12 ms·
When children become caregivers, who cares for them?
- gadders 3y agoReally feel for these kids.
- H8crilA 3y agoRemember that you are fully allowed to dump your parents. Took me way too long to realize this.
- lm28469 3y agoDepending on the country you might actually be legally obligated to take care of them unless you can prove serious crimes like physical/sexual abuse
- HeatrayEnjoyer 3y agoNo free country.
- pavel_lishin 3y agoHN has readers from all over the world, including Pennsylvania: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/what-do-you-mean-i-am-responsible-for-5519910/ https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/what-do-you-mean-i-am-resp...
- MattGaiser 3y agoUSA, Germany, Singapore are some of them. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filial_responsibility_laws https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filial_responsibility_laws I get that “no free country” can have many meanings, but these laws certainly exist in countries people call free.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- staticman2 3y agoI'm aware of some places where you might be financially obligated to support parents (Pennsylvania, for example has a filial support law). Is there any place where you literally have to care for them?
- greentxt 3y agoThe majority of states in the us have those laws and with increasing burden on the government due to greying of the population the courts are likely to shift towards more rigorous enforcement.
- oblio 3y agoYeah, but they're about financial support, from what I see. Which can already be a big thing, but I doubt there are laws that turn into you a literal nurse for them.
- SoftTalker 3y agoHave you looked at what skilled care costs? It's either be their nurse or be bankrupt.
- oblio 3y agoMy point was: do these laws mandate that you have to take care of them? Or is just pay a percentage of your income, like alimony?
- staticman2 3y agoIn American law you usually can't get a court order requiring someone to do a job, you can usually only get a court order for restitution via financial payment if they failed to do a job they were supposed to do. So my educated guess would be you never have to actually care for your parents, but I'd be curious if any other countries actually will order children to nurse their parents.
- moffkalast 3y ago[flagged]
- throw_pm23 3y agoRemember also that who you are (or even just the fact that you are) is in a very large part due to them. You are also fully allowed to feel an unconditional gratitude (dare I say, love) towards them for simply existing, while accepting them as they are, as individuals, without owing each other anything, and regardless of what they have done or not done. It also takes some people way too long to realize this, and it can be a liberating feeling.
- anonzzzies 3y ago> Remember also that who you are (or even just the fact that you are) is in a very large part due to them. Remember that you didn't ask for that though.
- silverquiet 3y agoNot everyone is thrilled about existing, and they didn't get a say in that. I could never imagine having children and I never understood why people wanted them, and then I realized that these people must have actually enjoyed their childhood; a concept that was obviously foreign to me. I don't harbor any ill will towards my parents, but nothing for me is unconditional.
- Aeolun 3y agoI had a fantastic childhood (well, compared to the mean I guess), but that doesn’t mean my love of my parents is unconditional.
- silverquiet 3y agoI suppose the implication is that most people who say they had miserable childhoods blame their parents; I might be a bit odd in that I think my parents did really well, but my problems are inherent to me, and that is why I can't really be mad at them. In some sense, you can blame your parents for everything since they provide both the nature and the nurture, but if you think they truly meant well, it's hard to resent them.
- ta1243 3y ago> "In the United Kingdom, about a million young people under 18 years old spend more than 50 hours a week caring for family members" > "Roughly 15,000 of them are children, with 3,000 just 5 to 9 years old. You can't dump your parents that easilly when you're under 18, and at 5-9 the only other option is being placed into local authority care.
- knighthack 3y agoHow did your parents hurt you?
- Clubber 3y agoThat's certainly the easiest route. Depending on circumstances, you might have to live with that for the rest of your life. Also, if you have kids, you'll be teaching them through example of how they should take care of you as well. Taking care of elderly parents is one of the toughest things in life that nobody talks about.
- nradov 3y agoThat depends where you live. Some US states have filial support laws and adult children are legally responsible for paying for care. https://blog.aarp.org/legal-grounds/more-filial-support-cases-ending-up-in-court https://blog.aarp.org/legal-grounds/more-filial-support-case...
