<p>My MIL is certainly in a position to help with tuition if not pay for all of it herself. That said, she is not, and we are very pleased. Instead, she is taking care of herself and making sure that she has enough funds so that she will not ever be a financial burden on us. We will likely do the same for our own grandchildren way down the line - that is be careful not to be a burden on our kids by not gifting tuitions.</p>
<p>“So the less they need your money, the more likely you are to share it with them? Hmmm”</p>
<p>-Exactly!! the less they need my money, the harder they worked to be self-sufficient. that is exactly why we are paying for D’s Med. School, exactly the reason.</p>
<p>About the only thing that seems consistent across these posts is that virtually everyone is saying, “my own experience has been blah blah, and I believe this is the best way. I would NEVER do it another way.” Interesting how firmly our own experiences cement our values.</p>
<p>The other problem with grandparents paying for the grandkids is in the numbers - if one set of GP has 4 kids and then they each have 4 kids that’s 16 grandkids as potential recipients and even more conservative numbers of 4 grandkids is a fair amount - especially if these GPs already paid for their own kids’ educations. Things get even more complex in these days of blended families of kids, step-kids, step-grandchildren, multiple sets of parents/step-parents, grandparents/step-grandparents, and trying to be fair to everyone.</p>
<p>"“my own experience has been blah blah, and I believe this is the best way.” </p>
<p>-We were NOT asked here about peice of informational fact. The request on this thread was to express one’s personal opinion. I base my opinions only on my own experiences, what else? How I can base it on somebody else’s experiences?</p>
<p>Another, what do you do if only one of your children has kids? You give one child $50K times # of thier college kids for four years and none to other children?</p>
<p>“Hmm, well, you are only a senior in high school of course.”</p>
<p>Lots of grownups are on the same page as born2dance94. Some adult kids get are more irresponsible as a result of parental support, but others learn valuable lessons from it, or get help and no harm. There’s no one to one relationship between parental policy and kids’ future financial planning. It depends on the individual. I was born a penny-pinching miser who hoarded the cherry from my sundae when I was 4; I was never going to waste resources even if I’d had a golden parachute. One of my sisters is ferociously independent and refused lots of assistance, while I welcomed any family help I could get. Yet I’ve managed my finances far better than that sister. We had the same parents offering the same helping hand, but different temperaments that led us in opposite directions.</p>
<p>Probably I would appreciate my nice condo even more if I’d spent a few years in a hovel. But I’m OK with having skipped that rite of passage. In fact, if anyone would like to gift me a hundred grand so I can upgrade to the penthouse floor, I’m happy to take it. I’d happily sacrifice some quantum of self-reliance for the unobstructed lake view. :)</p>
<p>I don’t think my way is the best way – I think that there isn’t any way that will instill the parents’ desired values in every kid.</p>
<p>Our folks have 15 grandkids. There is no way they could consider funding all of these college educations–each family carefully selected educations within the means of the family. It has worked so far with the oldest 7 grandkids; 8th plans to matriculate somewhere in the fall.</p>
<p>OP, can’t figure out what you expect other than what we have experienced and factors that WE think about in making the choices each of us and our families have made.</p>
<p>@beastman – I think people’s remarks have a lot to do with how they view money. I personally think money is money. If you have it you give it, if you need it you accept it. Other people think a person should pull their own weight. There isn’t a right or wrong, just different ways of viewing money.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s precisely the question that H and I have discussed recently in the context of setting up accounts for potential future grandchildren. But yes, if one had 4 kids and the other had no kids, then those 4 would each get $x. That’s not “penalizing” the one who didn’t have children – he or she simply doesn’t need the money. To me, that’s like paying for braces for the kids who need them but not paying for braces for the kids who don’t need them. I don’t know anyone who tries to “equalize” by spending $1800 on something for the child who doesn’t need braces.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think often people DO in fact have ways of viewing money that reflect a feeling of “right” or “wrong,” which is why some people get so emotional about it. And really, in certain instances there probably is a “right” way to approach it vs. a “wrong” way. The problem is that not everyone is the same, so the same approach may not be the best for everyone, and figuring out the “best” way in a given situation is often very difficult.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, you can reach the same result without even thinking about need. I view each grandchild as an independent human being, not an appendage of his or her parent. Tuition or other gifts to the grandchild are just that – not gifts to the child in disguise. Each child gets $X, and each grandchild gets $Y. Fair to everyone.</p>
<p>This might get complicated if you’re planning an estate, and you think that some grandchildren might be born after the grandparent’s death. But if we’re talking about completed families, and/or living grandparents, it’s easy.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So what? I SPECIFICALLY stated in my posts that “some” people look at adults asking parents to buy them things they do not need in one way and others do not share my opinion. My comment with regard to her age is that her current experience of 17-18 years may not necessarily be applicable to her adult years, particularly as her expenses mount and she is put to the test. She will also see many people who, because their parents are always there to bail them out, NEVER get their act together financially and will always “need” help. Those same people might have really been able to find some strength and resilience if they knew they HAD to rely on themselves instead. In THOSE cases, I believe “helping” isn’t really helping, and their parents have robbed them of the opportunity to become self sufficient and experience the pride and well being of knowing they are capable.</p>
