FLOURISHING AFTER 50: My son, his partner and their kids have moved in with us to save - but now they want our money as well
Dear Vanessa,
Our son is 32 with two young children. He and his partner have been renting for years, but with the cost of everything going up, they can't seem to get ahead. They've been slowly saving for a house deposit but it could take years.
Recently, they asked if they could move in with us for a while to save more money. We agreed - it makes sense and we want to support them where we can. But now our son has taken it a step further and asked if we would consider contributing to their deposit so they can buy sooner.
My husband and I are both 61 and still working. We've got retirement savings and some extra put aside, but we're not retired yet - and we don't have unlimited resources.
My husband is very cautious and thinks helping financially is a bad idea. He's worried that once the money is gone, we won't get it back - and we might end up needing it down the track. I can see both sides, and I'm torn. We want to help, but not at the expense of our own future. What's the right thing to do?
Christine.
Dear Christine,
You've described a dilemma so many families are facing right now. With housing unaffordability, high living costs, and interest rates biting, adult children are under enormous financial pressure- and often, their first thought is to turn to mum and dad.
It's understandable. You're the generation who built up savings, paid down debt, and likely bought property at a more achievable price. To your children, you may look financially secure. But what they often don't realise is that retirement is getting more expensive, we're all living longer, and your money has to stretch much further than it used to.
Opening your home to help them save is already a generous act - and likely to be a huge help. But giving away money, especially before you've even retired, is a completely different decision. Once you gift a lump sum, it's usually gone for good. And if something changes - your health, your job, or even their relationship - you can't always get it back.
That doesn't mean you can't help. But it does mean being crystal clear about what you can safely afford to give, and what impact it will have on your lifestyle for the next 20 or 30 years. That's where a conversation with a good financial adviser can make all the difference. They can model what a gift or loan would do to your future income and help you structure it properly, so it's protected.
For example, if your son and his partner were to split up, would you want your contribution to be part of a legal agreement or loan that's repaid? Or is this money a gift with no expectations? These are emotional decisions, but they have real financial consequences.
And just as importantly, you and your husband need to be on the same page. If one of you feels uneasy, that's a sign to slow down and gather more information before making any commitments. Money given under pressure or guilt often causes long-term resentment - especially if it later affects your ability to live the retirement you planned.
If you need help finding an adviser in your area, I offer a free referral service to connect you with someone experienced and independent.
Supporting your family is a wonderful thing - but so is securing your own future, so you can enjoy your retirement, your freedom, and the time you've earned with your grandkids.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
29 minutes ago
- Sky News
US warplanes transit through UK: Here's what the flight tracking data shows
Flight tracking data shows extensive movement of US military aircraft towards the Middle East in recent days, including via the UK. Fifty-two US military planes were spotted flying over the eastern Mediterranean towards the Middle East between Monday and Thursday. That includes at least 25 that passed through Chania airport, on the Greek island of Crete - an eight-fold increase in the rate of arrivals compared to the first half of June. The movement of military equipment comes as the US considers whether to assist Israel in its conflict with Iran. Of the 52 planes spotted over the eastern Mediterranean, 32 are used for transporting troops or cargo, 18 are used for mid-air refuelling and two are reconnaissance planes. Forbes McKenzie, founder of McKenzie Intelligence, says that this indicates "the build-up of warfighting capability, which was not [in the region] before". Sky's data does not include fighter jets, which typically fly without publicly revealing their location. An air traffic control recording from Wednesday suggests that F-22 Raptors are among the planes being sent across the Atlantic, while 12 F-35 fighter jets were photographed travelling from the UK to the Middle East on Wednesday. Many US military planes are passing through UK A growing number of US Air Force planes have been passing through the UK in recent days. Analysis of flight tracking data at three key air bases in the UK shows 63 US military flights landing between 16 and 19 June - more than double the rate of arrivals earlier in June. On Thursday, Sky News filmed three US military C-17A Globemaster III transport aircraft and a C-130 Hercules military cargo plane arriving at Glasgow's Prestwick Airport. Flight tracking data shows that one of the planes arrived from an air base in Jordan, having earlier travelled there from Germany. What does Israel need from US? Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on 15 March that his country's aim is to remove "two existential threats - the nuclear threat and the ballistic missile threat". Israel says that Iran is attempting to develop a nuclear bomb, though Iran says its nuclear facilities are only for civilian energy purposes. A US intelligence assessment in March concluded that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon. President Trump dismissed the assessment on Tuesday, saying: "I think they were very close to having one." Forbes McKenzie says the Americans have a "very similar inventory of weapons systems" to the Israelis, "but of course, they also have the much-talked-about GBU-57". The GBU-57 is a 30,000lb bomb - the largest non-nuclear bomb in existence. Mr McKenzie explains that it is "specifically designed to destroy targets which are very deep underground". Experts say it is the only weapon with any chance of destroying Iran's main enrichment site, which is located underneath a mountain at Fordow. Air-to-air refuelling could allow Israel to carry larger bombs Among the dozens of US aircraft that Sky News tracked over the eastern Mediterranean in recent days, more than a third (18 planes) were designed for air-to-air refuelling. "These are crucial because Israel is the best part of a thousand miles away from Iran," says Sky News military analyst Sean Bell. "Most military fighter jets would struggle to do those 2,000-mile round trips and have enough combat fuel." The ability to refuel mid-flight would also allow Israeli planes to carry heavier munitions, including bunker-buster bombs necessary to destroy the tunnels and silos where Iran stores many of its missiles. Satellite imagery captured on 15 June shows the aftermath of Israeli strikes on a missile facility near the western city of Kermanshah, which destroyed at least 12 buildings at the site. At least four tunnel entrances were also damaged in the strikes, two of which can be seen in the image below. Writing for Jane's Defence Weekly, military analyst Jeremy Binnie says it looked like the tunnels were "targeted using guided munitions coming in at angles, not destroyed from above using penetrator bombs, raising the possibility that the damage can be cleared, enabling any [missile launchers] trapped inside to deploy". "This might reflect the limited payloads that Israeli aircraft can carry to Iran," he adds. Penetrator bombs, also known as bunker-busters, are much heavier than other types of munitions and as a result require more fuel to transport. Israel does not have the latest generation of refuelling aircraft, Mr Binnie says, meaning it is likely to struggle to deploy a significant number of penetrator bombs. Israel has struck most of Iran's western missile bases Even without direct US assistance, the Israeli air force has managed to inflict significant damage on Iran's missile launch capacity. Sky News has confirmed Israeli strikes on at least five of Iran's six known missile bases in the west of the country. On Monday, the IDF said that its strategy of targeting western launch sites had forced Iran to rely on its bases in the centre of the country, such as Isfahan - around 1,500km (930 miles) from Israel. Among Iran's most advanced weapons are three types of solid-fuelled rockets fitted with highly manoeuvrable warheads: Fattah-1, Kheibar Shekan and Haj Qassam. The use of solid fuel makes these missiles easy to transport and fast to launch, while their manoeuvrable warheads make them better at evading Israeli air defences. However, none of them are capable of striking Israel from such a distance. Iran is known to possess five types of missile capable of travelling more than 1,500km, but only one of these uses solid fuel - the Sijjil-1. On 18 June, Iran claimed to have used this missile against Israel for the first time. Iran's missiles have caused significant damage Iran's missile attacks have killed at least 24 people in Israel and wounded hundreds, according to the Israeli foreign ministry. The number of air raid alerts in Israel has topped 1,000 every day since the start of hostilities, reaching a peak of 3,024 on 15 June. Iran has managed to strike some government buildings, including one in the city of Haifa on Friday. And on 13 June, in Iran's most notable targeting success so far, an Iranian missile impacted on or near the headquarters of Israel's defence ministry in Tel Aviv. Most of the Iranian strikes verified by Sky News, however, have hit civilian targets. These include residential buildings, a school and a university. On Thursday, one missile hit the Soroka Medical Center in Beersheba, southern Israel's main hospital. More than 70 people were injured, according to Israel's health ministry. Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said that Iran had struck a nearby technology park containing an IDF cyber defence training centre, and that the "blast wave caused superficial damage to a small section" of the hospital. However, the technology park is in fact 1.2km away from where the missile struck. Photos of the hospital show evidence of a direct hit, with a large section of one building's roof completely destroyed. Iran successfully struck the technology park on Friday, though its missile fell in an open area, causing damage to a nearby residential building but no casualties. Israel has killed much of Iran's military leadership It's not clear exactly how many people Israel's strikes in Iran have killed, or how many are civilians. Estimates by human rights groups of the total number of fatalities exceed 600. What is clear is that among the military personnel killed are many key figures in the Iranian armed forces, including the military's chief of staff, deputy head of intelligence and deputy head of operations. Key figures in the powerful Revolutionary Guard have also been killed, including the militia's commander-in-chief, its aerospace force commander and its air defences commander. On Thursday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that US assistance was not necessary for Israel to win the war. "We will achieve all our objectives and hit all of their nuclear facilities," he said. "We have the capability to do that." 3:49 Forbes McKenzie says that while Israel has secured significant victories in the war so far, "they only have so much fuel, they only have so many munitions". "The Americans have an ability to keep up the pace of operations that the Israelis have started, and they're able to do it for an indefinite period of time." Additional reporting by data journalist Joely Santa Cruz and OSINT producers Freya Gibson, Lina-Sirine Zitout and Sam Doak.
Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
VIEW Investors react to US attack on Iran nuclear sites
June 21 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump on Saturday said that a "very successful attack" on three nuclear sites in Iran had been carried out. In a posting on Truth Social, Trump added, "All planes are safely on their way home" and he ended his posting saying, "Now is the time for peace." Following are comments from some financial and corporate analysts: JAMIE COX, MANAGING PARTNER, HARRIS FINANCIAL GROUP, RICHMOND, VIRGINIA: 'Oil is sure to spike on this initial news, but will likely level in a few days. With this demonstration of force and total annihilation of its nuclear capabilities, they've lost all of their leverage and will likely hit the escape button to a peace deal." MARK MALEK, CHIEF INVESTMENT OFFICER, SIEBERT FINANCIAL, NYC: "I think it's going to be very positive for the stock market. I believe that on Friday if you'd asked me, I would have expected two weeks of volatility with markets trying to analyze every drib and drab of information coming out of the White House and I would have said that it would have been better to make a decision last week. "So this will be reassuring, especially since it seems like a one and done situation and not as if (the US) is seeking a long, drawn out conflict. The biggest risk still out there is the Strait of Hormuz. It could certainly change everything if Iran has the capability to close it." JACK ABLIN, CHIEF INVESTMENT OFFICER OF CRESSET CAPITAL: "This adds a complicated new layer of risk that we'll have to consider and pay attention to... This is definitely going to have an impact on energy prices and potentially on inflation as well."
Daily Mail
5 hours ago
- Daily Mail
FLOURISHING AFTER 50: My son, his partner and their kids have moved in with us to save - but now they want our money as well
Dear Vanessa, Our son is 32 with two young children. He and his partner have been renting for years, but with the cost of everything going up, they can't seem to get ahead. They've been slowly saving for a house deposit but it could take years. Recently, they asked if they could move in with us for a while to save more money. We agreed - it makes sense and we want to support them where we can. But now our son has taken it a step further and asked if we would consider contributing to their deposit so they can buy sooner. My husband and I are both 61 and still working. We've got retirement savings and some extra put aside, but we're not retired yet - and we don't have unlimited resources. My husband is very cautious and thinks helping financially is a bad idea. He's worried that once the money is gone, we won't get it back - and we might end up needing it down the track. I can see both sides, and I'm torn. We want to help, but not at the expense of our own future. What's the right thing to do? Christine. Dear Christine, You've described a dilemma so many families are facing right now. With housing unaffordability, high living costs, and interest rates biting, adult children are under enormous financial pressure- and often, their first thought is to turn to mum and dad. It's understandable. You're the generation who built up savings, paid down debt, and likely bought property at a more achievable price. To your children, you may look financially secure. But what they often don't realise is that retirement is getting more expensive, we're all living longer, and your money has to stretch much further than it used to. Opening your home to help them save is already a generous act - and likely to be a huge help. But giving away money, especially before you've even retired, is a completely different decision. Once you gift a lump sum, it's usually gone for good. And if something changes - your health, your job, or even their relationship - you can't always get it back. That doesn't mean you can't help. But it does mean being crystal clear about what you can safely afford to give, and what impact it will have on your lifestyle for the next 20 or 30 years. That's where a conversation with a good financial adviser can make all the difference. They can model what a gift or loan would do to your future income and help you structure it properly, so it's protected. For example, if your son and his partner were to split up, would you want your contribution to be part of a legal agreement or loan that's repaid? Or is this money a gift with no expectations? These are emotional decisions, but they have real financial consequences. And just as importantly, you and your husband need to be on the same page. If one of you feels uneasy, that's a sign to slow down and gather more information before making any commitments. Money given under pressure or guilt often causes long-term resentment - especially if it later affects your ability to live the retirement you planned. If you need help finding an adviser in your area, I offer a free referral service to connect you with someone experienced and independent. Supporting your family is a wonderful thing - but so is securing your own future, so you can enjoy your retirement, your freedom, and the time you've earned with your grandkids.
