If YOUR kid was offered a scholarship to a rival school....

[HailToMichigan]

don't you think that's kind of ridiculous? i mean, i hate michigan as much as any Ohio State fan, but i'm not so devoted that i'll actively try and sabotage my kid's education.

if my kid wanted to go to michigan because that's the school they think fits them best, then so be it. i'm not going to put my hatred of those mitten douchebags over my desire to see my kid do well. that'd be silly, and frankly, bad parenting.

I think sabotage is a pretty harsh word. My folks gave me the exact same conditions regarding a certain five schools (two from dad, three from mom) that BB73 gave his kids. I think it's fair. They earned the money, they have the right to choose where and where not to spend it. I don't feel like I was unduly influenced. I ended up not being interested in those five anyway, same as I wasn't interested in about 95% of other schools in the country too.

 

[grnvllbuck]

I would be like the poster a few pages back, where he would attend his boy's games, but proudly wearing the scarlet and gray. Of course I would want him to be successful with his role on the squad, but I would still want "them" (TSUN) to lose to the Bucks. I would also be thankful that it would only be 4 years, and I would not have to spend any more Saturdays in that god-forsaken "Big House".

 

[Electron Boy]

I influenced their choices with financial incentives, but I didn't outright prevent them from going to TSUN or Ntre Ame.

see, this is what bothers me. i'm very glad that your children have gotten/are getting a good education, but i simply cannot understand why you'd put any sort of conditions on support for your kids. not only that, but you admit that these conditions are there solely because of how you feel about michigan and notre dame's sports programs.

to me, like i said before, that's ridiculous. i've been an Ohio State fan my entire life, lived and died on how they do in sports, and spent five years and tens of thousands of dollars in undergrad and grad school here, but i don't think i could ever justify that mentality.

this is the way i look at it: if i had grown up a Buckeye fan in michigan. i love the place, it's my dream school, etc., and my parents were die hard michigan fans who said they would help me go to any college of my choosing EXCEPT Ohio State. i'd be up a creek financially, and understandably i'd be enraged. it's not just that they essentially prevented me from going to Ohio State, it's that they did it simply because of how they feel about a sports team.

i'd say that anytime a parent puts their feelings about a football rivalry over the feelings of their children, there's a serious problem there.

"sabatoge" is a pretty harsh word, but i'd say in the scenario i layed out above, it's petty applicable.


edit:

and of course, i'm taking my example a lot further along than what you were talking about. if your kids weren't interested in those schools to begin with, then it's not really even an issue. also, i do understand your point about the "opposite sides of the fence" thing; if you really are that devoted, then absolutely that could lead to problems, and i can see where you're coming from. i disagree with that mentality, but i can definately understand it

 

[BB73]

but you admit that these conditions are there solely because of how you feel about michigan and notre dame's sports programs.

I said "primarily", not solely. If you're going to be so critical of my behavior, please don't misquote me. But I'm not going to elaborate.

Your scenario isn't applicable in my case, since I would never live in TSUN. Some may also call that "ridiculous", and they're entitled to their opinion, and I'm entitled to not be bothered by what they think.

 

[matcar]

I said "primarily", not solely. If you're going to be so critical of my behavior, please don't misquote me. But I'm not going to elaborate.

Your scenario isn't applicable in my case, since I would never live in TSUN. Some may also call that "ridiculous", and they're entitled to their opinion, and I'm entitled to not be bothered by what they think.

True statements. You are entitled to your opinions and thoughts and the rest of us are entitled to think your nuts. It's all good.

 

[BB73]

True statements. You are entitled to your opinions and thoughts and the rest of us are entitled to think your nuts. It's all good.

HailToMichigan didn't seem to think I'm nuts. Hmmm, maybe that proves your point.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

It's one thing to put conditions on your child's college choice for a variety of reasons. Sports rooting interest is not one of them.

Given, Notre Dame's cowtowing to the current medievalists in Rome, I'd have a hard time giving them 40K a year. In the same vein, I'd probably have a very hard time agreeing to give my money to Baylor, BYU, Bob Jones or Texas A&M.

If my kid was a 4.0 National Merit Scholar who insisted on going to Akron to follow a girlfriend or buddy, I'd be outraged at his squandering his hard work and college choice for such immature reasons.

But to bar your kid from going to a universally acknowledged top school solely because of your football rooting interest is, to me, unfathomable. And don't try to pretend that there's other factors. There are far more social, cultural and academic similarities between Ohio State and UM than there are differences.

 

[HailToMichigan]

HailToMichigan didn't seem to think I'm nuts. Hmmm, maybe that proves your point.

