We're worried about our son and our grandchildren

[Anonymous]

Yes, about 5K 5 years ago to #1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here.

We haven't given #1 money in about 5 years and it wasn't all that much (about 5K). Of course when he visits us or we visit him we pay for restaurant meals, maybe go to the theater etc.

Their late grandfather set up trust funds for all of his grandchildren, that's where the 40K comes in (so we're technically not "giving him the money.") 40K is certainly a nice boost/floor - but since it's distributed annually it can't be spent on a "Paris Hilton" lifestyle. He also believed that they should be able feel free to pursue the career of their choice, even if it didn't pay as much, and enjoy a vacation every now and then.

Compared to my in-laws (refugees from Nazi Germany), we've all had it easy!

I guess we should have told my father-in-law that this was a bad idea, but he died in 1988.

#1 he knows perfectly well we'd pay for him to fly out and visit us in CA - but he doesn't want to come visit! He says he loves us but he can't stand to have #2 "rubbing his lifestyle" in his face. But he knows that we'd do the same for him if he really needed it.

However #1 went to a private LAC 100% paid for by 50/50 by parents and grandparents, while #2's education was a lot less expensive (at a state school). So we've probably given more to #1 over time when we take college into account.

Your relationship with #1 sounds totally appropriate and normal for adults whose parents have some money.

I think a big part of the problem here is that you have a skewed sense of normaly. As another PP says, you can spend time with your son and grandkids without lavishing money and gifts on them. You can also pay for small or even big treats, like a ski vacation or a play at the Kennedy Center. But this idea that you can't have a relationship with your son if you aren't literally paying him the equivalent of a middle class salary out of your own pockets is insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I must have hit a nerve, OP!

You're right, there can be a middle ground among reasonable people. But here nobody's reasonable, except perhaps your oldest son (who is sweet-talking but still accepts your money).
Your children have become used to depending on you because you created this dependency, so now the middle ground does not exist.

Why do you assume the worst about #1? It's the deceased grandfather not the OP that "gives" #1 the "money he didn't earn.

So OP gave #1 $5K 5 years ago? That's a drop in the bucket for a family that appears to have a net worth of about $5 million. Doesn't really sound like a sin to me.

[Anonymous]

OP seems to be taking credit for father-in-law's generosity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here.

We haven't given #1 money in about 5 years and it wasn't all that much (about 5K). Of course when he visits us or we visit him we pay for restaurant meals, maybe go to the theater etc.

Their late grandfather set up trust funds for all of his grandchildren, that's where the 40K comes in (so we're technically not "giving him the money.") 40K is certainly a nice boost/floor - but since it's distributed annually it can't be spent on a "Paris Hilton" lifestyle. He also believed that they should be able feel free to pursue the career of their choice, even if it didn't pay as much, and enjoy a vacation every now and then.

Compared to my in-laws (refugees from Nazi Germany), we've all had it easy!

I guess we should have told my father-in-law that this was a bad idea, but he died in 1988.

#1 he knows perfectly well we'd pay for him to fly out and visit us in CA - but he doesn't want to come visit! He says he loves us but he can't stand to have #2 "rubbing his lifestyle" in his face. But he knows that we'd do the same for him if he really needed it.

However #1 went to a private LAC 100% paid for by 50/50 by parents and grandparents, while #2's education was a lot less expensive (at a state school). So we've probably given more to #1 over time when we take college into account.

Your relationship with #1 sounds totally appropriate and normal for adults whose parents have some money.

I think a big part of the problem here is that you have a skewed sense of normaly. As another PP says, you can spend time with your son and grandkids without lavishing money and gifts on them. You can also pay for small or even big treats, like a ski vacation or a play at the Kennedy Center. But this idea that you can't have a relationship with your son if you aren't literally paying him the equivalent of a middle class salary out of your own pockets is insane.

+1

[Anonymous]

Op, if you are real, listen. Please listen.

