<p>In this way the parents would be treating the children equally insofar as the values being addressed. Equality should be given in terms of love and respect, despite the fact that there may be disparities insofar as how much such support may cost financially. Love and respect does not come with a price tag. The message to be delivered would be along the lines of to each according to his or her needs. Perhaps fair and equitable could be a guiding principle rather than economic equality.</p>
<p>What time is it? Trolling time!</p>
<p>Fair and equitable? Are we talking about parenting, division of property in divorce, or principles of communism? ;)</p>
<p>Equally even if they are at completely different stages in their lives? How about if there are couple decades between them? Equality needs to be addressed under very specific conditions. Otherwise it is not possible at all to address this issue as family might be in completely different situation financially and otherwise while raising one kid vs another, who might already be on his own.</p>
<p>Equality is important but impossible. All our kids are different from each other and we treat them farily and we do our best to also give them all the emotional stability and support they need. Economical equailty is important on the surface but again impossible. S1 goes to Caltech, S2 to Yale and D is planning on a community college for nursing. How can there be economic equality; $60,000 for S’s and $7500 for D. We are struggling with this as a family right now. </p>
<p>I don’t want my kids to feel as I do, I moved out and paid for my own college completely and 2 younger sibs my parents paid. To this day feel a little cheated. Don’t wanmt my kids to feel that way.</p>
<p>If the issue is never brought up as everybody is an adult and understand that equality is not possible, than the issue does not exist. I am not sure about all these feelings and stuff, seems that most of it is artificially created. It is understood that they are supported as much as possible, each one of them. But degree of support cannot be possibly the same. D. might want to talk to a mother under distress, S. might want to keep it to himself and talking to him might mean to be nosy, he might not like it at all. We have to support and RESPECT each of them differently, we have to RESPECT the fact that they are very different people and might be at very different stages in their lives and being surrounded by very different crowd of friends. Equality might actually mean disrespect for all of that. One of them might be actually offended by being treated in the same way as another.</p>
<p>Equal opportunity but not equal reward. So…let’s say 2 kids…one barely graduates high school and the other is the valedictorian. It would be reasonable to pay for college for the valedictorian (within your means) but then tell the one who barely graduated that they must show decent grades at the junior college first. Or…if let’s say, one graduates high school and the other does not…you are not obligated to give the same gift to both…only the graduate gets the gift. See what I am saying? Give both equal chance to achieve something…reward the ones who come through.</p>
<p>In terms of love, support and affection?
To each according to need. Need changes by week, day and even hour.
Fair isn’t part of my plan. However if I feel that deprivation would teach needed skills faster than indulgence, the deprivation it is!</p>
<p>joszacem, In all fairness, you should get your D a new BMW.</p>
<p>S #1 wandering through CC and now instate University. S #2 at expensive (even with partial scholarship) private university. We have already “raided” … I mean, “transfered” funds from #1’s 529 plan to benefit #2.</p>
<p>I’d like to think my judgements are fair but it’s not something I worry about. I follwow the principle of “Just do the right thing.” Obviously that’s always influenced by the set of circumstances involved. Parenthood can be fluid at times, and frankly, I don’t have the time or inclination to try to weigh every current decision for my kids against every other one I’ve made in the past. That said, I always abide by love and respect regarding whatever it is we’re dealing with. Works fine.</p>
<p>Me thinks you feel wronged Jim.</p>
<p>“To each according to need. Need changes by week, day and even hour.”
