17yr old doesn't want to come on holiday

[Rolo1324]

Hi, my son has just announced he doesn't want to come on holiday with us this July because he'll be bored! I did check with him when I booked that he wanted to come. I'm not able to cancel his flight and look like we'll lose £700. I'm not sure how to manage this if terms of him understanding the cost implications.

Could he bring a friend or the other half? I didn't want to go on hols with my folks at 17 and was bored when I did. We had very different ideas of fun and how to spend time at that point in life.

How are there coat implications if he doesn't go? He can look after the dog if he's at home. Grandparents don't need to babysit a 17 Yr old.

Cost*

If he is loved up, could he bring the partner with him?

he wants a free house.
Could you say fine don’t come but you can’t stay at home on your own so will have to go to a relative?

Just go without him. The cost is an annoying red herring.
Manage other aspects of his behaviour around responsibility directly - if you think he's not seeing the value of your generosity to him, then deal with that.
Are you happy for him to be home alone (i.e probably inviting gf and/or friends over) during the holiday or not? Address that.
If you want him to behave in a more responsible way you also need to step back and create that space and be clear about your expectations.

Make him pay you back, you see threads on here about CFs who don’t pay their share when they change their minds about planned events. Make him take responsibility now, before it’s too late.

What’s the point of making him pay? If he doesn’t want to go and you’re not making him take the hit.

That isn't the same though, unless the OP was planning for her DS to cover his share of the holiday in the first place.

The lesson he would learn.

What lesson?

Exactly this. Not the same at all.

What lesson do you think he would learn, exactly?

I'm guessing that you think he would learn not to commit to something and then change his mind.

However, the lesson that he might actually take away is that his mum is pretty unreasonable in wanting to profit from his last minute change of plan.

If the OP was actually going to be out of pocket as a result of him pulling out of the holiday, then I think it would be totally fair enough to make him pay. But the cost to her is the same either way, so the only reason to make him pay is to punish him for his decision. I think that's a pretty poor lesson tbh.

It's shit that he committed to the holiday and then decided to pull out. I totally get the OP being pissed off with this, and I think her ds needs to understand that she is pissed off. However, I don't personally agree that making him pay for a holiday that the OP would have paid for anyway is a fair response, and I don't think it will have the desired effect of making him more considerate in the future either. I think it will just piss him off and poison the relationship.

However, the lesson that he might actually take away is that his mum is pretty unreasonable in wanting to profit from his last minute change of plan

In what way does OP profit by making him pay the money back? And why should she take the hit of his last minute change of mi d rather than him as the person who made that decision?

The OP profits because she has money she wouldn't other wise have (and doesn't have to pay someone to look after the dog).

It makes literally no difference to her (other than the loss of his likely to be moody and pissed off company) if he goes or not.

The money is gone whether he goes or not. Of course it's a waste of money if he doesn't go but making him pay it back when she was quite happy to pay for him makes no sense - she needs to reinforce the message another way.

He needs to learn that he can't just opt out of expensive commitments. The PPs who said he shouldn't pay the money back need to think of another memorable way of teaching that.

Although I love the OPs idea of getting the grandparents to stay! I would also ask for a contribution to the flight in line with his earnings eg. A quarter of his month pay for 2 months.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves I fundamentally disagree that it is wrong to do things because of the principle, to teach children fundamental life lessons.

If he's allowed to get away with it, he won't learn and will continue to act selfishly. If he realised and appreciated how much flippantly agreeing to something like this cost the other person, he might actually put some thought into it next time.

That is why we do it.

Of course it's a waste of money if he doesn't go but making him pay it back when she was quite happy to pay for him makes no sense - she needs to reinforce the message another way.

Why? Why not that way? It's a perfectly logical way.

Fair enough. You parent your way, I'll parent mine.

I'm all in favour of teaching children fundamental life lessons. I just don't agree that applying a random financial penalty is an effective way of doing this.

We can agree to disagree on this.

The OP profits because she has money she wouldn't other wise have (and doesn't have to pay someone to look after the dog).

This isn't profiting, it's getting back money she wouldn't have spent had he not agreed to go. That's very different from profiting. The only reason she wouldn't otherwise have it is because he initially said he wanted to go.

I'm interested to know at what age people seem to think young people should have to start feeling the consequences of their decisions. Making him pay the money back literally isn't even a punishment, it's simply a life lesson.

We had exactly the same with our son at the same age. We were furious, as we had checked before booking that he definitely wanted to come. We made him pay for his ticket (he was working) as we were not prepared to just chuck that money away. It taught him a lesson we feel.

Ermsorry but if one of ours said there coming then there coming. Wouldn't leave a 17 in house that long anyhow

Of course it's a punishment.

It would be a life lesson if it was a natural consequence of his decisions, but an arbitrary decision to make him pay is absolutely a punishment.

Some people believe in arbitrary punishments so fair enough. That's not how I ever wanted to parent though.

It’s not profiting is it, she won’t be any more ‘up’ if by some miracle he pays it back, she’ll break even and be in the same positing she was before he said yes and then backed out. If he had said no in the first place op wouldn’t have spent the £700 in the first place.
Definitely don’t agree with forcing him to come as he already said yes, he’ll be miserable and it will ruin your holiday.
I think grandparents visiting for a week in the middle would be a good idea, more so for the company! I’d not want to leave my 17 yo home alone for 2 weeks but she’s not in a great place at the moment so it would be neglectful of me to do that, I was left home alone at that age and was totally fine though, a couple of house parties but that’s to be expected. Loved the freedom.
on the other side of this, I am half wishing for the days my older teens (17 and 19!!!) don’t want to come on holiday with us, there are always a couple of days of moaning/dramas although generally good company. Dh would gladly have them join us every year forever more!!

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves

There's no "of course" about it, it's a difference of opinion. But you have clearly decided that your parenting techniques are superior so I'll leave you with those thoughts. I'd like to think it's possible to have a discussion without being so condescending.