- dyauspitr 3y agoMakes me realize how different lives are. I’d rather cut off a couple of fingers than dump my excellent parents.
- Tom3849 3y ago[dead]
- Ajay-p 3y agoI think we have a duty to care for our parents the way they cared for us, but not to be their servant. I take my mother to all of her doctors appointments, get her groceries, and help around her house. I would do more if only she would let me. She cared for her mother, but it was a bit of a strain as her mother succumbed to dementia. She cared for my father as he withered away from cancer, until she could no longer physically do it. Then he was admitted to the hospital and then hospice. She was very sad that she was not able to live up to what she saw was her duty, to care for him. I feel it is my duty to care for my parents, but there is a line for everyone that is reality. There are many factors such as a person's behavior, now or in the past, and the relationship that may not be there. My parents have treated me very well, so it is the least I can do to return this to them. I think we should strive towards that if we can.
- exe34 3y agoIf I treated my parents the way they treated me, I'd be in jail. I chose instead to fire them.
- malfist 3y agoCompletely agree. We didn't agree to the bargain when we were born. That'd be like adopting a adopting a puppy and expecting it to take care of you later because you cared for it and fed it for a few years. That said, I'll do anything for my father and step mother, they've always treated me with love and compassion. But my birth mother? She couldn't get the time of day from me. She donated an egg and a laundry list of ACEs, and still refuses to call my husband anything than "your.... Friend" even though we've been married ten years
- lotsofpulp 3y ago>I feel it is my duty to care for my parents As a parent and a child who saw my parents waste all of their youth being a cook/nurse/maid for my paternal grandparents that lived way too long, I feel it is my duty to end myself (I’m sure this is easier said than done), or at least free my kids of the expectation that they need to care for me, so that they can prioritize their life for themselves and their kids’ futures. Transport to a few doctor appointments and helping out a few hours per week is no big deal, but I don’t want to see my kids organizing their life around supporting me.
- nohuck13 3y agoAs a parent of a disabled child I sometimes feel alone and overwhelmed even with a loving spouse and a well paid tech job. I can't imagine the experience as a teenaged solo carer with no options. Without quibbling with this basic directional correctness, the numbers in the article are bunk. > "In the United Kingdom, about a million young people under 18 years old spend more than 50 hours a week caring for family members" There are 14 million people under 18 in the UK [1]. If 1 million under-18s spend 50+ hours caring for family members, and only a few thousand tragic cases are under 9 (as the article claims) then the claim is that something like 1 in 3.5 children aged 9 to 18 spends 50+ hours caring for family members? [1] https://data.unicef.org/how-many/how-many-children-under-18-are-there-in-the-uk/ https://data.unicef.org/how-many/how-many-children-under-18-...
- pjc50 3y ago> 1 in 3.5 children aged 9 to 18 spends 50+ hours caring for family members. Surprising, but you can't just dismiss statistics on the basis that they're surprising to you. A lot of people lead very different lives, invisibly. 15-20% of people are disabled: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthandwellbeing/bulletins/disabilityenglandandwales/census2021 https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthan... Not immediately clear if "caring for family members" includes older children caring for younger children, but that would certainly bring up the numbers. It is possible that the "50+ hours" is not accurately counted.
- stewx 3y agoNote that the 15-20% of people who are "disabled" are not defined as needing around-the-clock caregivers. Disability is a spectrum. I would indeed dismiss that particular statistic about the number of kids spending 50+ hours looking after family members, because it is likely wrong by an order of magnitude.
- nohuck13 3y agoAlso that doesn't mean that 15-20% of people of parenting age are disabled. It might skew elderly.
- ricardobayes 3y agoMy mother fully expected me to financially support her, her husband and my elderly grandmother, even well before she turned 60. (Meanwhile they were sitting on 4-5 apartments between them). When queried about their spend, it became apparent to me is they expected me to finance a "luxury" lifestyle of travel and pay-per-view cable television. Unfortunately, some of the "boomer" generation don't really understand one earning is not enough to support a full extended family these days.
