Judge Backs Parents, Saying Their 30-Year-Old Son Must Move Out (npr.org) 419
"Attention geeks living in their parents' basements!" writes PolygamousRanchKid , sharing this story from NPR:
The promise of adventure didn't do it. Neither did the lure of independence, or the weight of his 30 years. Instead, it took a judge to pry Michael Rotondo from his parents' home. The couple won an eviction order against their son, after a judge argued with Rotondo for 30 minutes. "I don't see why they can't just, you know, wait a little bit for me to leave the house," Rotondo told Donald Greenwood, a justice on the Onondaga County Supreme Court...
Christina and Mark Rotondo resorted to legal action after a series of notes to their son (starting on Feb. 2) failed to get him to move out of their home in Camillus, New York, a town west of Syracuse. Those notes followed discussions that began last October. The notes to Michael Rotondo ranged from orders to leave and encouragement to get a job, to offers of more than $1,000 and help in finding a place... The notes escalated into a formally worded notice for Rotondo to leave that set a 30-day deadline -- which lapsed on March 15...
In a legal filing cited by CNYCentral, Rotondo said that in the eight years he has lived at his parents' house, he "has never been expected to contribute to household expenses, or assisted with chores and the maintenance of the premises," and that those conditions are simply part of an informal agreement. When he was in his early 20s, Rotondo briefly lived on his own, but he moved back in with his parents after losing a job...
The case is being seen as an extreme example of a growing trend. As NPR reported in 2016, a Pew study found that, "For the first time in more than 130 years, Americans ages 18-34 are more likely to live with their parents than in any other living situation."
Christina and Mark Rotondo resorted to legal action after a series of notes to their son (starting on Feb. 2) failed to get him to move out of their home in Camillus, New York, a town west of Syracuse. Those notes followed discussions that began last October. The notes to Michael Rotondo ranged from orders to leave and encouragement to get a job, to offers of more than $1,000 and help in finding a place... The notes escalated into a formally worded notice for Rotondo to leave that set a 30-day deadline -- which lapsed on March 15...
In a legal filing cited by CNYCentral, Rotondo said that in the eight years he has lived at his parents' house, he "has never been expected to contribute to household expenses, or assisted with chores and the maintenance of the premises," and that those conditions are simply part of an informal agreement. When he was in his early 20s, Rotondo briefly lived on his own, but he moved back in with his parents after losing a job...
The case is being seen as an extreme example of a growing trend. As NPR reported in 2016, a Pew study found that, "For the first time in more than 130 years, Americans ages 18-34 are more likely to live with their parents than in any other living situation."
Not News For Nerds (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not News For Nerds (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah.. listen.. clean your room, sort yourself out. And pet a cat if you see one on the street.
Re: Not News For Nerds (Score:2)
If there is a story that belongs on /., it's this one
Re: (Score:2)
If there is a story that belongs on /., it's this one
Perhaps back when it was news.
I'm getting rather tired of the fourth-generation blog reposts making it to the headlines here, a long time afterwards. I think anything that references a blog or other news aggregator and not the primary source needs to be weeded out of the Firehose with extreme prejudice.
Re:Not News For Nerds (Score:5, Interesting)
More to the point the Stereotype is that “Nerds live in the parents basement.”
Most jobs for nerds pay well enough for them to live on their own and most do.
However conditions for younger adults are much harder today then the past generations in terms of home ownership.
In areas that have the better paying jobs also have outrageous housing costs. So that home your grandparents or parents got with an adjusted for inflation salary of 50k a year job now needs 80k a year to get a similar home in some cities that has inflated to closer to 120k.
So many kids are staying at their parents house and help paying for their rent because their parents were able to get their home at a bargain compared to today. So the overall experience for somewone to pay a fair rent to their parents is lower.
Re:Not News For Nerds (Score:5, Insightful)
More to the point the Stereotype is that “Nerds live in the parents basement.” Most jobs for nerds pay well enough for them to live on their own and most do. However conditions for younger adults are much harder today then the past generations in terms of home ownership.
I know it is fashionable to complain about the terrible injustices facing the millennials, and how badly they have it, but allow me to telll a story of how we privileged late boomers had it on our waltz to easy street.
Sarcasm off.
I entered the workforce in the early 1970's. One of the first issues of the times was that I might get drafted and sent to the Jungles of Vietnam. Then there was finding employment. As the job stimulus aspect of the war was winding down, we were in a bit of a funk. As a single white male, I was at the bottom of the hiring list. Bell Telephone HR told me as much. I qualified well for their employ, but they needed more people who didn't look like me. Beyond that, their rankings for employment were married Veterans, single veterans, Married men with children, Married men, and single men (fwiw, I'm not sure where females were in the mix because he didn't mention them)
Then after finally landing work, there was this double digit inflation. Many of my fellow young people simply didn't save for retirement or other things, a habit they have continued till today. But they did whine.
