Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Would it be such a bad thing to set your children up financially so that they never have to work?

185 replies

wonderingWallaby · 04/06/2022 10:49

Let’s assume from the age of 21 you provide them with a monthly/annual allowance of x amount (a substantial figure), and they will receive this for the remainder of their life. Obviously I wouldn’t be happy if they spent all day sleeping, playing video games etc. But if the money allowed them to avoid the rat race that is work, maybe that’s not such a bad thing? I know there are a lot of positives to working, but my thought process is that life is short. And if you’re in a position where you don’t have to work or you can ensure your children don’t have to work, is that really such a bad thing?

OP posts:
Namenic · 04/06/2022 11:13

Sounds terrible. I don’t mind helping my kids out if I can, but this does not incentivise hard work, living within means, dealing with unexpected hardship. Helping them develop skills to deal with difficult situations would be one of my aims.

Kimmy567 · 04/06/2022 11:13

Warren Buffet said "Leave your children enough money so they can do anything, but not enough that they don't have to do anything.” I like the idea of helping them become capable, brilliant individuals, avoiding facilitating learned helplessness!

Louise0701 · 04/06/2022 11:14

I don’t work (31) and probably never will as I am in an incredibly fortunate financial position. It would bring nothing to my life at all.
I do lots of meaningful things and have the time to experience things I wouldn’t be able to if I was working.
I would do it.

Waxonwaxoff0 · 04/06/2022 11:15

I'd do it for DS if I could. I don't feel like working has made me a better person in any way.

I certainly can't afford to though! Unless I win a huge lottery jackpot.

cheekyfucker101 · 04/06/2022 11:16

I wouldn't do this.

I have two kids at private school and I work bloody hard to send them there. I was raised on a council estate so its took me hard graft to get where I am now.

The school is fab but there are mums there that have never had to work are still funded by mummy and daddy who are now paying for their kids school fees. These women are not grounded in reality and I honestly feel pity for their kids.

A free loader is a free loader no matter what side of society you live on and these people can never have self worth or esteem if they rely on other people to feed them even as an adult.

I will help my kids with a deposit for a house but they are and will be encouraged to go in to professions that helps them live life.

Tormundsbeard · 04/06/2022 11:18

Is work such a bad thing? A lot of people enjoy their jobs / have a vocation etc..
I think it would be great to be able to provide housing/holidays, but let 21 year olds find their own path.

DisforDarkChocolate · 04/06/2022 11:19

I think life has to have meaning. If it's not going to be providing for your self and your family it can leave you prey to vices like drugs. That's been much simplified but without a way of demonstrating our worth to ourselves most people aren't happy.

Jalisco · 04/06/2022 11:20

Not quite the same thing as you are asking, but a friend of mine made a mint selling his computer company to Microsoft in the 1980's - he'd got into the field before home computers were a thing. Anyway, he made £millions, and then made even more investing it well. He didn't set his children up financially - quite the opposite.

His children grew up with good parents, the best opportunities that money could buy, but definitely not spoiled - so no excesses etc. But by the time they were teenagers every single one of them (3) started to go off the rails and become, frankly, nasty selfish louts (at best) with appalling attitudes and serious issues - sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll doesn't really cover it. Expelled from multiple schools. Why - because they "knew" that their parents were so wealthy that they didn't need an education, didn't need to work, and didn't need to make anything of themselves. Even when the parents threatened to cut them off and out of the will, they "knew" their parents would never do that.

They have all been disinherited and all their parents money is being left to charity. The children know, but it hasn't made a jot of a difference to their behaviour because they are now pretty much useless for anything - 2 have multiple convictions for drug dealing. Their parents set up an "emergency trust" which will be managed independently and which will allow for certain support if the children want it - but that is restricted to things such as medical interventions, counselling, and things that will either prevent harm or enable them to turn their lives around if they choose to do so; they will never receive allowances or money directly. It broke their parents hearts to do this.

Both parents wish they had never made the money. They were both aspirational and hard working, but none of that has rubbed off on the children because they treated an easy life as an entitlement. So no - having seen this over the decades, I do not think setting up your children to never have to work is a good idea. Humans need motivation and goals. There are ways of easing the path to help children to grow and develop, but too much is, in my opinion, worse than not enough.

Schoolchoicesucks · 04/06/2022 11:20

I worked for a very wealthy family who considered this really carefully.

Their approach was to have a family trust that would pay for private education for their grandchildren plus future generations (and also to pay their way through university so they wouldn't need to use loans).

