Is it wrong to subsidize lower earning children?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It’s not a better career path, simply a more lucrative one. If the only way these siblings can attend the family reunion is to have their travel paid for, I don’t think it’s wrong. Equity is not equality.

[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.

This!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think you should have offered to pay for all of your kids or none of your kids. Basic fairness.

Also, you have no leverage to guilt her into going now because she's paying her own way. Presumably you offered to pay for the other 2 because you want your family to be there. I doubt the third will go now no matter what you offer because you poisoned the well.

This.

Yes, you can help your some kids more if they have a genuine issue (cancer, loss of job, need more education, physical/mental disability). But if you pay for airfare for 2, then pay also for the third kid.

How close your children are to each other in life is directly related to how fairly and equally you treated everyone. All siblings do not end up with the same success and money in life. Kindly remember this and make sure that your inheritance should be divvied up equally too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It’s not a better career path, simply a more lucrative one. If the only way these siblings can attend the family reunion is to have their travel paid for, I don’t think it’s wrong. Equity is not equality.

The parent is not responsible for equity. They are only responsible for equality. Treat your kids equal - especially this non-essential fun trip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It’s not a better career path, simply a more lucrative one. If the only way these siblings can attend the family reunion is to have their travel paid for, I don’t think it’s wrong. Equity is not equality.

The parent is not responsible for equity. They are only responsible for equality. Treat your kids equal - especially this non-essential fun trip.

That’s silly. If one child needs various supports and therapies, the other child doesn’t get to demand equal funds be spent on them. Furthermore, it’s OP’s money and she can allocate it exactly as she wishes. OP’s only mistake was telling her daughter about her plans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It’s not a better career path, simply a more lucrative one. If the only way these siblings can attend the family reunion is to have their travel paid for, I don’t think it’s wrong. Equity is not equality.

The parent is not responsible for equity. They are only responsible for equality. Treat your kids equal - especially this non-essential fun trip.

That’s silly. If one child needs various supports and therapies, the other child doesn’t get to demand equal funds be spent on them. Furthermore, it’s OP’s money and she can allocate it exactly as she wishes. OP’s only mistake was telling her daughter about her plans.

Got it. Lie to your more successful kid by omission. As if it isn't going to come out. You are the kind of parent who creates divisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It’s not a better career path, simply a more lucrative one. If the only way these siblings can attend the family reunion is to have their travel paid for, I don’t think it’s wrong. Equity is not equality.

The parent is not responsible for equity. They are only responsible for equality. Treat your kids equal - especially this non-essential fun trip.

That’s silly. If one child needs various supports and therapies, the other child doesn’t get to demand equal funds be spent on them. Furthermore, it’s OP’s money and she can allocate it exactly as she wishes. OP’s only mistake was telling her daughter about her plans.

What’s silly is equating paying for medical treatment to an optional family vacation, or suggesting that op try to conceal the fact that she’s paying for the siblings flights from her daughter.

OP’s mistake seems to be assuming that her daughter would want to participate in family reunion that she probably had little say in organizing and requires her paying her own way while her siblings are subsidized rather than saving her time and leave for a vacation of her choosing.

[Anonymous]

My parents NEVER gave/give us money without giving the others the same amount.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It’s not a better career path, simply a more lucrative one. If the only way these siblings can attend the family reunion is to have their travel paid for, I don’t think it’s wrong. Equity is not equality.

The parent is not responsible for equity. They are only responsible for equality. Treat your kids equal - especially this non-essential fun trip.

That’s silly. If one child needs various supports and therapies, the other child doesn’t get to demand equal funds be spent on them. Furthermore, it’s OP’s money and she can allocate it exactly as she wishes. OP’s only mistake was telling her daughter about her plans.

Got it. Lie to your more successful kid by omission. As if it isn't going to come out. You are the kind of parent who creates divisions.

Once again, for the people in the back. Making more money doesn’t make your kid more successful. I’d be more proud of a kid in Doctors Without Borders than one in private equity.

[Anonymous]

NP. Some people are saying there’s not much difference between 25 and 29, but I disagree. When I was 25, I was in grad school earning a $16k stipend. There’s no way I could have paid for an overseas family reunion. A few years later it would have been a different story.

[Anonymous]

My mom has done all kinds of things for my sister and she will not even get my kids a birthday gift (forget about me getting a gift and I'm talking about even a dollar tree gift). She has plenty of money and we each have similar HHI but I am the only one with grandkids. My kids know and hate how she treats me and they keep their distance except when I force a visit. I don't see my mom and its very strained. I don't care as much about the money as I do the lying, games, treating me badly, allowing my sibling to treat me badly, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. Some people are saying there’s not much difference between 25 and 29, but I disagree. When I was 25, I was in grad school earning a $16k stipend. There’s no way I could have paid for an overseas family reunion. A few years later it would have been a different story.

It doesn't matter you make the offer to both kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have three 20 something kids and two of them work low paying jobs while one is more established and successful. I think she makes 250k at 29. We are having a family reunion in another continent and I told her that I’ll be paying for her siblings (25 and 27) flights (because they wouldn’t be able to afford it otherwise) but want her to pay for her own ticket because she can easily afford it. Well, yesterday we were discussing the trip and my daughter said she is deciding not to go because she’s busy with work. Usually she always travels with us so I’m not sure if she’s angry that I asked her to pay for her own airfare. It would cost around $1500. Was I wrong to do this?

I would not go either. I would take it as you really don't want me there and I would be mad you are treating me differently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My parents NEVER gave/give us money without giving the others the same amount.

Same and it has avoided countless issues. They saw the rifts created with friends" kids and made a conscious decision to avoid that. I appreciate it and so do my siblings. We will not be spending 5 years squabbling over an estate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

Actually I do know what it's like to be the responsible kid/sibling who grows up and takes care of myself while my parents help my siblings. Here's what I have learned:

1) It's never equal. Even when they think they are making it equal. Kids have different needs and they don't all line up. Is giving 10k to one kid to help with grad school tuition the same as giving 10k to another kid to buy a car? Nope. They are just different things. A car is an immediate purchase, it will be put to use instantly. Grad school is an opportunity and outcomes will depend on a variety of factors, including how hard that kid works. It's just complicated. It will never be perfectly even. The kids getting the $1500 for the plane tickets might not even see it as a gift -- it makes it really hard for them to back out of coming, doesn't it? Maybe none of the kids want to go but OP not giving the eldest money made it easier for the eldest to say she couldn't make it. Nothing is ever even. It's complicated.

2) It's not just about money. Do you know the thing I resented most my parents saying no to? When I graduated from law school I asked if I could come live with them in the summer while I studied for and took the bar. They said no, because my sister had recently had a baby and they were busy helping her and didn't want me there during that time. That hurt me more than any money they gave my siblings to help with stuff over the years. So even if you divvy the money up equally, it still might not be equal.

3) No one is entitled to their parents' money, for any reason. That's why I think it's fine if this is how OP wants to allocate these funds, and this is why I don't think anyone can say "oh if you can afford this, you can afford that." You don't know their finances, their plans, how they've spent money in the past, none of it. You don't know. OP gets to decide how she spends her money and if she thinks the other two kids need a bit of help with some plane tickets and the third doesn't, that's her choice. When I've been in that situation, there have been times when I thought it wasn't fair and other times when I was okay with it (like when my parents spent a lot of money to send my brother to rehab -- I'm not getting rehab money and I'm okay with that). You have to grow up. It's not your money. Part of becoming an independent adult is realizing it's just not up to you and letting it go. It's not your money.