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

[Anonymous]

I'm glad I'm not in this situation but I would not have abundant empathy for my parents' problems if they refused to have any empathy for my problems when I was younger. I know of a lot of parents of adult children who think that the world worked exactly as it did when they were fresh out of high school, so they refused to give their kids any financial help (or babysitting) at all after they graduated from high school. If I had a parent like that I'd be so tempted to say "you knew you'd get old, why didn't you prepare for it financially? That was your problem and you failed and I guess you have to deal with the consequences." I wouldn't do it because I'd feel guilty but the entitlement of some of these people is astounding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've no intention to ever take a single $ from my kids even if i end up needing but after spending millions on them, if they can afford but don't offer to help if we need, it would be sad. Kind of cruel. I hope I raised better people than that.

So does that mean you think that "people have a moral obligation to help a family member in need even if they don't have any legal obligations towards them"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What we need is safe and supportive childcare and eldercare in this world. These are basics, weapons and designer goods aren't. We as a society should be supportive to each other.

Traditionally, family filled those roles.

But when in your 40s, full time job, menopause, demanding kids and also need to look after your parents...


... you get suicidal.

The in-family eldercare has gone the way of the dodo, except in countries where household help is still cheap, or in places so underdeveloped that women are always home.

Yep. There is no way for one person to do it all.

So you want the government to pay for other people to do your family's work? Neither the children nor the elders are benefitted by outsourcing.

[Anonymous]

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.

First of all, kids don't get a say in what their parents do or don't spend on them before they turn 18. Even if someone under 18 asks their parents for something expensive, they really aren't mature enough to understand just what a big sacrifice they're asking their parents to make. And if a parent thinks their kid should have to ultimately pay back for their college education, they can simply refuse to pay and tell their kid they have
to take out loans.

Second, whether or not someone "should" need help has nothing to do with whether or not they do need help. So you seem to be suggesting that someone in this age-range who does need help doesn't deserve it. By your rule, if the lives of a 25-year-old and a 75-year-old were on the line and only one of them could be saved, the 75-year-old should be saved, even though 75 is a perfectly normal age to die at, while 25 is much too young to die.

I forgot to add that many parents set up a college fund for their kids before they turn 18, and that the money in said fund can't be used for anything else. So parents paying for college is potentially another thing the kid didn't have a say in before they turned 18.

Most of us consider being alive to be a good thing... and going to college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What we need is safe and supportive childcare and eldercare in this world. These are basics, weapons and designer goods aren't. We as a society should be supportive to each other.

Traditionally, family filled those roles.

But when in your 40s, full time job, menopause, demanding kids and also need to look after your parents...


... you get suicidal.

The in-family eldercare has gone the way of the dodo, except in countries where household help is still cheap, or in places so underdeveloped that women are always home.

Yep. There is no way for one person to do it all.

So you want the government to pay for other people to do your family's work? Neither the children nor the elders are benefitted by outsourcing.

Who decided childcare and eldercare were "family work"? Where does that leave people with no family? Or single people who don't have anyone to support them while they quit their jobs to care for an aging parent? Making childcare/eldercare an individual problem is a recipe for economic disaster

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What we need is safe and supportive childcare and eldercare in this world. These are basics, weapons and designer goods aren't. We as a society should be supportive to each other.

Traditionally, family filled those roles.

But when in your 40s, full time job, menopause, demanding kids and also need to look after your parents...


... you get suicidal.

The in-family eldercare has gone the way of the dodo, except in countries where household help is still cheap, or in places so underdeveloped that women are always home.

Yep. There is no way for one person to do it all.

So you want the government to pay for other people to do your family's work? Neither the children nor the elders are benefitted by outsourcing.

Who decided childcare and eldercare were "family work"? Where does that leave people with no family? Or single people who don't have anyone to support them while they quit their jobs to care for an aging parent? Making childcare/eldercare an individual problem is a recipe for economic disaster

Actually, it does not. Making such things a societal problem are a recipe for social disaster.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

The obligation is moral.

(And of course, there are exceptions for parents who were abusive or negligent),

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The obligation is moral.

(And of course, there are exceptions for parents who were abusive or negligent),

A lot if parents who were abusive or negligent can’t admit that to themselves.

[Anonymous]

Because many more adult children in this kind of situation are capable of supporting themselves than elderly parents.

We provide some financial support for my MIL. She is 80 years old and only has her social security to live off of. What is she supposed to do, find a job? She is not in a physical state to be a Walmart greeter.

