<p>We paid for both kids to go to private HS & they are both attending same private college. S got significant merit award. D went to CC for 3 semesters + summer school & is now a transfer there. Neither has made any comments about funds or fairness; both are working hard and we are proud of both. S really wants a car & we have an older car that we don’t need, so we will be shipping it to him (D has only a learner’s permit & no license). He will pay for insurance, maintenance, & shipping. We plan to allow S to keep the funds he has saved over the years (from birthdays & gifts) tho it is significantly higher than D’s savings–maybe because he was the 1st child? We also used some of his funds to buy a state bond that matured.</p>
<p>To the extent it matters, I do think it makes sense to allow students to choose a lower cost undergrad school to get help for anticipated grad school. That is a very reasonable and mature thing to do. If the kid opts not to go to grad school, the funds could also be available to help start a business or buy a place or whatever the student and family feel is appropriate. We did want S to consider schools where he was offered a free ride but he didn’t find them as attractive as the school he chose where he got 1/2 tuition (still substantial but more than it could have been). We do feel fortunate that we are able to help our kids and allow them attractive choices.</p>
<p>^^ In the case mentioned in post #20 above, I could see “cutting such a deal” as oldfort mentions - agreeing to help with law school if the student chooses a significantly less expensive undergrad. If my kid were aiming for law school, the expense of a professional school would have been an issue to be discussed when deciding on an undergrad school. I do believe in making kids do a cost/benefit analysis with family resources.</p>
<p>The reality is that most of us do not have unlimited resources. We also do not want to be dependent on our own kids at a later date, so my top priority is to fund retirement to the max. </p>
<p>We are not paying for or even helping with our kids’ grad schools – that is on them. We put them both through their top choice colleges, which happened to be private and we were/are full-pay. I realize that other familes may have other situations and other goals. D got full funding for grad school, fortunately. She also had the option to go part-time funded by her employer, but that both would have taken longer and obligated her to stay with her employer for a while after finishing. It was her choice to do as she is. D is an economist so understands about “opportunity cost” etc.
S has no idea about grad school at this point (engineering undergrad, just about to start his second year).</p>
<p>We are of the “one pot” model, too. How much goes to whom is not always equal, but the aim is that both get out of undergrad as debt-free as possible, and both work equally in the summer to earn their portion of the costs. That requires some odd reckoning. For example, we pay for my son’s books but my daughter pays for her own. This is because he has a much higher summer earnings expectation than she does. He can’t earn enough to pay it and also buy books. What she earns in her summer job is mostly available for her to do with what she wants. I don’t reallocate their incomes, but I do allocate <em>ours</em> to balance things out somewhat. That’s just one example, but we make those adjustments in lots of ways as we go along. Both should have equal opportunity to accomplish what they want, but that doesn’t mean we divide our resources strictly in half for them.</p>
<p>We’re also in Soozie’s camp. Three kids, one pot and we feel we treated them equal. Equal for us means each was given the opportunity for an education at a school he loved that would meet his needs. The fact that the schools came with different price tags didn’t enter into it any more that the differing costs of their medical care. The feeling that the different dollar amounts spent was unfair would never even enter my kids’ thoughts. They are each thrilled to be getting educations at schools they chose and love.</p>
<p>I’ve never been a big believer in the whole “equal” thing. There is an excellent book on sibling issues that takes the approach that the “equal” mentality leads to a lot of problems. I told my kids that each kid gets what they need and what they need is not always what a sibling needs. This also carried over into talents, etc. If one kid worked hard at piano and was talented, that didn’t mean every kid needed lessons or the money shelled out in some other way. One kid played sports a lot which cost less than the kid who was artistic and took art lessons. But I wasn’t going to find some way to pay more to the kid who was athletic because his passion was cheaper. I know one family where one kid is in public school and the other in private - different kids, different needs. I don’t think they owe the public school kid anything or that either kid has any reason to be jealous - both are in excellent programs suited to their own needs. Anyhow, we didn’t pay the same amount for all of our kids re college and it was fine. Each ended up at a school they chose to be at and that’s what matters. This is different than showering one kid consistently with gifts and not others, etc. Obviously, some parents do overtly favor kids – that’s not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about need-based parenting.</p>
