One at Uni, one at work…

[BelleClapper]

How do you square this without causing resentment?

Dd (17) is working full time on an apprenticeship course. We are charging her rent/keep/petrol equivalent to 25% of her take home.

DS (18) up until now was planning to leave college and get a job. He announced yesterday that he is now accepting the three University offers he got a while back. As an aside he’s just split up with his GF of two years who was absolutely definitely in no way the reason he wasn’t going…

So we will be in a position of taking money from DD and sending money to DS. Which has totally changed the dynamic. I’m really conscious of causing resentment from DD who already suffers a bit with middle child syndrome and jealousy.

If you’ve been in this situation what did you do? I want DD to contribute for lots of reasons, none of which go away just because DS now needs three more years of support.

I absolutely would not charge her rent whilst giving your son money. Whatever the good reasons may be why you want(ed) to have her pay keep they cannot, in my view, I overcome the huge sense of injustice she will feel if this arrangement continues once your son goes to uni.

Tell her you are going to save her “keep” for her. Or just don’t take it at all. The sense of wrong she will likely feel could have serious consequences for your relationship.

I assume, if you are taking a quarter of her take home pay, then this will be a sum that comes some good way to being what you will be paying to your son. You won’t be able to avoid the inference that she is working to support her brother. That’s unfair, not a good message to be sending any young woman of today and could do damage not only to your relationship but the sibling one too.

I have also to say that, unless money is so tight it’s unavoidable, I really dislike taking money from actual children for their “keep” and/or from those still in training or education. But I know that is not what you asked.

I am also the parent of 3 (20,16 and 10). I am acutely aware of how badly my (absolutely lovely and generous hearted) DD2 would feel about such a plan were it ever to be implemented in our house.

You sound like a good mum, BelleClapper. It doesn't sound like either of your kids are missing out. You're supporting them both. £250 is nothing, plus it's the life lesson.
University is hard even getting minimal support from parents, so your boy isn't getting an easy ride compared to his sister.

I don't think there is an easy answer to this but I do think it's worth pointing out that your DD does have a job with training, so she is continuing her education too.

However, she is also earning and I think it's an important lesson to learn how to manage money and budget as soon as you start earning, including saving money. So it could be, as others have said a way to save for your DD too.

Depending on her area of apprenticeship, the opportunities available with her employer/sector of work she may progress to a higher level in her apprenticeship including degree level. The work experience, skills, knowledge plus the qualifications she will gain will hopefully provide some good career opportunities, plus no student debt! Maybe there are degree apprenticeship opportunities in the area your DS is looking at?Just a thought.

I think it's getting that balance and being open and transparent with them both so they understand. Good luck!

@PaperbackRider

The one at home is being supported by only being charged a fraction of the costs of housing, food and transportation

She's 17. She shouldn't be paying anything, her parents are obliged to maintain the minors in their care.

Come on, loads of kids that age pay some board to their parents to get them used to paying their way.

Tbh I think it doesn't matter how old someone is, once they are working full-time their parents are within their rights to ask for a contribution if they want to.

My sibling went to Uni, I did not. I paid (very low) keep to my parents whilst they were sent cash. It didn’t and doesn’t bother me at all, it was perfectly logical.

I bought a property much earlier than my sibling and my parents helped me out with that. They there helped my sibling out financial during a divorce.

My point is, my parents have helped us when we needed it. That has been uneven. I’m good with that.

I would think of it like this:

Each of your children has 'income' from an external source (loan for DS that he is given on condition of doing his university work, wages for DD that she is given on condition of doing her apprenticeship work).

From this income, they must pay for all their outgoings - rent, bills and other expenses.

The market cost of these outgoings is, e.g. £1000 pcm.

Your DS is using all his income to pay for his outgoings and receives £100 pcm from you to enable him to pay the market rate for his outgoings.

Your DD is using one quarter of her income to pay for her outgoings and receives £750 pcm from you as a gift in kind matched against the market rate for things you provide to her that she would otherwise have to pay the market rate for.

She is, in fact, getting considerably more absolute value from you than he is.

I'm shocked at the amount of posts being surprised that DC being charged rent on a £1k take home pay.
I have 2 kids both at uni, me and my dh have always made it clear to them that when they start working they need to contribute to the house. Whether we use the money to pay the bill or save it for them till a later date is neither here nor there, (we probably will save it for them but we certainly won't be telling them that). What's more important is that they understand the value of money. They need to understand that not everything is handed on a plate, that running a house costs money. Both my DH and I grew up contributing to the family expense pot and it didn't do us any harm, infact it made us more money savvy.
The DD in question will still have £750.00 a month with which she can do what she likes, a lot more than people who rent or pay a mortgage have left over at the end of the month.
I know I will be advising my kids to use the 25:35:40 rule. % towards keep, 40% to use as they wish and 35% to go towards savings.

At 17 & 18, talking with them both and work through options and concerns if there are any is probably the best way to square it. Different people will view it all differently. My 16yo DS isn't resentful when we discussed and agreed that a certain amount of his money goes on household buying, some on his own bills, some on his transport needs, and so on, but I know others with similar age teenagers who get very resentful about some of those.

I wouldn't recommend going in with how DD is 'actually better off'. I don't see how framing the situation that way is going to help prevent resentment and jealousy or do much expect maybe assuage some parental guilt. It's possible the DD has no issue with it and those feelings come from previous things.

