Handouts or no handouts?

Categories: Wormie Says

The Sunday Times wrote a report on parents who still contributes to their working children financially (All grown up...and still getting handouts from mum and dad, ST April 30, 2006). Most of the parents quoted did so not to help the children tide over difficult times but to supplement their income. This however is not unique to Singapore, according to the report, as The New York Times had reported that Americans pay about $2,300 annually to suport their adult offspring. It is good that if the parents are able finacially, they should help their children. However is this good for the children, especially in the case where such financial "help" is to supplement their salaries and increase their spending abilities?

Most people will agree that once a person receive his first paycheck, he has reached adulthood. And adulthood means being independent and responsible for himself. In the modern world, usually the only obstacle to being independent is financial. Therefore with the first paycheck, comes some degree of independence.

Most adult value their independence. They do not appreciate 'feedback' from their parents. For this reason alone, the apron-string of handouts should be cut so that the child is 'really' independent. There cannot be any grudge when getting 'feedback' from parents but happily taking handouts from them.

Being an adult comes responsibility. Responsibility in adulthood encompass many things including being responsible for himself. Therefore, he has to be responsible financially also. If the salary does not enable him to live a luxury lifestyle, then his expectations should be adjusted and just live as comfortable as the salary allows. If he wants to improve his lifestyles, the way is not handouts from parents but to work harder or to improve himself so that he can get a better paying position. By receiving handouts to enable an unrealistic lifestyle is not being responsible.

What happens if one day the parents cannot afford to give handouts anymore? Overnight, lifestyles will have to change. The bigger the handout previously, the more hardship the child will experience. This is because suddenly, there is a vacuum left by the handout and the child now has to rely on his "meagre" pay to support an unrealistic lifestyles. Everything he has tried to portray will crumble. If he can accept the more realistic lifestyle, then the problem stops there. What happens if he cannot accepts the more restricted spending power? He may turn to unsecured loans that is so easily available from banks. Such loans, initially may feel like the parents' handouts; but in reality this is a loan which means it has to be repaid. Any default in repayment will mean interest accumulation and may spell the start of a spiral of worsening debts.

To the girl who is willing to spend $3000 on a Channel handbag with the help of the parent's money, has she considered whether the mother would have spend the same amount on a handbag? Does she think that it is fair to her parents although the parents are giving her the money freely?

Parents tend to dote on their children and this is should be the case. However sometimes to love them is to be 'mean' to them. If they are brought up to live within their means, they will not suffer when faced with difficulty. They will learn to be responsible to themselves and the parents. Giving handouts to the child will only make the child complacent and unrealistic; in the long run they will lack the necessary motivation to improve. Worse, they will teach the next generation such unrealistic expectations resulting in unhappiness when faced with reality.

There must be a reason why Bill Gates, once said that he will only leave $1 million to his son. True, $1 million is a lot of money until you consider that Bill Gates is worth tens of billions of dollars!