To think that this should be the norm...

[JackmanAdmirer]

We plan to set our DC up for their adult life, we plan to help pay for them at uni if they go, or an apprenticeship, any education they want to do really and classes and skills such as musical instruments, sports, languages etc whilst growing up, we plan to pay for driving lessons and buy their first cars, we plan to pay at least half of their weddings, we plan on helping them with a deposit to buy a house in their early 20's.

We see this as helping our kids when they need it most - however there will be no money for them (except funeral expenses) when we die.
Generally speaking, people who lose their parents are middle aged and comfortable enough so don't need the money.

People keep saying this is spoiling our dc but I don't see that at all, I see it as setting them up for a good life without the huge crippling money worries that both DH and I went through in our 20's and early 30's.

Aibu that this really should be the normal way of providing for your kids instead of leaving them money when you die?

Op I am skint. Does that make me a shit dm? I support my adult dc emotionally every step, I provide free dc care when required, home moving, decorating, laundry, anything to make their physical lives easier when needed. Can't hand out cash though. And they are doing OK, great in fact - working and supporting themselves!! The bank of dm is closed.

How old are your DC? Surely this can only be 'the norm' if you can afford it? So many variables.

YANBU for wanting to provide for your kids during their teenage/adult life, although I would argue some of the items you describe could be paid for by Saturday/weekend work, which also teaches them a good work ethic and independence. I did it, and had to save for my first car. I got parental help at uni, so I appreciate the need to make your child comfortable, but maybe you don't have to do every little thing - give them some room to strive for what they might want etc.

YABU perhaps for saying "this should be the normal" - there are plenty of folk who might be financially struggling at the age where they would want to do all you suggest, and perhaps by the time they pass away, they happen to be in a better position to pass on funds. So in short, not everyone can time it the way they might hope.

I don't think the OP was suggesting that if you didn't do this you are a shit parent.

I think op is saying assuming you do have money spend it on them when they're young and skint rather than when they're middle aged and earning well themselves.

It can't be the norm if you can't afford it. A lot of people's biggest investment is their house so I guess the sale of that would be split between the children upon the parents death (unless it's had to be used for care home fees). Can't really use that cash before they die without giving up the family home! YABU

I think what you plan to do is great op but for a huge number of people in this country it simply isn't feasible.

I think your op could have been worded differently, it's certainly not "the norm"

I presume what you mean is that you would prefer your children to have the benefits now and in the future for you to hopefully share the moments with them rather than waiting until you are no longer here?

I do think that is a nice thing to do.

My dgm had money in the bank for her 3 grown up daughters. Had saved all her working life. She lived a very basic lifestyle herself as she believed that the money was for " when she was gone "

When my df left my dm, she was in dire straits, car packed in etc but my dgm refused to touch the money to help her.

I think it should be the norm that that younger generation doesn't expect to inherit anything.

However, you say all that will be left for them is the money to cover funeral expenses - have you also made sure that there will be enough to cover one or both of you needing long term nursing home fees? I think it is really unfair to expect the younger generation to pay for those.

All of that is great, and good for you if your plans work out but what happens if for some unforeseen reason you can't do that?

I'll be teaching my kids that they need to work and save for things, I'll help them wherever I can but ultimately if they want to, for example, ski, learn to drive, do a PhD, buy a house there's a point at which they will need to be able to fund that as independent adults.

You can't be sure what's around the corner. You may be comfortably off when the DC are little but anything could happen before they get to adulthood.You may not even get get on with them or even see them.

So plan to do whatever you want with your money and hope it all turns out. If you are able to subsidise them and want to then great.

I think you are possibly going a bit over the top and risk your DC not knowing the value of money or hard work....

My mum was a single parent and couldn’t afford to do these things for me, it meant I had a part time job from the day I turned 16 and all the way until I finished med school. I didn’t learn to drive until I was 23 and didn’t get a car until I was 24 because I couldn’t afford it until then. My husband and I have recently gotten married and bought a house, we saved for these things with minimal input from our patents.

Everything I have I am grateful for because I worked very hard.

I went to a private school ( I had a scholarship) and most of my friends are from wealthy backgrounds, they all had the type of financial support you plan to provide for your DC and not one of them owns a house or car of their own, the two who have bought houses had their parents pay for them. Quite honestly I love my friends dearly but they are all still living like teenagers in their late 20s!

So in my experience spoiling your child financially will only make them lazy.

Having said all that I don’t want my DS to struggle as much as I had to so would probs pay for a few more things than my mum did me

Great if you can afford it but surely if you are in that position you still have a house which your children will inherit unless you are leaving it to charity.

