Why is it taboo for adult children to leech off their parents, but not for parents to leech off their adult children?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IDK, but sounds like you have a terrible relationship with your family. If my parents ever had a need, I would 100% take them into my home and take care of them. Right now they live with my brother. In our culture we take care of our elders. I have also told my kids they can always come back to me for help. It might be that they need an extra push to be more productive and get off video games and get a real job, but I'm not there yet with my kids. I will always have a room for them at my house when they are in need. However, if you're at the point when you feel that "I didn't ask to be born" that doesn't seem like a good place to support their parents. Seems like deeper issues.

Like I said before, I understand both arguments on their own. What I don't understand is the double-standard; why the "You have a moral obligation to help a family member in need even if you have no legal obligations towards them." argument is valid when an adult child has a parent in need, but not when a parent has an adult child in need.

Idk about others but my parents would've done everything if I needed help and I do everything I can for my children. Its not an obligation, real term is unconditional love.

Parents may choose not to continue to help an adult child to help said adult child “grow up” and be less dependent on them. Withholding non-life saving help can be seen as good parenting necessary to help their adult children “launch”.

On the other hand, parents give children life and most adults like being alive. In fact, most consider life the most precious gift they have. That in itself is enough to be grateful and feel some obligation.

But what if you had good parents? Good parents shouldn’t be taken for granted. There is no guarantee that a child will end up with parents who will provide for them and love them to the best of their abilities. So if you are privileged enough to end up with some good parents through no merit of your own, you ought to feel extra grateful and willing to give back to those who raised you.

If nothing else, consider it a delayed tip for good parental service

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IDK, but sounds like you have a terrible relationship with your family. If my parents ever had a need, I would 100% take them into my home and take care of them. Right now they live with my brother. In our culture we take care of our elders. I have also told my kids they can always come back to me for help. It might be that they need an extra push to be more productive and get off video games and get a real job, but I'm not there yet with my kids. I will always have a room for them at my house when they are in need. However, if you're at the point when you feel that "I didn't ask to be born" that doesn't seem like a good place to support their parents. Seems like deeper issues.

Like I said before, I understand both arguments on their own. What I don't understand is the double-standard; why the "You have a moral obligation to help a family member in need even if you have no legal obligations towards them." argument is valid when an adult child has a parent in need, but not when a parent has an adult child in need.

Idk about others but my parents would've done everything if I needed help and I do everything I can for my children. Its not an obligation, real term is unconditional love.

Parents may choose not to continue to help an adult child to help said adult child “grow up” and be less dependent on them. Withholding non-life saving help can be seen as good parenting necessary to help their adult children “launch”.

On the other hand, parents give children life and most adults like being alive. In fact, most consider life the most precious gift they have. That in itself is enough to be grateful and feel some obligation.

But what if you had good parents? Good parents shouldn’t be taken for granted. There is no guarantee that a child will end up with parents who will provide for them and love them to the best of their abilities. So if you are privileged enough to end up with some good parents through no merit of your own, you ought to feel extra grateful and willing to give back to those who raised you.

If nothing else, consider it a delayed tip for good parental service

But withholding non-saving life isn't good for a parent? Isn't it also bad for a parent to be too dependent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whenever a parent creates a thread complaining about adult child living with them, many of the comments are along the lines of "They're an adult. Let them hit the streets and fend for themselves." To be fair, I can kind of see where these people are coming from. The OP's of these threads have no legal obligations towards their kids, and the commenters are advising the OP to just play it cold. However, the same logic doesn't seem to apply whenever an adult child creates a thread complaining about their parents living them. Suddenly the comments are along the lines of "They're your parent. How could you even think of throwing them on the streets and letting them fend for themselves?"

In the latter situation, I do understand that people think the since the OP's parents took care of them, it's only fair for the OP to now take care of their parents. But the thing is, the OP didn't ask to be born. The OP's parents chose to bring them into the world. The OP's parents signed up for the responsibility of raising them. If they didn't want that burden, they didn't have to become parents in the first place. The OP, on the other hand, signed up for no such responsibility. I understand that family should be there for each other regardless of legal obligations(or lack thereof), but I don't understand why this is so one-sided.

I find the arbitrary "rules" for both to be absurd and a strange "American" view. Rugged individualism tropes and all that. Barring some abuse type situation, I cannot imagine denying helping my children or my parents. Of course I would. My grandparents were immigrants on both sides. And lots of generational housing/helping occurred and it makes things a lot easier in many ways. I don't know what happened to make this so frowned upon now but I don't like it, personally. And it disregards the changes in society that have happened in the last 50 years that make it much harder for elderly and young people to be successful and financially sound.

[Anonymous]

simple
older parents were once/still are productive members of society, by both having jobs and raising children (ie the next generation of productive members of society).

adult children "leeches" have not yet become productive members of society, but they need to.