Anyhow, The problems of millennials is more that they have been raised with unrealistic expectations. The young ladies have been raised with the concept that they can "have it all", just like men. That conveniently ignores the fact that men don't have it all.
The males are largely sad cases. Oftentimes drugged into submission during their school years, and having been educated that they are not the ones who can have it all, many have simply given up.
Before the typical backlash that happens when someone dares express an opinion other than that no generation has ever had it worse - their problems are based on entirely fucked up ideas on our part.
In areas that have the better paying jobs also have outrageous housing costs. So that home your grandparents or parents got with an adjusted for inflation salary of 50k a year job now needs 80k a year to get a similar home in some cities that has inflated to closer to 120k..
Remember though, that with today's two income household model, and the willingness to spend stupid amounts of money for housing, that is what you end up with.
So many kids are staying at their parents house and help paying for their rent because their parents were able to get their home at a bargain compared to today.
So the fact that we terrible prents were making less money then is of no consequence? Yeah - my house cost less than it would today. I was also making less. I do not know if you are a millennial, or just play one on TV, but seriously, you should try having no job prospects, hyperinflation and the possibility of having an early death and/ornasty PTSD after being forced to fight.
The lesson of all of this is that the cards we are dealt are the cards we are dealt. Wanna whine and complain, piss and moan about how awful it all is? by all means do - its a free country. There were a few folks I grew up with that did that too. Now they are old pissers and moaners. Hope they enjoyed their lack of success. But if peop;le think that life is just too hard for them - well, I guess they might be right.
Re:Not News For Nerds (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Not News For Nerds (Score:5, Insightful)
They have a choice, realize what they need to do, or wallow in self pity. They were raised by well meaning but stupid parents wh othought that by submitting to their every whim whould create a generation of super people, and a society and school system that thought by inculcating them with high self esteem that was not balanced by acheivement would giver them the confidence to overcome everything.
When in fact, it inculcated them with an unrealistic sense of entitlement, coupled with an exxagerated self esteem that crumbled when they got into the real world and found that they couldn't be promoted to ultra boss, and momy and daddy could no longer prevent any and all problems from getting in their way.
So yeah - they can wallow in self pity, live at home, and deplete mommy and daddy's retirement funds. Or maybe they can learn what their parents and society wouldn't allow them to learn, just later in life.
Re:Not News For Nerds (Score:4, Informative)
And which generation were these "well meaning but stupid parents" from again? Boomers, you say? How interesting.
Actually, parents of Millennials are Gen X. Not Boomers.
Re: (Score:3)
They were raised by well meaning but stupid parents wh othought that by submitting to their every whim whould create a generation of super people, and a society and school system that thought by inculcating them with high self esteem that was not balanced by acheivement would giver them the confidence to overcome everything.
And which generation were these "well meaning but stupid parents" from again? Boomers, you say? How interesting.
GenX. But then that doesn't fit your narrative, eh? Interesting.
Re: Not News For Nerds (Score:2)
You know as well as I do that no iDroid costs 3 grand and no one drinks 20 dollar lattes all the time since there ainâ(TM)t no such thing
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Fine. They can live as I did in my early 20s then. No mobile phone, never go to a coffee shop, no car, a meal out once a quarter, few luxuries but still no savings, sharing a rented house with three female ballet dancers.
Forgive my lack of sympathy for young people, I can see plenty of options available to them.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Not News For Nerds (Score:5, Insightful)
>One of the first issues of the times was that I might get drafted and sent to the Jungles of Vietnam.
So did everyone else, but from your story you weren't, so that gave you an advantage.
>As a single white male, I was at the bottom of the hiring list. Bell Telephone HR told me as much. I qualified well for their employ, but they needed more people who didn't look like me.
Jobs that didn't prefer white males in the 70s? Jesus F. Christ, that's a bold lie right there.
> Then after finally landing work, there was this double digit inflation. Many of my fellow young people simply didn't save for retirement or other things, a habit they have continued till today. But they did whine.
So why are you complaining about millenials?
>Anyhow, The problems of millennials is more that they have been raised with unrealistic expectations. The young ladies have been raised with the concept that they can "have it all", just like men. That conveniently ignores the fact that men don't have it all.
The American Dream is not a new concept. Stop blaming Millenials for buying into it. The Baby Boomer media is what pushed that concept so fucking hard.
>The males are largely sad cases. Oftentimes drugged into submission during their school years, and having been educated that they are not the ones who can have it all, many have simply given up.
OK, stop, you're just a stereotype of an alt-right troll who hasn't seen what the outside world looks like right now.
>Remember though, that with today's two income household model, and the willingness to spend stupid amounts of money for housing, that is what you end up with.
But I thought that your generation didn't save money? How come you expect that from young couples now?
