Financial support for kids at uni

[salmonandchips]

What's fair when you have two kids at uni but one has bursaries / grants / lower cost living accommodation than the other? Meaning that before parental support, one child is thousands of pounds per year better off?

Give them both the same amount and let them get on with it? The "disadvantaged" one will just have to work more hours in their part time job / and or get an overdraft.

Or try and even it up some how, meaning that one child might get more financial support from parents than the other?

Initially I had a lot of sympathy for your POV, and thought that evening things up would be the fairest option.

However, then I read that your dsd had deliberately chosen a lower prestige university because of the financial benefits, whereas your ds had chosen to disregard the financial aspects in favour of the prestige factor. Both are valid decisions in my view, with different consequences.

I think dsd should be allowed to enjoy the financial advantages of her choice, while ds should get to benefit from the more prestigious degree.

If you choose to even things up for university, surely you will also have to even things up with salaries further down the line, when dsd's "lower" degree may well mean that she is earning much less than your ds. Do you really want to be evening things up 10, 20 years down the line?

I think you should treat them equally now and let each reap the consequences of the choices that they have made.

I didn't spot that bit! I would not fund any child of mine who picked a lower graded unversity because more cash was on offer. That is a really silly choice.

Although in fairness DG if it's something like vocational like nursing, the uni may be less prestigious, but the course itself may be quite highly thought of. Mind you it's rather irrelevant where you qualify as a nurse, it's your registration number that is important and that's not tied to a particular institution. all courses in nursing are overseen to make sure they meet the requirements by the regulator to maintain standards across the board.

Dsd is very able academically. She considered Oxford but has now decided to go to a uni that is 30th on the list for her subject.

Ds is less able but is aiming at low end Russell group.

Both are doing "traditional" subjects.

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer and I think there is a compromise available somewhere.

I also think I am upset by this because I do feel that my ds always gets the raw deal in our family and this change of heart by dp on how we deal with this, I feel, is another example.

I do feel that more is expected from ds and less is given in lots of ways.

Lots of thinking and lots of talking to be done.

If my ds would be better off if I was a single parent, and my dp didn't want to even things out then I would be very unhappy.

Ignoring the finances for a minute, how come DP hasn't dissuaded DSD from applying to this uni? Did he go to uni himself? It sounds like DS is making the right choice.

We both have expressed the view to dsd that we feel she should be applying to a "better" uni, but ultimately it's her decision.

Neither dp, myself or our children's other parents have been to uni.

We both have expressed the view to dsd that we feel she should be applying to a "better" uni, but ultimately it's her decision.

Well done for trying, and yes, it is her decision.

However, if she could have gone to Oxford/high end RG and didn't purely for financial reasons, that is unfortunately a poor choice on DSD's part, although she may not realise it.

I can't speak for arts/humanities so much, but for STEM subjects it really makes a difference where you go and 30th for your chosen subject is not really excellent for an able student.

It's interesting how different people see the choice of uni as something to be considered positively or negatively.

Dsd wants to be a teacher. Ds wants to work in finance / accountancy.

Whether they'll end up in those professions only time will tell.

salmon, do make sure whe knows that most employers recruit by university (ignoring the subject ) and plenty limit themselves to the top 10 universities for the higher paid jobs. I don't think this message gets through enough in schools. (I agree something like nursing is different however).

The better the school and better the pay the more likely the teacher has a degree in their subject and went to a leading unversity so even in teaching it works. For finance/banking it is as I said above - employers who pay the highest pay tend to limit themselves to the best university because they have limited time to interview people etc

Also why oh why oh why do we time and time again having girls going for low paid work and boys high paid? The teacher won't earn much and will have a difficult life and the accountant may end up on £200k a year as a banker. Why can't girls make these financially sensible choices? Do schools or parents push them into lower paid work like teaching I wonder?

You have to do something you enjoy or at least don't mind. It's better that it's high pay of course but if your heart isn't in it you won't get anywhere.

I have definitely told both kids that a top university is the way to go if you are academic.

Dsd is adamant that I'm wrong and dp is just pleased she's going to uni.

They go to different schools so not sure if it's the school or the other parent or just the way they are that makes them see university levels differently.

We've both been to numerous open days and all universities give you the hard sell.

Dsd has got an unconditional offer, so I understand it's hard to resist. She's said she doesn't want to get stressed by her exams this year.

She may be worried that she won't get the grades for a better uni. She might be a bit unconfident? Much better I think sometimes to aim a bit lower and if you do much better go for adjustment?

