How common is "failure to launch?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I immigrated from a culture where most people live in multi-generational families. In our society, no one fails to launch. People may not be earning a living but those who are at home are taking care of the home, family and social obligations.

My brother lost his job 5 yrs ago. He is 60 now. His wife is the breadwinner. He does projects at home. House repair, additions, medical care, veggi garden, selling of property, consolidating investments. He is busy as hell and will rake in big amounts of money with selling his property (he used to buy land for cheap at one point in life).

A 55 YO, by definition, is not a failure to launch. We're talking about people in their late teens - 20s.

Are "we"? A 55YO who still lives with their parents and can't hold down a full-time job despite having no clear psychological or cognitive impairments is very much a failure to launch.

A married 55YO who makes themselves useful is various ways is not a failure to launch.

I am in my 50s and a lot of my friends have sibling who we think of as having failed to launch. My BIL, for example, lived with my ILs until they died and just got his first full-time salaried position despite having a master's degree.

Just because he has a masters degree does not mean there are no psychological or neurological issues. Or maybe undiagnosed neurodivergence.

This. Plus even IQ doesn’t correlate to EQ or being employable. Or in a long term relationship.

+100

In my family the failure to launch person has a masters. At 65 and with a house that my grandparents gave the down payment for (and likely additional $ when they were alive) and has SS from a deceased spouse, this person has not been consistently employed FT for more than 15 years and still asks for financial support from family members. They were diagnosed with a psychological disorder, which they are being treated for, some time after their 30s.

So they have a psychological disorder which explains everything you describe before it. You should have sympathy, pp. His life has not been easy.

NP. You are arguing the same side as the PP who was agreeing with the PP's that psych/neuro issues exist and IQ doesn't correlate to EQ or employability. She was being sympathetic. As has her family, financially supporting this person. It is a difficult situation all around when you worry about the 'failure to launch' sibling as well as the 'elder care' that they don't have the skills to provide- but that everyone seems to think they are up for- by sheer fact that they live there/never moved out/got on with life.

-we have a sibling who has never/will never get diagnosed but we know something has to be up. We just help them along financially/socially and explain that as they never moved out and don't have a job or hobbies, they are the one who is living there as a parental room mate. That they now need to try to ask questions/be more aware of how the parent is doing/they need to talk to/assist with an aging parent who no longer wants to cook every meal for them and is increasingly less aware of messes, needs help cleaning now, and now that there are MD appts- occasional driving is needed. With LOTS of other sibling oversight due to things that they miss a lot of things due to likely autism. It's not always ideal that 'the one left at home who 'didn't launch'' ends up holding the bag with increased potential for elder care when it's their lack of awareness/proactiveness/ability to see around corners that got them in the permanent room mate situation to begin with. With our sibling, we are concerned about their ability to provide self-care, let alone elder care, but it's difficult when you have a parent who supports the arrangement. So far lots of other sibling eyes have picked up on infections, TIAs, cancers, GI symptoms that the neurodiverse sibling has not noticed. Wing and a prayer here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I immigrated from a culture where most people live in multi-generational families. In our society, no one fails to launch. People may not be earning a living but those who are at home are taking care of the home, family and social obligations.

My brother lost his job 5 yrs ago. He is 60 now. His wife is the breadwinner. He does projects at home. House repair, additions, medical care, veggi garden, selling of property, consolidating investments. He is busy as hell and will rake in big amounts of money with selling his property (he used to buy land for cheap at one point in life).

A 55 YO, by definition, is not a failure to launch. We're talking about people in their late teens - 20s.

Are "we"? A 55YO who still lives with their parents and can't hold down a full-time job despite having no clear psychological or cognitive impairments is very much a failure to launch.

A married 55YO who makes themselves useful is various ways is not a failure to launch.

I am in my 50s and a lot of my friends have sibling who we think of as having failed to launch. My BIL, for example, lived with my ILs until they died and just got his first full-time salaried position despite having a master's degree.

Just because he has a masters degree does not mean there are no psychological or neurological issues. Or maybe undiagnosed neurodivergence.

This. Plus even IQ doesn’t correlate to EQ or being employable. Or in a long term relationship.

+100

In my family the failure to launch person has a masters. At 65 and with a house that my grandparents gave the down payment for (and likely additional $ when they were alive) and has SS from a deceased spouse, this person has not been consistently employed FT for more than 15 years and still asks for financial support from family members. They were diagnosed with a psychological disorder, which they are being treated for, some time after their 30s.

So they have a psychological disorder which explains everything you describe before it. You should have sympathy, pp. His life has not been easy.

