• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Parenting: "As long as you live under my roof..."

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,576
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Parenting: "As long as you live under my roof..."

How far does that legitimately go?

Example: Can/should a parent use that to dictate whom their 19 yr old (who is living at home for whatever reason) associates with, or even whether or not they stay out all night? Or, is it just another manner try and legitimize control?
 


Once the child is 18 they are legally adult. Thereafter it is the parent's choice whether to continue supporting them in any way, or allowing them to live with them still or not... and the adult-child's choice whether to accept this condition or strike off on their own. The homeowner (parent) may impose whatever conditions he wishes on the guest's (adult child) continued tenancy and/or financial support.

In other words the parent can make ANY rules he wishes and the adult child can either obey or go make his own way in the world under his OWN roof.

That's what the parent CAN do.

Now what the parent SHOULD do isn't necessarily the same thing... that's going to depend on a whole host of differing factors, variables and particulars that could get into a long drawn-out discussion. Also it depends on how much pressure the parent wishes to put on the child to move out and become self-supporting sooner rather than later.

Thing is, the homeowner and provider of financial support can put whatever strings on his continued support he wishes. Whether it is WISE to be overly stringent with those conditions is a longer discussion.
 
I agree with the last sentence entirely. Parents do have the choice of letting the adult child out or allowing them to stay at home. The thing is they are for all intents and purposes not only your adult child but a boarder in your home. Most landlords set rules and limits. Parents of adult children living at home have the same right. The question is how far can you take those 'rights". thats the tight rope we have to walk on.
 
their home
their rules
 
"Adult child" is really an oxymoron. They're either an adult, or they're a child. Pick one.
 
C'mon They are my child and they are an adult. I will always look at them as my kids as most people I know do. YEZ
 

I think the adage, "As long as you live under my roof...." is fair. And, yes, stay out all night? Get your own place. Associate with ***holes? Get your own place. Why not? It isn't legitimizing control. It is legitimate control. Young people who live at home have every right to move out and get their own place. Don't want to? Live by my rules. Period.
 
radcen said:
"Adult child" is really an oxymoron. They're either an adult, or they're a child. Pick one.
Click to expand...


They're an adult but they are YOUR child. They will always be your child; they will be "your child" when they are 40.


In point of fact the modern "nuclear family" is a relatively new thing, mostly of 1950's origin. Previously it was not uncommon for the adult children of a given family to continue living on the farm, often in the same house, with their parents even after marriage, and even after having children of their own. This was particularly true of the heir to the farm (usually the eldest son).

To a large degree these "adult children" remained under the rule of the family patriarch and/or matriarch as it was the parents who held title to the land and control of the finances. They could either tow the line or get out.

But again, where to draw that "line" wisely is another matter and subject to very individualized conditions.

Generally speaking I think it is wise to allow an adult child living under your roof considerable lattitude in what they do outside the home or who they associate with, at least up to a point. The "point" is, you don't allow them to DISRUPT your home or family, nor jeopardize your security, nor drag you into a pile of **** they created by associating with scumbags or engaging in high-risk behavior. Which of their friends are welcome in the home is the homeowner's call; whether those friends are welcome to stay overnight, or to be there when the homeowner/parent is not, is a judgment call of the parent/owner.

In short you protect yourself and your home as needed. I don't think there is anything wrong with providing some guidance to the young adult regarding their outside behavior either, while remaining aware that your ability to monitor and control that is limited. For instance, "you are not allowed to drink at all anywhere" is perhaps a little strict and also hard to enforce; contrariwise "you are not allowed to come home drunk" is a reasonable condition as it relates to the peace and security of the household.

"You are not allowed to come in at 4AM... either be home by 1AM or else sleep somewhere else" is also reasonable, as it protects the home and family from unreasonable disruptions and security risks.

"You are not allowed to associate with Bitches MacDaddy the gang pimp anywhere at all" is not unreasonable (trouble has a way of coming home) but not very enforeceable.... "Bitches MacDaddy is not allowed in this house" IS enforceable and perfectly reasonable as it involves the household safety and peace.
 
I like, and agree with, the vast majority of what you say (especially the protecting yourself aspect), but when it comes down to micromanaging is where I think we fall off the boat. We say they're adults, but we're not willing to treat them as adults. Really, I think the majority of the "my house my rules" mindset is our own lack of emotional ability to let go and only serves to be part of the problem of too many young adults not being able to negotiate their own lives, because they don't know how.
 

Here's the way I look at it. If a person of legal age (18+) is living in my home, they are to abide by my rules and expectations. If they don't like it, they can do what they need to do to get their own place.

