How long should we contribute to adult child?

[cantthinkofauniquename]

Said child is 23. Back story is that for a number of reasons, we did not contribute financially for the first 2 years of university. We did for the last year. In a couple of months, we will have been paying an amount monthly for 2 years. Trying to decide when is the right time to stop. Child had a job before graduation. They're doing well and we're proud of them.

We can afford to keep paying but it is a stretch. It would make a large difference to our own household budget if we stopped. We have 2 younger children.

YANBU - Keep paying for another year as she should have had 3 years support.

YABU - Paying for a year after a degree is enough.

@InsanelyPregnantAndSore

If you plan to financially support your bio children for the full 3 years then it’s only fair to also support your SC for 3 full years. The first 2 years of her degree were no doubt a nightmare.

I hate to say it but when I read things like ‘we didn’t support her due to change in circumstances’ I can’t help but suspect things would have been different had it been one of your bio children

I don’t mean that in a nasty way, I just see a lot of situations where step parents (generally step mums) feel pretty justified in their ‘we just aren’t in a position to help financially’ assessment toward their SC and that’s it, no payments made. It’s much more clinical and clean cut. Whereas most bio mums will live on baked beans, pay the mortgage late and sell the family car if it means their kids not going without.

DH and I would go to extreme lengths to our own detriment to provide for our two xx

People forgot though that stepchildren have two support streams. When I was little I used to wonder why everyone felt sorry for me being from a 'broken home' when I'd get twice as many Christmas presents, birthday presents, holiday and pocket money than my friends whose parents were together

If you plan to financially support your bio children for the full 3 years then it’s only fair to also support your SC for 3 full years. The first 2 years of her degree were no doubt a nightmare

The first 2 years were funded by her mother. The DSD has now had 4 yrs funding from her parents, the OPs children hope to get 3 from their parents for Uni.

That’s awful that you didn’t support her for her first two years after you said you would!

I think it depends what you’ve explicitly promised, and what the relationship is like.

Ideally you’d be able to have a discussion around stopping paying a monthly amount now she’s got a job and graduated, and saving up the payments to give to her in a lump sum at a different time, when she needs it. Perhaps she’ll need a rental deposit, or a lump sum for a training course or a car or something.

That would allow you to save now, have a bit behind you in preparation for DC2 going to uni and still mean each DC was treated fairly.

@JamesMiddletonsMarshmallows

Did the 23 year old get trampolines and holidays and activities (or whatever) when she was a young child? If so, then there won't be any resentment. If not, why not?

No because my sister was a teenage single mum and used to get by on beans. She had to budget carefully to afford nappies.

If the family's financial situation has changed dramatically in that time then I would consider giving a lump sum to the older one to help with whatever she needs now.

I really do think that's absolutely ridiculous. An independent and financially comfortable 23yo being compensated in adult life because she didn't get trampolines? Luckily DNiece is lovely and just pleased she had a mother who loved her enough to buy nappies before anything else. Some of these adult children sound like right money grabbers and will probably be the kind to only sniff around their parents when they think there's a chance of a decent inheritance - especially when they've been raised to think copious amounts of money are a god given right

Well that's your view. I'm only saying what I would do. My DC are only little and close enough to have the same standard of upbringing. But if my circumstances had changed massively for the better in between children then I would want to share that with both my DC because I love them! People still enjoy holidays at 23! Maybe she could be invited along with the family. Or maybe she needs a car or whatever. My children won't stop being my children at 18. I can still buy them treats and presents if I have cash to spare.

@BurbageBrook

That’s awful that you didn’t support her for her first two years after you said you would!

Why is it awful?

Whereas most bio mums will live on baked beans, pay the mortgage late and sell the family car if it means their kids not going without.

I wouldn't do this to put my child through uni, especially if I had 2 other children to support. Your example really is irrelevant to this situation, but used to drum up disgust against stepmums.

OP, some people are so harsh here! I get it. And it's true that she could feel resentment if your other kids get more.
I feel that you shouldn't pay more if she is comfortable as she clearly is at the moment. To avoid resentments I think you give your other children the same amount you gave her.
If she managed to get through uni on less than she was promised, by getting a job surely your other kids can too? X
Deffo understand its harder it she is a stepdaughter but I think you have already been incredibly generous with all the kids. Good luck with whatever you decide.

