How many parents still financially support their middle age adult children?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s not “support,” OP. That’s estate planning. I’m not dependent on my parents, but I am lucky to receive gifts and other advantages (like not worrying about retirement). No, they are not making any sacrifices to make those gifts. Realistically, close-in DC suburbs mean very high income or generational wealth. Your neighbors could surely afford to pay their own way, they would just live somewhere else.

Same for me with the bolded. I graduated without debt, had the wedding and honeymoon of a lifetime, etc. My great-grandkids will never have to work. Money is distributed slowly, and you get more the more schooling you get so our family is incentivized to become educated. We are encouraged to serve on non-profits, do philanthropy, and yes, work. DH and I each have full time jobs.

You're deluded if you think that intergenerational transfer of wealth =/= support.

The POINT is that people refuse to follow your judgmental definition of support. You might be jealous, PP, but it's not a good look to then imply that everyone receiving gifts or money are lazy dependent slackers. Most of them work hard for what they have, and the extra is put to good use.

You really want it both ways huh? You both want to spend other people’s money but to also pretend you’re standing on your own two feet.

I don’t think you need to be ashamed of enjoying the benefits of your privilege but refusing to own it is wild.

I think it’s more than once the payments started - the big home purchase, gifted vacations, tuitions paid, etc then the adult kids start make decisions differently. They stop doing banking or consulting and work at Club Fed or non profits. They still may work hard, just aren’t looking for big bonus jobs any longer or necessarily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know lots of my friend's wealthier parents helped them constantly until the parents died.

And why wouldn't you if you had the funds? We are UHNW. We will help our kids as long as they are working hard/contributing to society (ie....they need a 40 hour/week job and be working hard to better themselves---not an issue one has graduated college already and gainfully employed, other is in college doing well). But why wouldn't we help them fully fund their IRA/401k? and pay for family vacations (they are both single)

They know any future grandkids will have fully funded 529s, and we will help with house downpayment when they are ready to settle into a specific area.

So yes, that's helping, but only for extras. They still live "within their means" for everything else, meaning they can afford the basics in life.
I would much rather see my kids/their future spouse and grandkids enjoy the money while I"m alive, than have them wait until they are 50-60+ and inherit it. And if they truly wanted to go into a field with low pay, but a field that truly helps/contributes to society, they know we would help support them in order to do so. Just seems silly to make them wait until we die to enjoy the $$.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I hate this too. But the richer we get, the more I see it.

Husband and I are both from pretty middle class origins, but now have good salaries, our kids are in private, country club membership, etc. basic rich bit$$ stuff. Our peers, even some of our closest friends, are heavily floated by their parents. I've had to learn how to turn off the "ick" factor in this. It's just the way that this tribe of people operate.

Why is it an "ick" factor? If the parents can easily afford it, why not help their kids/family now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live in a close in Montgomery County suburb and it seems pretty clear that several of my neighbors are still being supported financially by their parents. These are people in their 40s who have multiple children. I feel like if you haven't figured out how to be financially independent by the time you are in your 40s, it is very unlikely you ever will. Is being supported financially forever part of these people's life plan?

If you support your children financially when they are middle age, do you feel good about it? It seems like parents in this situation must have to worry not only about whether their retirement savings will be enough to support themselves until they are 100, but if their savings are enough to support their children until they are 100!

I guess I'm just jealous and bitter!

In my younger days, I would've been jealous too but when you experience life you learn not to be jealous of anyone as you know that life is fairly unfair to all. However, if their parents have extra money, they'll leave it for them anyways so why not help while still alive to see the benefits.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Usually these people say “we don’t need the money, we support ourselves” before naming something they do that is enabled by the gifts they receive from their parents

Well they probably dont "need the money" and would live differently without the gifts. But if their parents are wealthy and have the money to give, it just makes tax sense to do it yearly. Maybe they'd take different vacations, or their kids would attend public schools, but if the grandparents want to gift enough to pay for Europe and private schools, why shouldn't' they?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many parents rather do charity than spoil grown adults.

If you have enough $$$, you can easily do both. If I'm worth $40M, I'm not going to give it all to charity and let my kids struggle with paying for college or not taking any vacations. I can give extensively to charity and still gift my family a lot

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have several friends who receive money from parents who choose to gift it during life rather than leave it until death. None of these friends need it for basic support but they spend it on themselves and their kids just as the parents intend. If I had money to leave my kids, I would certainly rather see them vacationing and doing fun things during my (and their) life than giving them a lump sum when I die.

I see that, but it is support even if under the auspices of estate planning.

Look, we are probably going to be in the position to do this to some extent with our kids. I told DH they need to figure out how to support themselves, but I am really open to providing money for real estate if it lands them in a better school district, etc. Might not be willing to do this for K-12 private school.

