MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should the twins get the same value presents?

StephSmith687

RedSpecs wrote: »

Forgive me, but the last few posts here have made the most sense. Those of you obsessing over the matching of monetary values of presents are only headed for disaster and a bunch of spoiled little brats who always will expect to get what they want. When you aren't in a position to provide that one day, their spite will know no bounds.

Yes, children may get a bit upset, but that's now we learn life's lessons. It won't scar them for life, but pandering to their every desire most certainly will.

When I was a kid I was grateful for what I got cos I knew my parents didn't have a pot to p*** in and did their best. The spoilt little brats of today don't know they're born.

I disagree completly my parents have always spent the same on all 4 of us even down to the last pound but we are not spoilt brats. Even now that Im 21 my parents will spend the same on me as the other younger ones (even down to buying 50ps worth of sweets). This is not because we are spoiled but because my parents would feel guilty if they didnt they have done this all our lives even before we understood about money. We would each make a list and our parents would choose items of it upto what ever they could afford that year. This way we each got something that we wanted.

With regards to the twins if the parents can not afford to spend £100 on both girls then they should explain to them that they may not get everything that they wish for this year. The same as my parents did that way we were not disapointed when we didnt get everthing and 9 times out of 10 the other things on our list were soon forgotten in the excitment of christmas day.

completelybroke

I'm really thankful my 5 yr old son is more concerned about the fact that santa doesn't bring his mummy and daddy anything rather than asking for countless things for himself.

LindaS

I would try to give equal value presents.

I remember one christmas when my dad bought one present each for me and my sister. I got a santa xmas decoration and my (younger) sister got an ipod nano.

Maybe he didnt mean to treat us differntly but it did make me wonder.

ed4mgf

I'm a twin myself and at the age of 10 probably wouldn't have really cared how much each gift cost, and would have been happy with the presents I asked for. Also they'll probably end up sharing anyway and both use each others presents.:beer:

nundern

Despite us both being (well sort of) adults, my mum still has this dilema with my brother and I. This year, he has asked for a PS3 and I have asked for a jacket which costs more than £200 less than a playstation.

I've told my mum that if I'd have wanted something that expensive, I would have asked for it. The point is, I am getting what I have asked for knowing full well my brother is getting something more expensive and I don't mind. I think the twins should get the presents they asked for regardless of the difference in price. They'll be pleased with what they get and knowing twins, they will probably end up using each others' gifts anyway!

If you really felt guilty about it (which I don't think you should seeing as you are giving each of them what they wanted) then why not buy a more expensive set of skates or buy all the accessories to go with the cheaper pair. Or ask if there is anything else that twin wants!

ronback

Of course they should! My wife and I have brought up 4 children including twin girls and they all had the same amount spent on them - they have now produced 5 grandchildren for us to spend equal on them also! We would never show any favouritism to any of them so either spend less on one or more on the other (but I suspect the DS will still be bought!) MerryChristmas! :beer:

TRT

I've thought long and hard about this; I've applied my maxim "What would Santa do?" and I've decided to eat all the mince pies and drink the brandy.

And as for the presents... the one after skates HAS to get the safety gear added on as well, which will bring the price up. The fact that there's a difference in the cost is immaterial, they get what will make them happy (not necessarily equal to what they ask for or what they need, but that's another philosophical question!), and I would not expect them to love or favour me any different any more than I would want them to think I loved or favoured one over the other. I hate them both equally! (Joke).

And any complaints can be dealt with by saying "Well, if you feel like that, then next year discuss it with your sister and choose a joint present."

AndyRen_2

simon_the_saver wrote: »

Why not get the DS and game, but mark the DS as shared and the game for Monica (approx value £40) and the skates for Gabriella. Then they can each buy games to play on the DS

I have read all 5 pages of posts, and there are many I agree with, this one the most. You HAVE to let children understand that they can't have whatever they want (or they end up growing up materialistic), and I understand how many parents want to treat their children equally (and there is a difference between treating them fairly (applying the same reasoning to both) and equally (give them equal sum total of presents)). I suspect many of the people who are saying 'give them solely what they want, regardless of cost' are not parents themselves.

A PS to Simon's OP, the total value of the shared DS approach (£180) is still less than giving £100 to each, and more importantly it teaches the twins to share.

My parents' solution to this was to give us what we wanted if they could afford it, and to make us share if they couldn't. One year I asked for a home computer (as they were called then!) and my older sister asked for something cheap I can't remember. We were allowed a computer but on the sole condition we shared it, and I presume my sister got her desired present as a secondary gift and I got an equal value secondary present.

Another option they gave us if it was something only one of us wanted, was to have the big present as a joint Christmas/birthday present (both our birthdays are in August), and to be content with only receiving one or two little presents for our birthday.

We both loved playing on the computer, often together, and (since there weren't many games available for it - it wasn't a ZX Spectrum like all my mates had!) she got into writing her own programs for it. She (like anne99's hypothetical Olympic skater) is now a highly accomplished computer programmer earning twice as much as me and I still love playing games on my pc.

Long, rambling post, but I think the message is, don't give in to your children, act with principles and trust your instincts - the twins will subconsciously or otherwise absorb and respect your morals, and probably repeat it with their own children.

AndyRen_2

LindaS wrote: »

I would try to give equal value presents.

I remember one christmas when my dad bought one present each for me and my sister. I got a santa xmas decoration and my (younger) sister got an ipod nano.

Maybe he didnt mean to treat us differntly but it did make me wonder.

Since your sister got an iPod Nano, this must've been a recent Christmas and I presume that, with student debts, you're both now adults. Therefore your father probably thought the comparative value of each item probably doesn't mean as much to you now as it would've when you were younger.

haziec

Definately treat them the same moneywise, good idea to make up the amount with cash or vouchers rather than try and buy another present.

would LOVE to pose the question - should you spend the same on your Daughter in law or Son in Law that you spend on your married son or daughter ?? LOL