Anonymous wrote:My DD is at a private college and my DS will be attending an in-state public.

If he also was attending a private we would had have to stop funding our retirement for the duration of his education, but now we don’t

If any of you are/were in a similar position, how did you feel about the “fairness”? Did you even address it? fwiw DD is taking $3500 subsidized loans annually and DS doesn’t have to take out any loans, which he will know.

Same here. We are spending $80K/yr for DC1 and will likely be spending half that for DC2. Plan is to 'earmark' about half the savings (about $100K) for DC2, could be a separate investment account with him as beneficiary, leftover money in a 529 account, car during college, or a combination of all of that. Do what makes sense to YOU.

My brother and I were in undergrad in late 90s to early '00s, but my mom bought me a car.

I have three kids (one in college OOS). My initial thought is - it's paid for college, wherever they go. Thats it. I believe in this. On the other hand, if my next kid goes in state, I can see getting him a car or something to travel back and forth as the cost will be 1/2. But a lot of this has to do with the kid. My oldest will likely be incredibly wealthy and I think my second is a little less clear as to his path- so I do think I could rationalize giving him some him extras if he goes to a cheaper school. But in general, I never tried to spend the same on my kids- one needed braces, the other didnt (I didnt write them a 5K check), some did expensive sports and another didnt - you'd go crazy trying to figure it out.

Anonymous wrote:I had twins and I told both of them at the age of 12 that each of them had 400K in education fund for wherever they chose to study. They get whatever left in that fund after graduation. DD attended Ivy and had $0 left after finishing her master degree while DS attended a state university on a scholarship for both BS and MS in Computer Science. He got 400k to start his new life. DD could have done the same thing but she decided to attend Ivy. FFIW, DS is making three times more than DD. Go figure.

Very similar for our twins. Both have xx college budget - incentive for cheaper option means extra money for them.
It's not down to the penny, but we do try to be fair.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an only, but my husband and siblings had wildly different education costs. Only the youngest went to private HS. All 3 went to private universities, but with varied amounts of merit aid, distance from home, and living expenses. There was no “true up” to make it “fair”. Each child was promised a 4 year degree at a college of their choice and that is what they received.

That is slightly different from my college roommate who was not promised a degree, but instead was given a lump sum of money. She did co-op semesters and worked as an RA for her dorm and later as a TA. She was incentivized to reduce the cost of college because any money left over was hers to keep.

I find that families tend to approach this differently based on their income/financial levels.

The rich/UMC tend to not be concerned "about fairness" because they can afford to and will pay for their kids needs thru graduate school and help them get established afterwards. They are more inclined to send each and every kid to "the best fit for the kid" school, no matter what the cost and don't want their kid to choose a "cheaper school" simply for the price---they want them at the best school for that kid.

The MC/UMC who did not save enough for college are more inclined to say "each kid has $X for college/grad school". it's on you to choose how to spend it. But many will also say, we can pay at most $x for school, but finances are tight so let's try to find the right school at the best price, we don't have to spend $x total

This.

No right answer on this issue as every family have different budget.

Anonymous wrote:My kids know I will pay for their undergrad and grad no matter where they go, and going somewhere cheaper does not net them the cash.

This is my philosophy.
Did he chose the public school over private options? If so then there is no issue here. If you only gave him that option but gave his sister more options then that would be unfair.
I doubt that happened, so if they are both at schools they choose to attend then that is fair and equitable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DD is at a private college and my DS will be attending an in-state public.

If he also was attending a private we would had have to stop funding our retirement for the duration of his education, but now we don’t

If any of you are/were in a similar position, how did you feel about the “fairness”? Did you even address it? fwiw DD is taking $3500 subsidized loans annually and DS doesn’t have to take out any loans, which he will know.

You are providing an education to both for the schools they chose to apply to and were accepted. That's fair.

+1 Did your DD have an in-state option? Did your DS have a private option? That’s fair.

Anonymous wrote:My DD is at a private college and my DS will be attending an in-state public.

If he also was attending a private we would had have to stop funding our retirement for the duration of his education, but now we don’t

If any of you are/were in a similar position, how did you feel about the “fairness”? Did you even address it? fwiw DD is taking $3500 subsidized loans annually and DS doesn’t have to take out any loans, which he will know.

You are providing an education to both for the schools they chose to apply to and were accepted. That's fair.

