To only give my adult children significant financial help towards a house if they live where I say?

[Complex4]

This is not my view but that of someone close to me. They are retired and would like their children and grandchildren living close to them. They appear to have very little going on at this stage in their life and family is a huge source of happiness for them. They are planning to offer each child a significant amount of money towards purchasing a house (or even cover the whole cost), but only if it is close to them. If the house isn’t perceived as close enough they do not get any financial assistance. If the poll can be answered as if this was my view please.

YABU = You are being unreasonable to place conditions on where the house should be if you provide financial assistance

YANBU = You are not being unreasonable to place conditions on where the house should be if you provide financial assistance

Holy no. How manipulative ...

If I was the child in the situation, I would be tempted to do it, but not quite as the parents are imagining.

Buy a house close to them with a buy to let mortgage. Then I would get a lettings agent to manage it, while I used the profit to help pay the mortgage elsewhere.

Am I controlling because I finance the choice I approve of and that suits me, and not the choice I don't approve of?
Of course not.
It's reasonable not to hand thousands to someone who will piss that opportunity up the wall in alcohol and gaming.

It would be unfair if your DS was doing his best financially, needed help with a deposit and you said no though.

@FirstOfficerDouglas

Put it the other way round. "Mum, I'd love to live near you but can't afford to" - OK I'll give you £xx to make up the difference so that you can move here to this nice area near me. It is about how it is presented. Has the decision already been made to make the move and the money is a help or is it a bribe?

Context is all. (And like it or not we all finance our children to do things we approve of)

I'll pay £10k towards your wedding. (Thank you, how lovely !!!)

I'll pay you £10k if you have a big white wedding like I want.

If you get married I'll pay you £10k towards the wedding - but not if you don't. (Bribe?)
(And for the kid who doesn't get married - no cash at all).

This in spades.

If the child wants to live there (possibly where they grew up if their parents are there) and the parent offers to help out so they can, that’s a nice thing.
If the parents then gets to see their child and grandchildren more often that’s a good thing.

It could be controlling or it could be a nice gesture so a child doesn’t need to move away from their family to afford a house.

I think dangling money and advantages with strings attached is controlling.

Cbt,

There are a shocking amount of controlling employers, then.

YABU
Or your friends are. Putting strings could actually impede their children, not help. A parent should not live vicariously through their child. My dd has a far more lovely, caring and nurturing environment.

@SoloMummy
Ok an inlaws one. Fil has given money. No strings attached. No advice. My side have given money with both strings and advice. When we moved away, I got “ I never moved away from my mother, I loved her too much”. That was her journey, not mine and the world had changed 30 odd years later.

This is so manipulative it actually gave me a physical reaction! Disgusting behaviour.

I would never be this desperate to accept this kind of offer off a parent who was in effect saying “I’ll help you if you move near me, but if you won’t I’m not bothering”.

Absolutely terrible! Controlling, manipulative, selfish and suffocating. I would run a mile from any relative like this.

I made sounds about moving up North a while back, my Dad absolutely wanted me to go for it. He wants me to live my life, be free and fly the nest as much as possible!

I've said YABU, but it does depend quite a lot on context actually, and possibly on the relationship between the family involved. If the son/daughter can't afford a house at all but actively doesn't want to move near the parents, and the parents know that and are trying to make them, then yes it's controlling. My parents were sad that we moved a long way away and would love us to live near them (in their mind-bogglingly expensive area) but they wouldn't try this.

They are extremely short sighted parents.

Presumably offspring will purchase house locally to parents to obtain money and either rent it out or sell it and move to an area of their choice.

It not accepting charity is fine. In fact, building your own life without help is far more satisfying, anyway.

Expecting no strings charity is, on the other hand, awfully entitled and childish. Taking money and then saying ‘fuck you, I don’t want anything to do with you here forth’ should not, morally, be an option.