NP. You are arguing the same side as the PP who was agreeing with the PP's that psych/neuro issues exist and IQ doesn't correlate to EQ or employability. She was being sympathetic. As has her family, financially supporting this person. It is a difficult situation all around when you worry about the 'failure to launch' sibling as well as the 'elder care' that they don't have the skills to provide- but that everyone seems to think they are up for- by sheer fact that they live there/never moved out/got on with life.

-we have a sibling who has never/will never get diagnosed but we know something has to be up.

We just help them along financially/socially and explain that as they never moved out and don't have a job or hobbies, they are the one who is living there as a parental room mate. That they now need to try to ask questions/be more aware of how the parent is doing/they need to talk to/assist with an aging parent who no longer wants to cook every meal for them and is increasingly less aware of messes, needs help cleaning now, and now that there are MD appts- occasional driving is needed. With LOTS of other sibling oversight due to things that they miss a lot of things due to likely autism.

It's not always ideal that 'the one left at home who 'didn't launch'' ends up holding the bag with increased potential for elder care when it's their lack of awareness/proactiveness/ability to see around corners that got them in the permanent room mate situation to begin with.

With our sibling, we are concerned about their ability to provide self-care, let alone elder care, but it's difficult when you have a parent who supports the arrangement. So far lots of other sibling eyes have picked up on infections, TIAs, cancers, GI symptoms that the neurodiverse sibling has not noticed. Wing and a prayer here.

Same when an ASd I person married and has kids, can’t take care of them well. It’s scary and dangerous in many ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Usually "failure to launch" is just a rude term for someone who has intellectual, congitive, nueorcognitive and/or psychological struggles and either the parents went into deniaql and did not get adequate treatment or the parents did care, got help, but it was not enough.

Also, what is interesting is among the uber wealthy often it isn't referred to as "failure to launch" because the person lives off family wealth. I know several trust fund babies who label themselves as entrepreneurs or investors. Nobody bats an eyelash. If they are marries as long as they pay their pills-great. If the person is single, nobody seems to side-eye because the person doesn't live with parents. The person doesn't live with parents because there is lots of money to play with.

I still consider it failure to launch, even if wealthy. Boss's daughter never held down a real job and flits around Europe in her 30s, totally on the parent's dime. I guess it's fine since they have the money to support it but I still don't consider her a fully "launched" adult.

This. I have a sister who is a SAHM who has some issues that I would put in the failure to launch category. She has severe anxiety, depressive episodes, doesn’t work steadily, etc. She doesn’t live with my parents but also doesn’t have adult responsibilities in many ways. Her husband makes all decisions, takes care of her financially and she is very dependent upon him to be the adult. I feel bad for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Usually "failure to launch" is just a rude term for someone who has intellectual, congitive, nueorcognitive and/or psychological struggles and either the parents went into deniaql and did not get adequate treatment or the parents did care, got help, but it was not enough.

Also, what is interesting is among the uber wealthy often it isn't referred to as "failure to launch" because the person lives off family wealth. I know several trust fund babies who label themselves as entrepreneurs or investors. Nobody bats an eyelash. If they are marries as long as they pay their pills-great. If the person is single, nobody seems to side-eye because the person doesn't live with parents. The person doesn't live with parents because there is lots of money to play with.

I still consider it failure to launch, even if wealthy. Boss's daughter never held down a real job and flits around Europe in her 30s, totally on the parent's dime. I guess it's fine since they have the money to support it but I still don't consider her a fully "launched" adult.

This. I have a sister who is a SAHM who has some issues that I would put in the failure to launch category. She has severe anxiety, depressive episodes, doesn’t work steadily, etc. She doesn’t live with my parents but also doesn’t have adult responsibilities in many ways. Her husband makes all decisions, takes care of her financially and she is very dependent upon him to be the adult. I feel bad for her.

That doesn't make her failure to launch, pp. If she lives independently of your parents and is married, she is launched.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Usually "failure to launch" is just a rude term for someone who has intellectual, congitive, nueorcognitive and/or psychological struggles and either the parents went into deniaql and did not get adequate treatment or the parents did care, got help, but it was not enough.

Also, what is interesting is among the uber wealthy often it isn't referred to as "failure to launch" because the person lives off family wealth. I know several trust fund babies who label themselves as entrepreneurs or investors. Nobody bats an eyelash. If they are marries as long as they pay their pills-great. If the person is single, nobody seems to side-eye because the person doesn't live with parents. The person doesn't live with parents because there is lots of money to play with.

I still consider it failure to launch, even if wealthy. Boss's daughter never held down a real job and flits around Europe in her 30s, totally on the parent's dime. I guess it's fine since they have the money to support it but I still don't consider her a fully "launched" adult.

This. I have a sister who is a SAHM who has some issues that I would put in the failure to launch category. She has severe anxiety, depressive episodes, doesn’t work steadily, etc. She doesn’t live with my parents but also doesn’t have adult responsibilities in many ways. Her husband makes all decisions, takes care of her financially and she is very dependent upon him to be the adult. I feel bad for her.