My MIL's current situation came about from a mix of dumb choices and terrible luck. Sure she'd be better off financially if she didn't make the dumb choices. But I can afford to help so I'm not going to let her become destitute. She wouldn't be able to afford both hosuing and her medical bills on her social security check alone. What's the other option?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because many more adult children in this kind of situation are capable of supporting themselves than elderly parents.

We provide some financial support for my MIL. She is 80 years old and only has her social security to live off of. What is she supposed to do, find a job? She is not in a physical state to be a Walmart greeter.

My MIL's current situation came about from a mix of dumb choices and terrible luck. Sure she'd be better off financially if she didn't make the dumb choices. But I can afford to help so I'm not going to let her become destitute. She wouldn't be able to afford both hosuing and her medical bills on her social security check alone. What's the other option?

Seeing as how most people are dead by 80, she's already better off than most 80 year olds simply by being alive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because many more adult children in this kind of situation are capable of supporting themselves than elderly parents.

We provide some financial support for my MIL. She is 80 years old and only has her social security to live off of. What is she supposed to do, find a job? She is not in a physical state to be a Walmart greeter.

My MIL's current situation came about from a mix of dumb choices and terrible luck. Sure she'd be better off financially if she didn't make the dumb choices. But I can afford to help so I'm not going to let her become destitute. She wouldn't be able to afford both hosuing and her medical bills on her social security check alone. What's the other option?

Seeing as how most people are dead by 80, she's already better off than most 80 year olds simply by being alive.

Same P. I did some actual research to back up what I said. It turns out I was off, but not by much. According to this life table, https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html, most women die between the ages of 83 and 84. So if she's alive 4 years from now, you'll be justified in not helping her anymore.

[Anonymous]

My parents should've been nicer to me and made better financial decisions if they wanted me to support them. My parents spent and spent and spent and I grew up thinking we were well off... until the rubber hit the road on larger life expenses, then they left me with the bill, after telling me it was covered and committed to the expenses. They also have new cars every 3 years on the dot, lavish vacations, etc. But are in their 70s and can't retire because they didn't save for retirement.

We live modestly - live in our starter home, drive old cars, save a ton, etc. Our child wants for nothing, but we refuse to over extend ourselves ... mostly because I don't want to burden my child down the road because we messed up.

I know my parents will come knocking for money at some point and I'm not sure how we plan to respond. Alternately, my ILs lived much more modestly their whole lives on less income and will be fine financially till they die and likely have modest inheritances for their children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My parents should've been nicer to me and made better financial decisions if they wanted me to support them. My parents spent and spent and spent and I grew up thinking we were well off... until the rubber hit the road on larger life expenses, then they left me with the bill, after telling me it was covered and committed to the expenses. They also have new cars every 3 years on the dot, lavish vacations, etc. But are in their 70s and can't retire because they didn't save for retirement.

We live modestly - live in our starter home, drive old cars, save a ton, etc. Our child wants for nothing, but we refuse to over extend ourselves ... mostly because I don't want to burden my child down the road because we messed up.

I know my parents will come knocking for money at some point and I'm not sure how we plan to respond. Alternately, my ILs lived much more modestly their whole lives on less income and will be fine financially till they die and likely have modest inheritances for their children.

Just put your foot down and say no. Otherwise, you'll be just turning yourself into a pushover.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My parents should've been nicer to me and made better financial decisions if they wanted me to support them. My parents spent and spent and spent and I grew up thinking we were well off... until the rubber hit the road on larger life expenses, then they left me with the bill, after telling me it was covered and committed to the expenses. They also have new cars every 3 years on the dot, lavish vacations, etc. But are in their 70s and can't retire because they didn't save for retirement.

We live modestly - live in our starter home, drive old cars, save a ton, etc. Our child wants for nothing, but we refuse to over extend ourselves ... mostly because I don't want to burden my child down the road because we messed up.

I know my parents will come knocking for money at some point and I'm not sure how we plan to respond. Alternately, my ILs lived much more modestly their whole lives on less income and will be fine financially till they die and likely have modest inheritances for their children.

Just put your foot down and say no. Otherwise, you'll be just turning yourself into a pushover.

I’ll have to see when the time comes. Hopefully, they’ll go bother my sister… they assume age and her DH are well off, but they massively overspend, just like my parents did. It’ll be interesting to see my sister explain to them that she’s actually not well off at all.