>So the fact that we terrible prents were making less money then is of no consequence? Yeah - my house cost less than it would today. I was also making less.
Adjusted to inflation, housing prices are up by over 100% compared to income since the 70s. You may have made less, but your house cost a LOT less. The numbers are very clear on this: housing is the one thing where prices soared throughout the last forty years.
>you should try having no job prospects, hyperinflation and the possibility of having an early death and/ornasty PTSD after being forced to fight.
There was a less competitive workspace, the US never had hyperinflation, and the draft was something that influenced a small part of society who were usually poor anyways. I mean, it's not like getting a doctor to say "he's got bone spurs" was anything other than a matter of money.
Re:Not News For Nerds (Score:4, Insightful)
>As a single white male, I was at the bottom of the hiring list. Bell Telephone HR told me as much. I qualified well for their employ, but they needed more people who didn't look like me.
Jobs that didn't prefer white males in the 70s? Jesus F. Christ, that's a bold lie right there.
Hate to burst your modern day bias bubble, but the 1970's were all about affirmative action. If you were white, they would take you only if there wasn't a lesser qualified minority who applied for the same job. GP's experience holds true.
Re:Not News For Nerds (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah - my house cost less than it would today. I was also making less.
No. In real dollars, the average wage was higher. Maybe you are making more after inflation now than you were then, but many people are not. The minimum wage hasn't kept up with inflation in over two decades. Back then, it was holding its own. Since then, it hasn't been. So yes, things absolutely are worse now. Wages are lower in real dollars.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah - my house cost less than it would today. I was also making less.
No. In real dollars, the average wage was higher. Maybe you are making more after inflation now than you were then, but many people are not. The minimum wage hasn't kept up with inflation in over two decades. Back then, it was holding its own. Since then, it hasn't been. So yes, things absolutely are worse now. Wages are lower in real dollars.
Y'all are missing the point - the point is, every generation has had problems.
The young'uns who came before me had to worry about tuberculosis, the so called "greatest generation" had the great depression and WW2 to contend with. My father bought his house in 1960 for $8,000, I bought mine in 1994 for a lot higher of a price, but as I said, everyone has problems. Every generation has issues to face. And millenials manage to get pissed off at a person for saying that they don't have it worse than any othe
Re: Not News For Nerds (Score:3)
Re: Not News For Nerds (Score:5, Interesting)
Every word in your post is wrong. The trend of kids failing to launch has little or nothing to do with economics and everything to do with lazy parenting and kids who just don't have any desire for independence.
The first part of your post is at least close to correct, but your whole tirade about lazy parents and young adults is simply ignorant. There are many reasons why more kids are living with their parents and it is true that economics is not the only reason. Still a significant reason, with student loans growing rapidly and many essentials (housing, health care, etc) rising above inflation for decades, but not the only one. The simple fact that employed young adults are far less likely to live at home than unemployed ones shows economics is a large factor.
This article [psychologytoday.com] summarizes many of them. Young adults waiting longer to get married is one factor. But the most interesting one is that young adults simply have a much better relationship with their parents today than they did 30 years ago. One finding was that in 1986 half of parents reported speaking with their grown child in the past week, whereas in 2008 87% had. Many young adults don't feel the need to move out because they have a friendlier relationship than previous generations did.
My wife and her two siblings lived at home for around five years each after college. Not because of a failure to launch, as each had degrees and were employed in their chosen fields. They did it because it helped spring board their financial lives by saving for a full 20% down payment on their first home. My father in law took 75% of their take home pay for "rent" and put it in a savings account. So not every situation where kids live with their parents is a bad one.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Just the end of a myth (Score:5, Interesting)
However conditions for younger adults are much harder today then the past generations in terms of home ownership.
Home ownership has been overpromoted for decades in this country, and the reality of it is finally sinking in (not necessarily for this kid, but for our country in general). We have multiple cable networks that are still effectively acting as marketing outfits for realtors, hyping home ownership as an investment 24x7.
What is finally happening though, now that we again have a reasonably normal real estate market, is that people are finding they are not actually making money on their homes. You spend $20k on a kitchen renovation and then 10 years later you sell your house for $5k more than you paid; losing $15k in the process. On top of that you were paying homeowner's insurance the entire time, paying interest on your mortgage, paying to keep up your lawn, driveway, roof, exterior, interior, etc. People are waking up to the fact that houses are in fact really terrible investments. If you want to save money you're better off renting and putting the difference into even a CD (if you are risk-averse) or a balanced stock market account (if you are more risk-tolerant). But we've been told for so long that a house is a great investment, and a lot of people are stuck with that mindset because it was repeated as gospel.