That doesn't make her failure to launch, pp. If she lives independently of your parents and is married, she is launched.

\

No she is not launched if she can not support herself without her DH.

What do you not get about women's rights? Of course you never read Project 2025 and have no idea what is coming fool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Usually "failure to launch" is just a rude term for someone who has intellectual, congitive, nueorcognitive and/or psychological struggles and either the parents went into deniaql and did not get adequate treatment or the parents did care, got help, but it was not enough.

Also, what is interesting is among the uber wealthy often it isn't referred to as "failure to launch" because the person lives off family wealth. I know several trust fund babies who label themselves as entrepreneurs or investors. Nobody bats an eyelash. If they are marries as long as they pay their pills-great. If the person is single, nobody seems to side-eye because the person doesn't live with parents. The person doesn't live with parents because there is lots of money to play with.

I still consider it failure to launch, even if wealthy. Boss's daughter never held down a real job and flits around Europe in her 30s, totally on the parent's dime. I guess it's fine since they have the money to support it but I still don't consider her a fully "launched" adult.

This. I have a sister who is a SAHM who has some issues that I would put in the failure to launch category. She has severe anxiety, depressive episodes, doesn’t work steadily, etc. She doesn’t live with my parents but also doesn’t have adult responsibilities in many ways. Her husband makes all decisions, takes care of her financially and she is very dependent upon him to be the adult. I feel bad for her.

That doesn't make her failure to launch, pp. If she lives independently of your parents and is married, she is launched.

\

No she is not launched if she can not support herself without her DH.

What do you not get about women's rights? Of course you never read Project 2025 and have no idea what is coming fool.

Yes she is, by definition. Sorry SAHMs bother you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Usually "failure to launch" is just a rude term for someone who has intellectual, congitive, nueorcognitive and/or psychological struggles and either the parents went into deniaql and did not get adequate treatment or the parents did care, got help, but it was not enough.

Also, what is interesting is among the uber wealthy often it isn't referred to as "failure to launch" because the person lives off family wealth. I know several trust fund babies who label themselves as entrepreneurs or investors. Nobody bats an eyelash. If they are marries as long as they pay their pills-great. If the person is single, nobody seems to side-eye because the person doesn't live with parents. The person doesn't live with parents because there is lots of money to play with.

I still consider it failure to launch, even if wealthy. Boss's daughter never held down a real job and flits around Europe in her 30s, totally on the parent's dime. I guess it's fine since they have the money to support it but I still don't consider her a fully "launched" adult.

This. I have a sister who is a SAHM who has some issues that I would put in the failure to launch category. She has severe anxiety, depressive episodes, doesn’t work steadily, etc. She doesn’t live with my parents but also doesn’t have adult responsibilities in many ways. Her husband makes all decisions, takes care of her financially and she is very dependent upon him to be the adult. I feel bad for her.

Agree with others that's not failure to launch. You just don't agree with her life choices (possibly a bit of sibling envy?). Failure to launch is when the kid in their early twenties ends up not doing anything - no job, no school, just basically sitting around the house with no plans for the future. It's sadly pretty common. But, I think they all eventually do launch; it just takes longer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Usually "failure to launch" is just a rude term for someone who has intellectual, congitive, nueorcognitive and/or psychological struggles and either the parents went into deniaql and did not get adequate treatment or the parents did care, got help, but it was not enough.

Also, what is interesting is among the uber wealthy often it isn't referred to as "failure to launch" because the person lives off family wealth. I know several trust fund babies who label themselves as entrepreneurs or investors. Nobody bats an eyelash. If they are marries as long as they pay their pills-great. If the person is single, nobody seems to side-eye because the person doesn't live with parents. The person doesn't live with parents because there is lots of money to play with.

I still consider it failure to launch, even if wealthy. Boss's daughter never held down a real job and flits around Europe in her 30s, totally on the parent's dime. I guess it's fine since they have the money to support it but I still don't consider her a fully "launched" adult.

This. I have a sister who is a SAHM who has some issues that I would put in the failure to launch category. She has severe anxiety, depressive episodes, doesn’t work steadily, etc. She doesn’t live with my parents but also doesn’t have adult responsibilities in many ways. Her husband makes all decisions, takes care of her financially and she is very dependent upon him to be the adult. I feel bad for her.

Agree with others that's not failure to launch. You just don't agree with her life choices (possibly a bit of sibling envy?). Failure to launch is when the kid in their early twenties ends up not doing anything - no job, no school, just basically sitting around the house with no plans for the future. It's sadly pretty common. But, I think they all eventually do launch; it just takes longer.

+1. There are some cases where they stay at home and end up being the default caregiver of the elderly parents. I have two siblings that did this.