Son, DIL, money (mine)

[OhdratNC]

I think I might just need to suck this up but would appreciate advice.
DS was made redundant from nightmare corporate job a year ago and is now self-employed so a big drop in income but also a big drop in stress levels. Two DCs aged 11 & 7. DIL is devoted to DCs, has never had a job and doesn't want to work. I'm retired but have a good pension & some savings. I offered to subsidise the household while DS builds up his business but also asked if DIL might get a P/T job so that she could contribute to the shortfall. Suggestion didn't go down well (their relationship isn't great). Some occasional small contributions have been forthcoming but essentially I am transferring 50% of my income each month. I can manage this but it means that I either delay work needed on my house or use my savings. DS is anxious about it too but doesn't know how to get DIL to see that this is unfair. She finds change distressing and tends to be very stubborn and self-centred when she feels cornered, as she probably does in this situation.

Only on MN could a woman sit on her arse, having had a meal ticket for at least 11 years and it be her husband's fault

If they have agreed between them that she would be corporate wife whilst he is corporate earner then its an equal choice for both of them and one made in many corporate marriages. The corporate earner isn't the home based partner's "meal ticket" any more than the home based earner is the other's "cleaner and childminder".

OP implies son's job was very high flying corporate - to maintain that with a family you either need a corporate spouse or one hell of a lot of external paid-for help.

They should make sure they are claiming everything, put mortgage on interest only and extend the term, get money advice and cut expenses

I see a huge difference between giving a child capital to allow them to do something valuable for them and continuously giving them money to top up their income.

In one situation, you are helping them by investing in something that will make a significant difference to their future (house, business, etc).

In the other, you are enabling them to live beyond their means.

If it was the man who was the SAHD who had children of school age who didn’t do any housework and was being subsidised by his MIL while refusing to work he would be called a massive cocklodger. I can’t beleive there are people defending the DIL. Unbelievable.

Only skimmed the thread.

Sounds like they are both taking the piss tbh.

We don't know exactly what career ds or dil may have had. They may both be capable of corporate careers. I know many families where both parents have demanding corporate careers. They just need childcare in that case.

@caffeine

Yes, but circumstances change. There is no longer a corporate income and the DIL therefore needs to step up and help provide for herself and her children.

What the hell is a ' corporate wife.?' ( Visions of a seventies Stepford wife floating around topping up all the men's drinks. ) Is it different because they are posher for some reason?

How has she managed to never work in her entire life?

Reduce the amount you pay to 25 percent. Can't believe you are paying so much frankly. If he can't manage he needs to get another job.

@Nenic

Wholeheartedly agree.

I agree with Rosa. You are undermining their marriage by setting conditions about her getting a job.

Of course DILs don't take it well when an MIL implies that they are not sufficiently contributing to their family. They are a family and you should dealt with them as a unit rather than put the blame for their financial position on either and attempting to divide them.

If you want to give them money, give them money. If you don't because you think they can't be that badly off if they can afford for one of them not to work, don't.

I'm sure you are not trying to interfere. Your son is to blame for coming to his mum for a solution to their financial problems rather than speaking to his wife about it like adults should.

OP implies son's job was very high flying corporate - to maintain that with a family you either need a corporate spouse or one hell of a lot of external paid-for help

Nonsense. Myself and my husband are corporate. You just need wrap around care and holiday cover. Just like any other working couple

Why do people think the op's son's business is failing? He's only been doing it for a year, it can take longer than that. When my husband first went into business it took at least two years to make any money but it paid off in the end. It's quite brave to go into business after having a secure, well paid job - he didn't choose to be made redundant but as it happened, he took the opportunity to try self employment.

Another year and the business may be flourishing.

Also suggestions that the DIL trains as a teaching assistant are quite ridiculous. We don't know her, she may have absolutely no talent at all for teaching, it is a vocational job. Being stuck for hours at a time in a school, responsible for thirty children, is not everyone's idea of bliss. I wouldn't do it, would rather work in a launderette!

The OP certainly doesn't hate her daughter in law, she is helping her and her son. She just has misgivings about the woman being a stay at home mother when more income is needed.

I'd like to know why the daughter in law doesn't want to work: being out of the work force for so long could make the prospect of a job quite intimidating. She's probably scared and feels she can't do anything! For those of us who always worked, even with kids, it seems odd but not everyone has a lot of confidence.

OP, reduce your financial input because 50% of your income is too much, but I support you in helping your family financially as much as you can and would do the same. If the business takes off you will be rewarded in time.

Your son is to blame for coming to his mum for a solution to their financial problems rather than speaking to his wife about it like adults should.

If you'd never got involved a year down the line they would be divorcing or sorted. You've just prolonged it and lost a wedge of money.

Agree with Bluntness. Both DH and are have full-time careers (involving international travel). We live overseas and have no family help, yet we still manage a baby and a toddler perfectly well, without an army of external help.

@Nenic, my point entirely.

Yes, but circumstances change. There is no longer a corporate income and the DIL therefore needs to step up and help provide for herself and her children.

Yes but the DS was going to get another corporate job with a steady income until his DM stuck her beak in. No one asked OP for money, she OFFERED to subsidize her DS whilst he got his business off the ground & now she’s changed her mind & instead of owning it, she’s making it all her DIL’s fault. For all we know, her DIL might not have been happy about any of this because OP’s posts read like she & her son agreed this amongst themselves.

If it wasn’t for OP’s offer, her DS would have got another job & would no doubt have healthy savings as he wouldn’t have spent his redundancy money on retraining & start up costs.

I can see why the DIL is probably angry.

@Tinkety

No, the OP states in her opening post "I offered to subsidise the household while DS builds up his business but also asked if DIL might get a P/T job so that she could contribute to the shortfall"

If all 3 weren't in agreement why enter into any arrangement?

It sounds like the DIL had no intention of getting a P/T job, which was a condition of the OP offering to help. Now a year has gone by and the OP is coming to realise that she's helping to keep a grown women who simply refuses to behave like an adult and supportive herself.

Although the OP's offer was made because she wanted to help, I think it's backfired and demonstrated two things - the law of unintended consequences and the saying that 'no good deed goes unpunished'.

This situation isn't all the DiL's fault, or all the son's fault or all the OP's fault, everyone has played a part. Now it's going to take some careful unpicking, because the OP can't just turn off the tap.

The phased withdrawal seems the best bet, but it's not going to be easy or palatable.

Where does it say that the son was going to get another corporate job Tinkety?

DO NOT MSKE THis ABOUT YOUR DIL.

Stop giving money, with notice, as ageeed.
Do NOT say anything g to your Ds or especially his DW about getting a job.

This is not your business. However much you (and we) have views about her role in the family team, if you say so you risk making their marriage even more difficult.

Just tell your DS you have done a year of support and now need to turn your attention to work in your house.

Does the dil know you are giving this amount of cash every month? Just wondered if your ds had even told her?

Phased withdrawal is less useful than notice, I think. OP needs to flag the fact that she can’t continue to bankroll them, and leave DS and DIL to sort out between them whether he will look for a corporate job or DIL will find employment or both. If he gets another job she doesn’t need to phase the withdrawal, just to cease.

It’s all very well to say that the business might only need another year to get off the ground, as a poster did. Maybe, but it could be another few years. Most couples in that scenario wouldn’t be looking to Bank of Mum, but sorting it between themselves. If they want to prioritise his business as a couple then he needs a business loan and DIL needs to get a job.

Not wanting to post and disappear but I have enough helpful suggestions now and am off to act on some of them. Thanks for all your insights.