How to Help a Struggling Adult Child Without Ruining Them
August 27, 2026
Listen Now
Subscribe
Ready to talk with an advisor?
The advisors at American Retirement Advisors have been having these conversations for over 25 years. A no-cost discovery session is the fastest way to find out where you actually stand.
Schedule a Discovery Session
Show Notes
Eddie and Betty's Conversation
Welcome to The American Retirement Advisor. I'm Betty, Eddie's here with me in the studio today, and we are getting into something a little different from our usual. It's not about rates or account types. It's about the moment when a parent who has done everything right, who has the money sitting right there, just freezes. Ian Schaeffer, our company's COO, wrote a piece about this, and I read it twice because it described something I think a lot of families recognize but almost nobody talks about out loud.
I appreciate you framing it that way, because it really does feel like a topic that lives in the kitchen, not in a financial planning office. Ian opens with this image of a parent who can absolutely afford the check, sitting there not writing it, night after night. And the reason they're frozen isn't 'can we afford this.' It's something quieter and honestly harder than that.
Right, and he names it so specifically. The fear is not about the money leaving their account. It's about what the money might teach their kid. That a check today turns into an expectation tomorrow. That the other children are watching and quietly keeping score. And the one that I think hits hardest, that writing the check sends a message nobody actually means to send, which is 'we don't think you can do this on your own.'
That line is the center of the whole piece. Because the parent is not being stingy. Ian is very clear about that. He says it took him a while to understand that pause, and when he did, he recognized it as love that has learned to think one step past the moment. The parent is weighing what the money will do, not just what it will pay for. That is a very different calculation.
So what do families actually do when they're stuck in that spot?
Ian says most people land in one of two places, and neither one works. Some go completely silent, give nothing, watch their child struggle through something they could have made easier, and carry that ache. The other direction is the open tab, quietly refilling the account every time it runs low, no conversation, no end point, just transfers that keep arriving.
The open tab sounds like the generous choice, though. I can see why a parent would go that route. It feels like kindness.
Ian's line on this is one of the sharpest things in the piece. He says the open tab is usually fear wearing kindness as a coat. Because it's easier to send the money than to have the honest conversation about what the money is actually for. So the transfers just happen in silence, resentment builds, the siblings notice, and the child being helped never actually hears that anyone believes in them. They just learn the account is bottomless.
That is such a specific kind of damage. You could be pouring real money into that situation and the kid is not getting the one thing that might actually change their trajectory, which is someone telling them plainly that they think they can make it.
And Ian makes the point that silent generosity and silent refusal leave the same hole. Both of them avoid the real conversation. Nobody ever says the true thing out loud. That's the thread connecting the frozen parent and the open-tab parent. The strategy is different but the avoidance is the same.
So what does he suggest instead? Because I think a lot of parents are sitting with exactly that question: I want to help, I just don't want to make things worse.
He offers a reframe, and it's practical. Stop asking 'should I give my child money.' Start asking a different question: do I want this help to replace what they can do, or to build it? Those are two completely different things even if the dollar amount is identical.
Can you put that in concrete terms? Because replace versus build sounds clean on paper but I want to make sure listeners can picture the difference.
Sure. Ian's example: paying a kid's rent indefinitely replaces their footing. It takes over a function they need to develop. Covering the certification that gets them a better job, or the deposit that gets them close to steadier work, builds capacity. Same checkbook. The outcome is opposite. One makes the problem go away temporarily. The other changes what the person is capable of.
And I think that distinction also shifts how the parent feels about writing the check. If you're clear that you're building something, not just plugging a recurring leak, it probably sits differently in your chest.
That's exactly what Ian is getting at. He says the best help he's watched has three things the open tab never does. A purpose you can name out loud. An honest end to it. And real belief in the person, said in actual words, not just implied by the money arriving. Help structured that way doesn't whisper 'you can't.' It says 'I've got your back while you climb.'
The words piece is where I think a lot of parents get stuck practically. Because even if you've worked out what you want to do, opening that conversation without it feeling like a verdict or a charity transaction is its own challenge.
Ian anticipated that completely. He gives three actual sample lines, and he's careful to say use these in your own voice, at your own table, with your kid right there. Not a letter, not a transfer with a note. A real conversation.
What are the lines?
The first one is: 'I'm not doing this because I think you can't. I'm doing it because I can, and because I believe in where you're headed. Let's figure out together what actually moves you forward.' That line does a lot of work. It names the belief, it keeps the kid's agency in the room, and it makes this a collaboration rather than a rescue.
What's the second one?