Even people who are currently retiring and selling homes they lived in for 30+ years (having therefore paid off their mortgages years ago) are finding they aren't getting back as much as they had imagined. They bought for $40k, sold for $220k, which sounds great. Except they actually paid closer to $90k with interest over those 30 years. And they spent at least another $20k over those years on homeowner's insurance. They spent thousands on roofing and carpet, and lawn maintenance. They did their kitchen, bathroom, etc. The actual return looked like $180k but really was much closer to $30k once all this is deducted, which is a pretty lousy ROI for 30+ years.
Re: (Score:2)
Purchase price + renovations + boiler + fixtures/fittings + insurance + mortgage interest comes to about 70% of the amount I'd have spent on rent in the same period.
Except that instead of saving 30%, I've saved that and also now own a house.
ROI looks pretty fucking amazing to me, even disregarding the change in house price.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Not News For Nerds (Score:2)
However conditions for younger adults are much harder today then the past generations in terms of home ownership.
Have you heard about the Great Depression? Home ownership was a bit harder then than today.
Single wage-earners in their twenties aren't typically homeowners, they are renters.
The man-child in this case is actually fighting another court case trying to get visitation to his own child - everything his parents are asking him to do should be the same things the family court judge hearing his visitation case would expect him to do - secure housing, get a job, provide a stable role model for his child.
Re: Not News For Nerds (Score:2)
Wow! Your completely made-up set of 'facts' completely turned my opinion around.
Why can't a college-educated person secure employment that pays enough to meet his needs? He likely qualifies for state and federal aid to help meet living expenses.
Home ownership is an anomaly (Score:2, Interesting)
Home ownership, along with car ownership, is a meme designed to keep the economy going in the post-WW2 era.
For most of human history families stayed together over the course of the centuries, farming the same land over and over again. Move where? Why? People bred for the purpose of having more hands to help farm the land and someone to take care of them when they were too old and sick for manual labor.
All of the world's problems stem from the fact that human nature hasn't changed while 20th century Western
Re: (Score:3)
The anomaly to me is house appreciation. I was telling a friend, who recently bought a house, how I thought it was weird that everyone [in the US] considers houses to be things that gain value [within reason]. When I look around at everything else though, cars, computers, phones, furniture, appliances; everything loses its value. Some things hold value better, such as a luxury limited edition car, but even those things probably aren't going to resell for more than you paid for it. But houses? Houses/Condos
Re:Home ownership is an anomaly (Score:5, Interesting)
What appreciates in value isn't the pile of bricks, it is ownership of a piece of land with the right to build a house there and live on it. The actual edifice does depreciate: people pay less for older houses that need a lot of work, the difference is approximately the cost of doing the necessary repairs and renovations.
Re: (Score:2)
The anomaly to me is house appreciation. I was telling a friend, who recently bought a house, how I thought it was weird that everyone [in the US] considers houses to be things that gain value [within reason].
[...]
I specified the US, because I know in Japan that most people view houses and condos as places with depreciating value, and its not uncommon for people to simply knock an old house down and rebuild on the land.
That's the thing there: at a minimum the land is the thing that appreciates in value beca
Re:Home ownership is an anomaly (Score:4, Interesting)
But houses? Houses/Condos and the property are generally expected to keep their value and go up.
Houses need to be maintained to keep their value. Their value goes up with population increases. This isn't a given, but it is a general trend in growing population centres where demand constantly outstrips supply.
A house (and its land) is like any asset. The difference between it and the ones you list is supply demand, finite life expectancy, and useful life. If you buy a house now, don't live in it, don't touch it. Except it to be worth nothing in 100 years as it will likely need to be bulldozed for being a health hazard. On the flip side if you bought a 1960s era Ferrari 250 GTO for $18000 ($150k in today's money) and it's in perfect condition then you made more of a profit than you would have on any house given these things sell for in excess of $30m now.
But back to houses. When I bought a house in Australia in a city many years ago, armchair investors though I was mad. The city was growing at a slow rate, the house values were stagnant and we were on the back of a financial crisis. They all suggested I invest in mining towns, and gave anecdotes of 10-20% value growth per year. Well fast forward to 2018, my own house value is up 20% above inflation from 10 years ago, and those get rich quickers found out what happens when you hold on to a short term investment too long and all filed for bankruptcy.
Houses in cities, in popular countries, with a good economy are like bluechip stocks. They aren't immune from going down in value but unless the entire country goes down the toilet they are generally expected to inflate in value with the economy if looked after.
Re: (Score:2)
A house (and its land) is like any asset. The difference between it and the ones you list is supply demand, finite life expectancy, and useful life. If you buy a house now, don't live in it, don't touch it. Except it to be worth nothing in 100 years as it will likely need to be bulldozed for being a health hazard.
It won't even take twenty years, and even THAT timeline assumes nobody breaks into it and loots it for copper.
On the flip side if you bought a 1960s era Ferrari 250 GTO for $18000 ($150k in today's money) and it's in perfect condition then you made more of a profit than you would have on any house given these things sell for in excess of $30m now.