I have no issue with either of my children staying at home while they go to college. However, I expect that whomever is living in my home be respectful of it and of me.

I left my folks' house when I turned 18 and have never returned. I don't think it's too much to ask of anyone to be respectful of another's house and self.
 

Goshin gets it in one.
 
Does it make a difference if they pay rent?

If they do pay rent, does it make a difference if said rent is legitimate market rate, and not a token rent?
 
I'd bet that (almost) literally no boarding landlords put restriction of association on their tenants. Though they may put limitations on who their tenants have as visitors.

I'd also bet that most boarding landlords put no restrictions on hours, though I'm sure there are probably some that do.
 
If you're willing to allow your adult child to stay in the home once they've reached the age of majority you're probably going to be forced to accept that the dynamic will shift.

I stayed with my parents on and off from 18 to 22. I moved out once to move in with a douche bag I was dating and moved back in when we broke up because he cheated. I moved out again when the company I worked for transferred me to Indiana, and then moved back in when they transferred me back. Moved out for good at 22.

As a minor, my parents were pretty lax. The general rule was that I needed to be respectful of their home and their tendency to worry. If I were going to be out late (I never had a designated curfew) I was to call them at a reasonable hour and let them know. I wasn't allowed to have guys stay overnight, and when they DID come over the door to my bedroom was to stay open at all times. Friends could sleep over (female) any time, but I was expected to attend school the following day and keep my grades up.

Their philosophy was: as long as I maintained an "A" average and held down a part-time job, and as long as my choices did not get me in trouble I was given a lot of freedom.

So when I turned 18, and on and off while living with them, the rules didn't really change. My dad was open to allowing guys to spend the night as I got older, but I always felt uncomfortable with the idea and never took advantage of that freedom.

When I become a parent, I hope to exercise the same philosophy. My kids will have general, reasonable expectations placed upon them and general, reasonable freedom to exercise their own decision making ability. Should they stay at home beyond 18, some rules with be relaxed, but some expectations will shift. I would, as my parents did, require some level of of financial contribution to household expenses once my child finishes high school if and only if they do not immediately begin college. If they DO go to college (please, please, please let my kids go to college) then they will be expected to acquire part time employment to pay for their luxury and splurge items (clothes, technology, etc).
 
My experience in high school was very similar to yours. Primary difference being that I left for the Army 2 weeks after turning 18, so I was out anyway for the next three years.
 


Possibly. See, the thing is we're talking about millions of cases (lot more young folks living with parents these days, due to hard times and whatnot), and each case is individual and different.

Forgive me for resorting, yet again, to personal example. My son is 16 and lives with me full time. He is remarkably sensible, hard working, and responsible for his age. I give him lots of advice and support but relatively few commands... because there is little need to. For the most part I treat him like I would treat any subordinate adult male living under my roof.... because he ACTS like an adult for the most part. He doesn't need me to steer for him every minute, so I let him steer while I read the map and help him navigate, to coin an analogy.

Now, if he was flunking in school, coming home at 1AM drunk or stoned, or otherwise doing stupid ****, it would be an entirely different scenario. I would HAVE to "take the wheel" for a time to get him back on the road and off the sharp rocks, to continue the analogy.

An adult child living at home as a dependent is a slightly different matter in that they are a legal adult, but exercising some control over a dependent who lives under your roof is not at all unreasonable, especially if they are doing stupid ****. By living under your roof as your dependent, they are to some degree "ceding their personal sovereignty" to their benefactor (their parent and guardian who is paying their way) as a matter of pragmatic reality. Assuming the parent loves their child and wants them to construct for themselves a good life, it is no surprise that they may attempt to exert some control over areas they see as being "problems" in their adult-but-dependent child's life.

Now depending on what individual case or specific example we're talking about, sure you'll have some parents to impose unreasonable conditions or attempt to micromanage to an unreasonable degree.... but the solution to that is "Move Out". Get a job, rent a place, and you can do things your own way under your own roof.... within the bounds of legality and society and your rental contract at least.

OTOH you have young adults living with Daddy and Momma who are doing stupid **** and ****ing up their life and Ma and Pa are trying to get them straight and keep them from driving off a cliff, too.

It just depends on the individual circumstances.


Typically I figure: Reasonable parents + reasonable young adult kids still living at home = reasonable rules.

If either side is UNreasonable then sure things can get crazy.... but again, the solution there is either the young adult obeys the rules for as long as they want the aid and support, or they move out. This is one of the problems that arise with any kind of dependency situation.... the benfactor doing the providing can set almost any conditions he wishes on his continued benevolence, and if the recipient finds those conditions unacceptible his only recourse is to do without the support of the benefactor.
 