<p>They’re different kids in different situations with different decisions. I can’t think of any reason why it s/b expected that they’d each have the exact same amount of dollars spent on their college education. It doesn’t really make any sense any more than handing one of them an equal pile of dough if they chose not to go to college at all. </p>
<p>You’re treating them equally and fairly by providing a college education for both of them and that’s more than some parents do so they should both feel grateful for the opportunities you provided for them. I think you should consider placing any funds you anticipated would go to the college fund but are no longer needed for that purpose into your retirement fund or other investments or take a great vacation or something. You’re already meeting your end of the deal regarding funding the kids’ college educations.</p>
<p>Also, unlike some here, it was not like we had all the funds saved up for college and then one kid didn’t use it all and we then gave the difference. We did not have it all saved up and we are paying over time. There is no extra money sitting around to give to X kid whose total college cost may have differed a little from the other kid (nor would I hand them over the difference had it been saved up anyway). </p>
<p>Here is an example. D1 is in a 3.5 year grad school which we are funding. While she got scholarship offers at five excellent grad schools (these are professional schools that do not pay you to attend but may offer some money, not all, as scholarships toward tuition), she did not get such an offer at the sixth school but that was the school she preferred and we let her attend it. This summer, she learned she was awarded a substantial fellowship toward tuition there for her remaining 2.5 years. It is a wonderful surprise that will help us out a great deal (she applied for it but didn’t think she would win it and never told us that she put in for it). Now, it is not like I am now giving her the difference of what I had thought I would have to pay out! Simply this is a nice help and she knows it helps us. But it is not like we promised a dollar amount. We promised an education.</p>
<p>I agree philosophically with everyone here who supports giving each child what they need.</p>
<p>But within limits. I’ve observed a family dynamic where the low maintenance kid (financially, not necessarily emotionally!) ends up as an adult with some big issues towards the other sibs and parents.</p>
<p>So make sure that you’ve role played how the conversation goes with each of your kids before you decide how to communicate your limitations and your generosity. Even the best intended parents sometimes convey (however subtle it may be) “you’re the slug and he’s the genius. So we don’t think it matters how much we spend on you”.</p>
<p>I’m not of the “one pot” opinion although I do believe that siblings should be able to attend the school that best fits their interests/personalities, assuming that school is affordable to the family.</p>
<p>I’ve been saving money in my sons’ names since they were infants with the intention of having equal amounts available for them to use on their college education. Anything left over in their UGMAs or 529s will be theirs, thus giving them an incentive to select a school we could all afford.</p>
<p>S1’s account is worth almost exactly the 4-year cost of his in-state public school, so he’s not likely to have anything left over. I think he’s fine with that as he values his education that much. Unfortunately, the savings plan got a little derailed for S2 over the years, and his account is about three quarters of S1’s. Regardless, any gap will be funded from my savings and current income with the goal of graduation with little to no debt. This assumes he goes to an in-state public school or gets the equivalent in scholarships at a private college (he’s a senior in high school). There’s a limit to how much I can contribute, and S2 knows this. I’m guessing his education might cost more than S1’s, given inflation and the chance he’ll go to a private college. I don’t forsee any issues between the boys, or among them and me, about who got more money for college. Each boy is so different in personality, interests and abilities that it’s obvious to all that they should go to completely different types of schools.</p>
This is exactly what we did. While we paid for S to go to a state university, S2 accepted a full ride to a top 20 LAC with the stipulation that he will get help from us for law school (four years’ worth of EFC).</p>
<p>I’m guessing the “you” not being spent on this example is “the slug”, but I’ve seen instances where the opposite happens. I know parents with several kids, one of whom is an academic superstar, and the parents feel the academically stronger child should work relatively long hours while at a highly competitive school so that limited parental funds can be spent on the academically weaker siblings who could not manage such a brutal school and work schedule.</p>
<p>dnt- It goes both ways and I didn’t mean to suggest otherwise. My example was just intended to point out that parents who keep insisting that their kids have absolutely no issues with how the parents have chosen to divide the resources… are projecting a little, in my experience. I know adults who still have a lot of anger over this- I don’t think their parents were bad people or insensitive, but the message sometimes leaks out in the wrong way. </p>