I see a lot of people talking need over fairness. The issue with this is you cant predict when need pops up or who will need what. I am not happy with the way my parents divided educational expenses. It has definitely led to negative feelings towards them, and compounded mental health issues. I was told in-state (went to the state flagship) or loans, next youngest was told in-state (he went to the most expensive college at the state flagship) or OOS, and the youngest was told wherever (went to a prestigious OOS). My siblings both were able to get jobs right out of college. Where I graduated with a useless major during the financial crisis. When I wanted to add a useful major that would have required an extra semester they said no. I ended up in law school since I couldn't get a job to get the prerequisite experience for an MBA. They paid for a year on instate law school tuition, but I definitely felt trapped by the loans. It took about 5 years for my legal career to sort itself out, with some very bad dark years at first. My parents never offered to step up and help me out financially when I needed the help. But they had money when my siblings wanted to go to college. I was also the only one required to get a job during high school, while my parents funded my brothers spending.

I could see my parents stretched themselves to have a third kid, but never thought to give up the country club for my education. Its also clear they felt like they just had to get us through college, even if it wasn't done equally. Then when they had money and opportunity to correct it, they didnt.

The main takeaway? You may end up stretching yourself for your last child at the expensive of the older children because you dont know who would need what and when. I wish my parents had said here is how much you have for school and if they had money they were going to spend on the younger siblings, they at least tried to make it equal for me in some way.

Anonymous wrote:I’m an only, but my husband and siblings had wildly different education costs. Only the youngest went to private HS. All 3 went to private universities, but with varied amounts of merit aid, distance from home, and living expenses. There was no “true up” to make it “fair”. Each child was promised a 4 year degree at a college of their choice and that is what they received.

That is slightly different from my college roommate who was not promised a degree, but instead was given a lump sum of money. She did co-op semesters and worked as an RA for her dorm and later as a TA. She was incentivized to reduce the cost of college because any money left over was hers to keep.

I find that families tend to approach this differently based on their income/financial levels.

The rich/UMC tend to not be concerned "about fairness" because they can afford to and will pay for their kids needs thru graduate school and help them get established afterwards. They are more inclined to send each and every kid to "the best fit for the kid" school, no matter what the cost and don't want their kid to choose a "cheaper school" simply for the price---they want them at the best school for that kid.

The MC/UMC who did not save enough for college are more inclined to say "each kid has $X for college/grad school". it's on you to choose how to spend it. But many will also say, we can pay at most $x for school, but finances are tight so let's try to find the right school at the best price, we don't have to spend $x total

Some of my kids attended the absolutely most expensive private schools and colleges, others went to public high school and zero-cost colleges. The ones who went to the most expensive schools actually feel like the ones who went zero cost are the parental favorites. Not true, no favorites, but cost of school is really not the business of your children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fair does not mean equal. I have taught my kids this since they were very young. Everyone gets what is right for them.

This is such BS. You are ALL knowing? Of course I would need specifics to be entitled to my outrage. But, generally ... as long as no child is an extreme outliner re: needs, people DO care a lot re: fairness. If you aren't fair, it will forever harm your relationship with them and their relationship with each other.

Welp, being that two of my kids have already graduated from college, and my relationship with them and their relationship with each other is great, I'm not really worried. But you enjoy your outrage. This is why you teach this concept young, and not in 12th grade. When both kids are in school and one needs tutoring and the other doesn't, should I have just ... handed the one who didn't need tutoring cash? To keep things equal? No. Because fair is each kid getting what they need. And they understood that on a much deeper level than apparently you do.

DP who is also a parent to two young adults. At this point you simply have no way of knowing how things will turn out in the future. Among my own friends, the resentments over the paying for college and other parental support bubbled up in their 40s and 50s, not when they were just out of school. For some it happened because the paying differential fit into a pattern (real or perceived) over time. For others, it was triggered by elder care issues when they felt that the more successful sibling had more money invested in them, and should contribute more, or they felt that the parents made a bet by choosing tuition over retirement money, and should deal with the consequences.

Bottom line, don’t be smug, it’s not a good look.

I’m an only, but my husband and siblings had wildly different education costs. Only the youngest went to private HS. All 3 went to private universities, but with varied amounts of merit aid, distance from home, and living expenses. There was no “true up” to make it “fair”. Each child was promised a 4 year degree at a college of their choice and that is what they received.

That is slightly different from my college roommate who was not promised a degree, but instead was given a lump sum of money. She did co-op semesters and worked as an RA for her dorm and later as a TA. She was incentivized to reduce the cost of college because any money left over was hers to keep.

“Fair” is equity BS. Get over it.

We set up a college fund when our kids were born and allocated an identical amount to each child. We always let our kids know that a specific amount was available for tertiary education, and it was up to them how they chose to spend it. There was enough for each one to go full-pay to a good public school for four years, have a decent second-hand car as a student, and go on to graduate or professional school if they used their allotment wisely.

They both attended public universities. The older one got a scholarship and saved enough to go straight on to an MBA. The younger went to a more expensive public school and paid full price. He worked for a couple of years and now wants to do a Ph.D. program. He has used up his allotment from us, but the program should be self-funding. I think it worked out for both of them.