Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To expect a 20 year old to pay towards the holiday?

381 replies

MrsRGervais · 19/03/2014 16:49

Dh and I are looking at a holiday abroad next year. It will cost a fortune as the holiday is to incorporate 4 adults and 2 children. The adults are his ds's aged 18 and 20. Now the 18 year old has special needs so can't really earn money so fair enough but Aibu to expect the 20 year old to put something towards the cost?? I really begrudge paying plane and accommodation costs for him when he's an adult and we're struggling to afford it. He's unlikely to take any spending money either as every time we've taken them somewhere he's not brought a penny with him (yet is bragging on Facebook about spending over £100 on lord of the rings memorabilia!)
DH will do doubt hit the roof at the suggestion of not paying 100% of the cost of his eldest but Aibu to suggest that he contributes? I'd certainly ask for a contribution from my own son once he was 18.

OP posts:
RufusTheReindeer · 21/03/2014 08:54

In my group of friends 14 years ago it was very unusual to go on holiday with parents who were paying for the bulk of it

I'm sure if you go back another 10 years it was even more uncommon in 'normal' (not minted) families

I am well aware that we were only invited once we had their grandchildren, for two reasons first being that they knew money was tighter and secondly they wanted to be with their grandchildren

Bowlersarm · 21/03/2014 08:56

Precisely whatever5. Well put.

lainiekazan · 21/03/2014 09:32

Yesterday I made the point (grrr,ignored as usual!) that one of the stepsons has SN. Therefore the presence of the 20-year-old may be crucial to the success of the holiday. If so I can understand why the dh is keen for him to come and pay for him, no matter how stretching that is to the budget.

Also the holiday is planned for next year so the boy may well have a job then and have other plans.

cory · 21/03/2014 09:34

The point here seems to be that the OP's husband wants his son to come on this holiday. He wants it enough to want to make financial sacrifices.

That doesn't mean he necessarily gets what he wants. Any financial sacrifice will necessarily involve the OP, so she has a say too.

Otoh it certainly doesn't mean that his son is under any obligation to find the money so that his dad can get what he wants. Let alone that the son would actually be able to find this money.

The problem arises if the OP and her husband expect the son to behave like an adult when it comes to paying his way but like a child when it comes to joining them in their ideas for a holiday.

My mother paid for my massive white wedding. Yes, it looked infantilising. Otoh she was the one who really cared about this big party and planned it all (including the colour worn by the bridesmaids). She wanted to decide, she got to pay. The alternative would have been a wedding paid for by dh and me- and planned to our standards. If we had paid, control would have been in our hands. And yes, it was a good party, we did enjoy it, we still look back on it with pleasure, it was a great day. But we didn't need it, the way she did. And the same possibly goes for the OP's ds: he may well enjoy this holiday, but possibly doesn't need it in the same way that his dad needs his presence on it.

cory · 21/03/2014 09:34

sorry, OP's sds

Bonsoir · 21/03/2014 09:38

In my world, parents pay for family life and when parents take decisions, parents pay. Anything else would be gross exploitation.

missinglalaland · 21/03/2014 09:52

Whatever5 I think there is some truth in the privileged argument.

Generally speaking, the more affluent a family, the longer the children are cosseted and treated as children. This makes sense if you can afford it. We now know that a human brain isn't fully developed until about 25 years old; we live in a society where the training/education needed for a "good job" or "career" takes a person well past 18 years old. If you can keep your fledglings "in the nest" a little longer, under your guidance and protection to get them as strong and ready for the world as possible.

I know that I wouldn't have 7 years of tertiary education and wouldn't have become a high earner without my dad's support in my late teens and early 20s. He made up any difference in uni costs that scholarships didn't cover; when I got my first professional job in another city he gave me first and last months rent and money to buy three suits and a formal coat. He bought me a sensible used car. From his point of view, it made sense. He was a high earner, could afford it and was committed to helping me become a successful adult. He was deeply invested in my and my sisters both emotionally and financially. And yes, he paid for a few holidays while I was at uni.

Contrast this with other kids at my comprehensive who worked 20 hours a week while in high school to help kick money into their families' budgets. I am sure their parents loved them as much, but the financial realities were very different. They simply didn't have the luxury of extending adolescence for their dc. They needed their dc to shoulder adult burdens asap.

Now, I just don't know enough about the OP to say what's going on here. She might be skint and in a situation where the family doesn't have much to give to the kids beyond the basics. (Then I wonder I why they have chosen this holiday. Cut your clothe to suit your purse, etc.) She might resent paying for a child from the first marriage, and have a stone for a heart. Most probably, she is frustrated with DSS1's behaviour, feels she has little control or say over it, and as a result just doesn't want to deal with him anymore, has been counting the days till he is "an adult," and wants to be done with it already.