That won't take even TEN years to degrade into a leaking, rusting pile if you don't keep it in a cool, dry place and start it once a month.
Re: (Score:2)
No I don't. Bubbles conceptually are irregularities when perceived value and investments massively deviate from actual value. The result is usually a correction when the bubble pops and reality sets in, often triggered by some financial or civil event.
House prices in Australian cities aren't the result of market speculation, they are just supply and demand based. Yes they are high at the moment, and yes they may drop going forward but this will be the result of natural economics and not some realisation tha
Re: (Score:2)
It's the land under the structure that goes up in value - Because it's a finite resource.
Re: (Score:2)
For most of human history families stayed together over the course of the centuries, farming the same land over and over again.
No, that's for a few thousand years of human history. For the majority of human history there was no farming.
All of the world's problems stem from the fact that human nature hasn't changed while 20th century Western Civilization tried to shoehorn it into what best suited Capitalism.
There were plenty of problems before the 20th century.
Re: (Score:2)
You must be a developer.
Re: (Score:2)
You must be good at nonsequiteurs.
Re: (Score:2)
Just inferring from your assuming that a word is a constant rather than a variable's value :)
Re: (Score:2)
No, that's for a few thousand years of human history. For the majority of human history there was no farming.
For the majority of human nomadism, they didn't have writing (which developed from counting systems used by people who had turned agrarian and had stuff to count) so they didn't record history.
Re: (Score:2)
For the majority of human nomadism, they didn't have writing (which developed from counting systems used by people who had turned agrarian and had stuff to count) so they didn't record history.
That's an exceptionally pedantic (and not correct, because the word "history" has multiple related definitions) reading of it and only illustrates the fallacy of the original.
If there's about writing that made humans magicaly more suited to non nomadic lifestyles then there's equally something about technology that ma
Re: (Score:2)
Writing makes life better for everyone who has access to it. Capitalism makes life better for a handful of people, and worse for everyone else. Sometimes it seems like it makes things better, until you consider its unsustainability.
Re: Home ownership is an anomaly (Score:2)
That's driven more by the inability to get more land and build your own home than a preference to stick it out together. Not to mention most of their farms were in the single digit acreage so it made no sense to waste space building another residence for sleeping when the sun is down. Or the fact that cooking individually takes more time and wastes resources.
If you look in any era, rich families didn't do this. Heck, way back, a 13 year old would be married off, made a duke, and given a small homestead.
If y
Missing the big picture (Score:5, Interesting)
And worse, it's practically required, because busybodies think any kid walking down the street alone is a police matter, and CPS misses kids being beaten and goes after parents who let their kid walk to the park. Support laws like Utah just passed, clarifying that the normal freedom most of us over 35 had isn't neglect.
Re: (Score:2)
You're assuming a lot about this particular situation. Maybe the kid and parents are both just pieces of shit. I mean you kinda have to be to get a court order to throw your kid out.
Re:Missing the big picture (Score:4, Insightful)
And likewise to be 30, living with your parents (with your child) and contributing NOTHING to the household. Not money, not housework, not yard work, NOTHING.
Of course, that may also go back to the parents.
Re: (Score:2)
His child wasn't living with them. His child was living with the child's mother.
Re: Missing the big picture (Score:2)
Yes, he's fighting for joint-custody.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Of course, that may also go back to the parents.
"may"? Bullshit. DOES. 100% DOES. It was their responsibility to raise an independent adult, and they failed. Barring that, they could have at least raised him to help, but they clearly didn't do that either.
Now society has to pay, and they've just gotten off the hook. They should have to keep him, since they made him.
Re: Missing the big picture (Score:3)
Chores aren't the issue, his 'failure to launch' is the issue.
They think their grandchild, their son's child, deserves a better male role model than their son provides.
Re: (Score:2)
They think their grandchild, their son's child, deserves a better male role model than their son provides.
What a pity they didn't raise him to be one. Too bad they can't take responsibility for their actions.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe the kid and parents are both just pieces of shit.
FTFA:
The Post and Daily Mail also note that Rotondo has another legal case running: He's suing Best Buy, claiming that he was wrongly fired for refusing to work on Saturdays.
Hmmm . . .
Re: Missing the big picture (Score:2)
So he's got:
his parents evicting him;
his baby-momma challenging custody;
and a lawsuit against a former employer.
Re: (Score:2)
While the assessment of the situation sounds accurate, it lacks the context of why this could happen.
Just a century ago, it was more likely that a couple got half a dozen of kids, half of them reaching adulthood (losing the other mainly to diseases). So the worth of a kid was much less than it is to parents today.