- canadiantim 3y agoDoes anyone know of any tools that can help caregivers organize effectively? Caregivers generally have to organize a lot of information, re: scheduling, important health info + various other information. I haven't found any effective or good solutions in this space, which is shocking. Especially it's difficult to find a solution that incorporates a useable calendar that enables everyone in the orbit of a caregiver (and the person they're caregiving for) to be able to schedule and plan within a community, shared calendars, etc. Has anyone seen any tools like this? Would be much appreciated, else I'm building it myself. Thanks.
- thinkerswell 3y agoIf you are able, this is a reason why it’s a good idea to have 5+ kids: spread the load among siblings for this kind of thing.
- athenot 3y agoThis (along with odds of survival) was traditionally the main reason for having many children. They were help around the farm but also a form of life insurance.
- dyauspitr 3y agoAlso as in the case of my mother’s family (11 kids), the onus for taking care of the younger siblings progressively falls on the siblings older than them.
- bombcar 3y agoEven in large families I know of, the burden usually rests on one or two - but the larger the family the more support of the burden-bearers there are, which can make a huge difference.
- cardanome 3y agoNever seen that actually happen. More likely is a diffusion of responsibility and one sibling drawing the short stick and doing all the work. It is not even conscious malice by the other siblings. Stuff like that happens naturally. All siblings would need to live close by, have similar family circumstances (I have a family on my own that I need to prioritize. Betty who is single can take care of dad.) and similar level of skills in caring for the parent for that to work. Also people underestimate how horrible caring for people with dementia and other disabilities that require a high level of care is for people not trained in it. It is not socially acceptable to talk about the bad stuff.
- LorenPechtel 3y agoSpread?! My wife is the first of seven. Yes, she was the one financially most able to help her parents, both from being here rather than there and because she has a strong work ethic, unlike her siblings. That doesn't mean the load should have fallen virtually 100% on her when the other 6 were in the same city, not on the other side of the world.
- rvba 3y agoMost here will disagree with me, because public help is socialism but this is one of the places where the state could really help. Sadly hospices are underfunded and just run wrong - people stay in their rooms to die. Those children could look at own parents part time, some help provided by the state, or to some degree others in same situation.
- PaulKeeble 3y agoHistorically every time the state gets involved it inevitably leads to substantial amounts of neglect and abuse. Rather than putting people into institutions we would be far better off making home help and care more accessible and relatively free market so that people can choose the types of care they need. We should be doing that for as long as its possible. But in the UK today they are desperately trying to remove the meagre disability payments that people receive so the chances are more will just end up homeless as will their child carers.
- rvba 3y agoSome sort of a day-care / kindergarden for elderly would make a lot of sense. The children could even rotate to check if there is no abuse..
- bombcar 3y agoThings like that do exist, the sad reality is that if the children care, the parents do decently well, the abuse kicks in when nobody cares (or nobody exists, there are many people with no living relatives).
- LorenPechtel 3y agoOr when the children care but can't be there to see what's going wrong.
- LorenPechtel 3y agoI have passed multiple businesses around here that say "adult day care". I have not investigated exactly what they provide.
- lr4444lr 3y agoAs a parent, I say this to other parents: putting your kids in this situation due to failure to buy long term care/disability insurance for yourself, or having some contingent plan for other adult relatives to care for you daily in the event of a catastrophic but non fatal event is a disgrace. You failed to protect your children.
- bombcar 3y agoIn the USA if you cannot afford long term care insurance (and it can be expensive depending on how much it is, etc) your best bet is to work out how to be "Medicaid bankrupt" when the time comes.
- yellow_lead 3y agoWhat is that?