'I want to help with the thing that gets you unstuck, not the thing that keeps you comfortable staying stuck. Tell me which one this is, honestly.' That one is a little more direct. It signals that the parent is thinking about it carefully, and it invites the kid to be honest too rather than just taking whatever is offered.
And I imagine for a lot of adult kids, being asked that question directly is startling in the best possible way. Someone treating you like you have judgment worth consulting.
The third line is the one for the siblings, and Ian is deliberate about saying it should be said to all of them, out in the open, not in secret. The line is: 'You may each need something different from us at different times, and I promise you I am always aiming for fair, not identical. Ask me anything about it, anytime.' That takes the secret out of it. Secrets in families are where resentment lives.
Fair, not identical. I think that phrase alone could prevent a decade of family friction. Because the sibling who didn't need the help can hold it against the one who did for years if there's no framework for understanding why it happened.
Right, and Ian points out what those three lines accomplish together. They name the purpose, they name the belief, and they take the shame out of the room before it can walk in. That sequencing matters. You're not explaining yourself after the fact. You're setting the context before anyone has a chance to feel diminished.
Let's talk about what the family gets on the other side of doing this well, because I think that's worth sitting with. What does Ian say changes?
He puts it simply. The kid gets more than a check. They get the one thing that struggling quietly steals, which is the sense that someone still believes they can do it. The siblings get honesty instead of a secret to resent. And the parent gets to stop lying awake wondering whether their love is doing harm, because they built the help to do the opposite.
That last part is the one that I think speaks to the parents listening right now. The lying awake part. Because you can be a careful, thoughtful, financially secure person and still lose sleep over whether your instinct to help your child is quietly making things worse.
And the answer Ian is offering is that it doesn't have to be a guess. The size of the gift is not the variable that determines the outcome. It's the purpose behind it and the words wrapped around it. Two families, same dollar amount, completely different results depending on whether that conversation happened.
He also mentions at the end why he wrote this, and I found that section to be a really human note to close on.
His father works with families through exactly this, one at a time, helping parents tell the difference between rescuing a child and backing one. And Ian says he writes it down so that families can start the conversation at home tonight, without waiting for a professional to be in the room. There's real generosity in that framing. He's not saying you need an expert to unlock this. He's saying the conversation is the first move, and you can make it yourself.
Though I do think there's a version of this where the topic opens up bigger questions. Who gets what and how do we make sure our intentions are actually captured somewhere. That's where I'd say don't just have the talk at the kitchen table and leave it floating.
Agreed, and Ian makes that point too. He mentions that once you know what you want your help to do, and who gets what and why, capturing it plainly so no one is ever left guessing matters. Because the conversation is the start, but clarity that outlasts the conversation is what protects the family. If you're unsure how to formalize any of that in a way that holds up, that's genuinely a question for one of our advisors at American Retirement Advisors, not something to wing.
And I think even the matter of how to structure help to one child in a way that's fair to the others, whether that's documented somewhere or reflected in how an estate is organized, that gets complicated fast. I'd put that on the list to talk through with someone who knows your whole picture.
The mechanics of how you make it official are worth a real conversation with an advisor because those details vary a lot by situation. But the emotional and conversational piece that Ian is writing about, that part is not waiting for anyone's permission. You can start it this week.
There's something here that I keep wanting to name, which is that Ian is not describing families in financial crisis. He's writing about families who have done well. Who have the resources. And the problem he's describing is not scarcity, it's fear of getting love wrong. That's a much more common situation than I think we talk about in financial planning circles.
That's the real audience for this. The parent who is looking at their balance sheet and thinking, we could help, but what if we shouldn't. And Ian's answer is not a blanket yes or no. It's a question back: what do you want the help to build? Answer that, say it out loud, and you've already changed the nature of what you're offering.
I also want to name something Ian writes in his summary of the piece, because it's the clearest one-sentence version of everything we've been discussing. He writes: help that replaces what your kid can do makes them smaller. Help with a purpose, an honest end, and real words of belief makes them bigger. Same checkbook, opposite kid.
That's the whole framework in four sentences. And the thing I appreciate about how he landed it is that he's not telling parents to be cold or withhold love. He's saying channel it with intention. Know what you're doing and why, and then say so.
If you're a parent who read anything in what we've talked about today and recognized yourself, whether you're the one who's been going silent or the one who's been running the open tab, that recognition is actually a useful starting place. Ian's piece is on our website, it's a short read, worth doing with a cup of coffee. And if you want to talk through what any of this looks like in your own family's situation, our team at American Retirement Advisors is there for exactly that conversation, at no cost to you for that first visit. You don't have to have it all figured out before you call. That's what they're there for.