Financial support from parents has become critical to the capacity of many single young adults to attain and sustain independent housing in the United Kingdom. Utilising data from a qualitative study of early housing pathways, this paper applies Lüscher's theory of ambivalence in a context previously unexplored via this framework, analysing how participants talked about competing claims between siblings for finite parental resources in support of independent living. Most expressed faith in the assumed fairness of parental behaviours in providing support whilst often constructing themselves as 'more responsible' or 'more deserving' than their siblings. Whilst parental support was routinely made available regardless of recipients' current housing tenure, there was nonetheless a sense that support for owner occupation fell into a distinct category of assistance, reinforcing notions of tenure prejudice. Given ongoing dependency on family support, participants were largely resigned to these disparities, regarding them as integral to the ambivalent nature of inter-and intragenerational family relationships.

The paper examines some of the effects of exposing state schools to the strictures of the market on three governing bodies of secondary schools in two local education authorities. Using illustrative data drawn from an intensive 4 year study, the authors argue that the imposition of the market on schools can exacerbate value divisions between governors in the same school. Also the concern to improve the image and marketability of a school can result in attention being focused on the needs of future rather than existing pupils. Competition between schools may thus result not in higher quality education or diversity of provision but rather produce a search for uniformity in the shape of the desirable middle-class parent and child. The notion of schools serving a local community may thus be disrupted and choice for working-class and ethnic minority parents and pupils reduced rather than increased.

No abstract