quote:

---

Adults living the high life with parents

Misty Harris, CanWest News Service
Published: Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Canadians in their 20s and early 30s are enjoying a life of leisure once limited to the rich or retired.

They drive nice cars, take frequent vacations, have their meals prepared for them, and never, ever do their own laundry.

Such luxury isn't afforded by top-notch educations or good jobs, although many of them have both. It's the upshot of living with their parents.

According to social scientists, grown men and women are increasingly becoming caught in a suspended state of "adultescence." While their
professional accomplishments permit leaving home, their unwillingness to embrace independence keeps them from doing so.

"A lot of young people are telling me they could afford to live on their own, but they couldn't afford to live in the manner they're accustomed to," says Barbara Mitchell, author of The Boomerang Age: Transitions to Adulthood
in Families.

"It's almost like the luxuries of yesterday have become the necessities of today's generation because we've gone more into a consumer-oriented culture of designer handbags and fancy sports cars."

Statistics Canada reports the number of twentysomethings living with their parents jumped from 27 per cent to 41 per cent over the past two decades...

[Roderic Beaujot, a demographer and professor of sociology at the University of Western Ontario] believes the trend could leave a long-term imprint on everything from marriage and fertility rates to retirement age, noting: "The idea of Freedom 55 will have to be put aside..."

"You can live in your parents' household now without being treated as a child," says Beaujot.

"You're given all the privileges you would have as an adult, plus the advantages of having the work done by somebody else."

---

That 'somebody else' is invariably the mother. That was the first thing that jumped out at me. The other is what this phenomena says about consumerism and its effect on the family. Given the statistics reported in this piece, it's likely some Babble members are 'adultescents'. It would be interesting to hear your views and those of others.

quote:

---

That 'somebody else' is invariably the mother.

---

Is it? I wouldn't dispute that if some parent is picking up your socks, it's likely mom, but isn't dad out working to pay the mortgage in that case? Wouldn't a person living with their parents be enjoying a free ride from both of them?

[ 26 May 2006: Message edited by: CHCMD ]

But, if an adult can live on his own but, instead, chooses to have mommy cook his meals, clean his room and wash his clothes so that he can have more “spending” money from each paycheck then, as a parent, I’d show the “kid” the door.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CHCMD:
I was on my own at 18 - the parents split up and both took one bedroom apartments . . . I took the hint.

---

But failing that, I think we need to also consider: what are the parents getting out of this deal? I don't believe for a second that they're all being held emotional hostage by their kid. They're getting something out of this deal. If nothing else, if your kid never leaves then you don't have to go out and buy a dog to fill the void.

Another situation would be kids moving into their own places, but still "subsidized" fairly heavily by their parents. In my dad's condo complex, there seem to be a lot of quite affluent young people with a lot of free time. Now, they could be dot-com millionaires, or lottery winners, or mafia thugs, or something. But maybe it's that their parents are bribing them to move out.

[ 06 March 2006: Message edited by: Yossarian ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by cynic:
Well the idea of a single young adult being expected to move out on their own is a peculiarity of Westeern culture.

---

I remain concerned about what this phenomenon reveals about consumerism's affect on Canadian society. Those StatsCan statistics - an increase from 27% to 41% of twentysomethings living at home - indicates a big jump. The point in the article about the Dr. Spock generation may be apropos and also others.

I don't think my parents were overly upset or resentful about supporting me, but us being in close proximity all the time really strained our relationship. Especially with my father, who was retired by then, and dealing with his own issues around depression and being at home all the time. We get along so much better since I moved out again.

I can't imagine doing it solely by choice, or when I had a job that was enough to pay the bills on. But I guess every family is different.

quote:

---

How truly independent is someone who hasn't left Mummy and Daddy?

---

And I know when time came for me to start looking at postsecondary education, and I wound up going to school a 14 hour drive away, my grandmother was very unhappy. She kept asking my parents why they would "let" me move away like that. I know my folks weren't thrilled with the distance of my undergrad school (or the cost), but they never really tried to stop me from going away.

I always assumed there was a generational aspect to my grandmother's outlook; that it was just natural to her that a young woman lived with her parents at least until she got married, and that she certainly didn't go off and live in another city (or another country, as I eventually did).

But all these stories make it sound like young adults living at home is a wholly new phenomenon.

quote:

---

If nothing else, if your kid never leaves then you don't have to go out and buy a dog to fill the void.

---

And then, of course, he later wrote something even worse.

So I'm here to testify for the older generation - an older generation, anyway.

I've watched a number of retired/retiring couples cope with not just twentysomethings but thirtysomethings coming to stay at home, and I've never seen the oldsters happy about it.