A mom carries her baby for most of his first year. Then she lets him walk a little, fall down, toddle, get up, fall down, get stronger, walk more. By 2 he walks on his own and she just picks him up occasionally when he wants comfort or gets tired. Then as he gets older, she may pick him up and carry him when he gets really, really tired..like when he's 5 and gets tired after a day at the amusement park. But she doesn't carry him all day every day for the rest of his life.

But imagine another mom who can't stand to see her son hurt by toddling and falling. So she carries him in a sling through his first year, his second year. She switches him to a backpack his third year. And now walking is really hard, plus kind of embarrassing because he never really learned. And now his muscles have atrophied and he knows he's bad at walking and he really hates to try because it's hard and he falls down and he wants to just be taken everywhere. He's starting elementary school and the mom can't stay with him and carry him everywhere. What should she do now? Homeschool him? Get him a wheelchair?

That's an analogy for where you are now. You have crippled your son by carrying him all these years. And how he expects you to carry him forever. He had the capability to support himself, but you have seriously stunted his growth. And he doesn't want to learn now.

You have two choices. Support him forever, set up a trust for him for after your death that can support him and his wife through his 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, and 80's, or....stop carrying him. Stop hurting him.

He still has the capability if you will stop stunting his growth. And it's not like you're leaving him destitute -- you have bought him a condo and he has 40 GRAND A YEAR of spending money from his grandfather. I could easily support myself on $40K if I didn't have housing costs! (wtf?!?)

[Anonymous]

Op
What do you think will happen if you stop giving #2 money to live on (besides the $40k)?
I'm not being snarky, I am curious what you think would happen.
They live in the condo in DC, so no mortgage.
Can you tell us some scenarios you can think of for what would happen?

[Anonymous]

It sounds like DIL married #2 for money.

But at the same time OP says they get along well and with 2 children she may have matured and her perspective may have changed.

Do you actually know whether the #2s see you as just an ATM/babysitting service? Just because you assume it to be true, doesn't mean it is.

[Anonymous]

OP, Continue your generosity with your grandkids, buy #2 the condo in DC but make it very clear that you will not be able to help them financially in any other way and stick to it.

[Anonymous]

OP, have you yet bought the condos you were planning to buy in DC?

If it isn't too late: DON'T MOVE INTO THE SAME BUILDING!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again: Especially because we don't want to "cut off" #2 - we love the time we spend together. We just feel that we can't completely substain their lifestyle.

The condos in DC are in the same building. Our own children grew up down the street from their paternal grandparents and it was wonderful.

You seem to be confusing cutting him off financially with cutting him off emotionally. You can do the first without the second, or are you worried that he won't want to spend time with you (and allow you access to the grandkids) if you stop subsidizing his lifestyle?

+1

If spending time with #2 is dependent on continuing to fund him, then the connection is tenuous in any case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We're pretty close to retirement (66 and 61), but will probably continue to work part-time for another 5 years. We lived in the Bay Area and sold our house for about $5 million - we did really well on it decided that it just made no sense to stay there and we could do far better elsewhere. A few business ventures we were hoping to finance retirement fell through (we did very well for about 20 years, but the last 20 have been very difficult). Plus, we're worried about our younger son (#2) and his wife and children.

We've decided to buy two condos in DC, one for us and one for our younger son and his family. We have an older son (#1) and daughter-in-law who live and work in DC. So the family will again be reunited.

#2 had a condo in San Francisco that we bought for him and have decided to keep for the family, so we can at least spend some time in California. Plus it could be a revenue generator when we're not there.

We really wanted #2 to make something of himself but he hasn't really worked. Didn't do very well in college. He did very well on the LSAT though, so he could get into maybe a tier 2 law school. But he didn't want to be a lawyer and never applied. We tried to employ him directly in our business but then that fell through. Before our first grandchild was born, we insisted that it was time for him to work and not being picky about it. But that never happened. Our daughter-in-law, who came from a lower middle class background, thinks we have way more money than we actually do. She generally gets a sales job every now and then to amuse herself, but then gets bored and quits in a few months. So we are afraid none of them will ever have a real job. Now they have 2 chlldren.