<p>I’m not suggesting anyone change their MO. Just be aware that the kid who is always so good natured about the sibling who gets the lion’s share isn’t always so good natured. And watching in my cousins family the dynamic among adults who still resent that sibling number one spent junior year abroad sketching cathedrals while they worked two jobs since the college fund was depleted by the time their turn came… well it isn’t pretty. Nobody can predict the future (and past performance is no guarantee of future results as the brokerage firms tell us) but be careful how you spin the message. And be especially careful if your choices feed into some long standing pattern within your family, i.e. the kid who claims he’s going to med school gets the care and feeding (after all, he’s going to be a DOCTOR!) while the kids with fewer or less socially acceptable aspirations get short shrift throughout their education.</p>
<p>If I could afford to pay for med school and wanted to (disclaimer- I am not paying for my kids grad school… that’s on them) it seems that I should also be able to pay for law school or b-school or whatnot for the rest of my brood. Not fair to start picking and choosing what you’ll pay for on the basis of how prestigious you feel the outcome is going to be.</p>
<p>Although in an ideal world, the kids would be grateful for the gift of education that parents provide, and each kid would help the other, I don’t think it is an ideal world. I think some parents plan poorly, giving kid1 what they can, and then running out of money for kid2. Kid 2 is not going to be happy unless he/she can come up with some really good grants somewhere. I think this is more in the case of people who get some fin aid, but not those in the group that the college pays for everything. Coming up with the EFC can be a real challenge, especially when the parents say they won’t mortgage the house, sign for a loan etc. I think resentments can last the rest of a lifetime over these kind of things. I would say it is very important not to let a child feel that another child or children got the limited financial resources, and there was no more to go around. This is not really what most of the people above have described, but it does happen and can cause problems.</p>
<p>For us, we try to be “equal” when it comes to the untangibles- our time, our attention, effots, love. When it came to dollars for school, each did what they could themselves. One D got a scholarship that paid for her highschool. She didn’t get extra $$, but as a family, we did things together.</p>
<p>I do have some inlaws and I do have to admit, there is a bit of resentment between the older girls and the younger sister. When they went to school they paid it basically themselves. By the time thrid d was going to college, family was a bit more flush, and were able to cover tuition, so she has no loans. Now, 4th child is having to cover alot more on his own. So child #3, while no one is overt in their resentment, it pops up once in awhile.</p>
<p>“Oh she can do that cruise cause she doesn’t have any college loans like the rest of us”.</p>
<p>It was all in the timing, but I think the parents should have pushed 3rd daughter to take out a few small loans as well, its what they expected of the other girls.</p>
<p>The adult kids are mad at their parents, just feel they spoiled child 3 and they probablly did.</p>
<p>I have twins and I agree completely with soozievt in post 12. My twins have equal opportunities. It so happens we’ve spent more on son to date because he has chosen to go to relatively expensive summer programs while d has chosen to work and volunteer. OTOH we’ve spent more on D’s sport since S isn’t into any competitive sport. That’s life. If one goes to a low cost state u and the other goes to a private u, so be it. They don’t get to pocket the difference as it’s not a contest. If one goes to grad school and the other doesn’t, so be it. </p>
<p>I went to an expensive private u. My sister went to an out of state public u. We were treated equally because we got our college educations paid for. Any money my parents “saved” on my sister – well, more for their vacations or retirement!</p>
<p>Maybe that’s why I got the nice car for my college graduation present (paid my own way) and my sister who went to an expensive private art college paid mostly by my parents got nothing much. Now it makes more sense. Never really thought of it that way before.</p>
<p>I think a mixed system would be fair, family financial situation allowing it:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>kids should choose where they want to attend, but should be required to come with a good case to justify more expensive options of same ‘level’ (e.g., attending OOS of same standards as own flagship S.U.)</p></li>
<li><p>parents would met EFC as defined by FA package of each kid’s college. If they are paying more for the sake of lowering the financial burden of loans, they should do in an equal base.</p></li>
<li><p>allowance for clothes, car and pocket money should be the same</p></li>
<li><p>kids would be allowed to split merit aid, awards and prizes they collect after enrolling: part would offset loan burden (if any) or parents contribution, part would be extra money they could save or spend at will.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>I see no reason that I need to keep my d’s clothing allowance the same as my s’s. I’ll make sure they are both outfitted for the upcoming school year. That coats more for d but s doesn’t care in the least.</p>
<p>I still don’t see what’s “unfair” if both kids get to go where they want / can get in, and it so happens that one sibling’s cost more. Both kids got their education paid for and got their first choice.</p>