[Anonymous]

I don’t think this is a one answer for all situation. My IL’s have a spending problem and despite being high earners for decades, they have no savings. My parents were solidly middle class but managed to save way more than I was aware. Both DH and myself are willing to help my parents, but not his. My parents helped with college, but I also worked and had scholarships and loans. DH’s parents paid for college and promised grad school, but left him stuck with the bill at the last minute and he had to scramble and get loans because they didn’t have the funds to pay. Neither has given us down payments or large gifts, which we don’t expect. We just don’t want to be in a position where we are supporting our three young children and our parents at the same time, which I think is a fair stance. We don’t have enough in our early 40’s for the money to flow both ways, and we will choose downward every single time.

I don’t think the support your parents crowd is the same crowd who is receiving down payment cash, private school tuition and 529 contributions from their parents. Some of the time it is cultural, but some of it is just differences in socio economic status and generational wealth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Saying this “the OP didn't ask to be born. The OP's parents chose to bring them into the world.” screams that you are an immature irrational kid and entirely self-centered.

If adults didn’t keep procreating, population would die out completely. Do you get that?
And if most parents didn’t sacrifice and try their best to raise decent human beings, the world would devolve into complete chaos.

Come back after you raise a kid or 2, or do something else giving to society, and reevaluate your ideas

Why would be wrong humans going extinct? Maybe that would be a good thing. We're destroying the planet as I type.

There is something horribly wrong with wishing your own species to die out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IDK, but sounds like you have a terrible relationship with your family. If my parents ever had a need, I would 100% take them into my home and take care of them. Right now they live with my brother. In our culture we take care of our elders. I have also told my kids they can always come back to me for help. It might be that they need an extra push to be more productive and get off video games and get a real job, but I'm not there yet with my kids. I will always have a room for them at my house when they are in need. However, if you're at the point when you feel that "I didn't ask to be born" that doesn't seem like a good place to support their parents. Seems like deeper issues.

Like I said before, I understand both arguments on their own. What I don't understand is the double-standard; why the "You have a moral obligation to help a family member in need even if you have no legal obligations towards them." argument is valid when an adult child has a parent in need, but not when a parent has an adult child in need.

Idk about others but my parents would've done everything if I needed help and I do everything I can for my children. Its not an obligation, real term is unconditional love.

Parents may choose not to continue to help an adult child to help said adult child “grow up” and be less dependent on them. Withholding non-life saving help can be seen as good parenting necessary to help their adult children “launch”.

On the other hand, parents give children life and most adults like being alive. In fact, most consider life the most precious gift they have. That in itself is enough to be grateful and feel some obligation.

But what if you had good parents? Good parents shouldn’t be taken for granted. There is no guarantee that a child will end up with parents who will provide for them and love them to the best of their abilities. So if you are privileged enough to end up with some good parents through no merit of your own, you ought to feel extra grateful and willing to give back to those who raised you.

If nothing else, consider it a delayed tip for good parental service

What's wrong with paying it forward?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you not feel any responsibility towards your parents and have no wish to return the live, kindness, care, education, resources they provided to even though they could've spent energy and money on better lifestyle and retirement.

There is no real compulsion for parents to care and provide for their children. There are many who only offer abortions, neglect, abuse, selfishness, broken families, alcoholism etc etc.

What's wrong with paying it forward?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You sound like a spoiled 18-24 year old asking this.
Stats show Parents spend approx. $300,000 raising a child until age 18, plus tons more if they pay for college. That is enough.

For this, an adult child should then return the gift and help care for a parent for the last 5-10 years of their life when they become frail and need care. That’s the circle of life.

An adult age 22ish- age 60 shouldn’t need help or be leeching off anyone.

This. Parents spend money on their kids that they could have used to save for retirement, so they have less savings at retirement than if they didn't have kids. Or they could have used the money spent on kids to take great vacations.

Point is, they sacrificed one way or another.

"The kids didn't ask to be born" is a cop-out. If you asked any of these kids I'm certain they'd all say they're glad to be alive. They're also glad their parents put a roof over their heads and fed them.

That's a parents' job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You sound like a spoiled 18-24 year old asking this.
Stats show Parents spend approx. $300,000 raising a child until age 18, plus tons more if they pay for college. That is enough.

For this, an adult child should then return the gift and help care for a parent for the last 5-10 years of their life when they become frail and need care. That’s the circle of life.

An adult age 22ish- age 60 shouldn’t need help or be leeching off anyone.

No child asked to be born whereas the parent chose to take on the responsibility of raising a child.

That aside, there are a lot of crummy parents out there and the ones I’ve seen with the biggest “my kids owe me” are the ones who did nothing to save or set themselves up in retirement. Often this is cultural and I’ve seen it play out with friend who married into families with parents who lived pretty high on the hog spending paycheck to paycheck and now feel their child should care for them, often not just for a last few handful of years but potentially a couple decades. It’s so unreasonable.

And I imagine if you’re a kind, generous parent who treated your kids very well and you did the best you could to save, your kids will feel more inclined to want to help you if they can. But the expectation that your kids are going to just keep bankrolling you at the lifestyle you are accustomed to in old age is literal narcissism.

Why don't you ask some adult children if they wanted to be born. Pretty sure 99% will say yes. That argument is really dumb.

