To think DH is wrong to threaten to not speak to DS over university choice

[DPSN]

DS has an offer to study at Cambridge but is considering turning it down to study closer to home at a university with a reputation for his subject which is nowhere near as good as Cambridge's to be near his girlfriend. I think basing a life choice on a current GF is a mistake but he is very stubborn and I cannot force him to go to Cambridge. If she is the love of his life, love will conquer time and distance but if she isn't,I think he will regret turning down Cambridge for her.
I have asked him to weigh up the pros and cons of each option carefully.
DH , on the other hand, has said he will not want to speak to him again if he doesn't go to Cambridge and would want to limit financial support.
I feel I am living in a parallel world with DH thinking he can control DS' s choices with threats and bullying tactics. He says I am too soft for saying ultimately it is DS' s life and choice.
Opinions please.

Again, no-one is calling the girlfriend 'low life' .

People are criticising her for holding him back, that's all. It doesn't matter if it was Cambridge or a great job on an oil rig or the Navy or art college or au pairing in France...we are talking about a great opportunity in life. If she loves and cares about it him she would be packing his bags and telling him I can't wait to visit you in Cambridge!

Maybe she knows he doesn't actually want to go!

If he doesn't want to go, why would he say he doesn't want to go because of his girlfriend.

Surely this 'adult! As every keeps calling him wouldn't use his girlfriend as an excuse

molio we have people defer after a confirmed offer, my niece has recently done this with Oxford.

As others have said it's hard to say you don't want to do something. They want you to give a reason. Perhaps he said his girlfriend as he thought, wrongly it would be an acceptable reason.

I kept saying I didn't want to do the course I did, and I had to give reasons, none which were deemed acceptable. I said I don't enjoy it. Then the question comes back, why, why don't you like it? Try explaining why not. You shouldn't really have to explain sometimes but often people don't take no for an answer.

From my reading of this thread your husband wants to emotionally and financially blackmail your DS because he doesn't agree with his life choices.

This is very unreasonable.

Saying being at Uni is hard, I don't want you to be exhausted with work and a part time job and money worries, so I'll help you out financially is a nice thing to do and a choice. Saying I will only help if you go to the uni I tell you to: that's blackmail.

I'm honestly hoping that your husband is simply ranting because he is disappointed and that you can calm him down before you speak to DS, because if my parents had said this to me, I'd have left and they wouldn't have input into any of my choices ever again.

I was the one who said that Cambridge would have lots of bright attractive girls. He won't necessarily prefer them to his current GF, of course....

A friend of mine had a similar issue when her son turned down a place at Oxford. He did well at the university he chose, got a good degree and masters. He says he has no regrets.

I also know two families who had kids go to Oxford/Cambridge one dropped out and one was so depressed they had to take a year out.

Obviously loads of kids go to Oxford/Cambridge and do fantastically well but I think you can only offer advice and then stand back. Welcome to the world of grown up kids who cause us just as much angst as the babies but we have no control.

Saying being at Uni is hard, I don't want you to be exhausted with work and a part time job and money worries, so I'll help you out financially is a nice thing to do and a choice. Saying I will only help if you go to the uni I tell you to: that's blackmail.

Hmm. I don't actually agree with this, I don't think it's intrinsically unreasonable to only be willing to bankroll your adult children for things you think are worth your investment. I don't know what the sums involved are, but I'm guessing it must be several thousand, perhaps five figures over three years. Most of us would have to work hard, save and go without to be able to give that kind of money to our children. There are some university courses (and other things too) that I'd not be keen to pay for instead of putting it towards my retirement or buying me freedom from the mortgage earlier. It's very unfortunate that higher education and the job market have gone this way, I'd love my children to be able to study what they love without having to worry about finances. Probably the majority of us would. But they have, and the new reality is that most of us aren't rich enough not to have to think about it.

But I think it's a useful perspective you've articulated, because there's a pretty good chance that's how the DS will see it.

If funding is proportional to return on investment, would you push a child to study certain courses or would you be more prepared to fund a boy than a girl ( boys earn more than girls unfortunately) ?

Lot of bollocks on this thread.

