to ask if teenagers are a lot more expensive than children?

[burgatroyd]

Yesterday I asked advice on how to stop my rather irrational broody feelings. Money is a large factor for me not considering a third as I hear teenagers are a LOT more expensive than young children. So though I could possibly afford more kids now would worry I'd find it tough when they are older.

Those with teenagers or older kids, do you find it a lot more expensive?

My DD is only 10 and have already noticed her getting more expensive over the last year or so.

She's tall with big feet so clothes and shoes are not as reasonable as they might be. Then there's extra curricular stuff, birthdays & Christmas getting more expensive & eye care - she is very shortsighted for her age so we have to get lenses thinned or they look awful, and optician has just recommended contact lenses.

She's also hit puberty early so decent deodorant, skin care bits, sanpro etc all adding up, not to mention increase in appetite - she's basically a teen in a 10yo's body...which is fun .

Love her dearly but very glad we've only got the one Tbh.

Some teenagers are going to get a massive shock when they hit their twenties and suddenly have to maintain the lifestyle they've become accustomed to out of entry level pay packets

Good point, you constantly see on Mumsnet threads about relationship problems due to budgeting differences - that is why I want my DS to understand that he has to save for 'big ticket' items; he can't have designer clothes 'just because everyone else has them' etc etc.

And what on earth is wrong with a 'practical' present for birthday or Christmas - my DS's only interest is sports so why would we not give him a sports related gift - and no, of course we wouldn't buy him an ipad or similar .

Anyway, all this thread shows is that different families have different approaches to spending/saving - I am pround that my teen has been able to save quite a bit from birth and already talks about his 'university fund' .

zukiecat - nice to 'see' you again .

Rag, yes it is an interesting issue. In our case as the girls went to law school they earn quite a bit - the oldest just over £100k and she's just married so they have two incomes and she is very very careful with money so I think she'll be okay. We had a deal that when she went to university I would sell her horse etc. My older 3 know they are very very lucky I chose a lucrative career and never went part time which has meant they have no student debt. They also know I save used matches and we don't waste money at home so I hope they have my parents' WWII rationing mentality.

I certainly made sure they all know the consequences financially of picking different careers. Too many women graduate and pick something low paid and then give it up by the time they are 30 and never work other than as a school dinner lady etc again. Or they pursue a career as an artist or actress and fail like most do. However all the older 3 read degrees of subjects of their choice and it was the girls' choice to go into law after. I always explain happiness is about seratonin levels on the brain and being outside, forestry workers eg have some of the highest happiness levels in the UK is just as much likely to give you a happy life as something high paid. I have never felt I paid school and university fees to buy exam results or force the children into careers they don't want.

All my children saved their presents from family which were money and the 3 oldest either used them all up at university (one of them) or ended up graduating without debt and a good bit of the savings intact - two of them - which I think shows despite my helping them financially they are good with money and savings. I always enjoyed maths, finances, tax, pensions so that was bound to percolate down to the next generation. More women should spend longer studying personal finance, pensions (I own and publish and pensions journal) and tax law than how to paint their nails.

Ragwort a practical present for Christmas / Birthdays is miserable for an adult. I certainly wouldn't appreciate it. DH would never dream of buying me a new washing machine or blender or whatever for Christmas.
Why is a child any different?
Jeez, what's so awful about treating your child now and again and making them happy?

Depends on what the practical present is surely?

If DH presented me with a toaster for my birthday I'd be pissed off, but if he bought me equipment for my hobby I'd be over the moon.

I wouldn't give PE kit, or school books, but stuff for a child's hobby or interests we do. Sometimes it's the only thing we can buy as even she doesn't have a clue what she wants.

The Christmas before last part of DS3's present were lots of ski clothes for the school ski trip. Whats's wrong with practical stuff? One of my favourite gifts ever was when my friends all chipped in and brought me a breadmaker, they were going to get me a voucher for a spa day but my DH knows me well enough to suggest the breadmaker.

I think it's no bad thing to ensure that teens understand how much things cost in relation to income and outgoings.

I bring both mine up to be very economically literate.

However, I don't think one need keep them short to train them for tougher times. By that logic, we wouldn't allow them to live in nice homes for fear they couldn't afford their own in later life.

Well said WordFactory Nobody could argue with that.

