To help one grandchild if I couldn't afford to help all the same

[Jumpyy]

One of my grandchildren is going through a horrible time with fertility issues. She's been told that IVF is probably her only option which she and her husband cannot really afford.

She is suffering badly because of this, I believe very depressed and just not in a good place.

I have some money and I would like to give it to them for the treatment.

I have 4 other grandchildren most of whom are younger and (although unlikely), I probably wouldn't be able to afford to do the same for them or give them a similar amount at the same age, if I do this now.

WWYD? I don't want to see her suffering if I can help.

Yeah cause all these couples having children only did so when they had 20k of savings in the bank... Of course.

it isn't the worst thing that could happen

To you maybe. It's definitely the worst thing I've ever been through and the hardest time in my life without a doubt.

Saying that lots of women choose to be childless is irrelevant. It isn't the same as having the desperate need/urge to have children and not being able to fulfill it. Not the same at all.

I absolutely agree that help with the GDs mental health should be looked at as a priority. She needs to find a way to cope and I hope that she does. But the way some people go on its as if they think she's being dramatic for feeling the way she does because 'there are worse things that could happen'.

It might not be the worst thing that could happen to you but it's just incorrect to say it isn't for everyone. You only have to look at the miscarriage/infertility boards to see how utterly heartbroken people are over this kind of thing.

People do become suicidal or depressed, it isn't uncommon. It's a serious event in a lot of people's lives.

And honestly I still can't get over the natural selection argument. I truly hope the GD or anyone else suffering with infertility to that degree, never reads that. You're basically saying that you think infertile people have less desirable traits than those who can reproduce easily. It's a fucking horrible way to describe it. You might not have meant that but it's exactly what the phrase means.

And as for not everyone was meant to be mothers, no you're right. It's horribly unfair that there's infertile women out there who'd make absolutely wonderful parents whilst some actual mother's who never should have been.

I’m not saying infertile people have less desirable traits, as I’ve said repeatedly.

I’m saying infertile people can’t get pregnant naturally, and if medicine hadn’t gone as far as it had, those people would never be biological parents.

Gift it to them OP. No one else needs to know.

By your logic Ivana, people who get heart attacks (insert serious medical condition) should die because without medical treatment they wouldn't survive.
Or are you making the point that the offspring of those who have fertility treatment have less desirable traits for the collective gene pool?
Either way it's not a pleasant or sensible viewpoint.
The fact is that medical treatment for this range of conditions exists, a fact that should be celebrated. We all know older couples who would have loved children and didn't have any. A few have confided in me how lucky they think I am, because I had the opportunity of treatment, which they did not.

Medicine does lots of things that arent 'natural'. In fact most modern medicine is going against the natural course of things.

No one begrudges any treatment until it comes down to IVF and then it's unethical, unnatural, some people just weren't meant to be parents etc...

I'd sooner my taxes went towards this than to treat someone with a smoking related illness personally. But fortunately you and I don't get to decide who's worth it and who isn't.

Usually from people who don't appreciate their own luck at never needing it.

But @IvanaPee don't you see how mean it sounds when you, a person who has more than one child, says things like that? If you had no children yourself I would have more respect for what you're saying.

And saying 'oh I don't understand the longing for children' and 'I would have been happy childless' just sounds hollow when said by someone who has been lucky enough to have multiple children.

Saying that lots of women choose to be childless is irrelevant. It isn't the same as having the desperate need/urge to have children and not being able to fulfill it

Well of course it isn't...I was simply commenting that the number of women who choose to be childfree makes me wonder about the reported 'biological need'. If the need for children is indeed innate or biological, why don't all women experience it? Is it an 'urge' or a 'want' rather than a 'need'?

Ginger Yes, I made the choice not to have children because of my illness. My DM, GM and GGM all had RA and it is thought to be hereditary. Some have said 'But any DC you have might not have it', to them I say that 'might' is not good enough, I would want a 100% cast iron guarantee that any DC of mine would not have it, I'm not putting someone else through this just to satisfy my own wants.

Amara I'm pretty sure that by Ivana's logic, those with cardiac issues many, many years ago would have died as the treatments had not yet been developed. She's talking about what would have happened a long time ago, not what should happen now.

"If they can't afford IVF, they would really be struggling to bring up a child. It is an indication they are in no financial position to bring a child into the world. Although you are well meaning, it is a very bad idea."

This argument is always made on ivf threads. I don't understand it at all. We spent around £20,000 on various investigations and then two rounds of iui and four of ivf to have our daughter. We were lucky to be in a position to afford it. We then had all the usual baby expenses on top. How many people having a baby the old fashioned way have 20k to spend before spending a penny on baby equipment?