It's reasonable not to hand thousands to someone who will piss that opportunity up the wall in alcohol and gaming. - of course and most of us would see it that way - which was why I used that example. But the DS wouldn't. He'd see it as the parent judging his choices and favouring his sister.

We rarely as parents support our kids' lifestyle choices which we don't approve of.

Imagine the mother suspects the DD's partner is abusive. The last thing she wants is her DD moving further away with this brute but her DD is being pressured to buy a house with him. Wouldn't a "bribe" to keep the DD close be what any of us might do?

And is the parent 60 or 80? Fit and wanting to babysit or frail and needing care? Is their relationship good or not? Is the area nicer (better schools for GC) or just nearer the parent?

You can tell from some of the answers what sort of relationship people assume - (and possibly have/had with their own parents and kids)

Nobody is being forced to accept money in this situation. If they don’t like it, they can buy a house somewhere else with their own money.

We are doing it the other way round actually. Paying 50% towards a house next door to us for df to move into. I want him next door so I can keep an eye on him as he gets older. He doesn’t need to move as he is ok where he is, for now, but the house came on the market and it’s a golden opportunity. Paying half of it is to incentivise him to move and make the process quicker - the sale won’t be reliant on him selling his own house straight away. Also, houses here are more expensive.

Would I offer him that money to move somewhere else? No. Does that make me controlling? Maybe. But he’s happy with the arrangement and so are we. As a pp said, context is everything.

What's to stop the children taking the money to buy a house locally and then selling up and moving?

A deed of trust would - if the money had to be repaid out of the proceeds of the sale of the house!

My mother would have done this if she’s had the means. Her fantasy, had she won the lottery, was a row of four houses; one for her and one for each of her children and their families.

Whenever anyone asked after one of us her response was, “not seen them, they’ll be seeing (name of in-laws) again this weekend.” Because that was the only thing you were allowed to do at the weekend, visit ageing relatives!

It’s nasty and controlling.

@Camomila

PILs are a bit like this...they have money, and they'd give it to us but 'with strings', as a result they don't really get told much/only after big decisions are made.

My parents on the other hand give advice when asked for it but are otherwise neutral, that means we are actually a lot more likely to listen to them!

Your parents sound great. 😀

We rarely as parents support our kids' lifestyle choices which we don't approve of.

Yes, but living where you would like to live is hardly a life-choice that should provoke disapproval, is it? The example in the OP is an attempt to control the dc's life based on the parents' wishes, which many dc would find manipulative, whether they were tempted by the financial help or not.

But it's not just controlling where they live is it? It's controlling what jobs DC do (presumably needs to be within easy travelling distance of home), what schools DGC go to (what catchment area will they be living in) etc etc.

Not just the house. Suppose there are no suitable jobs for Parent A unless parent A commutes for two hours each way? Does Parent A take a lower paid job closer to home? Or have to rely on GP for help with children?

It's an offer they don't have to take it. Equally they can buy the house and rent it out or sell it -unless parents are putting it in their name.

I want to gift my DC my house -but if they want it earlier -they will have to discuss and agree with me where we live etc.

Interesting that it's always the inlaws who are imperfect. Could not just be your bias and interpretation?

In our case it's a cultural thing, my PILs are Asian but DH was born in England feels more British,

• he finds them controlling compared to his English friends parents/my European parents.

My parents have their own annoying habits! I just tune them out...(yes DM the baby can chew that...no DM I don't need a blood test, I have a bf baby, a 4 year old, and a dissertation - that's why I'm tired).

Very unreasonable, controlling and manipulative. Btw, just because you live next door/close to someone it doesn't mean their doors will always be open to you. If I took up such an offer (which I never would) the person would only see me in passing and very rarely so.

It is not controlling unless the adult children accept the money.

Of course it is, controlling doesn't have to be successful! We don't say an abusive partner is not controlling just because the person has managed to leave them.

It is abusive behaviour, and like any everyone should be against it, the controlled person may not be able to protect themselves.