Can a court impute income to a parent who left a well-paying job to go back to school?

Possibly, but courts generally recognize that a genuine, reasonable decision to pursue education that will improve long-term earning capacity is different from simply choosing to earn less. The analysis looks at whether the decision was made in good faith and was reasonable in the circumstances, factors like whether the training is likely to lead to materially better income, how long the reduced-income period is expected to last, whether the parent gave notice to the other parent or the court before making the change, and whether the children's support needs were considered and reasonably provided for during the transition.

A parent who returns to school after careful planning, with a realistic path to higher future earnings, is more likely to avoid having income imputed at their old salary than one who makes an impulsive change with no clear payoff or plan for interim support. Courts are also more skeptical where the timing of the decision closely follows a separation or an anticipated support obligation. Because this is a balancing exercise rather than an automatic result either way, a parent considering this kind of change should get legal advice and, where possible, discuss it with the other parent before making the move.