-Even if the need is few million $$$? I want to be your kid, I might be much older than you, though…</p>
<p>I believe in keeping things equitable, though not necessarily equal. Our three kids are spread out over 7 years, which was enough time for the cost of d1’s school, which d3 also attended, to nearly double. Fortunately, our income changed for the better during that time. I would not have told one child she could not attend the school we paid for her sister to attend unless the financial consequences were dire. </p>
<p>If a child isn’t emotionally or academically ready to go off to college, then I wouldn’t pay for it right after high school. But if a child simply doesn’t achieve at a superstar sibling’s level, I’d still pay the same amount for each education. For example, I wouldn’t tell the superstar to apply anywhere but the other to look only at instate publics because “she can get a teaching degree anywhere” (as is often said on this board, though not by me). I’d spend roughly the same amount on each child’s education – not to the penny, but roughly – as long as each child was making good progress.</p>
<p>Because we spent so much less on d1’s education, we’re going to make an adjustment at some point – either as a gift when she buys a house, in our wills, or something. She‘d never ask for or expect it, but it seems right to us.</p>
<p>3 kids over 7 years is lots of responsibilities. How about 2 over 20? Done with one, move to the next. Both “only”'s, full attention, full price, no sharing of anything.</p>
<p>Just wanting to add that I don’t think that instate publics are somehow a lesser option, or that teaching is a lesser profession. I’d hate to give that impression, since I don’t feel that way at all. Just trying to say that I’d spend the same amount, regardless of the kid’s desired field, as long as the kid was ready and able to work hard in college. If a child chose an instate school or merit offer that meant spending much less on that child’s education, I’d make an adjustment by paying for summer programs, a car, helping with grad study, etc. We actually did do this for our d2.</p>
<p>I only have one child, so clearly I’ll treat him equally, but I think it’s important</p>
<p>I really think my kid will do fine at an instate public. He seems like the kind of kid that would thrive there – bright, well rounded, extroverted enough to do well in a large setting, organized and proactive enough to take care of himself in a setting without a lot of handholding from profs, well rounded enough in his interests he’s sure to find a major he’d like etc . . . I also think it’s reasonable to expect him to keep his grades up for merit aid, develop skills (e.g. lifeguarding) that let him earn more than minimum wage and work a part time job/full time summers. </p>
<p>I have a niece who I love who has significant LDs, and I think would be lost at our instate options. I think that if she’s going to do well in college she’ll need a very small setting, with an office specializing in access for kids with disabilities, attentive professors, and courses spread out over 5 or 6 years during which she probably won’t be able to earn a significant amount of money. </p>
<p>If they were both mine, twins, and my budget wasn’t unlimited, I can imagine having to say to one “I can pay instate, if you want to go elsewhere you’ll need to get merit aid and a job to make up the difference” and to the other “I will pay for private”.</p>
<p>Is that “equal”? I guess not, but the playing field is already unequal. Does it provide equal opportunity to graduate?</p>
<p>I have five and they have kept me so busy that tallying up what’s equal with all of the different factors involved just has been impossible. I 'm not going to break the bank or the household to treat the fourth one in a way that the first one was treated because circumstances were different. Nor would I deprive one of a situation that was denied another. I have to take each child and situation as it arises. Do I love them equally? I think I do, but truly differently and there are times I outright dislike some of them more than others because the way they think and do things just grate on me. I’m sure they feel the same way about me. There are some things you cannot help.</p>
<p>However, on a daily basis, I treat them equitably as I would anyone, and in a way that I think is fair. Not everyone would agree. But I think common sense needs to be a strong factor in all of this.</p>
<p>Joszacem’s post moved me. I also paid my own college but some of my sibs did not. My parents were often unequal to us kids. The Mad Men thread helped me feel more peaceful about this because I realize my parents were a product of their times.
My two kids graduated from completely different colleges: one pricey private and the other State Univ. I treated them financially & emotionally as close to equal as I knew how. Parent contribution the same for both kids. Private has a student loan still in repayment and state u is loan free, due cost of their choices.<br>
As I look at death issues, the forum threads on equality in death have also informed me. I think people appreciate being rewarded (by being treated as equal) for being successful (contributing to community, paying own way) instead of “punished” by parents leaving more to less “successful” offspring.<br>
So, OP, I respectfully disagree with “to each according to his or her needs.” My choice has been equality at every level.</p>
<p>I think one has to swing with the situation. Sometimes it is “to each according to needs” and sometimes it is equality. One of mine got a life threatening dx, and believe me, we all got neglected for the two years of intense treatment. Some of my kids do have special needs that take more time and attention. In some families that is the case for a lifetime. It’s not fair, but it does happen. Also time is an important factor. There are times when we just had more to give financially and attention wise. We gave the first child a lot more in terms of spending on education and extracurriculars because we had the money then and the prospects of more. We had some set backs and simply could not do the same with the others. The youngest now is enjoying some more privileges simply because it’s available. </p>
<p>I’ve felt fortunate in that my kids don’t seem to have any problem with the discrepancies. They want their baby brother to have more and give what they can to him. THey help each other out, and I haven’t heard a peep about unfairness except in terms of privileges when they desperately want something for which we don’t give permission.</p>
<p>Oh, and we made mistakes in some things that we gave and spent. Am certainly not going to repeat them just to provide equality.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What if the superstar kid went to a school that gave a full ride? Seems like that would make it tough for the other kid to go to college on the same amount…</p>
<p>The answers seem to be the same: equal love, not necessarily equal $$$$$.</p>
<p>Analogy: I wouldn’t put equal food on their plates either. My D really does eat like a birda and my S, where oh where does he put it? Typical. But other things can’t be the same. Don’t want one stuffed and one starving. Each child should have the food s/he needs without overstuffing.</p>
<p>DS cost more growing up because of lots of expensive music lessons. However, he did practice an hour a day and desperately wanted them. DD took only sporatic lessons. DD’s clothes cost much more than DS’s. I didn’t keep a tally. DD’s school gave generous FA; DS’s gave more and no loans. I didn’t tally up money spent on each.</p>