I completely agree word
My mum and dad gave me and my brothers and sisters a fabulous time as kids. My mum didn't need to work but chose to and spent all her earnings on us ( mainly lots of great clothes and holidays, social events etc)

I have done exactly the same for my kids. Every spare penny has gone on travel, clothes, hobbies for them. However my DS1 is now a working guy and he has had it drilled into him that you must work hard and pay your way. Both boys know that you have options in life ( although sometimes you can get a raw deal)
We talked to them about what they aspire to get out of life and once they established that they then realised they had to find the path to take them their. One DS has chosen work immediately after he finished school and is well on his way with his chosen trade and DS 2 knows his path goes through Uni to get him to his destination.
How many clothes, skiing trips or holidays in Canada I pay for isn't going to stop them on their journey to where they want to end up.

However I think if they expected everything they got as a matter of course and were ungrateful sods my attitude to what they got would have been very different tbh. They simply wouldn't have got the nice stuff.

I expected them from a young age to take part in community activities and support charities. I don't mean hand over a few quid here and there but to go out and physically help. Both boys do this and tbh I think it has made them quite rounded as individuals.
Therefore I don't see the problem with paying for expensive holidays when I can,taking them out for meals or slipping them 20 quid if they are a bit short on week. Why would I?

Still maintain my point - yes probably totally different if you have "free" childcare.

My DD1 is now 9yo. She is pretty expensive in terms of cash flow and I can't see it increasing a lot. She is at state school but does 5 extra-curricular activities which all cost a fee plus the associated equipment. She is just coming out of the "party of a friend every other weekend stage" which requires a present to be bought - thank god! But her clothes cost a fair amount, she eats quite a lot and has an adult meal when we go out. She also has pocket money as well as lots of top ups for going out to cinema, to the corner shop for sweets with friends, admission to activities at weekends, all the school donation for this here, there, etc. So while I will end up giving her more money as she gets into teenage years I anticipate she will cut the formal extra-curriculr activities to 1 or 2.

I still maintain she is cheaper than my DD3 who is 14 months and I stay at home full time to look after her, pay for nappies, she's constantly growing and needing new clothes, she does activities (swimming, baby gym) and playgroups, plus soft play etc now and then.

DS is probably the cheapest at age 6 but he's not significantly cheaper than DD1!

University is a whole different story! At the moment we don't have significant savings for that stage and I anticipate working full time then and my earnings will be used to pay for each of our children at a time (big age gaps so none there at the same time in theory!) I am lucky that my career prospects won't be significantly impacted by taking a few years out so can still earn a reasonable amount in the future.

hi xenia!

I think we all have a different view on 'practical' presents - personally I like practical presents - I have no wish for clothes/jewellery/handbags/spa vouchers or any such things like that - actually my DH and I don't exchange gifts at all - if we want something particular we buy it ....... I am an adult and don't want/need a fancy gift wrapped present .

My DS loves sports, he plays different sports and loves all the equipment - so it makes sense to buy it for him for a Christmas or birthday present ......... and if it is beyond an 'agreed' budget then he makes a contribution towards it.

The initial point about this thread was whether teenagers were 'more expensive' than younger children - I understand everyone's family & spending habits are different but in our family the younger years were more expensive - not massively so, but I don't find having a teenager particularly expensive in comparison.

ssd - well spotted

Greengrow

I think your 5 is it/ children have had a very privileged upbringing, do you really think they know how those with far less manage?
Do you know this? I suppose it must be difficult if you are used to such wealth to imagine what it is like to not have it.
Maybe rationing as in war times may prove to be fun when you have a few million tucked away.

or a private island

I don't have an island - I sold it at Easter to pay off some of the divorce debt. I have never changed user names unless required to do so. I don't think I'm every hard to spot as I am very special,.... laughing as I type.

The issue is the same for all middle class people - how do you ensure your children know how hard times were. My generation heard our parents talking about WWII rationing. Our parents would save bits of soap to make into a full soap. I keep spent matches to save money and was chatting to the children about that yesterday.
I don't have any savings so I'm not sure if a mortgage house is wealth if you are going to live in it until you die but I certainly have been very lucky to be able to help the children at university but that luck was created by working full time for 30 years without maternity leaves - not a choice all women make and researching earnings in various careers in my teens, again something some women don't bother with.

I certainly don't dispute I have a high income. It will be nice when I don't have to pay their father or pay school fees to have some spare to save and I hope that day will come and of course I could sell the chidlren's home, repay the mortgage and move us into a small flat and then there would be some money. It is not really fair to suggest I have millions stashed away when I have no savings at all and a mortgage.

that luck was created by working full time for 30 years without maternity leaves

The luck isnt only created by hard work but also by being fortunate to have a skill which pays well. A career as a scientist (rather than a manager of scientists) may well not have paid so well. My DB is pretty near the top in his particular bit of the physics world but has never earned more than me as an accountant.