Firstly, Cambridge doesn't 'open doors'/'provide unique opportunity'- going to university, any university, provides access to certain career paths that aren't available to non-graduates, but as someone with a Cambridge degree who is worse off than most school friends who went to 'normal' universities, I can confirm it does fuck all for your 'networking' or opportunities unless you are already the kind of sleazy private school type who would already be handed things on a plate. If anything, there is some reverse-discrimination when job seeking at public sector or other universities, in that they think people who went to Cambridge 'had it easy' and should be working in the city, even if you go there from a poor background, so you end up not only without the networking as there is no way you'll be accepted by Eton wankers anyway, but also excluded from your own background as people think you're suddenly posh now (and like to go 'ha look a clever person is poor, proves we were right never to do homework' etc). All I got from Cambridge (that I couldn't have from any other uni) was chronic clinical depression and frustration at the UK's failure to address social inequality.

Secondly, we have no idea from this that the girlfriend is stupid or 'holding back' the OP's son. She might be lovely and bright, just not keen on university. I wouldn't necessarily encourage my children to go to uni at all, unless it was for a specific career path. I know people who earn double what I do now, having left school with just A levels. Admittedly they were lucky in that there was less demand for degrees-for-everything from inane employers than there is now, but my job, for example, doesn't require the level of qualification that I have. I'd prioritise mental wellbeing above university any time. I really feel frustrated by the lack of decent careers advice for young people, to enable them to make a sensible and informed decision about whether uni is right for them, and what careers require what academic/vocational pathways. I'd certainly have been better going for a more vocational degree at a more practical and socially accepting university.

OP, I think your husband is a delusional dickhead, sorry.

people who earn double what I do now
Hardly surprising since most job require a level of civility and self-control that, from your un-charming language and chip-on-the-shoulder attitude demonstrated in you post, you woefully lack.

Well my children are the same sex as each other, so that's not likely to be a pressing issue for us...

But the answer is, I don't know really. Mine are only small anyway. I do know that I'm very worried about us moving towards a US style of student finance, which I think we will by the time my children are university aged. DH and I are fortunate enough to be middle income and sufficiently comfortable that we don't have to worry about bills or an unscheduled hundred quid repair on the car, but I don't think we're going to have enough to be able to fund things that aren't sound investments. I hope to be able to offer my children a home into their adulthood to allow them to pursue higher education, perhaps unpaid internships no matter how much I don't like the things, and to save for a place of their own. Our housing choices have been made with this in mind. But I don't think I'm going to have tens of thousands to give them to support them during a course that will saddle them with debt and not assist their earning potential. Or for a house deposit on a place that isn't likely to hold value. I want to be clear that I'm not whining here, I know there are many MN posters who are really struggling and I'm grateful every day for being able to turn the heating on if I'm cold etc. It's just we're not high income enough, I don't think, to be able to bankroll everything our children might want to do. We're only going to have a finite amount of resources for them.

I felt some sympathy with the poster upthread who said she didn't feel inclined to sacrifice a new boiler in order to allow a child to pursue a degree that she felt was foolish, and that objectively probably would be in career terms. But equally, I think the young adult DC in this situation probably see it quite differently, which is understandable.

On the subject of pursuing certain courses, I don't know if I'd push, but I was approached a couple of years ago by my young cousin for advice on his university application (I have a degree and am now a professional, but come from a working class background and his parents know nothing about the process). He's fairly bright but not unusually so, was predicted Bs and Cs at A-level. Wasn't sure whether to do history or something with a more technological and business slant.

I did history myself, at Oxford as it happens, but my advice to him was that as he doesn't come from money, this was his chance to improve his financial lot and he wasn't likely to get any others. As his grades weren't going to get him into redbrick, I felt he was better off doing something practical. History degrees are brilliant, but their value to an employer generally is in terms of showing off how clever you are. For that, you need a prestigious institution. He wasn't going to get into one of those. He did follow my advice, is currently doing very well in his sandwich year at a northern non-traditional university, and there's been talk of a place for him when he finishes. Don't get me wrong, I'm sad that he didn't have the opportunity I did to choose based solely on what he loves (I am 11 years older than him). But I stand by my advice, and this is when I wasn't even paying for it.

Bottom line whether you use honey or vinegar to persuade him OP, I would not spend hard-earned savings on a second-rate school when he had the opportunity to at least try Cambridge. He wants to call 100 percent of the decisions, he can assume 100 pct of the financial risk as well. That's being an adult.

