The narrator and their spouse have two sons. When the younger son had his first wedding, the parents contributed approximately $10,000 toward the expenses.
Years later, when the older son married, the cost of weddings had increased significantly, so the parents provided $30,000 for that event. Now that the youngest son is getting remarried, he expects his parents to fund this second wedding, but the parents have refused, stating they will only pay for one wedding per child. The youngest son believes his father is acting like an ‘asshole’ over this decision.
AITA for not paying for my son’s wedding?
According to Dr. River Bennett, a specialist in family financial dynamics, ‘The challenge in intergenerational financial support often lies in establishing clear, consistent boundaries that apply equally to all adult children, even when circumstances change over time.’
The parents’ actions demonstrate an attempt at equalizing the support provided across two different time periods, factoring in inflation by increasing the amount for the older son’s wedding. However, by setting a precedent of one major contribution per child, they established a clear policy. The youngest son’s expectation for a second wedding fund clashes directly with this established boundary. His reaction suggests a perceived entitlement or a failure to internalize the shift in financial responsibility that comes with adulthood.
From a professional standpoint, the parents were reasonable in deciding to fund only the first wedding for each son; this promotes financial independence. The path forward requires the parents to hold firm on their decision while clearly communicating the reasoning—that the financial support was for the initial milestone, not an ongoing subsidy for future choices. Encouraging the youngest son to budget and save for his new commitment is the healthiest long-term strategy.
THE COMMENTS SECTION WENT WILD – REDDIT HAD *A LOT* TO SAY ABOUT THIS ONE.
The core conflict centers on the parents’ decision to finance only the first wedding for each son, viewing the financial support as a one-time event, while the youngest son feels entitled to continued financial support for major life events, regardless of previous contributions.
The central question for debate is whether parents have an obligation to financially support a second marriage for an adult child, especially when they have already substantially funded the first, or if the responsibility for all subsequent life milestones rests entirely with the adult child.