If my cousin was in the same position as your granddaughter, I would help if I could so I certainly would be happy for part of a theoretical inheritance- that I may never get for lots of reasons as no one can see into the future - to be used this way.

The OP is being motivated by compassion and a wish to 'fix' her GD and provide her with the baby she so desperately longs for. The trouble is, that might not happen. So my suggestion would be to agree an amount that will be given, and stick to it. If it works, wonderful. If it doesn't, she knows she's done her best to help.

I'm all for being even-handed, but the OP says she can't afford to be. She isn't answerable to her other DGC but she sounds like a kind person who would want to avoid any unnecessary hurt feelings, or indeed, engender resentment between her already suffering DGD and other family members. So the better plan would be for this to be a private arrangement between the two of them.

I'm on the fence as to whether funding this is a good idea, I think I'd want to know a lot more about the causes of the infertility and the likelihood of success. But there's a way of doing it without causing upset.

A relative I know well has just given one of their nephews close to £20k equivalent in dollars, and given nothing at the moment to other nephews or nieces. They would I think be in a position to give similar amounts to others perhaps later but there’s no guarantees. They gave the amount because that nephew has a life-limiting disease and is undergoing tests to see if it is terminal or not. Their earnings have been severely affected and this money is to help at least ease a bit of the financial burden so he can focus hopefully on health.

“Natural selection” or “personal responsibility” as abstract concepts are great, but in reality none of the nephews or nieces would begrudge him this money. We are not “entitled” to anything in terms of an inheritance - but this money could make a tremendous difference to someone’s life, much like your funding could help your granddaughter tremendously. A trip or car or new home won’t make as much of a difference to others.

If others have similar issues later hopefully the idea that family pulls together and helps each other out will provide avenues for them to help each other even if you can’t personally afford it. That’s a better lesson for a family unit than all things being split equally.

My GM gave my Cousin a large cheque when they got married 8 years ago. Several thousand and everybody knew.
Cousin wasted it. Booked a non refundable trip and then couldn’t go.

I get married very soon and havent cared about gifts...etc
I’m not ‘grabby’.
But I wish I didn’t know what my GM had done for my cousin as now (no matter how much I try not to mind) if she doesn’t do the same for me I will feel like I’m less of a favourite. I’m worried it will sourly tinge our relationship.

@Yabbers
Utter bollocks. Where do people come up with this nonsense. My parents gave my brother money when he left college. They did the same to my sister. They didn’t give me any partly because I got a pretty well paid job after uni and partly because they couldn’t afford to. They weren’t making a value judgement that my brothers sandwich shop job was worth supporting and mine wasn’t. They helped a child who needed it at a time when they had money to do so
I'm sorry but it's not nonsense to suggest that OP is making a value judgement when she expresses her desire to help one of her grandchildren with IVF. OP (like many other posters on this thread) views infertility as an important and worthwhile thing to help her grandchild with. Fair enough, but not everyone views having children in the same way and lots of people have other things that they view as being critical to their long term happiness. If the other grandchildren need financial assistance to get the thing that they desire every bit as OP's granddaughter wants a child then would OP be willing to fund this in the same way irrespective of what it actually was? If not, then OP is making a judgement and understandably this could be incredibly divisive in a family.

Your example is in some ways totally irrelevant as it sounds like your parents provided financial support to your siblings because they needed it, not for a specific purpose or aim. I admire the fact that you don't resent your siblings, however I wonder if you would feel the same if you hadn't been able to secure such a well paying job and you had a greater need for the money yourself? It's easy to feel generous when you have enough but if a lack of financial assistance had materially affected your life in a way that would have a long term impact on your hope and aspirations then I think it's harder to be quite so magnanimous.

@nokidshere
*What utter tosh.

You cannot live life by wondering who might or might not need something in the future. It's like saying you need to make a will with clauses for any grandchildren that might be conceived in the future.

I don't have savings particularly but if one of my (5) sisters needed money I would give them it if I could. I wouldn't say "no because the other 4 might need help somewhere down the line" it's a ludicrous notion*
I think what you describe as a "ludicrous notion" is how many sensible parents with multiple children plan financially for the future. This approach safeguards against all the money being spent on the eldest children that are most likely to encounter situations that require financial assistance first. For example an elder child might benefit from a private education, lots of money spent of extra curricular activities etc but is this a sensible thing for a parent to fund knowing that they can't afford to do the same for younger siblings who may well have a greater need for these things when the time comes?