Hardly surprising since most job require a level of civility and self-control that, from your un-charming language and chip-on-the-shoulder attitude demonstrated in you post, you woefully lack.
Quite harsh and also unhelpful. She'd obviously had quite an unpleasant experience there. I don't think from this one post you can conclude she's lacking in civility and self control . People vent on here all the time! It doesn't indicate she's the awful person you've painted her to be.

Good to know my degree is "second-rate" because I didn't buy get it from Oxbridge

I would give him same level of financial support regardless of the degree. I went to a good university but my subject was not vocational. My parents supported me regardless. I had the option to switch to management which could have improved my job prospects but there was no pressure. I've always appreciated and respected my parents' attitude.

siscaza you say your niece has deferred Oxford after a 'confirmed offer' (not sure what that is) but was your niece's reason for deferring as flaky as simply not wanting to leave a boyfriend in her hometown? It's absolutely right that if an applicant has applied for a non-deferred place and been considered on that basis then, having taken a place which now can't be given for the next academic year, the uni doesn't automatically say yes that's fine no questions asked. It's not as though there's a health issue with this DS, there's just a silly teenagey love thing going on.

Why is everyone talking as though he has actually got int Cambridge anyway? Surely it is all still at offer stage and dependent on his A Level results? Unless I have missed something, which is perfectly possible.

This may all be academic (bad pun, I know ) if he misses the grades for Cambridge and has to opt for his insurance policy after all.

I would hope that OP's DH would support his DS in that scenario, and not continue his tantrum because he doesn't want to pay for anything that isn't Cambridge.

I would agree with a previous poster that the DH's stance amounts to blackmail. However, I presume it is accidental blackmail, spouted forth in the heat of the moment and not thought through at all. Hopefully he will calm down and agree to a proper conversation with DS, one where they listen to each other rather than just talk at each other.

Perhaps the DH has become so carried away with the kudos of Cambridge that he can see nothing else (tunnel vision), whereas DS may want other options to be considered too.

Topseyt he has an offer which is more than most people do and apart from maths, the overwhelming majority of offerees get their grades. So I think your point is probably the academic one. My point, made a while ago, was that the DS might deliberately mess up so as not to get the A or As he needs - that could be less than merely academic if he feels under too much pressure to accept, so the dad will have to tread with some care.

Goodnight I think people just mean that there's Oxford and Cambridge in the first tier, and that will nearly always rank a graduate higher, all things being held equal.

After Oxbridge there are lots of other very good universities, some of which have individual courses which may actually rank higher than the equivalent at Oxbridge. And yes, someone who really knows the course content may actually prefer to hire from (say) Imperial than Oxford, but in general terms Oxbridge is considered a rank above all other UK universities.

Then there are lots of less good universities, and lots of completely dire ones.

"Second-rate" is just a relative term here I think!

That is also true, Molio.

The problem is with parents only funding courses they think are sensible may not be in fact backed up in reality. Unless parents are in that field of employment they are perhaps not aware of the current market and how the uni thranslates into job prospects.

There is a lot of sense in what jizzy says, the course can indeed improve your job prospects better than the uni. I did read some research by the Sutton trust which showed quite well technology subjects , medicine and subjects allied to all improved average earning potential. The uni attended although had an impact did not make quite that difference.

Life and job prospects are different than when we graduated....I met a couple of young men who with excellent degrees in maths were earning their living in a strange way. Gaming. I must admit my chin hit the floor. I didn't realise there was money in it. But they explained to me that it had more earning potential than traditional careers and we're doing very well.

Yes, it's also true that a parent might have no idea what they're talking about despite holding the purse strings. A Cambridge degree is likely to be a safer bet than most, you don't need to know much about the job market to see that, but there are courses at ex-polys that are very well renowned too. If my child wanted to be a social worker, for example, doing that at Manchester Met would likely serve them better than PPE at Oxford even though the latter does produce lots of successful people.

Saying that, you don't want to get too boxed in either. For example Aberystwyth is very well rated for political science, I know someone who recently got a place on the Masters there which is competitive. However, that reputation doesn't necessarily translate into academia, and the person wasn't sure whether they intended to pursue doctoral study or not. So they went for the institution that isn't quite as prestigious in the field but is more of a household name, on the basis that an employer wouldn't necessarily realise that the Masters is more prestigious than the name of the uni might suggest. I'd say that institutional prestige matters more for people who aren't sure what they want to do and so need to keep as many doors open as possible.