[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by MagiK: Based on Saucemans thread, and a recent post there...I found myself wondering the following. 1. How long (or two what age) are the parents obligated to allow their children to live at home rent and responsibility free? 2. Do parents have a responsibility to force their kids out of the family home at some point (like mother birds pushing the chicks out of the nest). 3. Is there a point at which a parent does more harm to the child by shielding them from responsibility rather than thrusting them into the cold cruel world?

Magik - I agree with you pretty much straight down the line. I was allowed to live at home rent-free as long as I was in school (including college), but I most definitely did not live responsibility free. I had an "on campus" job every semester in addition to working at McDonald's on the weekend for spending money. I also had responsiblities around the house and was expected to do my share.

A friend of mine got to experience issues #2 & #3 first hand. He came home from college after his sophomore year and announced he had decided to "take a year off" to experience life.
His dad said "That's great....where will you be staying?" [img]graemlins/wow.gif[/img]
"Huh....what do you mean?" asked his son.
"I mean, where will you live? I promised you could live at home as long as you were in school. You want to experience life?, then you need to get the FULL experience."

So my buddy had to find a job and a place to live. The dad owned his own business, but would not let the son work for him. So the son got out into the "real world" and found out it was pretty dang tough on his own. After a suitable time, the father allowed him to move back home and come to work for his company. The son promptly started his OWN business - which was basically a competitor to his dad's. When he refused to quit taking business away from his dad's business, he was fired - and again sent out to make it on his own. It took a little longer the second time, but the son's business eventually folded. Once again, dad allowed him to come back. As far as I know, the son is still there and DID "learn his lesson" the second time around.

His dad has a very successful business and the son is in line to take it over when dad retires. Apparantly, the son finally realized he had a pretty good set-up and decided to stay put.

Now to be honost, I don't completely agree with the dad offering his son a second chance with the business. There is always the danger that the son will try to "branch out" again...knowing that dad will act as a safety net if he fails. But so far, the son seems content to work for his dad and wait until it is his turn to run the business.