- bombcar 3y agoReducing your assets to the point where you can get long-term care from Medicaid. In the US, if you get into that situation Medicaid will first require that you "spend down your assets" before the state steps in and starts paying for certain types of care. And if you do something like give your house to your kids, if the time limits aren't right, the state could come looking for that house. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/03/01/1159490515/they-could-lose-the-house-to-medicaid https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/03/01/1159490... There are various planning options to reduce the impact from this, but you have to know to do it, and you have to execute on the plans well in advance. (Updated original post, it's Medicaid that can clawback, Medicare does not. So if you die of turbo cancer it's taken care of, but if you die of dementia it's not.)
- yellow_lead 3y agoThanks
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Aeolun 3y agoOne million? On 55 million inhabitants that’s absurd.
- afavour 3y agoOne of the clearest moments I've ever had of not realizing my privilege was a conversation with someone who, once they started earning money, had to give money to their parents to support the household. Embarrassingly this absolutely blew my mind. I grew up with my parents as providers and even today if my life collapsed around me I know I still have them as a safety net if I needed it. I've been able to capitalize on so many opportunities because of that.
- syntaxing 3y agoWere they Asian by any chance? I’m Asian American and it’s a cultural norm. We have a saying for the money we give to our parents (“family usage” in direct translation). It’s quite a financial burden for some of my friends. Some parents expect their kids to buy them a house and you can imagine how brutal it is in the current housing market.
- charlie0 3y agoI don't think it's strictly an Asian thing. A lot of first generation Americans have this expectation. It's very common to see their parents remunerate money back their parents in foreign countries.
- MisterTea 3y agoIt isn't. This is typical of most 1st gen immigrants. Growing up in NYC I have friends who were Sri Lankan, Polish, Italian, and Guyanese who's parents came here and worked their asses off to provide a better future for their kids while sending money back home.
- otoburb 3y ago>>Some parents expect their kids to buy them a house and you can imagine how brutal it is in the current housing market. Yes, but you left out that in most Asian-X cultures, first generation immigrant parents typically sacrificed almost everything they had, including in many cases the parental-filial relationship, to provide the children with enough education to claw their way out of their current situation and give them an extra leg up into a higher socioeconomic circumstance. My parents had this expectation, and my wife and I gladly and willingly obliged on both sides as only children. This expectation/obligation became even more poignant when we had our own kids and realized belatedly just how much our parents had sacrificed for us. Whether driven by cultural norms (or not), we appreciate what our parents did for us so that we can "pass it on" now that we're on better footing than either side ever was. While not always convenient or logistically possible, multi-generational housing (where one or both sets of parents live together or very close by) can go a long way to addressing astronomical housing costs at least until they need more intensive daily care due to aging.
- MichaelRo 3y agoIt seems to me that there are two main sources for the parent's expectation that their children should take care of them in the old age. I'm just referring to the "regular" cases here, with parents into the 80s and children past their 50s. 1) "Old fashion mentality". Usually framed as "I wiped your butt when you were a kid, now it's your time to change my diapers". I object to #1 with "It's not the same effort to take care of a 5kg kid as of an 80kg adult". When my father had late-phase Parkinson and could hardly stand, it was almost impossible for two persons (like me and my mum) to lift him up. Doing this every day wrecks your back and physical health as well. Not to mention the mental toll. Changing their parent adult diapers is also not good for children's mental health. 2) Lack of financial resources. In the old days people had to take care of their very old parents themselves because there was noone to do it otherwise for a price they could afford. I re-iterate, mainly there's the problem of physical strain, literally impossible to lift a full grown adult without special equipment or at least three persons without risking back injury. The rich can hire full time personnel (lifting needs to be done at night too, several times possibly), otherwise the solution is to share this hired personnel in a hospice. One can visit every day or even commit their parents only intermittently but a severely disabled adult is no baby and it's unfair ask for "duty to kill yourself" as a child taking care of one.
- kkfx 3y agoThat's why China have almost committed suicide with the one-child policy. That's why all who can try push automation at maximum... That's also why some neo-malthussian think we should drop to around 3G humans, not saying directly but evidently meaning mass killing an enormous amount of people, not counting the fact that good ideas tend to emerge rarely, so to have many we need a large population.