If the latter is the case, she has a tough row to hoe. DSS1 is her husband's much loved child. He is going to see it differently; if he feels about his dc the way that I do about mine, he will never give up. Anyone pitting themselves against me loving my children would lose. I would grow to resent and distrust them deeply.

cory · 21/03/2014 09:54

Bonsoir put it much more succinctly than me.

missinglalaland · 21/03/2014 09:55

Sorry for the typos.

lottie82 · 21/03/2014 10:18

as someone else has said, if it was your child, would you expect him to contribute? I'm guessing, no.

when I was in my late teens / early twenties and got invited away by my dad with my step mum and step brother, they always paid.

if you / your DH invited him, then no he shouldn't be paying.

brdgrl · 21/03/2014 10:42

as someone else has said, if it was your child, would you expect him to contribute? I'm guessing, no.
and yet, a number of people on this thread have said yes, they would. Or that as the offspring, they expected to/did pay.
As always, there are people who think that adult children should continue to be treated as children. As always, there are people who believe so strongly in this idea, that they cannot countenance that other people actually believe otherwise.
I don't mind if you want to continue to support your children into their old age, whether they need it or not. I do mind this insistence that somehow that is a morally superior position.

If it was my child, would I expect him to contribute?
If it was my child, I wouldn't invite him.

LtEveDallas · 21/03/2014 10:56

as someone else has said, if it was your child, would you expect him to contribute? I'm guessing, no

In my family (5 kids) we all did from the age of 17 onwards. My brothers kids and my sisters kids all did the same, and now have their own holidays with their own friends. DNephew and DNeice joined DSis and BIL coming to see us when we lived overseas, but both paid their own airfare.

DSD knew she would have to, she used the money we gave her on her 18th towards the deposit of her first 'girls' holiday this June. Her mum didn't take her on holiday after she was 16 (we did).

DD will be expected to do the same.

It's all part and parcel of teaching our children to be self sufficient and good with their money.

MaidOfStars · 21/03/2014 11:52

I do mind this insistence that somehow that is a morally superior position

It's in perfect counterbalance to the premise that the opposite is the morally-superior position Wink

Yours,
An infantilised grown up with no self-respect and no capability with money.

ormirian · 21/03/2014 12:24

Agree with bonsoir (may be the first time I've ever said that!)

It looks quite simple to me:

  1. Partner wants son to go on hols with him.
  2. Son has no money so can't afford to pay.

The outcome has to be that either dad pays or the son doesn't go. What other alternative is there?

whatever5 · 21/03/2014 12:24

I do mind this insistence that somehow that is a morally superior position.

I don't think that people who have said that they would pay for their 20 year old to join them on a family holiday have implied that it is a morally superior position. If anything it's the other way around. Although it's not unreasonable to not want to invite/pay for a 20 year old on a family holiday, to suggest that you are doing it for their benefit rather than your own is very disingenuous.

Caitlin17 · 21/03/2014 12:25

Cory and Bonsoir both excellent posts.

Maidofstars unless the 20 year old was begging pleading and whining to be taken on this holiday your comments are wrong. What is infantilised about doing something to please your father (which for all we know he may well rather not do, particularly as it involves his step- mother who doesn't seem that keen on him)

winklewoman · 21/03/2014 12:30

missinglalaland, what an excellent, thoughtful post.

missinglalaland · 21/03/2014 12:33

winklewoman BlushThanks

Impatientismymiddlename · 21/03/2014 12:38

Missinglalaland has made some very good points about privilege especially as the OP stated that they were squeezed for money.

Impatientismymiddlename · 21/03/2014 12:40

The OP talked about asking the step son for a CONTRIBUTION towards his share of the cost, she didn't say that she expected him to pay the full cost.

floppyfanjo · 21/03/2014 12:40

I wouldn't pay for an adult child (over the age of 18) to go on a family holiday UNLESS they were skint through no fault of their own and hadn't had a holiday for years.

I paid for DS aged 27 and DGD to come join us on holiday in spain last year because he'd been unemployed after being made redundant and due to low wages,maintenance etc hadn't had a holiday for years and due to being skint he hadn't been able to do anything "fun" with his DD (except go to the park) They had a great week enjoying the pool and the sunshine BBQ's etc BUT I wouldn't have paid if the circumstances hadn't been as the above .

MaidOfStars · 21/03/2014 13:15

Caitlin17 I also agree with Bonsoir so suspect something has been lost in translation along the way....

Caitlin17 · 21/03/2014 13:23

Sorry Maid read your post again the " infantilised " comment wasn't yours.

Sorry.

OddFodd · 21/03/2014 13:28

I don't think either position is morally superior. And neither do I think there's a causal link between subbing someone's holiday and a lack of independence/growing up. I think there are far more efficient ways of infantilising adult children than paying for them to go on a holiday they couldn't otherwise afford!

Impatient - the OP said she begrudges paying plane and accommodation costs for him. That sounds pretty much like she's expecting him to cover most of the cost.

The OP is long gone so this is probably an academic discussion but it's interesting to hear the very different POVs

MaidOfStars · 21/03/2014 13:43

Caitlin Entirely possible that the loss in translation was on my part as well. I'm losing track of who thinks what Smile

I'm pretty much on the side of "family invite you on holiday = family pay" (at least for the biggies, accommodation etc). At 37 years old, my parents still do this. If we invite them to go away with us, we pay.

Swipe left for the next trending thread