Yes, but the scientists were as free as teenagers as I was to look up what people earn in different jobs and chose their work accordingly. It is not luck that makes one person choose say to be a nurse and another to be a doctor with the pay differential that exists between those too (other than if the nurse was born with a lower IQ so could not pass the exams needed to be a doctor of course which I accept is luck).

We all make different choices and live with the results. Most mumsnetters would not want to have 5 babies without maternity leaves and always work full time. That was my choice and not surprisingly if you've 30 years of experience you tend to be better at something than if you 've done 5 year sof it. Mind you some peopleare useless at their job even with many many years of practice but that is a different issue. Gladwell found that 10,000 hours of practice at most things tends to make people very good - he found the Beatles did that in Berling in and Bill Gate did 10 000 hours of programming in his teens etc. A recent study found musicians who spend the most hours of practice alone practising themselves (not in groups) are better than music students who do less solitary hard practice.

I think you have to teach your DC how to make their own 'luck'.

In fact, whilst it's good to teach them how not to be profligate it's more important to teach them how to make money.

Alternatively the people who have a natural talent practice more than the people who dont. Statistics work both ways round.

You are fortunate that the thing you are good at and want to spend the time working at has allowed you to earn lots of money.

While I agree that a skill can be practiced I am not such a fool as to think that a study of physics is a skill. I could practice until the end of time but would still not be a competent physicist.

I agree that teenagers need to learn about consequences but also to understand that 30 years doing something they hate just because it earned the money is also a consequence. Success in a career is about more than money.

There is also more than success in a career. There is also success in life: long term caring relationships with a partner and offspring can also be viewed as success.

Spending money on not just the serious things can be about teaching teenagers to be generous with what they have.

I have always believed in 50% nature and 50% nurture in terms of how children turn out with but if you put you 10,000 hours in as a teenager whether that's practising the piano, drawing, studying physics, playing football most people will do very well as most of those things are mostly learned not made. However someone with no hands or feet is not likely to be the next David Beckham or concert pianist so I accept that some accidents of birth matter.

Also luck is often about taking chances. My daughter aged 9 at an airport decided she might win a scratchcard competition. She sure she would win she picked 100 entry coupons off the floor and kept scratching them. She won top prize - a cruise down the Nile. No one else tried to enter so hard. If don['t enter in life you have no chance of success. Plenty of women in effect don't enter life - decide they are not bright enough to become that female surgeon or not set up that busienss because they are sure they will fail. Pessimism and lack of hard work is as much the reason for their failure as any lack of luck.

This does not just apply to money. I wanted a large family so I got married aged 21. if you marry at 38 you are not likely to get 5 children. I want to be fit when I'm older so I eat well and don't smoke. This is wonderful that women can forge their own destiny - it gives them so much opportunity and chance and if they just change the mindset from mediocrity and failure and put in those 10,000 hours of effort the wold is their oyster. This something to celebrate and push forward and achieve.

Greengrow

I certainly won't argue with your last post, and would just like to clarify that my previous post wasn't a judgement at all. I really did want to know how you had managed to keep your dc feet on the ground when they had had a much more privileged life than most others.
I did think you were very rich though
With a dd dedicated to music I heard about the 10,000 hours, she goes on about it all the time and counts down I'm sure it's not that simple. I'm not sure which musician stated this, I don't suppose you know?
It was somebody from the classical world.

Ha, just seen your post about Gladwell, but I seemed to remember it was a foreign musician. Maybe they all got their heads together.

If we put that back into the context if teenagers costing more .... I think it depends what you want from your life and your dcs life.
As a rule of thumb, I want to teach my dcs about the 'simple' pleasure of life. That to be happy you don't always need to spend money ie you can enjoy yourself just as much if not more going out for a walk than going to Alton Towers. That you don't always need the latest gadget and that you have to learn to make choices (on what you buy, what you spend your time on etc). It's not about being a pain and stopping them from having the same things than their friends. It's about teaching them some values that are important to me.
Part of that is learning to be grateful for what you have.
And yes of course looking at how much a career can bring money wise can be a factor later on. But more IMO in that some jobs will always be less financially rewarding and you need to know if you will happy with that. Again IMO it's harder to accept the financials rations of a lower paid job when you've always had everything as a teen. Even if you really love that job.

Btw green it's good to see around. Your ideas can be unsettling but at least they make you think.

IME yes they do. I have 19 y/o dss and 2 little ds's. our ds's do not yet cost us uni expenses, car insurance, decent trainers, and pm ends winter clothes prices and do not eat more than I do. I don't begrudge dss a penny, he is a great son and we are proud of him, but yes he at the minute a lot more expensive than our 2 ds's together.