Well, humans have limited control over that. Birth control can fail. Complain to God or whatever higher power you believe or not believe in.

No, sorry. This line is tired. The vast majority of babies born are because people CHOSE to have them, not because of SA or because “birth control failed.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IDK, but sounds like you have a terrible relationship with your family. If my parents ever had a need, I would 100% take them into my home and take care of them. Right now they live with my brother. In our culture we take care of our elders. I have also told my kids they can always come back to me for help. It might be that they need an extra push to be more productive and get off video games and get a real job, but I'm not there yet with my kids. I will always have a room for them at my house when they are in need. However, if you're at the point when you feel that "I didn't ask to be born" that doesn't seem like a good place to support their parents. Seems like deeper issues.

Like I said before, I understand both arguments on their own. What I don't understand is the double-standard; why the "You have a moral obligation to help a family member in need even if you have no legal obligations towards them." argument is valid when an adult child has a parent in need, but not when a parent has an adult child in need.

Idk about others but my parents would've done everything if I needed help and I do everything I can for my children. Its not an obligation, real term is unconditional love.

Parents may choose not to continue to help an adult child to help said adult child “grow up” and be less dependent on them. Withholding non-life saving help can be seen as good parenting necessary to help their adult children “launch”.

On the other hand, parents give children life and most adults like being alive. In fact, most consider life the most precious gift they have. That in itself is enough to be grateful and feel some obligation.

But what if you had good parents? Good parents shouldn’t be taken for granted. There is no guarantee that a child will end up with parents who will provide for them and love them to the best of their abilities. So if you are privileged enough to end up with some good parents through no merit of your own, you ought to feel extra grateful and willing to give back to those who raised you.

If nothing else, consider it a delayed tip for good parental service

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:simple
older parents were once/still are productive members of society, by both having jobs and raising children (ie the next generation of productive members of society).

adult children "leeches" have not yet become productive members of society, but they need to.

This is such a dimwit teddy crass American take, I don’t even know where to start. You sound simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you not feel any responsibility towards your parents and have no wish to return the live, kindness, care, education, resources they provided to even though they could've spent energy and money on better lifestyle and retirement.

There is no real compulsion for parents to care and provide for their children. There are many who only offer abortions, neglect, abuse, selfishness, broken families, alcoholism etc etc.

I do feel that responsibility, because personally, I agree that "you have a moral obligation to help a family member in need even if you have no legal obligations towards them". While I can understand people who disagree with that statement, what I can't understand is people who agree with that statement when an adult child has a parent in need, but not when a parent has an adult child in need.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because when you are young and healthy, you have your whole life ahead of you and an obligation to figure out how to make your way in the world.

When you are elderly, you have probably contributed to the world (and any children you may have had). Your strength and likely health have diminished (or are about to). Your income may be limited.

Civilized people (versus a lack of wolves) support society’s weakest members.

So a 25-year-old with multiple sclerosis is less deserving of help than an able-bodied 75-year-old?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whenever a parent creates a thread complaining about adult child living with them, many of the comments are along the lines of "They're an adult. Let them hit the streets and fend for themselves." To be fair, I can kind of see where these people are coming from. The OP's of these threads have no legal obligations towards their kids, and the commenters are advising the OP to just play it cold. However, the same logic doesn't seem to apply whenever an adult child creates a thread complaining about their parents living them. Suddenly the comments are along the lines of "They're your parent. How could you even think of throwing them on the streets and letting them fend for themselves?"

In the latter situation, I do understand that people think the since the OP's parents took care of them, it's only fair for the OP to now take care of their parents. But the thing is, the OP didn't ask to be born. The OP's parents chose to bring them into the world. The OP's parents signed up for the responsibility of raising them. If they didn't want that burden, they didn't have to become parents in the first place. The OP, on the other hand, signed up for no such responsibility. I understand that family should be there for each other regardless of legal obligations(or lack thereof), but I don't understand why this is so one-sided.

I find the arbitrary "rules" for both to be absurd and a strange "American" view. Rugged individualism tropes and all that. Barring some abuse type situation, I cannot imagine denying helping my children or my parents. Of course I would. My grandparents were immigrants on both sides. And lots of generational housing/helping occurred and it makes things a lot easier in many ways. I don't know what happened to make this so frowned upon now but I don't like it, personally. And it disregards the changes in society that have happened in the last 50 years that make it much harder for elderly and young people to be successful and financially sound.

Bingo! I've posted in a few of the inheritance threads as my MiL likes to say, "you can't take it with you." I've come to think she believes it is a clever joke without realizing how much more expensive a middle class life has gotten over the last 50 years.

In that sense, I do feel for the folks on here who have parents who have spent all their money and expect to continue to live as they have over the preceding years by having their kids pay for it. I was lucky in a sense. My parents didn't have 2 nickels to rub together, but they were frugal with what they had. I did give them money off and on without being asked as they had worked hard and made a lot of sacrifices for us kids. I didn't have to face adding parental expectation of support after profligate use of their money along with saving for college and retirement. IDK how I would have responded if circumstances had been radically different.