They had a small monthly allowance from age 21. Not enough to live on, but enough that it would help them not have to scrape by - they could live somewhere nicer than may otherwise afford, they could take holidays, they wouldn't neccessarily have to choose a career based totally on earning vast amounts.

There was an amount to be paid between 25 and 30 that would buy them a 2 bed flat in a nice part of London.

If they started a business, there was a lump sum investment and a higher monthly allowance, so they wouldn't need to draw a salary from the start. They were keen to encourage entrepreneurship.

At 35 there was another lump sum that would buy a 3-4 bed house in a nice part of London.

Their thoughts were that they could take away many of the money stresses, while still requiring their children to do some form of paid work. They had financial stability and it encouraged them to start their own businesses, employing others. Their children wouldn't need to chase high paying corporate jobs to maintain the lifestyle they grew up in and could choose something that (they felt was) more rewarding/gave back etc.

MindYourHeadDoggy · 04/06/2022 11:21

What If the money dries-up unexpectedly and you’ve left your child totally devoid of skills, ambition, and ability?

I think it’s wrong to create a person who is 100% financially dependent on another for their life.

(And I say this as someone who does not have to work, but I choose to).

AclowncalledAlice · 04/06/2022 11:21

Me and (adult), DD had this conversation a couple of weeks ago (as in an "if I win the lottery" kind of way). When I said that I would set her up so she would never have to work again her reply was "well in that case I'd be a volunteer at work. I could never give it up as I love my job and need to do it". So even if she had had enough never "to work", I think it wouldn't have made any difference, she still would do something even if she was not getting paid for it. For her, and many others, work is not just about the money, it's about a sense of purpose and I think if that gets taken away then it can leave those people with all kinds of MH/social issues IMO

Jconnais1chansonquivavsenerver · 04/06/2022 11:23

I'd love to be able to do that for my own child, but only because they work for a very low-paying charity and can't get on the housing ladder now as they don't have enough savings for a deposit or for the bank to let them have a mortgage. If I could, I would buy them a roof over their head outright, knowing they would carry on working but not worrying about rent.

HollowTalk · 04/06/2022 11:32

Who would their friends be? Other idiots who have funded lives? I think the chance of them being hooked on drugs is so incredibly high.

Snoken · 04/06/2022 11:36

I would hate that. I would have missed out on all the people I have gotten to know over the years in various places of work across the world, I would never had experienced the elated feeling when you get a job you really want, I would have missed out on so much useful knowledge, I would have missed out on the feeling of having completed a degree part-time whilst working to further my interests and career, I would not have appreciated that Friday 5pm feeling when you know you have a weekend of relaxing ahead, and I would not have known how to fill my days in a useful manner. Especially now that the children are grown.

Can't help but think about About a Boy, and how pointless his life felt. I know it's just a movie, but I think there is something in it.

coffeecupsandfairylights · 04/06/2022 11:41

That would be an amazing thing to be able to offer a child - I think I would maybe do a salary-match if I could afford it.

GrumpyTerrier · 04/06/2022 11:41

The rich kids I've known who never had to work were all miserable. All they did was party and do too many drugs. If you are going to do this I would wait til they are 30 so they can learn the value of hard work, gain the skills they may still need in life, plus they'd be past the extreme partying age (in theory). Or make savings for them to access at 30 so they can get a house/start a business etc. The rat race is hard/boring/difficult sometimes but it allows you to learn so so much about life, yourself, other people. I wouldn't take that away from them.

BendingSpoons · 04/06/2022 11:42

'Good' work is generally good for your wellbeing. I appreciate many people have stressful or boring jobs, or have to work very long hours to make ends meet. If you could set someone up to not have to work, but with the work ethic to want to work or volunteer for some of their time, I think that would be best. They would have the freedom to find something they enjoy even if it pays badly or is a volunteer role.

Some issues of never working at all are what happens with potential partners? The relationship could be quite unbalanced. Also, what about their children? Would the money run out so their children would have to work? That could lead to resentment.

RHOShitVille · 04/06/2022 11:43

I would in a heartbeat. DD has ASD and ADHD and is regularly distraught about how she will get a job and manage as an adult. I've love to have enough to set up a trust for her to have sufficient income to just work part time and reduce the stress in her life.

I know she's capable, but I also know the jobs she'd excel in are poorly paid and that full time work would be unmanageable for her.

orwellwasright · 04/06/2022 11:46

Just what society needs. More entitled, pampered adults who are clueless about how others have to function in life.