That's right, I don't think you're nuts, and................HEY WH-?!

 

[BB73]

It's one thing to put conditions on your child's college choice for a variety of reasons. Sports rooting interest is not one of them.

Given, Notre Dame's cowtowing to the current medievalists in Rome, I'd have a hard time giving them 40K a year. In the same vein, I'd probably have a very hard time agreeing to give my money to Baylor, BYU, Bob Jones or Texas A&M.

If my kid was a 4.0 National Merit Scholar who insisted on going to Akron to follow a girlfriend or buddy, I'd be outraged at his squandering his hard work and college choice for such immature reasons.

But to bar your kid from going to a universally acknowledged top school solely because of your football rooting interest is, to me, unfathomable. And don't try to pretend that there's other factors. There are far more social, cultural and academic similarities between Ohio State and UM than there are differences.

Let me see if I have this right. I said that the sports thing was the primary, but not the sole, reason I wouldn't pay for my kids to go to either TSUN or Ntre Ame.

Then you say you'd have a hard time giving Ntre Ame money, and later in the same post, state that I barred my "kid from going" and that I shouldn't "try to pretend there's (sic) other factors."

So you're allowed another reason to influence a child away from Ntre Ame, but you know me so well that I couldn't have any other secondary factors?

I'm not saying that anyone else should do what I have done, and I'm not criticizing anybody that wouldn't.

And I didn't "bar my kids" from any schools. I said that if they went there, they'd have to pay for it themselves. There is a difference.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

Well, I didn't accuse you directly of "barring" your kid. I was speaking generally, but as you're the primary one advocating the opposite viewpoint, I can see how it could be seen as a direct response to you. I am aware that you didn't forbid your kids from going to ND or UM--just said that you'd cut them off financially.

That being said, my problems with ND--along with those other schools I listed--is that their education, administration and campus culture seem to be directly at odds with modern notions of academic freedom and critical thinking. I would consider that as a somewhat more substantive position than, "I don't like their football team."

Perhaps there were secondary factors regarding UM. What were they? I know that there's a certain snobbish element to UM, which I find distasteful. In my experience though, it's usually confined to some East coast kids who have a chip on their shoulder because they were rejected by a bunch of Ivies. I've spent a fair amount of time in Ann Arbor (almost went there for grad school) have worked with numerous UM alums and know many here in Chicago. There's just not that much difference between the two schools' students (with the exception noted above), culture (large, research oriented public B10 campus) or political mix (both slightly left of center, though UM marginally more so, and both with a strong greek/conservative faction) that one could have such strong feelings that weren't driven predominately by the football rivalry.

I'm not trying to paint you into a corner, but I am somewhat curious as to what the "secondary factors" there might have been that you'd abandon any financial support for your daughter's education had she gone to UM.

 

[Steve19]

I agree entirely with the views expressed by BB73. In principle, no kid has a right to expect their parents to pay their college tuition.

A lot of us paid our own way through university and complete our degrees just fine. It is entirely possible to work one's way through university in the USA still today, in fact, my students at OSU typically were employed, even if living at home.

Perhaps we really need to think about whether the information available on BP really provides us with enough information or the right to comment on another poster's parenting!

I have made my kids the offer that I will pay for their college education. However, I believe that if a parent decides to pay for their child's college education, then it seems entirely reasonable that such an offer could be made with conditions. If those conditions are objectionable to a child, then the child has the right to find alternative sources of finance and proceed as desired, without the parent's financial support.

As I have said in other threads, I am of the opinion that an undergraduate degree from any of the top 50 schools produces graduates with similar skills. So, if a kid is committed to Michigan or Notre Dame and a parent finds that objectionable for whatever reason, then I think a child has to make a decision. Nothing requires parents to pay for kids to pursue degrees that they think will not result in employment opportunities or for studies at a university to which the parent objects. Nothing requires the kid to choose a university or degree that meets the parent's desires.

A parent who sets such conditions is making a conditional offer to pay for a kid's education. Given the price of a college education today, that's hardly objectionable or a sign of bad parenting.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

Steve, I don't differ fundamentally from you viewpoint. I don't believe that a parent's commitment to paying for college is carte blanche and should come with no conditions. I just feel that "I don't like their football team" does not rise to the level of a legitimate condition.

Putting one's foot down because they think their child will get a substandard education or because they think a child is choosing a school beneath their abilities for foolish reasons is, at heart, putting one's foot down for what one believes is in the child's best long term interests. I just can't see how the same could be said about putting one's foot down because of your personal football rooting interests. That's making it about you...not the child's future...and is a silly and immature reason for causing what could conceivably be a serious rift between you and your child.