It's not pedantic or unkind to try and keep some kind of parity when it comes to financial assistance within a family, especially when people are at different life stages and the younger members wants and needs are still emerging. Your approach is biased towards older members of a family which is hardly a way of creating of harmony and cohesiveness.

As the eldest sibling, I fully agree with Bumpitybumper

It would be highly unfair if my parents had funded me to the detriment of my siblings.
Unless it was an actual life or death situation.

As the elder sibling I can assure you we don't always benefit! My feckless younger sibling was a serial recipient of handouts from my DP. They also were of the "help where help in needed" persuasion. However, that relied on them being able to separate genuine need from skilful manipulation, which they were unable to do.

@icecream and @brokenwing make good points. Same as I mentioned way back

If this is something they want so badly. As we did. You try and find the money

Have they started to save ? To work extra over time /second job /Loans /credit cards - cutback on treats /holidays etc

I still think the fair thing is to split money and if £10k to have )2k for the 5gc

The how will you afford a child if can’t afford ivf always crops up

Usually if no children and healthy both the man and woman would be working so can start saving towards something they want - yes time is a factor with ivf - age depending so getting a loan makes sense

Once preg obv one, usually mum is then on ml so reduced salary for a year so yes harder to pay loan or to save

Those who didn’t have ivf but got preg with first child. Did you work before ? If you wanted something did you save or are you saying literally no spare income at all

So yes in that case when one salary goes it must be financially tough. Even with working tax credits etc

People take out loans all the time for cars - holidays - home improvements

But you get something for your money. So to speak

But mention it for ivf and people baulk

Prob as not ivf is not guaranteed to make you preg

it isn't the worst thing that could happen

I am a man - we (ie my wife) had trouble conceiving (maybe my fault - it's not about the fault) . We had several sessions of IUI, and were intending next to try IVF, when she unexpectedly conceived naturally. I am not sure how many IVF cycles we would have tried. We could have just accepted that for us, it wasn't to be. I wasn't; sure about my wife going through everything that IVF entails.

I think maybe the problem is that couples expect to reproduce without a problem, and just can't accept it if they don't, especially when they see others having children almost at the drop of a hat.

But it really is not the worst thing in the world. Many of us have problems in our lives. Loss of loved ones too early, divorces, and breakups, health issues.

But it really is not the worst thing in the world

Again, you don't speak for everyone...

It's without a doubt the worst thing that I've ever been through. Mine was slightly different in that I conceived but had multiple miscarriages. I have never, ever been through something as difficult as that.

Just because Bob down the road has been through something that society considers 'worse' doesn't mean my sadness, hurt, depression at my own situation just switches off.

It was the worst thing to me. You don't get to tell me that is isn't.

Considering you went on to conceive naturally, I actually think it's quite difficult to realistically say how well you would have coped with something when you didn't end up having to face it yourself.

It's so easy to sit there as a parent and say 'there are worse things that could happen'.

It's so easy to sit there as a parent and say 'there are worse things that could happen'.

Like losing children, for example?

I know I'd cope better with never having DS or losing him during the pregnancy than now. And I was very careful not to be too confident in the pregnancy. I only bought the most important stuff close to the due date.

My point is it may well be the worst thing in her world.

You could use the 'worse things could happen' argument with most things, pretty much any issue talked about on MN for example. It doesn't make that person's feelings any less valid.

Hearing someone with the one thing she desperately wants telling her to get over it because worse things could happen just won't go down very well will it? Of course you would think 'well it's easy for you to say'.

I totally understand things being fair but not necessarily equal.

It becomes difficult when you're proposing giving all your available money to one GC (for totally honourable reasons). I think giving a good chunk to the GC who needs fertility treatment but keeping some back to give the others if they also need fair assistance with something. It doesn't have to be the same amount, but it would be nice to be able to help them all in some small way at the necessary time.

I also don't think it's awful giving a decent sum but not the full cost. As an adult, there are ways of funding fertility treatment which will be much more affordable for them with a lump sum to put towards the cost. It doesn't have to be the full cost or no support. Certainly in our family, my brother has had an interest free loan from my dad. He saved on interest, dad got his money back. Dad couldn't afford to gift the full amount but a part gift, part family loan was a win win for everyone. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.

My point is it may well be the worst thing in her world.

Maybe that she has contemplated so far. But not the worst that can happen to her.

Personally, I tend to use the "it's not the worst thing that can happen" to my own life. I think trying to find silver linings is better than considering everything as "the worst that can happen".