Goshin said:
Possibly. See, the thing is we're talking about millions of cases (lot more young folks living with parents these days, due to hard times and whatnot), and each case is individual and different.
Click to expand...
Again, I like and agree with most of what you say. My only real quibble is your first sentence <remainder snipped for brevity>. From my observations, this has been a distinct trend for 10-20 years, through good economic times and bad. Current economy is a factor, but I think it's more of a mindset that the bad economy just makes worse.

You touch on a good angle regarding conflict and when the parents/kids have critically differing opinions. It does concern me that more kids don't take the opportunity to move out on their own, or with roommates. I don't want to give the impression that it is all the parent's fault.
 


Another example: Boyfriend lived at home until 21 (minus a brief stay at college which ended due to medical issues). He maintained a full time job and didn't typically have "parties" or wild nights out. He paid for his own car, insurance, food, clothing, etc. but did not pay rent.

Boyfriend's sister just turned 21 and has moved back and forth between her dad's house and her ex-boyfriend's house (lives with parents) at least 7 times in the last 4 years. She works part time, pays for NOTHING (including the new 17k car her dad just co-signed for), and often parties and stays out late. Her dad has demanded rent and financial responsibility several times and his issued several rules, but she obeys none of them. Despite her blatant lack of respect and responsibility, her dad doesn't do anything to enforce the rules.

But really, what can he do? Kick her out? She has no marketable skills and no life skills and wouldn't make it on her own.
 


Tough love is tough to do, but it sounds like she needs some.
 
Yes. :neutral:

In fact, in the scenario you describe, he would be doing her a favor... though I'm sure she wouldn't see it that way. Most people are more resilient than we give them credit for, or that they realize... until they need to be. Key word: "need".
 
Last edited:
tessaesque said:
But really, what can he do? Kick her out? She has no marketable skills and no life skills and wouldn't make it on her own.
Click to expand...

I do not understand how a parent/s can enable a young adult in that way. She has no marketable skills now. No life skills now. She's not making it now! She's being completely enabled to be a parasite by her folks. How does that help her? Is she going to suddenly wake up one day and decide to be responsible?

Six months. Six months and out the door. That's my solution. New car? How about a beater? She is blackmailing her folks. It won't stop 'til they do. What a shame.

Edit: Tess, if I were in your boyfriend's position, I would be furious.
 
Last edited:

Yeah, the whole "failure to launch" phenomenon has been spoken about a lot recently. Young adults in their mid or late 20's still living at home, sometimes into their 30's.

Hard times always tends to make this happen more often, but I agree it isn't strictly an economic phenomenon. It is a social phenomenon relating to extending irresponsible adolescence into not merely the late teens but through college and young adulthood often well into the 20's.

I get the impression that you're putting much of the cause for this on parents who don't want to let go.... and perhaps there is something to that. However I think that there is equal blame to be laid on young adults who don't want to work full time and pay all their own expenses, who'd rather party and drink and play video games and live out some kind of Beverly Hills party-scene fantasy that grow up and become self-sufficient adults.

We could also bring society and the media into this... lots of shows these days that depict people in their late teens and twenties being irresponsible party animals who don't seem to have to support themselves nor answer to anyone.

Perhaps we've just gotten too far away from the days when children in their early teens or even when they are 6-12yo were expected to take responsibility for certain things and accomplish them without someone standing over them every minute, and held accountable for the outcome of their assigned tasks. You teach responsibility by giving responsibility, and by holding the child accountable for getting it done right. It is almost impossible to start doing this TOO young, as long as the child can walk and talk.


I don't think there is anything inherently WRONG with an adult child living with their parents, as long as they ACT as a responsible adult.... that is they work, pay their own expenses and some reasonable portion of the household expenses, and do not behave in a way that disrupts or jeopardizes the household. It is when either the parents or the adult child are acting in an unreasonable or irresponsible manner that it becomes a problem IMO.
 

when i was post-18 and living at home during the summers during college and grad school, there were still rules. however, these rules gradually evolved logically as i became more mature. we butted heads over it somewhat at the time, but i feel that my parents navigated the situation perfectly. i suppose their most intelligent strategy was to be firm but not obstinate. their position was more logical than emotional, and even the 19 year old version of myself could see this. looking back, i'm grateful for it, and i've told them as much.
 
Exactly my point girlnextdoor. If I had a boarder he/she would have to follow the same rules I put on my kid. Landlords do have rules as well its a matter of perspective. Ex no smoking in apartments, no wild parties, no destroying my (landlords) property, etc. been all over the country and never met a landlord who did not have some type of rules.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…