Good for you if you have the money to do that. Most people's inheritance is largely bound up in their house, and downsizing may not be possible nor release as much as one might think.

If middle aged children receive an inheritance they don't need, presumably they do as you do and use it for their children's university, weddings, first house etc.

Unless the house has to be sold to pay your care home fees.

I can see the value in not squirrelling away money until you die and then handing already comfortable adults a lump sum.

But that assumes a number of factors. Firstly, that you are in a position to choose. And secondly, that you can guarantee that your adult children will be comfortable at the point you die.

On the second point, I think you are assuming that if you 'front load' the money that they will inevitably be well off by the time they are adults. I don't think you are accounting for poor health or other shit that life throws at people.

However, if you have to make a choice, your plan is as good as any but I don't think you should suggest that your plan is better or it should be the norm.

The time of financial hardship I endured in my 20's has set me up for financial security in my 30's. I learnt to save, make do, mend and be frugal. Had I been given all you are offering on a plate, I wouldn't have learnt any of those very important lessons.

Your plan doesn't allow for the shit that life throws at us. What if your DC gets pregnant as a teenager, develops a drug habit, has severe mental illness etc how far would you go to fund them in challenging circumstances? We'd all like to think our DCs will follow a clear trajectory through school, into higher education, a job, a home, a partner and a family but so many don't for lots of reasons.

I think hoping to give your kids a good start in life is different to finding their life choices into adulthood and beyond.

Funding, not finding.

I think I’m theory it’s great. However! I was in an abusive relationship when I was in my 20’s, I lost my owned home, any savings and walked away with an eye watering amount of —his— debt. I now have no hope of buying again or actually being in a good financial position again.
Had my parents done what you did, I’d have lost it all to that twat.
I also had friends who inherited young, it’s all gone now and they wasted uni by not trying as they had this money to fall back on.

I plan on helping my kids but not to the point they take it for granted too much. I offer/will offer to match/contribute to their own savings for big ticket items in the hope that they realise the value of money and the point of working for something they want. They will hopefully appreciate what they have if it involves them working for it too.

Having said that my teens are very lucky, as are their friends, and do take their standard of living for granted. I will still persevere with my philosophy as I hope it will work long term.

No I don't agree.

They need to learn to stand on their own two feet. My parents were comfortable, but I had part-time jobs from 13 and all the way through university. I saved for my own deposit and we paid for our own wedding and honeymoon.

You risk raising complacent adults who don't understand the importance of earning and saving their own money.

Also as I approach retirement I really like the idea that I might be able to travel, volunteer and enjoy time with my DH because we will likely inherit around then.

Your post sounds a bit goady, where you seem to assume that everybody can afford to pay for uni fees, a car, a deposit and so on, but I I see what you mean. Give "now" or they have to wait until you die.

It's a choice. That would be mine too, I don't agree with people who think that helping their children are spoiling them. I much prefer my children to spend their weekends doing something they enjoy and useful for them, sport, charity and activities building their cv slowly than doing a job where they don't learn anything, but I can afford to pay for their activities, not everyone can. (and my generosity is directly related to their scores at school!).
Some posters are really irate about parents helping, but admit it's because they are jealous.

I would rather downsize than have no money to help my kids out, but not everybody can do so. If you are can't help them, it doesn't make you a bad parent. I don't understand people who chose not to help.

Its a bit all or nothing isnt it? what about moderation?

besides I dont think you can set your children up for life - you've got no way of knowing whats around their corner.

What age are your children and why are people telling you are spoiling them?

Surely everyone believes in supporting their children to the best of their ability, you goady plank.

We have funded uni, and ds has a fair chunk of a house deposit that he inherited when fil died. However, the bank of Mum and Dad will soon be shut, as dh retires soon and we need to save to get the mortgage gone early.

I am 52, dh is 57, and we think we have done our bit. I may inherit from my Mum when she dies, but who knows if she will need care? We know dh will inherit from his late father under the terms of his will when his Mum dies, but as Dh's gran lived to her late 90s, that could be another 15 years.

We are fortunate that dh has a job that supports this, but at some stage, the kids have to stand on their own two feet and cope. You also need to be aware that many Local Authorities are now looking back 20 years or more to see if you gave away assets that could be used for care. If I inherit anything then it might be used to fund our care, as opposed to helping ds. Much as I would like to help, helping myself in terms of not needing to turn to ds for help when we are older, might be the best way to ensure his standard of living. You might be comfortable in middle age, but will you be when you retire, and any inheritance could be used to supplement your pension.

I don't see the need to fund frivolous wedding plans, after all, it's a day; a marriage is hopefully for life.