Mr Magoo seems to think that anyone who can't say easily to his own kid "Out!" is automatically a co-dependent. Well, that's Mr Magoo's idea of human psychology. In my experience, most parents have to work through feelings that are a lot more complicated than that.

Mr Magoo started out implying that the parents somehow want the kids to stay at home because their lives are empty (implied by the "get a dog to fill the void" sneer). Again: I've never seen that. Retirement is wonderful for many people, complicated for others - but I have yet to meet a retired person who really wanted the younger generation around as dependents.

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Mr Magoo wrote:
So I'm here to testify for the older generation - an older generation, anyway.

---

quote:

---

Mr Magoo seems to think that anyone who can't say easily to his own kid "Out!" is automatically a co-dependent. Well, that's Mr Magoo's idea of human psychology. In my experience, most parents have to work through feelings that are a lot more complicated than that.

---

I don't mean to imply that the feelings can't be complicated, nor that parents should celebrate Junior's 19th birthday with a send-off.

[ 06 March 2006: Message edited by: JPG ]

quote:

---

Well the idea of a single young adult being expected to move out on their own is a peculiarity of Westeern culture. In most Asian and African cultures extended families are the norm, and living alone is rare. Just because now North Americans are realizing the benefits of making Mom do all the cooking doesn't make this a new phenomenon in human behaviour,.

---

Imagine, parents that don't mind if their children stay at home with them indefinitely. My my. How can we exploit these adult 'children' as cheap labour or mindless consumers of mortgages and all the trappings of indebtedness that come with 'independent' living?

How can we exploit the aging parents for the burgeoning markets of medical and life 'assistance' if our seniors already have their own built in care system already?

How can we continue to shred the fabric of family and community if such adult children continue to atttached to the family home and all those that live there.

It's a lot more expensive for young people to get out on their own these days, especially with the high costs of tuition, housing and pretty much everything else -- and few good-paying jobs for people just starting their full-time careers.

And like someone mentioned, some of the supposedly independent youngsters with their own apartments are getting some or all of their rent (or tuition) being paid for by their wealthy parents.

[ 06 March 2006: Message edited by: Secret Agent Style ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Secret Agent Style:
It's a lot more expensive for young people to get out on their own these days, especially with the high costs of tuition, housing and pretty much everything else -- and few good-paying jobs for people just starting their full-time careers.

---

If they are spending a significant portion of their meager income on discretionary items (going out, taking vacations, buying trendy clothes, etc., etc.), then they are not so poor that they have to live at home.

I have a friend who stayed in his parents' basement until his late 20s. His mom still did his laundry (he couldn't get her to stop), but he paid room and board and was responsible for preparing most of his own meals. It worked out well for all of them.

I think it is hard for younger people to think of older people without projecting pity on to them.

I think that because I remember doing it when I was young, just finding it so hard to imagine what retired people would DO with themselves, since they weren't doing what I considered interesting.

What can I say? Young people are often lacking in imagination when they think of the elderly. Old people often have plans of their own, and reasons that the young cannot fathom.

I recognize the importance of the question that Pogo has raised. However, I think it is unfair, given the practical pressures of the real world we currently live in, to foist all the responsibility for internalizing everyone else's conflicts and vulnerabilities on to people who have spent their entire lives imagining a certain kind of peaceable life and then suddenly find it's not there for them.

Instead of people narking away at one another across the generations, I think it would be much more useful for us to try to imagine different kinds of buildings, different kinds of communities, where people could go on living together more supportively.

Given most current arrangements, I have to say that it would be a cold and frosty Friday morning before I would live with anyone but a well-vetted partner ever again. And I don't know many people over sixty who don't feel more or less that way.

Old people all know: to the young, we are barely visible, and pretty much dispensable. I'm sure there are exceptions - but if you're about to claim you're an exception, please recognize that you are an exception.

I think it can work for lots of people, if everyone wants to be in that situation, if they genuinely get along well together, if everyone pulls their own financial weight according to their ability (e.g. if the adult child has enough money to buy a big screen television and jaunt off to Las Vegas with friends for a vacation, s/he has enough money to pay rent and buy groceries).

It's not for everyone, but I wouldn't be immediately contemptuous of someone who was living with their parents before knowing what the "deal" was, even though I couldn't wait for independence and moved out when I was 18. Would I be contemptuous of someone who lives in their parents' basement and expects mom (or dad) to do all the cooking and laundry? Oh heck, yeah.

I knew someone once who lived at home until she was 30 or so. After university, she found work, lived at home, got along great with her parents, saved up a decent chunk of money (and her parents didn't make her live like a pauper during that time - she spent money on other stuff too). I don't know whether she was paying rent or not - but her parents were comparatively well-off, so it probably wouldn't have been an issue even if she wasn't. And, well, it worked for them. So who's to say?