 

[Fungo Squiggly]

Steve, I don't differ fundamentally from you viewpoint. I don't believe that a parent's commitment to paying for college is carte blanche and should come with no conditions. I just feel that "I don't like their football team" does not rise to the level of a legitimate condition.

Putting one's foot down because they think their child will get a substandard education or because they think a child is choosing a school beneath their abilities for foolish reasons is, at heart, putting one's foot down for what one believes is in the child's best long term interests. I just can't see how the same could be said about putting one's foot down because of your personal football rooting interests. That's making it about you...not the child's future...and is a silly and immature reason for causing what could conceivably be a serious rift between you and your child.

Not to speak for BB73, but I tend to believe that if the child were to make a serious and logical explanation as to why the objectionable school is the ideal fit for him or her, the result may change. If one were to pursue a particular field in which a school such as ND or UM is the flagship school in that particular field, providing an education unavailable at other schools, that would certainly be worth consideration of changing one's policy. I could be wrong, of course.

A child choosing a school to attend just to spite his or her parents, however, probably gets what is coming his or her way. :p

 

[t_BuckeyeScott]

Steve, I don't differ fundamentally from you viewpoint. I don't believe that a parent's commitment to paying for college is carte blanche and should come with no conditions. I just feel that "I don't like their football team" does not rise to the level of a legitimate condition.

Putting one's foot down because they think their child will get a substandard education or because they think a child is choosing a school beneath their abilities for foolish reasons is, at heart, putting one's foot down for what one believes is in the child's best long term interests. I just can't see how the same could be said about putting one's foot down because of your personal football rooting interests. That's making it about you...not the child's future...and is a silly and immature reason for causing what could conceivably be a serious rift between you and your child.

If said child could get into TSUN or Ntre Ame, then there are plenty of other fine institutions that would accept them. Restricting a child from going to either of those schools wouldn't put a dent in there chance to attend a fine university because there will be plenty of highly ranked programs that would accept those same students.

 

[BB73]

Thanks for the support, Steve. HailToMichigan is relieved to no longer be the only one supporting my nuttiness.

Well, I didn't accuse you directly of "barring" your kid. I was speaking generally, but as you're the primary one advocating the opposite viewpoint, I can see how it could be seen as a direct response to you. I am aware that you didn't forbid your kids from going to ND or UM--just said that you'd cut them off financially.

That being said, my problems with ND--along with those other schools I listed--is that their education, administration and campus culture seem to be directly at odds with modern notions of academic freedom and critical thinking. I would consider that as a somewhat more substantive position than, "I don't like their football team."

Perhaps there were secondary factors regarding UM. What were they? I know that there's a certain snobbish element to UM, which I find distasteful. In my experience though, it's usually confined to some East coast kids who have a chip on their shoulder because they were rejected by a bunch of Ivies. I've spent a fair amount of time in Ann Arbor (almost went there for grad school) have worked with numerous UM alums and know many here in Chicago. There's just not that much difference between the two schools' students (with the exception noted above), culture (large, research oriented public B10 campus) or political mix (both slightly left of center, though UM marginally more so, and both with a strong greek/conservative faction) that one could have such strong feelings that weren't driven predominately by the football rivalry.

I'm not trying to paint you into a corner, but I am somewhat curious as to what the "secondary factors" there might have been that you'd abandon any financial support for your daughter's education had she gone to UM.

Fair enough, ORD. Sorry to not realize that you were speaking in general terms (you didn't quote me in you post, after all); I thought the "don't try to pretend" thing about other factors was directed at me, since my previous posts had implied other reasons without stating them.

As far as Ntre Ame, I think I share some of the same reasons as you have for not wanting to support the institution, which I believe you'd understand, but would be topics better suited for the political board.

For TSUN, the "snobbish element" or arrogant attitude was another factor. I haven't spent much time in Ann Arbor, but I've worked with a few TSUN alums in Chicago for a long time.

But for either TSUN or ND, wanting to avoid situations during the rest of my life in which I'd be with one of my children while attending, watching on TV, or just discussing a sporting event with tOSU, TSUN, and/or ND was significant. I have relatives that are TSUN fans, and it makes for difficult moments at Thanksgiving dinners, etc. I didn't want to have that with my own kids for decades to come.

I realize that having that as the primary reason wasn't the most noble motive. But the decision of where my kids went was theirs, after understanding the conditions regarding TSUN and ND. I provided spreadsheets which estimated their costs (they shared some financial responsibility, reduced by a better GPA in college). They didn't ask me to create the spreadsheets for TSUN and ND; knowing that their own financial contribution would be large, neither one applied to either of those schools.