Is it wrong to subsidize lower earning children?

[Anonymous]

The reality is the successful kids, and I have two, don’t have a lot of leave at 29.

[Anonymous]

You shouldn't pay for any of them.

[Anonymous]

I would know if my child was upset over what I said. It really seems like she is busy at work.
Also, I doubt you have been equal with all of them. Why would $1500 suddenly be a problem? The eldest has got the most for all I know.
It's not the money, it's probably the delivery or she is busy.

[Anonymous]

You were wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, you were unfair.

Your child earning that much is sacrificing health and time to make that kind of money. She doesn't need a horrible mother in her life who doesn't value her sacrifices.

Either you pay for all your children's travel expenses, or none at all.

My dh makes that kind of money and he works an easier job than I have with the same amount of hours as I do to make 1/3 of what he makes. Don’t assume that hard work always pays off. Depending on the field, it doesn’t necessarily work that way.

Op, by all means pay for all your children.

Pp, don’t assume that the siblings don’t have jobs that provide value to the world.

The daughter said she didn't have the time. You think she's lying? And this isn't about which job benefits humankind. This is about a parent off-handedly dismissing one of their children's lifestyles. That is NOT OK. I would never treat my adult children this way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You shouldn't have told the oldest. If one is a CPA and the other two are public school teachers, the teachers will never have the earning potential of the CPA. You should have kept it quiet.

And the two teachers get the summer off while CPA is working.
SO wrong, OP!

[Anonymous]

How do you know she makes that much? Regardless treat your kids the same. I would feel so left out if my parents paid for my other two siblings and not me. It seems you value them more.

You messed up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A family reunion in another continent is a ridiculous ask

Why? What if a large group of the relatives lives there? Should they just travel to the USA because a portion live there?

Anyone can choose not to attend if they cannot afford or have the time to take off. But the OP should offer to pay for all kids, IMO. Or None. You don't get to play favorites or punish one kid because they are more successful

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's okay unless you are very wealthy and an additional airfare is no big deal.

However it sounds like you framed it for her in a weird way that made her feel punished for her success. Instead I would have emphasized to her that you were doing this because her siblings would not be able to afford the trip otherwise, and you really want the family to be able to do this together. I also would have told her that you are incredibly proud of her success, and suggested doing something as a congratulations, but separate from the trip. I also would emphasize that in the trip itself, things would be equal between the siblings in terms of what you will pay for (accommodations, meals) and that it's just the airfare where you are asking her to step up since it's a burden on you to pay for the additional airfare (again, if it's not actually a burden for you, I'd just pay for everyone).

But why? If you can afford $1500 for two siblings, you should be able to pay $1500 for the other one. It's not an age difference thing (as in one is 22 and just out of college versus 29)---they are all adults

I don't see how you assume that if they gave 3k to pay for two of the kids that it's no big deal to pay another 1500 for a third kid. While also paying their own airfare and also presumably picking up the tab for the hotel and meals. Say they were hoping to do the trip for 12k, and then realized the airfare was a strain due the two younger kids and said okay we can stretch it to 15k to cover airfare due them, but then airfare for the oldest pushes it to 16.5k. It adds up. Some people might shrug and not care, but some people have budgets for discretionary spending even at this level. This may be a bucket list trip for OP, to visit this destination with her kids.

Also, there is an age discrepancy here and OP specifically points out the oldest is more established in her career.

But I think there's a way to handle it and a way not to. Telling the oldest "oh you have to pay because you can" with no other context absolutely gives the impression that they are just being punished for making more.

Either you can afford to do it for all of your kids or you don't do it for any. Unless one kid is truly wealthy (and making 200K at 29 is not the definition of truly wealthy). And yes, if you are already paying hotels/food for everyone and airfare for 2 of your 3 kids, then I'd argue you most likely can afford $1500 for the 3rd. IMO if you cannot pay for all 3, then you don't pay for any of them.

Do you know what it is like being the responsible kid/sibling? As you grow up and then into adulthood, where your parents help the others out more because "they need it"? It's a slap in the face to the one who has made smart choices to be successful and manage their finances.

It creates divides in the family. This isn't $15K, it's an extra $1500 and yes, I you can afford $3K, then you should be able to afford $4.5K to help ALL of your kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You shouldn't have told the oldest. If one is a CPA and the other two are public school teachers, the teachers will never have the earning potential of the CPA. You should have kept it quiet.

But that is a choice they ALL made! Unless one is independently wealthy, you don't give them less. Anyone could choose to do the work and become a CPA or an engineer or whatever. You get to pick what you do, and then it's up to you to live with your choices. but the CPA shouldn't get less from their parents because they chose a better career path.

[Anonymous]

The trip is an imposition to someone with limited time off and limited money (assuming the dd budgets well and saves). So you are asking her to sacrifice time and money to see family and the siblings get that free.

I think this really breeds a lot of resentment, especially if you don't reinforce the fact that 1. Her taking time to do this is something you are really grateful for 2. You are subsidizing this trip for siblings but not her and phrase it so flippantly with "you can afford it and they can't."

It's almost like she is punished for being the eldest, most responsible child. BTDT and it hurts. So it's normal she'd now be too busy, which may mean she has decided to prioritize work since she clearly isn't prioritized like her siblings, or wants to use her vacation time on her own terms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, you were unfair.

Your child earning that much is sacrificing health and time to make that kind of money. She doesn't need a horrible mother in her life who doesn't value her sacrifices.

Either you pay for all your children's travel expenses, or none at all.

My dh makes that kind of money and he works an easier job than I have with the same amount of hours as I do to make 1/3 of what he makes. Don’t assume that hard work always pays off. Depending on the field, it doesn’t necessarily work that way.

Op, by all means pay for all your children.

Pp, don’t assume that the siblings don’t have jobs that provide value to the world.

The daughter said she didn't have the time. You think she's lying? And this isn't about which job benefits humankind. This is about a parent off-handedly dismissing one of their children's lifestyles. That is NOT OK. I would never treat my adult children this way.

No, I was responding to the poster who said “Your child earning that much is sacrificing health and time to make that kind of money. She doesn't need a horrible mother in her life who doesn't value her sacrifices.” I do believe she could have to work and I also think op should pay for all her kids. But the “if she’s earning that much she must be working crazy hours/sacrificing her health” thought process isn’t always correlated

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes you were wrong.

You essentially told her she’s being penalized for working hard and being successful. If she makes that much she also likely has a lot work and might not be able to take the time off needed for a reunion on another continent. Especially one she has to pay her way for but her siblings don’t.

I never understand why parents to this. It creates unnecessary tension and resentment within a family.

+1 unless there are disabilities, don't punish the hard worker and reward the bums ....

[Anonymous]

You are a clueless parent and I see a future where the children become estranged from each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:i think you should treat all children equally.

+1 they made their choices and you are penalizing dd for hers. This would make me very angry, especially if she worked/works harder. If it's about a clear ability difference (like a documented learning challenge) fine, but short of that, equal all the way. I would be very apologetic if you want to keep your family relationships (including between siblings) positive.