@Estasala well funnily enough my sister loves her kids too.

She also recognises that a 7yo needs better financial support from his parents than a 23yo who wasn't lived at home for 5 years. So she does spend her spare money on her 7yo. Should he go without because she wasn't fortunate enough to provide such a good life for his older sister

@HaveringWavering

Had he got all E, F’s would you still have sent your younger dc to private school?

If I had had a child who had failed badly in state education, of course I would do things differently for the next one! What is there to be gained by disadvantaging two children in the name of fairness?!

Surely you realise that most parents have the benefit of experience when it comes to a subsequent child and may use that experience to do things differently?

And that’s fine and that’s one way to look at.... but you have to realise that if you do send the younger one to private school on the back of older DC getting poor results, then there’s a good chance there’s going to be a build up of resentment between siblings and between parents and older child.

Perhaps not as children, but as adults when the penny drops and the second is more successful, it would be very naive to assume the older one wouldn’t feel resentful.

If someone is in a situation to be able to afford to send a DC to private school then it wouldn’t be unreasonable to assume they live in a descent area with a descent state school.

If the family's financial situation has changed dramatically in that time then I would consider giving a lump sum to the older one to help with whatever she needs now

You can not actually be serious? What a bunch a money grabbing, self absorbed people there must be on this thread. Give a lump sum to a 23yr old because the 7yr old sibling has a trampoline and holidays because her mum isn't a poor 17yr old anymore? What type of weird parallel world is this?
Being a step child is totally irrelevant. She is an adult, with a job and a mortgage. She does not need money every month from anyone! She should be mortified about taking it. And a family should not be feeling the pinch being out of pocket to an adult.
At the start of uni, they couldn't pay. Big deal, lots of families can't pay the whole way through uni. It isn't some god given right. She should be grateful she was able to get anything. Parents aren't magic money trees and actually have no obligation to fund adults. The absolute state some people get themselves into on here as soon as a step child is mentioned is absolutely bonkers.

That just about sums up the problem with expecting life to be 'fair'

DSD has 2 parents, her DM contributed for all 3 years, her DF is still contributing, to an in work, home owning adult, out of some idea of 'fairness'. So DSD will have had twice the amount/time of support that her half sibs will get!

What happpened to "Each according to need"?

Or are parents supposed to bankrupt themselves at the alter of Fair?

Your dsd has 2 parents. You are not her parent.

Are you aware of the amount your dsd received from her mum whilst a student? It may well be that she has now received the same as you expect to contribute to your remaining children.

If your dsd wants to talk about absolute parity, absolute parity would dictate she gets exactly half from each parent. Ergo she’s already had more than her fair share from her dad.

Perhaps her dad should approach it as he couldn’t be more proud of her for having finished university despite the odds, got a great job and bought her own home. She’s been given more than the half she would have been given had he paid at the time. This is because he wants her to know how much he loves her and how he wishes things had been different at the time. However, he now needs to start saving for her younger siblings. (Then let her have her say, hopefully at worse she will rant then work it out).

If her mum picked up the full financial support tab during those 2 years, effectively you owe her mum the extra year’s payments rather than your DSD?

Because if you had been contributing equally for 3 years 50-50 with her mother, you’d only pay half as much?

Anyway - I would have a conversation about it if I were you l, but only if you didn’t promise to pay her for 3 years in the first place.

The fact she is a dad is utterly irrelevant to be honest.

My dsis and I had totally different support from our parents through uni.

I got nothing as my dad was made redundant during my a levels and although he took pretty much any job going there was simply no money to help me out and still keep a roof over his, mum and dsis heads and food on the table.

By the time dsis went 4 years later he had got a very good job back in his field and was able to support her monthly and cover her tuition fees.

There was never a making it up to me for having to work full time around uni etc.

