To ask DS to contribute 'rent'?

[herladyship]

DS is 18.

He works 28 hours a week at a gym, and is a retained firefighter.

He pays his own phonebill & car insurance/petrol, but this still leaves him with around £600 disposable income every month. We've talked about him contributing to household, and he agreed (we didn't specify a figure!) but I've been talking to friends with teens & popular opinion seems to be against me! Most people have commented it is 'old fashioned' or that it's mean if we don't 'need' the money..

DH has suggested we set an amount & then put it away for DS to have in future, but if we are doing that, maybe it would it be better to just encourage him to manage his own saving?

What does the MN jury think?
(ps: would prefer not to be flamed, as this is first ever AIBU )

mackerella - perhaps it is a fair return for not having had to stay at home under the parental eye!

I stayed in my college town after graduation rather than go back to live with my parents.

the line " I did not have child to make money out of them" is largely irrelavant it is not making money out of them but no longer subsiding them once earning and them paying for the things they use like heat light laundry food

I think mackerella has a point if you subsidise one child and not another and then give them the rent money as a deposit while not giving at least equivalent deposit to child B who always lived away from home it is unfair

if OP only had £25 disposable income a week, why would it be so wrong to charge a son that had £150 a week

I think OP's income is largely irrelevant

mackerella - I'm not sure that it does create a disparity. All it meant for my DB was that he could spend all the money he saved on a succession of rust-bucket cars which he ran into the ground or wrote off (record was buying a car on a Friday and writing it off on Saturday!).

We had to pay rent as soon as we worked from about 14. I particularly hates it when older as none of my mates did and found saving for holidays etc so much quicker. I wouldn't expect ds to pay but would expect a bit of contribution to food and maybe the odd meal out/treat.

In my first fulltime job post-uni I worked with several people who had lived at home with their parents and were continuing to do so post-graduation.

I was living crammed into a dingy flatshare to save money, enjoying my independence and fully understanding the concept of budgeting my meagre wages to cover bills, food, going out, and saving for things like a holiday.

The people living at home constantly moaned about their parents but said that they could never afford to leave home on the wages they were paid in the job. On questionning, this was because they expected to run a car, go out whenever they wanted, go on holiday and move out into either a flat rented on their own or a purchased property .

None of them paid digs and I really don't think their parents were doing them any favours.

Who in adult real life actually has every penny they earn, or even half of what they earn, to spend on themselves? I think it's a really bad habit to get your children into.

I know of one couple in their 70s who are worried about moving to a park home because it will leave their son in their late 40s homeless. He has never moved out but spends all his money on his social life on cars. Another lady moving into a home and her house could not be sold because son refused to move out of his free accommodation in his 40s! His sister who had moved out had to fork out on home costs. It is worrying this trend. Perhaps the answer is to take the money and make life less comfortable - like the advert when the couple paint the son's room yellow. As your dh said maybe take it and give it towards a deposit for his own place when he has found somewhere.

Who in adult real life actually has every penny they earn, or even half of what they earn, to spend on themselves? I think it's a really bad habit to get your children into.
This. Very well said.

Yes, I agree-that´s why something should be taken away-even if it´s with the intention of refunding it.

We all want to do what we can for our children, but isn´t part of that to teach them how to handle money & be responsible & independent?

mackerella I think you made a really valid point re the savings. My mum and dad have always been very careful about seeming to be fair to me and DB as I know their parents had very obvious favourites, in particular my mum's mum who spent all her money on my mum's older sister and brother then told the younger ones that because the older ones did stuff that my mum couldn't go to ballet like her sister etc.

When my mum saved towards me buying a house and my wedding she gave my brother exactly the same (he lived at home a few years longer than I did), same with drving lessons, cars etc.

Me and DH earn a lot more than DB and SIL but if mum and dad help them out they always try to buy us something or give us the equivalent which of course now I don't think is necessary but they feel it is only right.

I think having an 18-24 year old at home is quite different than people who are still living at home in their 30's and 40's when I think a proper rent payment should definitely be made!

but I've been wondering if those of you who save your DCs' contributions to give back to them later as a house deposit would give an equivalent amount to other DCs who choose not to live at home once they've finished full-time education? It seems a bit unfair if not, especially as the ones living at home are already subsidised to some extent by paying much less than a private rental would cost (and therefore have a much better chance of saving for a deposit). I'm probably bitter and heartless from having chosen to leave home and support myself as soon as I got a job while my brothers stayed at home for free..

But surely that is the child's choice to leave and where the parent is just holding back money for one child that has been handed over by the child.. it isn't the same as having to find money to save? Assuming that the child living at home isn't costing a fortune to keep over normal household costs, because I do they think should at least cover costs.

Personally though I can't imagine as an adult choosing to never contribute.

if the money handed over by adult child is to save then its reasonable however if parents buy food etc for one child and then save the money that was given for food to give it back to them later they are effectively subsidisng one child and not the other

it is very important in money terms to be fair to all siblings

If he's working, eating your food, using your heating etc, he should be paying his way. Even if it's a 'token' amount.

As long as you give the option to all siblings to stay home you have been fair.

My mum said we can live with her rent-free as long as we were in full-time education After that, we had to pay rent. My siblings and I found that fair enough.

it is an interesting debate. I left home at 17 as soon as I was earning so not an issue for me.

DS & DB paid 'rent' but they are both rubbish with money so I don't think it helped them learn to budget

most people here seem to agree he should pay, it's just the how much & whether we save it for him that varies.

I also wonder whether posters with young dc will stick to their plan when the time comes? Many of our friends whose DC don't pay were firmly in the 'they will contribute' camp when DC were younger!

I started paying rent as soon as I left full time education - I think it's totally fair enough!

It's up to you what you do with it - if you wanted, you could put it into a savings account to contribute to a deposit for a house for him (although I wouldn't tell him that's what you were doing, as it may stop him from saving money himself!).

I don't see any reason why people shouldn't start paying/contributing towards their living expenses as soon as they legally become adults - it isn't a case of whether you need the money or not, it's about teaching him to become a responsible adult who learns to manage his money rather than expecting other people to pay for him all his life (sorry - off on one there, experience of how PIL treat DBIL!!!)

Have just read some other responses, and see that the whole 'saving it for a deposit for him' has been the subject of some debate.

Do you have other DC's? I think it's totally right to be fair to all DCs - DH is one of 3, and the disparaty between the treatment that each of them get is really frustrating.

We moved in with PIL when we were renovating our house, and paid a weekly contribution for food etc. His older DB and DF are living with them now temporarily until they find a house to buy and don't make any contributions. Younger DB still lives at home but is renovating a house (which PIL have 'helped' him with financially), and doesn't have to pay anything. To me, that isn't fair at all.

I paid board to my DP's when I was still at home, and didn't get any help towards a deposit or anything (wasn't expecting it at all though) - I wouldn't have been happy if DSis got help for a deposit and I didn't though.

have a DD (12) & definitely want to be fair & treat them equally.

My parents said that they would not take "board" of us, but we had to put away a decent amount.. (£200) away every month in a saving account with a bank book. This would be a deposit for a house/ furniture etc.
I in a huff moved in with friends, stupid 16 year old....

I wish I'd done this as if I hadebt been fortunate enough to have a lovely dh who had done this we would now be stuck in rented.