<p>I don’t think that’s entirely fair, Seahorsesrock. Surely, there is some room for making honest assessments of talent and operating accordingly without devaluing the accomplishments of other children. At the extreme, would you suggest a parent that sacrificed to see their kid compete in the Olympics would be obliged to go through the same expense and effort to see their other kid compete in a high school swim meet? Or that telling one kid you weren’t going to spend money on a pricey sleep-away camp means you can’t let the other kid go to the expensive academic program that has accepted them?</p>
<p>In the case of college, I think it makes even more sense to differentiate in certain case. If D1’s dream school is Columbia and D2’s is Syracuse - and assuming that both get in - I think it would be perfectly valid for parents or grandparents to reason that Columbia might be worth tens of thousands of dollars more than a SUNY school, but that Syracuse is not. While there are a variety of circumstances under which that reasoning might not apply - for instance, if Syracuse has a specific program D2 wants to pursue - in most cases, I think that would be a fair call, even if it isn’t the call every parent would make. </p>
<p>In the OP’s situation, I think the grandparents’ reasoning for favoring D1 is relevant. If either the behavior of the girls or something in their academic backgrounds is at stake, I’d be inclined to take the money - if, of course, it is actually on offer (I’d also make sure D1 was the one handling the money, not me). If, on the other hand, their choice is arbitrary or based on faulty/manipulative premises (i.e, they’re doing this as a power play to punish and reward the daughters’ willingness to side with them in the divorce), I’d turn it down.</p>