Would you kick out an adult child with depression?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Substitute “depression” for “cancer.” Keep everything else in the post the same. How would you answer, OP and others?

So, the person is refusing cancer treatment, but is presumably creating a situation in which the parents must take care of the person...until they die?

I think the refusing treatment is the key element in this discussion, regardless of the disease in question.

You have to break down what "refusing treatment" is though. The typical treatments for depression are talk therapy and medication. A lot of people think these are straightforward treatments, but often they are not. Finding the right medication can take years, and some people have medication-resistant depression and never find a combo or level that works for them (some medications can make it much worse, or have side effects that make it not worth it). Talk therapy is really hard, especially if you have severe depression. A lot of therapists are crap (sorry, I've been through it -- there are a lot of duds out there). Plus depression itself can make people resist treatment. They feel unworthy of the effort or simply do not care enough about anything to try something. It's a terrible disease.

So context matters a lot. Are they refusing treatment or they refusing a suggested treatment that they have had a bad experience with or isn't working for them. People who have not experience depression, or have dealt with a mild case, can sometimes get frustrated when they have a loved one who doesn't get better shortly after starting an SSRI or talk therapy. And they'll blame the individual and say it's because they aren't trying hard enough. This can easily spiral and make the depressed person lose interest in therapy or give up on finding the right meds.

I agree with the PP that you should treat depression like any other medical problem in terms of supporting the person who is suffering. But treating depression is complicated at times and you can't assume that just because someone doesn't want to take a prescribed medication or see a specific doctor that they are a lost cause. You need to understand the disease.

+1

One of the effects of depression is that it interferes the person's ability to seek out and persevere with treatment. And it can take a long time to find the right meds (a process than can include medications that don't work, or have really negative side effects), and a long time to see results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they didn't contribute to housework, work, or get treatment.

Not a situation that I'm experiencing. I read posts where posters implied that was an option and am wondering what most people think.

If they didn’t get treatment, yes.

[Anonymous]

No.

[Anonymous]

I was that depressed young adult child and my parents didn't kick me out. They were patient with me and gently nudged me into treatment. I had an episode of major depression which lasted 2 years. If not for their support, I might not be here today. I am a healthy middle age parent and I have never had another depressive episode, thank goodness.

[Anonymous]

If my kid was getting treatment for depression, I would be more likely to kick them out. Once you are well enough to go to a good therapist weekly and take meds, it’s likely you can also contribute to household tasks. Not a hard and fast rule, but if my kid wasn’t getting treatment I would be more, not less concerned about the negative consequences of kicking them out.

[Anonymous]

If your answer is/was yes or yes depending on the circumstances, would you still do the same if they:

a) were experiencing suicidal thoughts or/and
b) would not look for a place to live, live in housing for homeless people, or accept your help to find a place?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No.

I would never, ever give up on my kid. The only situation where I would kick her out of our home would be if she was harming one of us, which is impossible to imagine. But if she was simply struggling, I would do whatever it took to help her. She is the single most important person in our lives.

In that situation, God forbid, would you still try to support her in getting better?

[Anonymous]

No.

[Anonymous]

No, bit they would have to agree to go to therapy, take meds, or do both to feel better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they didn't contribute to housework, work, or get treatment.

Not a situation that I'm experiencing. I read posts where posters implied that was an option and am wondering what most people think.

If any mentally ill people live in my house they have to be making efforts to treat and manage their disorder. Same for addicts or alcoholics.

That means therapy and doing the work the therapist provides, as well as taking any daily meds.

[Anonymous]

And they would still provide chores, cook some group meals and even get a part time job and pay some utility bills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And they would still provide chores, cook some group meals and even get a part time job and pay some utility bills.

What if they refused? I'm assuming you'd kick them out in that case?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am very sympathetic to people with depression, and I know that sometimes parents expect their kids to do normal things like contribute to household chores when the kids literally cannot do that.

But I also know a life with too much ease can contribute to depression.

I would error on the side of sympathy, but it’s a really tough call to make. I don’t envy anybody in that position.

Pls a life in zero contributions or productivity equals more depression.

Most people want to be needed and to contribute. Even from age 2 on. Like Montessori school. They want to be functioning, give them more and more times to function.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am very sympathetic to people with depression, and I know that sometimes parents expect their kids to do normal things like contribute to household chores when the kids literally cannot do that.

But I also know a life with too much ease can contribute to depression.

I would error on the side of sympathy, but it’s a really tough call to make. I don’t envy anybody in that position.

Pls a life in zero contributions or productivity equals more depression.

Most people want to be needed and to contribute. Even from age 2 on. Like Montessori school. They want to be functioning, give them more and more times to function.

That’s basically what I was trying to say in my second paragraph.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And they would still provide chores, cook some group meals and even get a part time job and pay some utility bills.

What if they refused? I'm assuming you'd kick them out in that case?

Yes get them into a home then. Or they can find someone else to enable them. It can go for decades. I recall one uncle living at home until age 50 until the last parent died. They gave him 80% of the inheritance over his siblings since he was so “broken.” He took the couple millions, moved to the west coast and worked in It. Never married, his house is probably a mess, but he’s functional and independent enough.