<p>It’s comforting to many of us to know that if our backs were totally against the wall, we have family and/or friends who would be there for us and help us. Many of us do our darndest never to impose of these folks but feel comforted knowing we have these resources that would be there if and when needed.</p>
<p>As has been said, family dynamics are different with each of the posters. My folks would likely bail out any of us if we really NEEDED them to; to my knowledge, that has never happened to date & the youngest of us is now 45 years old. We are glad that they are enjoying the fruits of their labors and have significant assets to take care of likely future needs.</p>
<p>So, we disagree. I think that her age is only relevant if any reasonable adult would find her views outlandish. She has a mainstream view many adults hold, so I don’t have any reason to think she’ll end up in a different camp after more experience. You think that her age is relevant either way.</p>
<p>“She will also see many people who, because their parents are always there to bail them out, NEVER get their act together financially and will always “need” help.”</p>
<p>Agreed, though she will also see people who never get their act together financially even though their family never gave them a penny. There are countless paths to becoming a lifelong financial screw-up.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think some of the disagreement may center on semantics: what one “wants” and what one “needs.” Everyone needs a roof over their head. Everyone does not “need” to own their own home. Medical expenses are a “need.” A car, depending on where one lives, may be more of a “want” than a need. There are schools of thought that responsible adults will pay for their own “wants” and not ask for help for those, while anyone can be put in a bad situation for certain “needs” which will require the help of a bank or a loan from a relative (I personally would never ever ask a friend for money, but that is a personal feeling). If I got into trouble and my kid needs an operation, I’m not going to let her die out of pride-I’m finding the money any way I reasonably can. Saving a roof over my kids’ head in times of extreme hardship - sure. But asking my parents for college tuition (though I couldn’t stop them from giving it if they wanted to), a car, or a house? Not happening in my world. As others have stated, they have no problem asking people for money.</p>
<p>To play devils advocate- what happens in large families where the grandparents decide to help the grandchildren pay for college with generous college savings plans-- but where the childless adults find that those same folks are tapped out when they need a hand? A college friend of mine is unemployed, her parents are no longer in a position to help her, and yet she’s watching her nieces and nephews (who she loves) cashing out very generous custodial accounts set up during flush times. These kids are doing semesters abroad with all the bells and whistles-- to her parents credit- but who is helping her stay current on her mortgage?</p>
<p>Nobody owes anybody anything. And she certainly doesn’t expect her elderly parents to be subsidizing her lifestyle now, as modest as it has become. But I’m sure she’s got days where she’s thinking, “hey, if I’d had kids they’d be flush courtesy of the bank of grandma and grandpa. But I don’t. And nobody seems to be worried about equity as long as the money is for “education”.”</p>
<p>I would think carefully before treating any of my kids differently financially-- even grown kids-- and that would include their children. That doesn’t mean I “owe” eyeglasses or an appendectomy or braces or speech therapy to my kids who didn’t need those things growing up. It does mean that I’d try hard not to set up a negative dynamic among grandchildren or siblings due to overt financial contributions that couldn’t be made somewhat equitable in some way.</p>
<p>Yes, money does get very messy and there can be bad feelings. Estate attorneys and accountants I have spoken with can tell volumes about this. Sorry for your unemployed college friend. Must be painful to her that the nieces & nephews are living the high life while she’s tapped out.</p>
<p>“what happens in large families where the childless adults find that those same folks are tapped out when they need a hand?”</p>
<p>The same thing that would happen to their siblings who DO have children. They might end up unemployed, too, and the grandparents would be just as tapped out. The tuition for their kids won’t help them cover their mortgage either, right? So the middle generation is in the same position regardless of whether they have kids or not – the childless one just happened to be the one that lost her job. It could have gone the other way.</p>
<p>The alternative would be that because I have no kids, I can go to my parents for help when I’m unemployed, but my sister Hermione can’t because our parents gave tuition money to Hermione’s daughter, thus draining the “Hermione help fund.” I’d be very uncomfortable with that.</p>
<p>I’m speaking as the childless adult who will certainly get the short end of the stick if gifts to my nieces and nephews “count” on my sisters’ tally.</p>
<p>It will get even messier if the grandparents who set up the funds end up needing help for THEIR medical bills & other living expenses. Will the grandkids rush to the rescue? What resources will they have to contribute? Are all the kids expected to contribute equally? Money can create all kinds of ill-will, even when all those involved appear to be comfortably situated.</p>