If it is likely to cause an issue with dad then talk to her, she is an adult with a job, her own house and a budget she should understand. Maybe discuss reducing it over a few months to let her adjust? Maybe 75% for a month, then 50 etc etc

@Estasala my niece will be 34 when her little brother starts Uni. 7yo's grandparents (different dads so not the 23yo's grandparents) died and left him enough money to get through Uni and probably put a modest deposit on a small house too. So when he starts, should she send the equivalent of tuition fees to her adult daughter?

@nokidshere

Not read full thread but I’m baffled why anybody’s parents would have to help them financially? That’s what student loans etc are for surely? I know years ago if an adult ‘child’ lived with their parents then they could still get as much financial help but it would be loan based as oppose to grant based. So those from poor led backgrounds wouldn’t need to pay as much. It was basically grants that were means tested, loans weren’t. Have they changed the rules or something? Are loans now means tested?*

The student loans don't even cover the cost of the rent in halls. The student loans are means tested based on parents income.

When my first went to uni 3yrs ago we were both working full time. His maintenance loan based on our income was around 5k and his rent in halls was 6.5k so we had to pay the difference and top up his part time job income in order to make sure he had enough.

When DS2 started 2yrs ago we had little income so the maintenance loans went up to around 8k, rent in shared houses is around 4k so they have enough from that and part time jobs to support themselves with a few treats thrown in from us when we can.

I don't feel the need to give DS2 an extra 1.5k because we had to top up his brother. Available income does not stay the same and they both understand that. Nor do I feel any guilt because our circumstances changed during that time.

It must have changed then since I was at uni. Seems the onus is on the parents now much more.

Stop paying but put that money in a savings account in case she needs it in future - for anything from an MA to redundancy.

I had no help from my parents at university (and was fine - full maintenance grant), but was very grateful a few years later when I was made redundant, had bills to pay and no maintenance grant coming in!

Well said @ChangeNameagain2

Luckily my 23yo niece is sensible and not grabby (probably because she wasn't raised by someone who could afford to equate love with money like some here) and expects nothing financially from anyone.

Did the 23 year old get trampolines and holidays and activities (or whatever) when she was a young child? If so, then there won't be any resentment. If not, why not?

I'm sorry you've brought your children up to not be emotionally secure and mature. That must be hard. Or if this is you have you though of councilling?

DD9 get more than late 20s DSSs ever got. That's because I had DD later while secure in a good job. DSSs parents decided to have them early. No daily comparisons checklist on who got what here. They spend hours playing online with DD during lockdown to make her happy and to support her. They love her. They also value us and their mother and her partner. That's because they are mature.

I feel that you shouldn't pay more if she is comfortable as she clearly is at the moment. To avoid resentments I think you give your other children the same amount you gave her.

No. She received from her father AND her mother so if OPs DC receive from their father AND their mother then they will get the same in total but all of it from one source.

I’m just trying to get my head round the idea that adults who are in work and capable of paying their own way want, need, or expect to be financially supported by their parents. Or that parents feel an obligation to support them.

Having said that, I’m not a parent, so maybe I don’t get it. But I was once a young adult, and it was a matter of personal pride that I supported myself from what I was earning, even though things were regularly lean towards the end of the month.

That’s awful that you didn’t support her for her first two years after you said you would

How is it awful? How can you possibly make that statement when you have absolutely no idea about another families financial situation? Would it still be awful if her dad lost his job and had no money? If one of them had suffered ill health, couldn't work, were funding treatment? Or should everyone just live with no money or get into debt to fund university for children, step or otherwise? No one has a right to have parents fund them through university. Lives and circumstances change, big deal. I would expect any 18yr + to understand that and get over it.

Did the 23 year old get trampolines and holidays and activities (or whatever) when she was a young child? If so, then there won't be any resentment. If not, why not? If the family's financial situation has changed dramatically in that time then I would consider giving a lump sum to the older one to help with whatever she needs now

This is mad. Absolutely mad.

Its also pretty sad that families here are measured in terms of the 'stuff' they give their kids rather than the love and emotional support and nurturing. What a poor lesson to teach your children.

If her mum picked up the full financial support tab during those 2 years, effectively you owe her mum the extra year’s payments rather than your DSD?

I've fucking heard it all now.

An adult chooses to support their adult child financially, so their ex must send them half the money 😂 give over