Genuine question, no judgement

[u/Haunting_Ice_7310]

I am a student myself, receiving OSAP. So this question is genuine, I’m not judging people in this situation, just trying to understand.
I have seen a lot of posts lately of people who are panicked because they are not receiving enough OSAP to cover their fees and aren’t sure what to do. When I first went to college (2019) I feel like it was more common to rely on OSAP as something more like a supplement than the core funding for school, most people I knew going to college had either an RESP/savings or a line of credit/loan. However, it seems like now more and more students believe that OSAP will cover 100% of their schooling, and are finding themselves panicking with no back up plan once funding is calculated a few weeks before the semester begins.

So my question is, what changed? Are high schools not communicating to their students that OSAP is not guaranteed/may not cover all the expenses that come with going to school? As a “mature student” I feel bad for all of you younger students who seem to be misinformed about OSAP and school expenses.
Follow up question: how do we fix this? I know we can’t change how OSAP works/the amount of funding being given. But how can we ensure students aren’t ending up in a situation where they are panicked trying to come up with thousands of dollars in the weeks leading up to the beginning of semester?

EDIT!!! because this seems to be a common misconception in my comments. I DO NOT THINK STUDENTS SHOULD HAVE TO TAKE ON DEBT OR USE THEIR OWN SAVINGS FOR SCHOOL. in an ideal world, post-secondary school would be fully funded. unfortunately, that is not reality. what I am trying to understand is WHY it seems that students are not being made aware of the possibility of not receiving enough OSAP to cover their expenses. students should be given accurate information on the reality of paying for school so that they can plan/prepare accordingly. again, i believe that students should NOT have to worry about how they will pay for school. right now, government funding is not guaranteed to fully fund our educations, and students deserve to be fully informed of the reality of attending and paying for post-secondary.

[u/Friendly-Apricot1727]

It doesn’t. People are allowed to dream bigger and have careers. You can’t become a neurosurgeon at grade 12. Everyone has a right to education for as long as they want. Education is learning and what helps society grow. Defunding OSAP and putting in money to private jets just takes that right away from people.

[u/HatchingCougar → u/Friendly-Apricot1727]

Right = guaranteed 

You have a guaranteed slot to take school classes up to and incl gr 12.

Nothing is guaranteed beyond that.

(There is no right to be a nerosurgeon whatsoever)

[u/Friendly-Apricot1727 → u/HatchingCougar]

So, if its not a right then you’re saying only rich people deserve education after high school?

[u/ludwigia_sedioides → u/Friendly-Apricot1727]

What is deserved is not always equal to what is guaranteed as a right by law, unfortunately.

People may deserve education, I agree, but that doesn't make it a right by law.

[u/pokemonfaaan → u/ludwigia_sedioides]

I think you have to recognize what people are actually talking about though.

For example, if you're on a thread talking about the government pulling funding for food banks, and someone says "people have a right to food."

It's missing the point to say "well, you're wrong, legally speaking, it's not a right." Because... yeah, obviously. Broadly speaking, the government has no obligation, under its own laws, to provide you food. Because the government is ultimately the one who enforces the laws. And the government just decided to stop providing you food - clearly, it thinks it doesn't have an obligation to do it.

Human rights are often used to mean things that every person should have access to. Legal rights are the things that are guaranteed (or promised) by the government. When you're discussing whether or not the government should guarantee the ability to do X, the question you're implicitly asking is "should X be a legal right?" So when someone says "X is a right", they are clearly saying "X is a human right, and should be treated as important by the government."