And that is your choice. But if you were worth more (think $30-40 M) why wouldn't you help with private schools if that's what is best for the kids? Obviously it's your choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep, my friend readily admits in-laws purchased their home, pay for kids private school tuition, take them on annual vacations abroad, pay for kids summer camps, plan to pay for kids college, give them weekly $ for dinners out, and even let them use their Netllix/Apple TV passwords, etc. My friend is a SAHM and husband is a fed. There is no way they could afford their lifestyle on their income alone. I think there are a lot of families in the DMV like this.

I would feel "owned" if my parents did this. No thanks.

Not all parents give gifts with "strings attached". We are wealthy, my kids will get gifts as we think they need. As long as they get educated, work hard (no "I'm only going to work 15 hours/week and let you pay for everything") we will assist with extras. Thankfully they grew up not realizing we had money (and we didn't until last decade), and even then we are frugal with alot of stuff (think we both drive 10+ year old cars because they still work just fine, we don't fly business all the time, only when price is not too much more, etc. )--basically they were still raised with a value of money and don't just get everything they want. Thankfully they want to function without much help from us---so we gift the extras. They don't want to just get handouts from us, they work hard but know we are always there to help if needed. It also means they are a bit frugal (one more so than the other).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep, my friend readily admits in-laws purchased their home, pay for kids private school tuition, take them on annual vacations abroad, pay for kids summer camps, plan to pay for kids college, give them weekly $ for dinners out, and even let them use their Netllix/Apple TV passwords, etc. My friend is a SAHM and husband is a fed. There is no way they could afford their lifestyle on their income alone. I think there are a lot of families in the DMV like this.

I would feel "owned" if my parents did this. No thanks.

Not all parents give gifts with "strings attached". We are wealthy, my kids will get gifts as we think they need. As long as they get educated, work hard (no "I'm only going to work 15 hours/week and let you pay for everything") we will assist with extras. Thankfully they grew up not realizing we had money (and we didn't until last decade), and even then we are frugal with alot of stuff (think we both drive 10+ year old cars because they still work just fine, we don't fly business all the time, only when price is not too much more, etc. )--basically they were still raised with a value of money and don't just get everything they want. Thankfully they want to function without much help from us---so we gift the extras. They don't want to just get handouts from us, they work hard but know we are always there to help if needed. It also means they are a bit frugal (one more so than the other).

Examples of strings:

“my kids will get gifts as we think they need”
“As long as they get educated, work hard “

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep, my friend readily admits in-laws purchased their home, pay for kids private school tuition, take them on annual vacations abroad, pay for kids summer camps, plan to pay for kids college, give them weekly $ for dinners out, and even let them use their Netllix/Apple TV passwords, etc. My friend is a SAHM and husband is a fed. There is no way they could afford their lifestyle on their income alone. I think there are a lot of families in the DMV like this.

I would feel "owned" if my parents did this. No thanks.

Not all parents give gifts with "strings attached". We are wealthy, my kids will get gifts as we think they need. As long as they get educated, work hard (no "I'm only going to work 15 hours/week and let you pay for everything") we will assist with extras. Thankfully they grew up not realizing we had money (and we didn't until last decade), and even then we are frugal with alot of stuff (think we both drive 10+ year old cars because they still work just fine, we don't fly business all the time, only when price is not too much more, etc. )--basically they were still raised with a value of money and don't just get everything they want. Thankfully they want to function without much help from us---so we gift the extras. They don't want to just get handouts from us, they work hard but know we are always there to help if needed. It also means they are a bit frugal (one more so than the other).

Examples of strings:

“my kids will get gifts as we think they need”
“As long as they get educated, work hard “

Not really strings. Strings are "you will become a doctor or a lawyer or major in CS or we won't give you any money and you must live in our hometown or no more money"
We just expect our young adults to be contributing members of society and functioning on their own, so that the money we gift is a perk, but not "needed" for basic living. I'm not buying my 25yo an $80K sports car, but I will make sure they always have a safe $25-30K decent vehicle to drive (if they need assistance to get one).

It's our money, we can choose what to do with it. If we want to gift a trip to Hawaii we will. If we don't we wont. No strings attached to that.

Yes, the "get educated/work hard" might seem like strings to you, but it's really not. We just refuse to fund lazy grown ass adults who have no reason not to work. We value education in our household. Kids are in/thru college. But if one wanted to take the HVAC/plumbing route, we would be fine with that too. But I sure as hell am not paying for everything for my 25 yo if they refuse to get a job (and are perfectly healthy, physically and mentally). Basically they need to have a plan for life. It would be doing them a huge disservice to just give them $100K/year and let them sit at home playing video games and drinking all day. When you are rich, you are free to do that, but I don't really recommend it (and certainly don't want to meet your kids if you do that for them).

