In America, they'd be kicked out of home as soon as they turned 16.
In Russia, they'd be just beaten up by their dads. Probably badly and regularly.
They do it because they can. Key is to make it impossible and force them to take up productive activities. No one in adult age should be kept at home funded by their parents unless it's short term with definite plan to fix it, or they are seriously disabled.
Of course, when it's about schoolchildren, it's different. Serious psychiatric help is needed. It's again parents' fault for not providing it.
> In America, they'd be kicked out of home as soon as they turned 16.
This is a lie. Are you american? I've never met a single person who was kicked out at 16. This include kids who were drug addicts, high school drop outs, pregnant teens, etc.
> In Russia, they'd be just beaten up by their dads.
I highly doubt that. Are you russian?
> No one in adult age should be kept at home funded by their parents unless it's short term with definite plan to fix it
Ideally. Unless they are writing poems like emily dickinson?
Getting kicked out at 16 or 17 is (or used to be, when I was a young adult) pretty common for gay youth, and tends to be glossed over. This is in the US, though, where toxic fundamentalism is unfortunately prevalent.
I don't know about Russian dads, but in America it's very likely they'd be indulged. I don't know anyone who would kick their teenage child out of the house because he or she was depressed. Especially when you see the sort of life the homeless have in most places.
I'm sure it happens, but at least from my perspective it would not be common.
Yea, but the acceptability of adult children living at home with their parents has really changed since when I grew up. We were pretty much all kicked out at 18 to go live on our own. That was just what we did in the USA. Some had a little financial support from parents--maybe the parents paid for car insurance or gas or something. But never the rent-free home for 10-15 years like we see today. The culture has changed massively. My old man would have never accepted me living at home after high school, but I look at my kid and think, well, she'll really struggle to afford rent, and she'll never own her own home, so I guess we have no choice.
> Yea, but the acceptability of adult children living at home with their parents has really changed since when I grew up.
For nearly all of american history, children ( adult or not ) stayed at home with their parents until they got married. Especially the daughters. Emily Dickinson's parents didn't kick her out when she turned 16 or 18 or 30 or 50. Emily Dickinson famously died in the same house she was born in.
> That was just what we did in the USA.
This is simply not true. At least not for the vast majority of american families. It is actually the opposite. Where parents wanted their kids to stay at home while changes in popular culture made kids want to venture out before they got married.
> My old man would have never accepted me living at home after high school
Even if that mean you sleeping in the streets? I doubt that.
If what you wrote is true, we'd have a far greater homeless population than we do. The idea that americans kicked out their kids after high school is nonsense. Sure parents would want their kids to get a job, go to college, etc after high school but only a tiny fraction of parents would kick their kids to the curb once they finished high school. Especially the daughters.
Just ask yourself, would you kick force your kids to live on the streets at 18? Of course not. Which parent would answer yes to that?
> Just ask yourself, would you kick force your kids to live on the streets at 18? Of course not. Which parent would answer yes to that?
That was the point of my post. My parents’ generation would and mine won’t. I don’t know anyone I grew up with who would have been allowed to live in their parents’ house for a decade after graduating high school. It would be unthinkable. Times have changed and what was unacceptable in the 80s and 90s is more acceptable now.
I'm coming up on 60 years old. Though I don't know anyone of my age who stayed at home after high school (I was a college-bound kid and all my friends were) I do not think my parents would have "kicked me out" at any point.
I did know some kids who got jobs and moved in with friends or got their own apartments, but never heard it was because their parents kicked them out, they just wanted to get away from their childhood and live on their own.
I just don't remember getting kicked out by your parents being a common thing. But maybe I was just never exposed to it.
> That was the point of my post. My parents’ generation would and mine won’t.
And the point of my post is that it's a lie. That parents are parents no matter when or where.
> I don’t know anyone I grew up with who would have been allowed to live in their parents’ house for a decade after graduating high school.
A decade? Now you are moving the goal post. The comment you quoted was 'Just ask yourself, would you kick force your kids to live on the streets at 18'. So you are saying everyone in your high school got kick out of their homes at 18? No? Fine.
> Times have changed and what was unacceptable in the 80s and 90s is more acceptable now.
Times always change and yet things always stay the same. I grew up in the 90s and I can say your description is not reality. Either we grew up in completely different countries or you are lying. Plenty of people stayed at home after high school or even after college to save money for their own house. Do you think it was the norm to dump your kids on the street as soon as they turned 18? What are you talking about?
You wrote the following: "We were pretty much all kicked out at 18 to go live on our own." I wasn't. None of my friends were. None of my cousins were. Nobody I know was.
Maybe you were kicked out at 18, but that's not representative of much of america. Why lie about something that is so demonstrably false? I don't get it.
Though you could probably argue the degree to which its right or wrong, they way I look at it is: I brought this person into the world, if he isn't self-supporting at age 18 (or 22, or whatever) then why is it fair to society that I make that society's problem? He's my kid, and I should own the responsibility for that.
Forcing people to work hasn't been historically successful. That includes stacking the incentives up to work or death. A large fraction of people simply choose death because no one wants to be forced to do things.
For overwhelming majority of human history people had either to work or die of starvation. There's absolutely no evidence to suggest that any significant fraction chose death.
They do it because they can. Key is to make it impossible and force them to take up productive activities. No one in adult age should be kept at home funded by their parents unless it's short term with definite plan to fix it, or they are seriously disabled.
Of course, when it's about schoolchildren, it's different. Serious psychiatric help is needed. It's again parents' fault for not providing it.