Paying for children at university

steph2901

My son is in uni and I can't afford to pay his way for him, but do help out with food shopping. He has a student loan and a job.

Andypandyboy

I am sure for the offspring who already has one child (which is not the norm for students ime) then your support needs to be practical and perhaps her choices were already constrained by being a parent.

However, for other children that may not be the case and so being so dogmatic that you would never offer financial support will inevitably constrain them and your clear disdain for education will colour their view of HE.

Up to you how you parent of course, but you are by no means the norm, and not all those kids turn out to be the feral students you portray!

I also have considerable experience with which to back up that statement.:D

A degree is not the golden goose, but used to best advantage it is the catalyst for achievement, and if the opportunities are not around the corner you move to where they are. I know loads of young, single graduates who stacked shelves or flipped burgers for a time, but as a stopgap, all of them, without exception, eventually found jobs commensurate to their qualifications, either close to home or further afield.

mumps

missbiggles1 wrote: »

But you can make comparisons between the educational standards in your day and those of your children.

In education itself, you used not to need even A levels (only to have studied at that level) to train to teach and teaching hasn't become more technical, just more paperwork.

My children have all done much better than I did academically, I was a bit of a late starter and if I compare their time at grammar school with mine I'm afraid it doesn't support what you are suggesting. I think that is more down to me not being interested, I discovered boys, and my kids all being much more committed. My father also died just after I started at grammar school which disrupted my education, I had always suffered from migraines but they became much worse at this time and I missed lots of time at school.

At 18 my four were all doing A levels and getting ready for uni and I was a mother!

I think all my teacher's had degrees, both at grammar school and primary although at primary they were generally from Irish universities rather than English, although I went to school in England it was in an Irish Catholic area and I can only remember one girl who had English parents. The teacher I had for two years from 9 to 11 went to Trinity College Dublin. Going to a non denominational grammar school was a culture shock.

One of my friends went to a teacher training college, so she didn't go to university but she did have A levels.

missbiggles1

Andypandyboy wrote: »

Yes, I agree it would be hard to police, but I really think that if you bring a child into this world you should be forced to be financially responsible for it under the systems in place. So, you may cease to be with a partner but you should not be allowed to "divorce" yourself financially from a child.

Ditto those not willing to support them even if they live with them. It really shouldn't be a choice. If there are no financial consequences people could go on to have large numbers of children without fear they will be called on to do what most of us do as a matter of course.

It should be an attachment of earnings or some similar scheme. Why should the country shoulder the burden of paying larger amounts to those who have a parent earning?

You have a child, you support it under the means tested system.

It certainly should work like that but the CSA doesn't seem to be able to manage it.:(

I suppose when you have people who give up their jobs rather than support the children they've fathered and others who pull in such large sums of benefit money from having enormous numbers of children spread over their working lifetime then you just have to think that large sections of society have gone to hell on a handcart!

I've depressed myself, I'm off to open a bottle of red.:o

mumps

Andypandyboy wrote: »

No, it isn't compulsory and there are other routes to education, but as a parent I couldn't stand by and see the aspirations of my kids go by the wayside because I wouldn't help them out.

I do think subject choice should align with reasonable career prospects and that there should be an expectation that there will be a balance between work and play that will result in attaining a good degree classification. Studies do show that those with a degree earn substantially more than those without. Of course it doesn't guaranteee a job but there are certain fields you simply cannot progress in or even enter without one. Without support those areas would be closed to many, which is a shame.

My kids will always have my support when it is needed, I think you seem to have a very black and white approach to supporting your kids and a very disparaging attitude to education.

You seem to be saying that kids with parental support are the ones who run riot, or is that just a rather convenient belief? None of mine behaved in that way and they were "supported" to the hilt, not mollycoddled.

I did the alternative route, had a baby just after my 18th birthday and another at 21 and started to study when the younger one started school. My boss agreed to me doing a course which my employers , a large police force, paid forbut I had to cope with a fulltime job and two kids. I did five years of it, my employers were great and paid my fees and bought my books and gave me study leave before exams but I told my kids it was hard and the older two could remember it. I encouraged them to do it fulltime straight from school and helped them as much as I could.

Andypandyboy

missbiggles1 wrote: »

It certainly should work like that but the CSA doesn't seem to be able to manage it.:(

I suppose when you have people who give up their jobs rather than support the children they've fathered and others who pull in such large sums of benefit money from having enormous numbers of children spread over their working lifetime then you just have to think that large sections of society have gone to hell on a handcart!

I've depressed myself, I'm off to open a bottle of red.:o

If I was not havng a dry January I would follow suit.

I am afraid that the abdication of parental responsibility really makes my blood boil.:o

missbiggles1

mumps wrote: »

My children have all done much better than I did academically, I was a bit of a late starter and if I compare their time at grammar school with mine I'm afraid it doesn't support what you are suggesting. I think that is more down to me not being interested, I discovered boys, and my kids all being much more committed. My father also died just after I started at grammar school which disrupted my education, I had always suffered from migraines but they became much worse at this time and I missed lots of time at school.

At 18 my four were all doing A levels and getting ready for uni and I was a mother!

I think all my teacher's had degrees, both at grammar school and primary although at primary they were generally from Irish universities rather than English, although I went to school in England it was in an Irish Catholic area and I can only remember one girl who had English parents. The teacher I had for two years from 9 to 11 went to Trinity College Dublin. Going to a non denominational grammar school was a culture shock.

One of my friends went to a teacher training college, so she didn't go to university but she did have A levels.

I really meant the general standard at each level rather than individual attainments. In the subjects I'm familiar with, A levels are not that much different from O levels in the 60s and the same with the first year or two of degree courses compared with A levels then.

Teaching only became an all graduate profession in the mid/late 70s, up to then it was quite unusual for primary school teachers to be graduates. Obviously that wasn't the case in grammar schools but I remember we all felt a bit sorry for the PE teacher who didn't have a gown to wear at assembly.:)

missbiggles1

Andypandyboy wrote: »

If I was not havng a dry January I would follow suit.

I am afraid that the abdication of parental responsibility really makes my blood boil.:o

I don't do dry Januaries - I give up alcohol for Lent.

System

I'd give them either both equal amounts or nothing. The one who went to london chose to go there knowing it has higher costs, just like if they chose to live in london they'd know it had higher costs (plus i think possibly theyd get more student loan anyway? could be wrong there).

My parents thankfully don;t have this issue as both of my younger siblings are at the same uni, they get the same towards their living costs.

Although i never got an allowance anyway, so i'm probably not the best person to answer this question! I just know my parents views are we are all treated equally (example being since I went on the school trip to france in year 7, the other 3 did too)

indiepanda

xXMessedUpXx wrote: »

I'd give them either both equal amounts or nothing. The one who went to london chose to go there knowing it has higher costs, just like if they chose to live in london they'd know it had higher costs (plus i think possibly theyd get more student loan anyway? could be wrong there).

I agree. There are very few courses you can only choose to study in London. Most young people would love to live in London if they could afford it, but if one child had been sensible and thought they'd choose a cheaper place to live and the other went for the London option for the excitement of being in the capital without it being necessary to do so for their degree, then it seems a little unfair for the sensible child to just get less financial support.

To be honest, I'd expect parents to have a sensible conversation with a child before they selected their university about what support they could give and the child to take that into account when deciding where to study rather than having to make a decision about what is fair once the choice has been made.

I wouldn't have dreamed of trying to study in London as I knew my parents didn't have much money and wouldn't have been able to come up with extra just because I'd decided to live somewhere very expensive. (I didn't go for the cheapest place either I'll admit)