Also, at the time just as of today, in big families, there's no way parents can keep an eye on all of the kids, so it's commonplace to relieve a part of the duty to the elders (such as in tlhIngan'
Re:Missing the big picture (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.slate.com/articles/... [slate.com]
https://www.psychologytoday.co... [psychologytoday.com]
https://www.psychologytoday.co... [psychologytoday.com]
Just to start. A few seconds on Google will back up every word in my post.
Re:Missing the big picture (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, here in Canada, the Ministry of Children and Family Development got interested in a case where a dad taught his kids how to be independent. Enough so that his eldest (12) can supervise the younger ones to take them to school... using public transit. Now he's under legal threat that if they catch his kids alone, even just to cross the street to go to the store to buy ice cream, they'd be apprehended into foster care.
https://www.theglobeandmail.co... [theglobeandmail.com]
And yes, our public transit system is very good, and honestly, I took the bus alone as well (and I was even less experienced - the dad taught them the route, they had cellphones and everything, I had none of that).
It's actually sparked quite a bit of controversy - the kids were mature enough to take the bus by themselves, they attended the same school so it wasn't a problem of separation, etc. And now the government demands he hover over his kids - take the bus with them, walk to the store across the road with them to get something, etc.
Hell, I walked to school alone for a good stretch until my mom got a job and I had to go to a neighbour's house until it was time to leave for school. Getting a ride in the car was a small luxury - at the right time it was kicked out the door to walk to school.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I rode my bike to school. Unsupervised. Starting at primary school, at the age of 6 or 7. Before that, riding the bike to kindergarden, nanny was supervising...
Can you imagine kids at the age of 6 in the public alone today?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Enough so that his eldest (12) can supervise the younger ones to take them to school...
At the age of 8, I was travelling to school alone on public transport. This involved one bus into Preston, then a change of buses (involving crossing the centre of town on my own - the current massive bus station didn't exist then) and a second bus out to my school.
Actually - I wasn't alone. I was supervising my 6 year old brother.
Re: Missing the big picture (Score:2)
Hell, I walked to school alone for a good stretch until my mom got a job and I had to go to a neighbour's house until it was time to leave for school.
When I was in 7th grade my mom dropped me off at the BART station, I rode the train to Oakland, caught a chartered bus to my school in the hills over Oakland, and the reverse heading home.
I was never worried, I wasn't aware of my parents being worried, and this was in the mid-seventies.
I can't imagine any parent doing this today, but I don't know the world was safer then/more dangerous today.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm gonna go ahead and say BART is more dangerous than it was back then. I don't think most of the world is more dangerous than back then, much of it is probably actually safer, but portions of it have certainly gone downhill and BART is one of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you cite any actual real evidence that this is true? Both parents are more likely to work today than in the past, so kids are often left home alone. This means less supervision, the opposite of what you claim.
Anecdotally, I rarely see free range kids out and about. I spent a lot of time out riding bikes with the neighbouring kids when I was a kid (junior school age).
Usually when people talk about how the world is going to hell, and things aren't like "the good ole days", it is just a load of bullcrap un
Nothing new... (Score:4, Interesting)
...apart from the lawsuit I guess, and with it broader awareness.
Anime watchers and those familiar with modern japanese society will already have heard of the terms: NEET, hikikomori.
But as with many problems in japanese society that often gets picked by international media as some weird thing that must only happen in Japan, this is not by far a japanese exclusive phenomena.
https://think.iafor.org/reclus... [iafor.org]
International media often exploit, fetishize, and even mock Japan for having these weird cultural things, often painting a picture as if it was commonplace there when it really isn't... but the truth behind this mocking of foreign countries is that more often than not, these things not only do exist back at home, but often it's worse than in Japan - only it's taboo, overlooked by press, and not selected as a subject for exposure.
So yeah... this guy is probably one of these cases. Surprise, bad stuff that happens in other societies is probably happening in sacred US of A too. And probably, a lawsuit is not the best way to deal with it too. Not that I'm ignoring the tribulation that the parents must've gone through already, but hikikomori are often unstable and should be seeking treatment and re-education, not being booted out of home.
There is a high potential of this being a case of throwing gas into the fire. Optimistic scenario, sure, the guy will leave home, get a job and reform himself. But people in the US really should not ignore the potential of someone mentally unstable becoming enraged with the situation and turning into yet another nightmare scenario that we all know pretty well by now having multiple cases a year. He could take his parents money, buy a gun, a go shoot some people plus himself.
Re: Nothing new... (Score:3)
And probably, a lawsuit is not the best way to deal with it too. Not that I'm ignoring the tribulation that the parents must've gone through already
They asked, they demanded, they threatened, and even offered money, but he refused - the lawsuit was not their first choice.
One of the best things my mother ... (Score:4, Interesting)
... did was kick me out when I was 19, 5 months after I was out of high school.
"You're learning a job. I don't care what. Wanna do performing arts? Ok, fine by me, you've got the talent. But you're moving out by end of summer. Get those applications rolling." -My mom, paraphrased.