Trustafarians have a bad rep for a good reason.

Sceptre86 · 04/06/2022 11:47

No way. They will get used to a certain kind of lifestyle they haven't earned and then what happens when you die? What happens when their kids are grown and expect the same? What happens if you divorce, split up with their parent and income changes? Do you have the kind of kids that would put some by each month so they could help put their own kids?

LindaEllen · 04/06/2022 11:49

We have discussed what we would do if we won/inherited a lot of money (the latter is likely to happen soon) and we wouldn't give my DP's son a significant amount. He's 18, and we know that he would simply sleep all day, game all night, and drink beer in his room, alone.

That's what he chooses to do in his holidays now. He NEEDS the structure of education/work. Whether he thinks he likes working/studying or not, without it, he gets into very dangerous and unhealthy habits so, in this situation, it wouldn't benefit him to have money.

He would, of course, inherit from us eventually anyway, by which point hopefully he would be mature and settled and could use the money wisely.

Louise0701 · 04/06/2022 11:50

@Snoken don’t you find it really sad that you can’t possibly think of anything at all to fill your time with other than work? I think that’s awful and a really miserable way to live that there’s literally nothing else you can think of to do with your life.

Gettingthingsdone777 · 04/06/2022 11:52

Sounds great OP, I don’t think it would be a bad thing. People are not inherently lazy imho, I know plenty of wealthy people (inherited wealth) who strive to achieve in different domains and the main difference is they are able to take more risks and chances in their career and live their life how they choose. Of course there are trade offs, earning your keep is definitely rewarding and empowering, but there are lots of benefits to not having to bow down to the employment market- money is also pretty empowering. Wealthy people are plenty happy in my experience, and I also know lots of people who are poor (despite working hard) who feel cheated by life- I don’t blame them for a second, the whole good work ethic virtue is nowhere near as well rewarded as we are lead to believe. If you can give children such an advantage I say go for it, but encourage them to use the money to buy freedom rather than “stuff”.

Serriedranks · 04/06/2022 11:52

Despite your intentions being good, I think this would be an appalling thing to do to your offspring op. Please don't do it! Give them two lump sums each to use how they see fit to kick in when they are about 30 and 50 years old, and apart from that, leave them to find their own way in life.

I knocked around with two people who had trust funds at university who I am still in touch with now. Out of our group of friends, those of us who had to work, have developed our skills and capabilities, have travelled, lived abroad, established relationships, had children, had the corners knocked off us, met many different people, grown in many different ways and have established careers and had the satisfaction (and yes the stresses) that have come from all of that. We are not the same people we were aged nineteen!

It is striking how little the two who haven't had to work have stayed the same, how they are almost personality-wise in a state of "arrested development". They tell the same jokes and stories all the time because they haven't had, and are not having, many new experiences. They are out of sync with all of us and so live quite isolated lives with not many friends, still emotionally dependent on "home" or the remnants of home now that their parents have died.

They dabbled in businesses that never came to anything when they were young, and had one or two jobs found through their parents friends that they didn't stick to, simply because they didn't have to! They were both perfectly intelligent, one even quite bright, and it seems such a shame that neither have put their good luck or brains to good use, for themselves, or others. Now they are turning sixty or thereabouts, they don't really have much to show for a lifetime of good fortune, other than pleasant living surroundings and a monthly income.

The fact that they were dependent on their families for money also led to a wierd love/hate relationships with their parents and in both cases it led to family problems. And neither have managed to establish long term relationships, first because they were suspicious of people liking them for their money, and latterly because they , I'm sorry to say ...don't know how to put this kindly ...aren't regarded as great catches because they are a bit strange and regarded as "loosers" ...sorry ...that's sounds unkind ...a better way of putting it would be they are not generally respected. No one will criticise them to their face of course because of the money, but that's how everyone feels about them in all honesty. Some of us feel sorry for them. They have had such privilege that's protected them from the swings and arrows of fortune that the rest of us have had to suffer, but sadly , to put it mildly, that hasn't helped their characters in terms of how they relate to others, and that's putting it mildly.

ZealAndArdour · 04/06/2022 11:53

The devil makes work for idle hands. I think a lot of kids would end up on drugs or gambling or just not very nice likeable people. Like a PP, would be better to do it around age 30 when they’re already set up to work and provide for themselves, and truly recognise the gift they are being given.

Swipe left for the next trending thread