I was very envious of my older brother growing up for so many reasons, but - as much as some people thought otherwise as it was a very visible difference between us - I never had any issues with my brother getting cars even when he was on his fourth when I was 17 because I didn't want to drive, I hated driving and his car fiascos only strengthened my idea that it was more trouble than it was worth even if he got way more spent on him for all those cars and repairs and insurance than I did for a bus pass. That was never an issue, we chose two very different options and had very different needs, but it would have been really annoying if I was told I was better off for having chosen the less expensive option. Balance things how it suits, but it should be about making things work well for them, not who comes out better. No one but them is going to be able to make those sort of comparison in any sort of way that means anything to them.

I would resent you too if I was her.

I wouldn't be taking any money out of a 17 year old's pocket OP, it's not like she could be living elsewhere with a rent contract considering she's a child.

It would be cheeky. Yo are using your DD's wages to subsidise your DS at uni. Not on

What? You could literally say that about anything the Op spends money on.

By this reckoning, Op decides to book a week in Spain = Ops DD is paying for her Mum to go to Spain! Gasp!

Makes no sense. She's 17 and working. She pays board.

Things won't always be equal. My DD needed extra tuition in one subject @ £27 per week. My DS didn't. I didn't give my DS the same amount in cash. My DS played sport, my DD didn't. So what?

OP have you said yet what your sons degree course is?

HRTHT - apprenticeship is training - maybe yours isn't but that's not right, you should be getting some training.

What will you do when your son has finished uni and comes home, possibly without a job. I assume you will support him?

I think the easiest way to do this is to say, right a degree course is 3 years. We will support all children for 3 years from 18-21 regardless of the route they choose. Afterall uni doesn't suit everyone and frankly is a waste of time for many.

For those who have said said that it's her choice not to go to uni. My brother went to uni, he was encouraged. I didn't want to go but wasn't encouraged anyway and yes, I do have middle child syndrome.

@Hardbackwriter

It's a combination. Yes she is earning, but she would be earning more working in a supermarket, therefore the lower wage is partly because its an apprentiship. I missed the fact she is only 17 as well, I think that's pretty savage personally.

A 17 year old would absolutely not be earning more than £12k working in a supermarket

Yes they would, most supermarkets pay all staff the same regardless of age, and more than £5.77 an hour which is probably roughly what she is on it earns £12k per year. Whether a full time job is likely is another matter.

I agree with @Usernameismyname01 - just have it as a clear rule, if you are earning you contribute, if you are in education, you don't.

I agree that there are good reasons to contribute, not least, an adult child not taking accommodation and bills for granted. I think you're doing the right thing - but you do need to probably address it head on when both of them are around, to avoid resentment or moaning. But present as a fait accompli - 'this is how it works around here' not a discussion. It's your house after all.

I'd save the money she gives you and give it to her when she is ready to move out as a best egg she has built up, and add in an equal amount of the same value that you are sending to DS to ensure it is fair

Only this would not be "fair", because Op would be giving her DD back her own money!! For it to be "fair", she'd have to give DD back her own money, plus the amount she'd given to DS over the years. Which quite frankly is bonkers.

When my older brother was at home 18-23 he rarely paid rent. Would “forget” mum wouldn’t chase him, would just let him off.
I’m the middle child, and never missed a payment.
The youngest sibling got a full time job at 20 and refused to pay any rent as they were saving for uni rent. I also used my wage on uni rent.
Ultimately, it’s up to you. But it caused a lot of resentment from me to my mum for not standing up to my other siblings.
I don’t understand why you need to send your DS money - can he not get a job?

Apprenticeships are 80% work and 20% training.

...and as for choose a cheaper university! What sort of parent would encourage their child to turn down say Durham and go to Bolton instead

@Changemusthappen

HRTHT - apprenticeship is training - maybe yours isn't but that's not right, you should be getting some training.

What will you do when your son has finished uni and comes home, possibly without a job. I assume you will support him?

I think the easiest way to do this is to say, right a degree course is 3 years. We will support all children for 3 years from 18-21 regardless of the route they choose. Afterall uni doesn't suit everyone and frankly is a waste of time for many.

For those who have said said that it's her choice not to go to uni. My brother went to uni, he was encouraged. I didn't want to go but wasn't encouraged anyway and yes, I do have middle child syndrome.

I would assume that if the ds comes home from uni without a job he will come home, claim the £70 per week Universal Credit whilst he is job hunting and pay board out of that.

Actually to be fair I think OP would have to save the market rent for both dc and then give it back to both of them.
I'm not suggesting this, just to be clear.

But dd is getting the better deal financially. Which is fine because she has chosen that for herself. Ds has chosen a route with more short term pain but probably long term gain.

@fairynick student finances are set up with the expectation that better off parents support their dc to an extent. On top of that many students work depending on the type of course they do.

@CaMePlaitPas

I wouldn't be taking any money out of a 17 year old's pocket OP, it's not like she could be living elsewhere with a rent contract considering she's a child.

I know lots of 17 year olds living elsewhere in order to either study or work away from their home area.

I agree with @Usernameismyname01 - just have it as a clear rule, if you are earning you contribute, if you are in education, you don't.

So the DD is both earning and in education. How do you apply that rule?

The dd is earning. Child benefit rules make it absolutely clear that an apprentiship is on the job training, not further education.

Our 19 year old living at home student with a job too pays £200 / month food and board - which actually goes into a help to buy ISA for him (so potentially 25% bonus on that if he eventually uses it towards a house/flat). He's "paying" in terms of committing that much income each month, but we are don't derive any benefit from it.