I think you are just jealous and stirring the pot

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep, my friend readily admits in-laws purchased their home, pay for kids private school tuition, take them on annual vacations abroad, pay for kids summer camps, plan to pay for kids college, give them weekly $ for dinners out, and even let them use their Netllix/Apple TV passwords, etc. My friend is a SAHM and husband is a fed. There is no way they could afford their lifestyle on their income alone. I think there are a lot of families in the DMV like this.

I would feel "owned" if my parents did this. No thanks.

Not all parents give gifts with "strings attached". We are wealthy, my kids will get gifts as we think they need. As long as they get educated, work hard (no "I'm only going to work 15 hours/week and let you pay for everything") we will assist with extras. Thankfully they grew up not realizing we had money (and we didn't until last decade), and even then we are frugal with alot of stuff (think we both drive 10+ year old cars because they still work just fine, we don't fly business all the time, only when price is not too much more, etc. )--basically they were still raised with a value of money and don't just get everything they want. Thankfully they want to function without much help from us---so we gift the extras. They don't want to just get handouts from us, they work hard but know we are always there to help if needed. It also means they are a bit frugal (one more so than the other).

Examples of strings:

“my kids will get gifts as we think they need”
“As long as they get educated, work hard “

OMG---it is the parent's money, so the parent's choice as to what to do with it. If you had money, would you just give it to your grown kids for now reason? Would you allow them to live off a trust fund and never work/volunteer/contribute to society? I suppose that's your choice, but probably not the best idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I hate this too. But the richer we get, the more I see it.

Husband and I are both from pretty middle class origins, but now have good salaries, our kids are in private, country club membership, etc. basic rich bit$$ stuff. Our peers, even some of our closest friends, are heavily floated by their parents. I've had to learn how to turn off the "ick" factor in this. It's just the way that this tribe of people operate.

Why is it an "ick" factor? If the parents can easily afford it, why not help their kids/family now?

Ever watched someone cheat on a test and then get inducted into national honor society? It's the same feeling. It's not real accomplishment, but for the vast majority, it looks like it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I hate this too. But the richer we get, the more I see it.

Husband and I are both from pretty middle class origins, but now have good salaries, our kids are in private, country club membership, etc. basic rich bit$$ stuff. Our peers, even some of our closest friends, are heavily floated by their parents. I've had to learn how to turn off the "ick" factor in this. It's just the way that this tribe of people operate.

Why is it an "ick" factor? If the parents can easily afford it, why not help their kids/family now?

Ever watched someone cheat on a test and then get inducted into national honor society? It's the same feeling. It's not real accomplishment, but for the vast majority, it looks like it is.

How on earth can you compare an adult kid getting financial gifts from their parents to Cheating?

Do you really go around comparing your friends and acquaintances to see who "has the nicer car and nicer home" and then wonder well did they really do it themselves or did family help? Who really cares what it looks like?
Unless the person getting money goes around bragging about how much they have....otherwise who gives a shit?!?!
Life is not a competition...once you realize that you might be a happier, nicer person.

Sounds more like you are jealous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We do. Or did until recently. We had to cut back when I found out my DIL was going on 3 vacations a year and lied about it. Not to mention the shopping sprees, taking friends and her mother eat out every weekend. My sister does social media and asked me about some pictures my DIL posted on Facebook. To say I was shocked is an understatement. Not mad just disappointed at misappropriated money that was supposed to go to needs not wants. I guess she flaunted her good times thinking I wouldn't find out. Our son is more to blame than her. He knowingly took advantage of us. His new I found God did not play well with us. Don't live like the devil then say you are following the golden rule. FAKE FAKE FAKE. It hurt me more than it did my husband. I feel very used. If they had saved some of what we gave I probably wouldn't care but they saved none of the money.
Now we have to babysit them meaning I will order whatever you need, give egiftcards for food and gas. I can no longer trust them. Son and DIL know they did wrong. She recently got a second job. Good. Now she can play on her own dime.
Don't tell me you love me then do something like that. It was so wrong.

You really need to just not give them anything. Not because they are irresponsible with money, but because you (and your sister apparently) think that you should control the money you willingly give.

You really should take a good hard look at your heart before lecturing your DIL about the golden rule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are you criticizing?

If the money is there and relatives are willing to share, what's the problem?! It's up to each family to figure out whether they can accept money with more or less strings attached.

No one we know is in this situation, but I see no problem with it.

You can admit to envy if you want, but you look stupid if you pretend there's some moral flaw in supporting adults. All it is if the green eyed monster!

That’s because there IS “a moral flaw in supporting adults.” Adults (without serious special needs) are supposed to be self-supporting. If they aren’t, they aren’t adults.