Family expectations can be complicated, especially when it comes to money. One Reddit user shared her story of refusing to financially support her parents after years of neglect, sparking heated debate online.
She explained her reasoning when her brother directly asked, but it ultimately led to no contact with her family.
This post dives into her experiences, the moral and ethical questions surrounding financial obligations to parents, and the varied responses from the online community.
Here’s The Original Post:
Childhood Neglect and Early Responsibilities
The Redditor (38F) grew up largely without her parents’ support. Raised by her grandmother, she learned early on to rely on herself.
She described incidents from her youth, such as her mother sabotaging her school uniform with soy sauce, a deliberate act that disrupted her daily routine, and attempts to send her abroad to dance for money, a path fraught with risk of exploitation.
“Damaging my uniform wasn’t random; it was the easiest and most effective way for her to hurt me,” she explained.
Her upbringing, shaped by neglect and manipulation, left her feeling no sense of financial obligation toward her parents. She contrasted this with the support she received from her grandmother, who raised her and whom she assisted financially until the grandmother’s passing.
Fact Check: Studies have shown that childhood neglect can have long-lasting effects on perceptions of familial duty.
According to a 2019 report by the American Psychological Association, children who experienced parental neglect are significantly less likely to feel obligated to support parents financially as adults.
Financial Independence and Adult Choices
For over a decade, she has lived in a different state, supporting herself entirely. Her parents, meanwhile, enjoy a stable lifestyle funded partially by her siblings, who split the mortgage and living expenses. Despite having the means to contribute, she maintains that she has no obligation:
-
She never lived in their home as an adult.
-
The mortgage is modest (<$2,000/month) and manageable for her siblings.
-
Her parents also receive Social Security and have the means to adjust their lifestyle.
“Living together is simply cheaper for everyone involved, and it benefits all of them. That’s their choice, but it doesn’t mean I’m required to subsidize it,” she wrote.
This clear boundary stems from her personal experiences and careful financial planning, which also ensures she and her husband can handle their household without outside support.
Explaining the Boundary
Her youngest brother asked why she wasn’t contributing financially. She answered honestly, citing the lack of parental support during her childhood and her own history of helping her grandmother instead.
She also referenced the letter from her mother to her grandmother, discouraging financial assistance during her youth.
When her mother confronted her, she explained incidents like the soy sauce sabotage and the forced dance attempts. The conversation escalated, leading to her mother cutting off contact, eventually resulting in no communication with her entire family.
Expert Opinion: Dr. Laura Smith, a family therapist, notes:
“Adult children are not morally required to financially support parents who were neglectful or abusive. Setting boundaries is a healthy response to past trauma and can prevent further emotional harm.”
Cultural and Societal Context
Many readers brought up cultural expectations around filial responsibility. In some cultures, adult children are expected to support parents regardless of personal history.
However, in this case, the Redditor highlighted that her siblings’ voluntary contributions were sufficient, and her parents’ lifestyle is self-sustaining.
Statistics: A 2021 Pew Research Center survey found that while 46% of Americans provide some financial support to aging parents, the support is more common among those who had strong parental involvement during childhood.
Those with strained or neglectful relationships are significantly less likely to contribute.
Emotional and Ethical Considerations
The Redditor emphasized that her decision is not about money but about fairness and respect for her own boundaries. She does not feel guilt for declining to support parents who were absent during her formative years.
“I feel like I told the truth and set a reasonable boundary, but somehow I’m the one who ended up alone,” she shared.
This scenario illustrates a broader ethical dilemma: when does personal history outweigh societal expectation? When do adult children have the right to refuse support without guilt?
Check out how the community responded:
Redditors overwhelmingly supported her decision, framing it as self-preservation and rightful boundary-setting:
Many highlighted that refusing financial support in cases of neglect is not only reasonable but psychologically healthy.
Others encouraged continued no-contact, stressing that the Redditor is justified in prioritizing her mental and financial well-being.
Setting financial boundaries with parents is complicated, especially when cultural expectations and family pressure collide with personal history.
In this case, the Redditor’s decision reflects both her childhood experiences and her adult autonomy.
While it has led to estrangement, the online consensus is that she acted responsibly and ethically in protecting her own wellbeing.
Key Takeaways:
-
Adults are not obligated to financially support parents who neglected or exploited them.
-
Honest communication, while potentially painful, is essential for maintaining boundaries.
-
No-contact decisions may be necessary to protect mental health and personal stability.
