3 ms·

Many Americans own a lot of idle property. There is a problem now where baby boomers want to age in place in their suburban homes, which locks younger people ou

Many Americans own a lot of idle property. There is a problem now where baby boomers want to age in place in their suburban homes, which locks younger people out of those properties. However these suburban homes have huge yards by global standards, that could easily support the construction of grandparent/in-law structures. It seems like one solution is for the suburban elderly to, maybe with their children's assistance, build an outlying house in the back yard and downsize to there, and let their children occupy the main house for raising grandchildren. Multi-generational housing is a good solution to this problem of elder isolation and general social isolation, and the friction associated with that can be eased given the amount of land many suburban properties contain. I have always thought that the turn towards the nuclear family caused many of the social problems that began to appear in the 1960s. I think we should return to more extended family living situations.

tvanantwerp 7y ago
A big obstacle to having extended families under one roof is that often the children don't want to live where the parents' home is located. I am certain I could move in with my mom tomorrow if I wanted--but it would mean leaving a city I've come to love and the career I've built here to live in a small town with little culture and zero opportunities. I think this is what you see in many rural American towns where only a small elderly population remains, while the young people all moved to cities for economic opportunity.
- m463 7y ago
  > often the children don't want to live where the parents' home is located I lived with my parents during college. It was expected because they couldn't afford to pay for a dorm for me. I think it delayed my growth.
stirfrykitty 7y ago
There is no way I want to take care of anyone other than my own children, which is enough. I have three children in my house, which is more than enough. Caregivers also spend tons of their own money on care giving, plus trips to the doctor, dentist, etc. I already don't get enough down time. I also want to actually retire on time and do what I want to do, not babysit the elderly. I don't want or need the hassle of being a care giver. It's not in my makeup to do that kind of thing. In addition, my children WILL NOT be living at home until they are 30. I will have earned my peace and quiet by then and I want to get it. MY job now is to make my children as independent as possible: learning to cook, mow, change a tire, be literate, good with math, critical thinking, and not rely on others for things that should be done alone. And most importantly, avoid debt like the plague. A man should owe no one if possible. My daughter already plans to pay for her own university by dint of military service. We explained to her that we made it on our own, she will have to do likewise. No parent should go into debt for their child's education. It prolongs the parents ability to retire and enjoy their own golden years.
- 0942v8653 7y ago
  When you are elderly, who will take care of you? > In addition, my children WILL NOT be living at home until they are 30 ... I agree with you here -- independence is the ideal. But for reasons beyond the individual's control this is not always possible: misfortune, ill health, age. The community has a responsibility to take care of those within it who are struck by these things.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

tvanantwerp 7y ago

A big obstacle to having extended families under one roof is that often the children don't want to live where the parents' home is located. I am certain I could move in with my mom tomorrow if I wanted--but it would mean leaving a city I've come to love and the career I've built here to live in a small town with little culture and zero opportunities. I think this is what you see in many rural American towns where only a small elderly population remains, while the young people all moved to cities for economic opportunity.

m463 7y ago
> often the children don't want to live where the parents' home is located I lived with my parents during college. It was expected because they couldn't afford to pay for a dorm for me. I think it delayed my growth.

stirfrykitty 7y ago

There is no way I want to take care of anyone other than my own children, which is enough. I have three children in my house, which is more than enough. Caregivers also spend tons of their own money on care giving, plus trips to the doctor, dentist, etc. I already don't get enough down time. I also want to actually retire on time and do what I want to do, not babysit the elderly. I don't want or need the hassle of being a care giver. It's not in my makeup to do that kind of thing. In addition, my children WILL NOT be living at home until they are 30. I will have earned my peace and quiet by then and I want to get it. MY job now is to make my children as independent as possible: learning to cook, mow, change a tire, be literate, good with math, critical thinking, and not rely on others for things that should be done alone. And most importantly, avoid debt like the plague. A man should owe no one if possible. My daughter already plans to pay for her own university by dint of military service. We explained to her that we made it on our own, she will have to do likewise. No parent should go into debt for their child's education. It prolongs the parents ability to retire and enjoy their own golden years.

0942v8653 7y ago
When you are elderly, who will take care of you? > In addition, my children WILL NOT be living at home until they are 30 ... I agree with you here -- independence is the ideal. But for reasons beyond the individual's control this is not always possible: misfortune, ill health, age. The community has a responsibility to take care of those within it who are struck by these things.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]