Quote:
Originally Posted by lazyplane
But this discussion has made me stumble on one point which i think can generate a lot views , that is :
Is it the right of the parent to choose how they want to spend their money on their children OR is it the right of the children to decide this ? And where and when does this point diverge ? Eg, does the child need to be of a certain age/maturity ?
Good discussion points.
|
This is an emotionally difficult question. It's not simply a matter of "offer" versus "demand". It's not right for the child to "demand", but it's only appropriate for the parent to "offer".
I was denied a place in
NUS medicine as I did not clear the interview, despite getting much better academic results than many who got in.
My parents were not rich, but they had a house which cost around $500k at that time. Would it be right for me to "demand" that they sell the house to send me overseas to study medicine? Of course not. It would have made me the ultimate unfilial son.
However, if they had made the offer, it would have been the ultimate sacrifice, similar to offering a kidney. In fact, I might have turned it down, but the offer was not made.
There are lots of grey areas in human emotions, the most difficult of which are borderline cases like mine. If my parents had been bus drivers who could not raise even $100k, it would have been very clear cut. If they were millionaires, then $500k would be small change.
$500k. All I had needed at that time was $500k.
It is ironic that today I make approximately $500k every half a year or so, but have neither the energy nor time to go back to medical school. Sometimes I just stare at my bank account and thought that if I just have a time machine, I could go back to the past and write a cheque to myself.
Life makes fun of people.