In reality, if they turned out to be pleasant, thoughtful adults who made good roommates, I wouldn't at all mind them living with me ... *if* I had a large enough house that we were all comfortable, and I had enough privacy that I could walk down my upstairs hall starkers without worrying about running into one of their partners.

As far as laundry and cooking goes, they can already make a simple supper and do laundry, so that's not going to be an issue :-)

quote:

---

Statistics Canada reports the number of twentysomethings living with their parents jumped from 27 per cent to 41 per cent over the past two decades...

---

I wasn't thrilled to be back at home - the 'burbs ain't my kinda community. I didn't have a room of my own for a couple years so no privacy or personal space.

[ 07 March 2006: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Statistics Canada reports the number of twentysomethings living with their parents jumped from 27 per cent to 41 per cent over the past two decades..

---

Out of curiosity, does anyone have any data on how many twentysomethings are pursuing higher education, as compared to 20 years ago? I live in London for 8-10 months out of the year, depending on my study schedules. Last year I spent all of 6 weeks at home with my parents. But because I do return to live with them for however brief a period, StatsCan considers me to be living with my parents.

quote:

---

STUDENTS who return to live with their parents during the year should be included at their parents' address, even if they live elsewhere while attending school or working at a summer job;

---

I lived at home until I finished my undergrad degree at 22. For a good portion of time following that, the basement suite in my parent's house has been occupied by my poorly educated younger brother with mental health issues, who is alternately employed in the oil rigs and making good money, employed in part time service work and making next to no money, or unemployed. Currently, my step sister, who just left a common law marriage with a large debt, is living there. We all view(ed) living with my parents as a way of cushioning us from economic circumstances that meant we weren't stable. My parents made clear they were glad to offer what they could to help, but it wasn't permanent, and I don't think they'll be upset when we're all financially stable (whenever that is).

As I see it, more minor segments of this population would be kids who stay with/move back in with parents for physical care issues (theirs or their parents), growth in families from cultures where it is expected that children will live at home until marriage or such, and the smallest but potentially growing segments of selfish or co-dependent people who just can't bear to let go.

Despite the fact that the article authors refer specifically to grown adults who are financially able to leave and who do expect their childhood to be perpetuated by Mom washing the dirty clothes and Dad stocking the fridge, most of the responses seem to be about:

1. children forced back home by financial or emotional crisis

2. families from other cultures with different expectations

3. anecdotes about friends who lived with parents, paid rent and helped out with chores

4. personal experiences of "the time I had to move back home and it wasn't like the article says at all..."

quote:

---

I'd say a poorly written, poorly reasoned, reactionary article

---

The inclusion of that stat makes the article poorly written, poorly reasoned, AND reactionary?

Would we be jumping down their throats for not including the 50 other reasons the unemployment rate could have gone up? Would it be irresponsible of them not to mention all of them? Would it be bad writing?

Post-secondary institutions (PSIs) have become big business and are increasingly funded by big business. Big business in turn says it needs more people with credentialed such-and-such qualifications. The symbiosis works for both:

• The PSIs get additional government funding to offer more and more specialized programs.
• Big business helps pay the cost AND gets tax credits for its trouble. A win-win situation.

[ 07 March 2006: Message edited by: person ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BCseawalker:
And young adults? They get drawn into that spiraling demand for more credentials.

---

“Credentials” does not necessarily mean “knowledge” but I’m sure there’s a relatively close correlation (i.e., a person with a degree in mathematics is likely to know more about mathematics than someone without a degree; not always, but usually). Hence, an employer wanting a mathematician is likely going to look for and hire someone “credentialed” in mathematics than someone without those credentials.

quote:

---

Isn't more families staying together longer a good thing? For example it would reduce the demand for housing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sven:

“Credentials” does not necessarily mean “knowledge” but I’m sure there’s a relatively close correlation (i.e., a person with a degree in mathematics is likely to know more about mathematics than someone without a degree; not always, but usually). Hence, an employer wanting a mathematician is likely going to look for and hire someone “credentialed” in mathematics than someone without those credentials.

So, unless you want to be swingin’ a hammer in the hot sun for a livin’, in a knowledge-based economy you will need credentials to indicate a basic level of knowledge regarding the matter studied.

---

Well, at least in BC, swinging a hammer would pay about 50% more than my MA has done for me so far.

We do have a cultural fixation with credentialism, which has lost the purpose and role of education (training citizens). Now we train workers, and citizenship gets lost in the shuffle.

All credentials do, really, is provide potential employers with an easy way to sift applications. Has anyone, ever, asked you what your grades were in University? Hell, I work as a researcher, and nobody even asks me what my degrees are in. After the first 6 weeks, they look at your work, not your credentials. It's getting the first six weeks that is the purpose of the credentialing.