AITA for refusing to go on the family vacation because I’m tired of always covering the extra costs?
The user, a 34-year-old woman, describes her role as the financially s**ble member within her family, contrasting her situation with that of her younger brother (31M) and his wife (29F), who have three children and frequently struggle with finances.
The central conflict involves the annual family beach vacation, where the user consistently ends up paying a disproportionate share of the costs, including covering her brother's portion from the previous year.
When planning the current trip, the user refused to participate unless she was a*sured she would not have to subsidize her brother again, leading to widespread anger from her mother and brother.
Subscribe to our Newsletter
Get the latest stories delivered to your inbox.
The user feels exhausted from consistently covering the financial shortfalls of her brother's family, believing that attending the trip under the current circumstances would enable their irresponsible spending habits.
However, the intense backlash from her family, accusing her of being cold-hearted and punishing the children, has caused her to doubt whether setting this firm boundary was an overreaction.
The core issue is whether the user was justified in refusing to attend the family vacation to protect her finances and stop enabling her brother, or if her refusal const*tuted unfairly punishing innocent parties like the children.
Readers are asked to consider where the line should be drawn between family support and financial self-preservation.
Commenters Came in Hot with Their Takes:
This one sparked a storm. The comments range from brutally honest to surprisingly supportive — and everything in between.