What is your opinion regarding someone who refrains from spending on his wife and children under the pretext that they do not respond to his wishes, even though his income is sufficient for three families?

Filial piety and obedience to parents in what is good are obligatory. However, a father is not permitted to abuse his right and cause hardship to his child. Thus, he is not allowed to force his son to study a specific subject that he does not desire, and the son will not be considered disobedient if he disagrees with him in this regard.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah cited that parents do not have the right to compel their child to marry someone they do not desire.

Ibn al-Qayyim is quoted as saying that a father should consider the child's situation and what he is prepared for in terms of work. If he is prepared for knowledge, he should be enabled to pursue it. If he is prepared for other permissible activities, he should be enabled to pursue them. All of this is after teaching him what he needs from his religion.

Therefore, the father's actions of causing hardship to his son and cutting off financial support for his wife, young children, and unmarried daughters are an injustice, as their maintenance is obligatory upon him.

As for his adult children who have no wealth or earnings, scholars have differed regarding their maintenance. The majority view that maintenance is obligatory until the male reaches maturity and the female gets married, unless they are chronically ill.

The Hanbalis hold the view that maintenance is obligatory for poor adults.

Study expenses are not included in the obligatory maintenance upon the father according to the majority after the children reach adulthood. However, it is commendable for the father to spend on them in this situation to gain the reward of charity and maintaining kinship ties.