laptop, internet allowance, and other tools reasonably necessary for the course (especially in the post-pandemic era)
Thesis, practicum, OJT, review, and board-exam expenses
Graduation fees and related costs

The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that support must be adequate to maintain the child in a standard of living compatible with the family’s social and financial position (Article 194 and Article 201).

When Does the Obligation End?

The obligation to support a college student ceases upon the happening of any of the following:

Completion of the degree or vocational course being pursued
The child reaches an age where continuation of studies is no longer reasonable (courts have used 25–26 as a soft ceiling in extreme cases, but only when the child is clearly abusing the privilege)
The child abandons studies without justifiable cause or is perpetually academically delinquent
The child marries
The child becomes gainfully employed and self-supporting (part-time jobs or OJT remuneration do not automatically terminate the obligation)
The child engages in conduct that constitutes legal emancipation or renunciation of the right to support

Landmark Supreme Court Decisions

Jocson v. Jocson (G.R. No. 207076, July 26, 2017)
The Court awarded monthly support of PHP 50,000 to a 22-year-old law student, emphasizing that Article 194(2) is mandatory and not discretionary.
Mangonon v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 125041, June 30, 2006)
The Supreme Court explicitly held: “The obligation to educate a child continues even beyond the age of majority… Parents cannot renounce or avoid this duty.”
Lacson v. Lacson (G.R. No. 150644, August 28, 2006)
Support was ordered for a 23-year-old medical student. The Court ruled that the father’s refusal to continue support because the child had turned 21 (old age of majority) was untenable.
David v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 111180, November 16, 1995)
The Court declared that support for education is a continuing obligation that survives the child’s attainment of majority.
Aberin v. Aberin (G.R. No. 225647, April 3, 2019)
A father was ordered to pay past due support plus tuition arrears for his 24-year-old daughter who was finishing her nursing degree.

Amount of Support

Under Article 201, the amount is determined by:

The needs of the recipient (actual school expenses + reasonable allowance)
The financial capacity of the parent obliged to give support
The lifestyle the child has been accustomed to

Courts routinely award monthly support ranging from PHP 20,000 to PHP 150,000+ for college students in Metro Manila private universities (Ateneo, La Salle, UP, UST, etc.), depending on the parents’ income and assets.

Procedure for Claiming Support

Extrajudicial demand – A formal demand letter is highly advisable (it starts the running of interest on unpaid amounts).
Petition for Provisional Support under Rule on Provisional Orders (A.M. No. 02-11-12-SC) – This is the fastest remedy. The court can issue a support order within 24–72 hours after filing, even without summons to the respondent.
Main Action for Support under the Rule on Provisional Orders or regular civil action.
Habeas Corpus with Prayer for Support if the child is in the custody of one parent who refuses to provide support.
Criminal Case for Violation of R.A. 9262 (Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act) if the withholding of support constitutes economic abuse (punishable by imprisonment and mandatory support payment).

Enforcement Mechanisms

Monthly support pendente lite is immediately executory.
Non-payment can result in:
– Contempt of court
– Attachment of salary, bank accounts, vehicles, real properties
– Issuance of Hold-Departure Order
– Criminal prosecution under Article 195 in relation to Article 199 of the Family Code and R.A. 9262

Special Situations

Illegitimate children – The obligation is identical once filiation is established (judicially or via voluntary recognition).
OFW parents – Courts routinely garnish dollar remittances or require dollar-denominated support.
Separated or annulled parents – Support is almost always awarded to the custodial parent; the non-custodial parent cannot offset visitation rights against support.
Scholarship recipients – Scholarship covers tuition only in most cases; parents remain liable for board, lodging, allowance, books, etc.
LGBTQ+ children – Sexual orientation or gender identity has never been accepted by Philippine courts as a ground to terminate support.

Conclusion

Under Philippine law, turning 18 does not emancipate a college student from the right to parental support, nor does it emancipate parents from the duty to provide it. Article 194(2) of the Family Code creates a clear, mandatory, and continuing obligation to finance a child’s education until the course is completed, regardless of age. The Supreme Court has consistently interpreted this provision expansively and protectively in favor of the student.

Any parent who unilaterally stops supporting an 18-year-old (or older) college student does so at the peril of immediate court sanction, substantial arrears, and possible criminal liability. The law is unambiguous: as long as the child is studying in good faith, the parents must pay.