Posted on 06/12/2002 3:30:18 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
The Cincinnati Enquirer reports that unprecedented numbers of American adults are living with their parents. Most obvious is the increasingly common phenomenon of men and women returning home after graduating college. Both the newspaper and callers to my radio show offered a variety of explanations, all of which were accurate: So much work -- academic and professional -- is needed today in order to become self-sufficient, therefore, it makes a lot of sense to stay home and save money while preparing for a future profession.
There may, however, be an additional and even more significant explanation.
Far more adult children stay home today because it is often quite pleasant to live with one's parents. This is a break -- a positive and significant break -- with the past.
Very few people in the past would have liked living with their parents beyond childhood. In fact, very many people did not like living with their parents during their childhood.
Of course, this is not the first generation of children to love or respect its parents. And surely many people today, just as in the past, have serious problems with their parents. But this generation of Americans (and quite possibly other Westerners) was raised with more freedom, autonomy and respect than probably any in history.
Most of us believe that in some important ways, including child rearing, American society has deteriorated. But we also need to acknowledge areas of improvement, and there have been enormous improvements in some of the ways children are being raised.
Do you remember the saying "Children should be seen and not heard"? That saying accurately reflected society's view of children. Children were not, to put it simply, taken seriously. They were rarely regarded as persons in their own right or as individuals who should be able to express themselves (that is what "be seen and not heard" meant). Children were regarded more like clones whose primary reason for being was to give parents pleasure and reflect honor on them.
It is certainly true that many parents have gone too far, rarely disciplining their children, trying to be their pals rather than their parents, almost never saying "no" to them, and treating them as if they were adults (thus denying them their innocence).
But whether or not they went too far, the fact is that a vast number of parents made their homes far more livable, even enjoyable, for their children than parents in the past did. As a result, more and more adult children do not regard being in their parents' company nearly as unpleasant or even embarrassing as children used to.
Let's be clear here. It must indeed be the goal of children to live and to make a new home on their own. As the Book of Genesis puts it, "And therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife and be as one flesh." That is the way a person grows up to become a responsible adult.
But with so many more years of formal education needed and with marriage happening at an increasingly later age, it is not necessarily a shirking of responsibility and a desire to remain a child that animates some adult children to temporarily live with their parents.
The question is: How do you know when continuing or returning to live with one's parents is just laziness or a common-sense decision for the time being?
You know by observing what these adult children are doing while at home. Are they partying all night, waking up late in the morning and watching a lot of television? Or are they working hard toward the day they can establish a home of their own?
If it is the former, the parents are merely enablers. If it is the latter, the parents have succeeded both in instilling good values in their child and in becoming their child's friend (which is what the parents of adults should eventually become). And that is something new that, at least in this arena of life, makes these days a lot better than the good old days.
lol, what'd your kids do to you?
One family has two adult males the other has one male and female.
The other benefit is the home is more secure,there is always someone around.
I would assume privacy is a burden at times but both homes are large and have fully livable basements or over garage living areas.
I certainly would invite the same,there would be nothing better than having family help with the mortgage payment and bills.
One thing I wouldn't do would be having a married with chilren family deal....
This is how it should be, imho. What a blessing you were to her.
After completing school my daughter went on to cosmotology school and is now managing a Supercuts. Even I was surprised at the amount of many she makes on tips. We are the last of $1.00 tippers, but it is amazing how much most people do tip, so she makes good money, and my son-in-law does well too. My daughter did buy her home, before she was married.
My son built his home, my daughters is a double wide manufactured home. My husband and I did help out each one by giving them each 20 acres, but the homes and everything else is paid for by them.
Becky
Sure, some kids need to be kicked out of the nest. But given the costs of acceptable housing in the DC area, I'd give the benefit of the doubt to a kid who lived at home provided he was working, saving, and contributing to the household.
For those who do live at home, enjoy it while you can. Build your fortunes and when it's time, leave. Frankly, when my wife and I have kids, I'm not sure how I'll feel, but I'm sure that any kids of ours will know that they are loved, and will always have a place to come to.
I am 27 and I live with my parents. I worked elsewhere and lived in an apartment for a couple of years after college, then moved back here. I am loathe to throw away money on rent as opposed to acquiring equity in a house, but I don't know how much longer I'll work in this area so it would be foolish to get tied down to a house.
If I was getting married, I'd be inclined to buy a house. But since I can't find a wife, what other incentive do I have? I'd rather be lonely at my parent's house than lonely in a big empty money pit of my own. Plus, I'd really prefer to buy land & build my own house, but that takes a lot of cash, time and commitment for someone who could conceivably take a job a thousand miles away next week.
BTW, I'm not "mooching." I'm an engineer and my salary is roughly twice the combined retirement pension & SS benefits my Mom & Dad receive. I don't pay rent, but I buy them durable goods (microwave, VCRs, ceiling fan, satellite dish, etc.) and help out around the house with things they can't do very well anymore (errands, minor repairs).
Only if you include taxes in the cost of living. Or if you concider "luxury" items as necessities.
I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I'm guessing the cost of basic necessities as compared to income before taxes is not close to being the highest ever.
Then my father started building his own boat, and he would always be asking me to give him a hand on some little project that wouldn't take more than a minute. I later figured out that it was really closer to 20 hours per week of unpaid labor.
Then they got rid of the television.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.