Is it obligatory for a wealthy father to compel his daughter to bear the family's expenses, under the pretext that he spends on his children from his second wife and his brother's family, knowing that his brother's children are males, one of whom is employed, and that the father is divorced from her mother and she has a full brother who is still a student?

Spending on children in need is obligatory by consensus. Scholars have adduced evidence for this from the Qur'an, the Sunnah, and scholarly consensus. The father is not obligated to spend on his son if the son possesses wealth that makes him self-sufficient, or if he is capable of earning, unless he is poor and unable to earn, and the father is affluent. Scholars have agreed on the obligation for a father to spend on his daughter until she marries, due to her inability to earn. It is not permissible to neglect spending on one's children under the pretext of spending on others, and justice must be observed among children in expenditure. The hadith "You and your wealth belong to your father" does not mean that the father owns his son's wealth; rather, it permits (the father to take from it) under four conditions: that taking it does not harm the son, that the son does not need it, that the father does not take money from one son to give to another, and that the father has a need for the money he takes.