However it is wrong to deprive our GRANDCHILDREN of a good life. They should not be held responsible for their parents', well, f*ing up.

And in spite of our issues with them, nothing makes us happier than spending time with them and our grandchildren.

So there's nothing we can do. Even with the trust fun set up for our children by the grandparents (about 40K a year for each child), #2 and daughter-in-law can't manage their finances. I can't count how many times we've had to bail them out over the past decade. What can we do? We have to support them. And 40K is not enough for a family with 2 children. And since they're in their 30s now, with no to minimal work experience, we don't think they can get jobs now.

So we're selling our house and downsizing. The good news is we can afford some condos in DC, a vacation home somewhere for the whole extended family (maybe in New England or upstate New York) and to keep the condo in San Francisco and the time-share in Colorado (we're avid skiers), and still have $$$ left over: this is probably about $2 million in real estate (we can also get rental income). We're going to have to leave as much money aside as we can but we want to have some enjoyment in our golden years as well.

Good to hear you raised some real shitbag children. How do you feel? Why do you feel your children are such losers and what could have you done differently?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: They don't have jobs because they've never had to get jobs and that's on you.

Yep. God and G0d bless DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We're pretty close to retirement (66 and 61), but will probably continue to work part-time for another 5 years. We lived in the Bay Area and sold our house for about $5 million - we did really well on it decided that it just made no sense to stay there and we could do far better elsewhere. A few business ventures we were hoping to finance retirement fell through (we did very well for about 20 years, but the last 20 have been very difficult). Plus, we're worried about our younger son (#2) and his wife and children.

We've decided to buy two condos in DC, one for us and one for our younger son and his family. We have an older son (#1) and daughter-in-law who live and work in DC. So the family will again be reunited.

#2 had a condo in San Francisco that we bought for him and have decided to keep for the family, so we can at least spend some time in California. Plus it could be a revenue generator when we're not there.

We really wanted #2 to make something of himself but he hasn't really worked. Didn't do very well in college. He did very well on the LSAT though, so he could get into maybe a tier 2 law school. But he didn't want to be a lawyer and never applied. We tried to employ him directly in our business but then that fell through. Before our first grandchild was born, we insisted that it was time for him to work and not being picky about it. But that never happened. Our daughter-in-law, who came from a lower middle class background, thinks we have way more money than we actually do. She generally gets a sales job every now and then to amuse herself, but then gets bored and quits in a few months. So we are afraid none of them will ever have a real job. Now they have 2 chlldren.

However it is wrong to deprive our GRANDCHILDREN of a good life. They should not be held responsible for their parents', well, f*ing up.

And in spite of our issues with them, nothing makes us happier than spending time with them and our grandchildren.

So there's nothing we can do. Even with the trust fun set up for our children by the grandparents (about 40K a year for each child), #2 and daughter-in-law can't manage their finances. I can't count how many times we've had to bail them out over the past decade. What can we do? We have to support them. And 40K is not enough for a family with 2 children. And since they're in their 30s now, with no to minimal work experience, we don't think they can get jobs now.

So we're selling our house and downsizing. The good news is we can afford some condos in DC, a vacation home somewhere for the whole extended family (maybe in New England or upstate New York) and to keep the condo in San Francisco and the time-share in Colorado (we're avid skiers), and still have $$$ left over: this is probably about $2 million in real estate (we can also get rental income). We're going to have to leave as much money aside as we can but we want to have some enjoyment in our golden years as well.

No. No, you don't.

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately you have enabled 2 adults to such an extent that they are now in their 30's with no work experience. Please stop before they are in their 40's with no experience, or worse, in their 50's or 60's.

What kind of example are they setting for your grandchildren?

I don't understand parents who do this.