Moral Money: our reader is pondering cutting off her family to maintain financial independence
Dear Sam,
A few years ago, I realised that my parents, who are in their mid-60s, have not planned for their retirement properly.
They have two rental properties that were supposed to generate income, but my brother occupies them both for himself. In my view, this is financial exploitation, but my parents refuse to take legal action.
When my dad retires next year, their state pension and minimal pension pots will not cover their living expenses. I’ve already had to help them financially in emergency situations, and I’ve tried to explain how crucial the income from the flats is to build a buffer before my dad stops working. However, they didn’t follow my advice.
My dad is concerned about the situation, but my mum seems to be completely delusional and just says that “things will work out”.
As far as I know, my brother has never had any stable income. I’d say he considers honest work beneath him. I don’t see him willingly giving up on the flats, which he feels entitled to.
My parents don’t want to consider downsizing, or selling off the flats.
The situation worries me immensely because, even though my husband and I have well-paid jobs, I feel that I have to put my life on hold – including having more children – in case I need to financially support my parents in the future.
I’m starting to realise that cutting off contact with them would make decisions about my own life a lot easier. I don’t want to give up on my dreams to effectively fund my brother’s lifestyle, and I’d hope a drastic move like this maybe could be a wake-up call.
It feels like either way it will be painful – but is it moral to give up on helping my parents?
Thank you.
Dear reader,
This is an incredibly painful dilemma, and it’s clear you’ve carried the weight of responsibility for too long. What you are facing is not just a financial problem, but an emotional one, tied up in love, loyalty and a sense of duty.
You’ve tried reason, you’ve offered practical solutions and you’ve even stepped in with money, but your parents’ choices and your brother’s behaviour have left you fearing that your life could become financially and emotionally entangled in theirs indefinitely. That fear is not only rational, it’s also an alarm bell that something has to change.
It’s important to start with a truth you may find uncomfortable: you are not responsible for financing your parents’ retirement. It may feel cruel to say, but their failure to act is not your failure.
They have made decisions, sometimes by omission and sometimes through denial, that have led to their vulnerability. You cannot undo those choices, and you cannot reasonably carry the cost of them without damaging your own family’s future. It is not selfish to draw a line. It is necessary.
Your parents are still relatively young in retirement terms, and they do have assets in the form of the rental properties. Whether they are willing to face reality is another question, but those flats represent security that most people in financial difficulty simply don’t have.
If they continue to let your brother occupy them without rent, then they are, in effect, choosing to prioritise him over their own financial wellbeing.
That may be painful to watch, but it is not your problem to fix. The most you can do is state your position clearly: you will not subsidise them while they allow him to exploit them. That is not manipulation, it is a boundary.
Boundaries are different from ultimatums. An ultimatum is an attempt to control someone else’s behaviour: “Do this, or I’ll do that.” A boundary is about protecting your own wellbeing: “If you choose this, I cannot take on the consequences.”
You cannot force your parents to confront your brother, or to sell the properties, or to downsize. But you can make it clear that if they do not take steps to secure their own future, you will not fill the gap.
Boundaries feel harsh in families, especially when a parent-child dynamic is at play, but they are a form of respect for yourself, your husband and any children you may have.
Cutting contact may sound like the only way to enforce that boundary, but it isn’t your only option. You can remain present in their lives emotionally while being absolutely firm about the financial line.
If your parents ask for money, you can decline while still offering them support in other ways – such as researching benefits they may be entitled to, pointing them towards Citizens Advice, helping them understand their pension entitlements, or encouraging them to speak with a financial planner.
This way, you separate emotional care from financial rescue. If they refuse help, that’s their decision. Your responsibility ends where their autonomy begins.
As for your brother, you’re right to recognise the deep unfairness. It sounds as if he has built his life on entitlement, and your parents, whether through love, guilt, or fear of conflict, have enabled it. That dynamic is unlikely to change merely because you confront it.
The question is not whether you can shift him, but whether you can refuse to let his choices dictate your own life. That might mean grieving the relationship you wish you had with your parents and brother, and accepting the one that actually exists.
That grief is real, and it may help you to acknowledge it rather than keep fighting the fantasy that one day they will wake up and see things differently.
You and your husband are in strong financial positions, and you deserve to enjoy the fruits of your hard work. Putting off your dreams, whether that’s more children, new opportunities, or simply living without constant fear, because of your parents’ and brother’s actions will only breed resentment.
If you continue down that path, you risk sacrificing your future happiness while achieving little in terms of changing theirs. The moral question you pose, whether it’s right to stop helping, can only be answered by turning it back on yourself.
Would helping indefinitely be moral, if it meant damaging your own family? Is it moral to let your children grow up with parents who are stressed, resentful and financially overextended? Is it moral to allow your brother’s exploitation to continue unchallenged by filling the gap he creates?
The more honest answer is that stepping back is not an abandonment of morality, it’s the only way to act with integrity.
So, no, it is not immoral to stop bailing them out. What matters is being clear with them and yourself – you love them, you will not walk away from them emotionally, but you will not sacrifice your life to sustain the choices they are making.
That will be painful, and it may damage the relationship, but pretending otherwise only delays the inevitable. Pain now, handled with honesty, is better than years of slow erosion of your wellbeing.
If there is a wake-up call for your parents, it will come not from an ultimatum, but from the consequences of their own choices finally becoming unavoidable. You cannot shield them forever, and you shouldn’t.
What you can do is live your life fully, knowing you acted with love, but also with the wisdom to know where your duty ends.
All the best,
– Sam