I was doing performing arts 6 months later, in a big town 300 km away. She drove me there, in her Citroen Charleston De Cheveau. She told me a few years back that she had to pull over and cry for while on the way back, but she knew it was the very best thing to do. ... Smart lady, my mom is.
Best move ever. ... All because I was pushed on to the trail that made me become a grown man. ...
6 months in I felt better than ever before in my life, doing my own thing my own way. These days I'm a man with a grown daughter traveling South America for 9 months flat at the age of 20 and have a SO I love and respect, that fucks like a pornstar.
Love you, Mom.
LOL! (Score:3)
I think you misread something there sir. Deliberately I presume. :-)
The problem (Score:3)
The problem isn't that he's overstaying or that they raised him poorly. Pushing the child out of the nest is a transition many families have to go through. You might say he should have learned or they should have taught him earlier, but that's a matter of degree.
The problem is that they have so few skills to resolve the conflict that it reached the courts and media.
Man-boy was born into the wrong culture (Score:2, Informative)
Perhaps he would be happier living with Italian parents?
My parents raised all 7 kids to be independent. We were expected to find our own travel methods for sports teams, pay for our college education, get a job ASAP. My mother was a little disappointed when most of us stopped coming home (or calling all the time). She said they raised us to be too independent. OTOH, none of us has needed to be bailed out by our parents from jail or financial issues. We plan for the worst and hope for the best.
When I wen
Lots of cheaper ways than going to court! (Score:2)
Parents have to kick their adult children out of the house all the time. Most of them use much more sensible and less costly means. How about...changing the locks on the doors? That's just a couple hundred bucks.
OF COURSE parents should do this sort of thing with plenty of warning, but it's quite effective.
Re: (Score:2)
Parents have to kick their adult children out of the house all the time. Most of them use much more sensible and less costly means. How about...changing the locks on the doors? That's just a couple hundred bucks.
You can't do that, he lives there. You have to evict him. If you just change the locks on the house in which he lives, you're committing an illegal act.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless there is a formal, signed lease between you and the child, you don't need a formal, signed eviction notice to kick them out. At least, you don't need such in Texas. To sue, your adult child would need documentation showing that they had a right to live in your house.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless there is a formal, signed lease between you and the child, you don't need a formal, signed eviction notice to kick them out. At least, you don't need such in Texas.
IANAL in TX or elsewhere, but I do not believe that you are correct [avvo.com]. Most lawyers seem to agree that eviction is necessary [avvo.com], and even the person who suggested just changing the locks double-answered and said "Or, you could do the eviction route." and that answer is condoned by more other lawyers than his first answers. From a hilariously brief glance at that lawyer's reference on the issue, it seems to me that a three-day notice is required to evict, absent any other agreement. Do you have some citation whic
Teaching children respect first (Score:3)
Too many parents these days want to be a "friend" to their children. That's all good, but respect is even more important. If you've taught them respect and hard work, you probably won't have to kick them out in the first place. But if you do have to, you won't have to go to court to make it happen!
Two young men in my own family had to be shown the door at some point. There was no court case. And later, they both thanked their parents.
Re: (Score:2)
This guy is tragic (Score:2)
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/3k4kaw/the-millennial-who-wouldnt-move-out-of-his-parents-house-is-tragic-actually [vice.com]
As someone who has had to deal with this on a personal basis, I kinda feel sorry for him. BUT, he needs to GET A LIFE.
I had to help with strongly encouraging my parents to kick one of my aunts out of their house, after a few years of her making their life a living nightmare. One of those next-to-useless nebbish people, still a virgin when she died.
One gets the feeling that "this will not en
Every generation has a scapegoat (Score:2)
for all their problems and it's typically the previous generations fault.
I am really tired of hearing how hard the current generation has it, how this is unprecedented and how it's everyone elses fault.
As a solid Gen X type, I can assure you the " Silver Spoon " life you think existed for everyone but the Millennial generation is a laughable idea.
Growing up poor ( those rich Baby Boomers right ? :| ), my only route to decent job skills were with the military as college was something only the kids from wealt
Re: Ok heres why the parents messed up (Score:2)
Soooo.... How long have you lived in your momâ(TM)s basement?
Re: (Score:2)
As fucked up as this sounds, I feel hes onto something here. Its the parents fault for not being a parent and teaching them real world skills. I simply don't understand people that want to live at home with their parents. I moved out when I was 15 for the first time, Ill admit I was a dumbass for that but it gave me the taste of being an adult and realizing that the outside world isn't all gumdrops and unicorn farts like some people would like you to believe. Moved back in a year later to save some money to
Re:Ok heres why the parents messed up (Score:5, Insightful)
When you want to evict somebody for real, you do it legally to begin with dont fuck around. Dont try to serve the notice yourself or any of that bullshit. Or come up with your own arbitrary timeline. The kid was right initially, they cant evict him by typing some letter saying get out in 2 weeks. Thats not how it works people.