Predicted grades are often in the high side. If you do go for something "higher" but fail to achieve it might stop her feeling joy and pleasure in what she does achieve, the loose ten pounds but find a fiver effect. But if you are modest you end up finding a fiver and it feels good. Some people seem to cope with that better than others and shrug off those feelings.

Of course the whole 'unconditional offer' phenomenon that has sprung up is based on exactly your DSD's line of thought, and they often come with financial inducements too.

Doh! It IS an unconditional offer. DS nearly accepted one too. I was relieved when the moment passed, I have TBH.

But you can't judge someone badly for taking an unconditional if they feel that for them it's the right thing to do. Some people like certainty - and are less risk takers.

True, but it must be very frustrating if you think your 17 yr old is overestimating the risk hugely due to nerves.

Perhaps a more pertinent and immediate life lesson for girls from this thread, is to never to diminish your own financial situation to support some one else's child without first checking that your partner has the same understanding of what's happening and will be happy to play fair as well when the time comes for them to open their wallet a bit wider to support your offspring.

It seems here that we have a classic case of wife work, or I guess step wife work where OP has given up on child benefit and provided emotional and practical support to her DSD but these are not valued by her DP as they have not explicit cash value.

I'd be very unhappy with the status quo here salmonandchips. It's clear from your posts that you care about your DSD and her life choices, can the same be said of your DP about your DS?

This must be upsetting for you op.

I think your dh is beings slightly unreasonable.

I don't think your ds sh you'd be penalised for having a step parent.
Are you able to afford to even things out?

I absolutely care about both children. I want them to both achieve their full potential. It's in everyone's interest that they do so.

Dsd is predicted A*AA. The unconditional offer is from a uni which would have taken her with BBB.

Ds is possibly aiming a bit high and might end up going through clearing.

We have had a lot of arguments about equality for the children over the years and I honestly feel I want them to be treated the same way. I often feel that "equality" is manipulated to excuse his children from a lot of things. It doesn't do anyone any good in the long run.

Just chucking in a wild card here......if DSD gets high grades, would she consider taking a year out and reapplying to better Unis? She would end up with unconditional offers if she already has the grades.
Is she doing a B.Ed.? Or a first degree with a view to teacher training afterwards?

Qe had a talk about about UCAS at school recently. As I already knew and the boys knew, the school said don't be seduced. The lesser institutions seduce you in with them but on the whole you'd be better off going somewhere better which doesn't make an unconditional offer.

I do worry. My chidlren go to fee paying school. A friend's daughter who wanted to do law (I'm a lawyer so they were discussing it with me) got the best A level results in her comprehensive. Guess where she went and what she studies? Law at an ex polytechnic and why did she go there = because her friends from school went there. No one in their right mind should be advising a very bright aspiring lawyer to go there. She won't qualify now because she didn't go to the right institution but her father, she and the school presumably are unable to do internet searches to find out what she needs to get to where she wants to go in terms of career. Or may be the school did tell her but she insisted of course - plenty of teenagers do what they want, not what we think is best for them .

On general evening out you just do your best. We as siblings never sat there with calculators looking at whose university course cost more - one of us did medicine which is longer but that was fine - any of us could have chosen that one and had the longer funding; with those of my children who have gone so far again I funded the courses they did - if one were longer than the other none of them objected. They all had the same allowance at university although none had a scholarship or extra bursary. If they had they could keep that and still get the same funding as the sibling.

Also why oh why oh why do we time and time again having girls going for low paid work and boys high paid? The teacher won't earn much and will have a difficult life and the accountant may end up on £200k a year as a banker. Why can't girls make these financially sensible choices? Do schools or parents push them into lower paid work like teaching I wonder?

DG I feel your rage. I'm not sure that it is schools, or parents, or peer pressure or anything else in particular, but there is a very definitely worrying trend. My DD (the middle of my 3; the other two are boys) knows and sees aspirational women, and is able, but somehow doesn't seem to expect to be high flying herself.

[I think you're dissing teachers a bit, since a head of department/ deputy head/ head teacher actually earns OK, but I take your point in relation to someone in finance!]

Maybe grumpy your DD isn't interested in a high flying career? I think you overlook the fact that those careers need good grades yes, but also a desire to succeed in that area. It's not enough to be bright.

I felt the pressure to have a career...Ive got the academic side but I've never had the enthusiasm or personality for those sorts of jobs.

Perhaps she is more realistic too. Most graduates even from really good institutions don't end up in high flying jobs. Some will of course, but lots won't.