Except he doesn't pay rent, this is "evicting" the guy you let sleep in your spare bedroom for a few days but never leaves. Or your girlfriend kicking you out of her house and you go nope we had an "informal agreement" so I live here now until I'm evicted. Freebies end when the person giving it away wants it to end. When the time was up they should have put his things on the street and changed the lock. I doubt he'd have gotten anywhere in court, no consideration = no contract. No contract = you're a guest. Guests leave when they're asked to leave or they get kicked out.
Re:Ok heres why the parents messed up (Score:5, Funny)
Except he doesn't pay rent, this is "evicting" the guy you let sleep in your spare bedroom for a few days but never leaves.
It would've been easier just to state that you're not a lawyer.
Re: (Score:2)
It does depend on what state it is but a resident is a resident (in my state). Eviction is the only legal way to get a resident out that refuses to leave. Funny story... a guy lets a friend move in who was homeless. A couple months go by & that friend also has a girlfriend living there. A couple more months go by & this guy comes home from work to find a party going on. Tells everyone that gotta leave, party is over... said girl says "why don't you leave?". He grabs her & shoves her on th
Re: (Score:2)
Same in Nevada. Have gone through similar situations, However had it been me, and that happened, the house probably wouldn't be standing anymore. The "Friend" would probably have also no longer been existent. The nerve of some people.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Ok heres why the parents messed up (Score:2)
You can't (normally) evict someone that isn't party to a lease agreement. AFAIK this man-child did not have a lease agreement with his parents - if he did, the parents could have let that agreement lapse, and if he remained in the house called the sheriff to have their son evicted.
Being their child doesn't entitle him to live in their house indefinitely.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't (normally) evict someone that isn't party to a lease agreement.
What? [sfgate.com] Who told you that? [nolo.com] And why did you believe them, after all the other nonsense they almost certainly have told you? Are you just soaking it all up and regurgitating it? You should carefully check over everything that person has ever told you, I assure you that more of it is wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
They can't legally evict him that way but he can no longer claim that they hadn't told him to leave.
It's a sensible first step prior to initiating actual eviction processes.
Re:There should be a law preventing such rulings. (Score:5, Insightful)
Sometimes a deadbeat is a deadbeat entirely on his own. This kid graduated college. He's not uneducated, though it seems he hasn't bothered to learn much. His parents may share some of the blame, but sometimes, you have to grow up despite your parents, if you didn't grow up because of them.
Re: There should be a law preventing such rulings. (Score:3)
This kid graduated college. He's not uneducated, though it seems he hasn't bothered to learn much.
1. You should never confuse graduating from college with being educated. The two are entirely unrelated.
2. He actually didn't. He has said repeatedly in interviews that he does not have a degree, so unless you know something I don't then it seems that he's both uneducated and not a college graduate.
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes a deadbeat is a deadbeat entirely on his own.
So he gave birth to himself, raised himself, enabled himself? Poppycock. His parents made him, but failed to make him complete. It was their responsibility to raise him, and they failed. If they want to kick him out, they should be billed for any public assistance he receives.
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck getting votes for that initiative.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you decide to bring another life into this world, then fail to raise it not to be a dead beat, or give it the life skills necessary to get and keep a job
Yeah just as well life turns out perfect for everyone and everything is exclusively the fault of the people who raised you.
Re: There should be a law preventing such rulings. (Score:2)
So you say parents, and parents alone bear responsibility for providing for their children the rest of their lives?
Great, so we can dismantle the welfare state and tell everyone to go live with their parents? Sounds great, what could possibly go wrong? /sarcasm
Re: (Score:2)
Rest of world, including europe: Offspring inherits house, everyone lives together, multi-generational families.
Depends a lot on where you live in Europe, how easy it is for said offspring to find gainful employment and how high the cost of living is. Where I live, adult offspring usually move out when they are between 19 and 21.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think there's ONE European country where the majority of families live together for more than one generation. India, on the other hand...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:White people. (Score:5, Insightful)
Multi-generational families are a thing from an agrarian past, there is no place for them in a modern society.
Do you have children?
I have an Indian friend. She and her (Australian) husband live in a house with their two little kids and her parents.
Childcare for her is way wicked easier compared to us white folks. The kids' grandparents help with school dropoff and pickup, meal prep - You name it. The kids help keep the elders young, and the elders help reduce the stress on the parents.
Re: (Score:3)
Holy shit, this. Live-in grandparents easily provide $20-30k a year in child care services, never mind the joint savings from combining fixed living costs and utterly invaluable additional sanity you gain from having the adults in the household properly rest with maybe even some time for their own leisure.