Does one owe it to their parents to take care of them in old age?

[Ego]

You didn't ask to be born you say. Well, I didn't ask for you to be born either in many cases. You were a mistake...

YOU made a mistake. Your child played no part in that mistake other than in being born as a result of it. You pay the price for your mistakes, right?

[OldPro]

You can try playing the 'blame' game if you want Ego but it doesn't change the facts. I supported you when you needed to be supported.

I used a scenario of a mistake as just that, a scenario. It is just an example of 'inverting' as Dave says. It could have as easily been that your birth was planned and I planned to support you till you were able to 'stand on your own two feet'. It wouldn't change anything if the day came when I was unable to support myself. I doubt any parent plans to have kids so that those kids will then be expected to support them in their old age. Not in our culture anyway.

There is no question that our culture is changing and we now have the 'me' generation who have a sense of entitlement and a very selfish view of life. That can be seen in many different aspects of our culture and this topic is just one of them. You can find all kinds of information that confirms that. https://www.google.ca/search?q=me+gener ... nt&ie=&oe=

Few if any parents want to have to rely on their children to support them in their old age. But they should not have to ask themselves, 'will they support me if I need supported.'

[Sclass]

My stepmother is kind of an ethnic type from a third world country. She left her aging parents to marry my dad many years back and used dads money to take care of her mom remotely. She spent some of her time here caring for my grandparents when they hit their 90s. I was worried that I'd have to help take care of her after my dad was gone. His reply was she had my half sister so she would have care in her old age. I agree with Ego...some people think this way. It is cultural. I'd go as far to say it is kind of old world.

Funny thing now while my dad insists on dictating the terms of my mother's care, my stepmother is avoiding the problem in any way she can. I guess she is worried she may inherit my mom.

Granted this is really old world stuff.

Even though my parents have the means to pay their own way, I don't like how they want me to be the manager of their elder care. I guess that sounds kind of spoiled. Maybe they can have their way since they are paying. But I wish they'd hire a professional manager for the household. I'm cheaper of course. I'm free since I'm retired. But I retired me through sacrifice...why do I have to hand my windfall of freedom over to my parents?

And my siblings aren't expected to help because they still have to work? F this BS. It's like I went off and got rich and now they want to take my time for free. Why didn't I just go into debt and stay working like my brother and sister?

As I was looking for dementia lockdown centers for my mom last week I realized this was a way of passing responsibilities off to somebody else for money in many cases. I wanted relief and I am willing to pay somebody to take the problem off my hands. Dad refused and said it was a death sentence in there as they use heavy meds to "stabilize" a dementia patient. I told him their euphemisms for euthanization were not lost on me.

Basically my folks want to stay in their homes with round the clock care but not pay for a manager. I'm so tired of being HR, payroll, time clock clerk, security guard, neighbor negotiator and petty cash clerk. I guess it could be worse, they could be broke and living with me.

This came to a head this week because a neighbor said the street wasn't zoned for a nursing home and he was going to take legal action against me if I didn't institutionalize mom now. Dad said if I didn't like it I he could have mom dropped off on my doorstep by one of his agents. I asked why my stepmother (roughly my age) was unwilling to take her. Silence. Maybe she "owes" my mom for sharing a husband with her so many decades.

No I don't owe them this. My AWOL siblings don't seem to owe anything.

Maybe I should ERE to Pattaya or Mexico where I'll be left alone.

I so regret showing up to help.

[GandK]

No I don't owe them this. My AWOL siblings don't seem to owe anything.

That's where I'd be climbing the walls in your shoes, Sclass. There is zero reason for you to be doing this alone. It's your father's responsibility... legally, morally, ethically, however you want to look at it. And if he's abdicated (jerk! sorry), your siblings should be stepping up, too.

This entire discussion hinges upon whether people have functional relationships with their parents or not, and how any existing dysfunction came to pass. I'm sure I'd be taking care of my mom in your shoes, just like you are. I'm also sure I'd be angry with the world to be left shouldering that burden alone, just like you sound.

[C40]

She promised me that she won't do any more public dancing and she understands that I am very angry that she made use of tomatoes from my garden in a criminal act.

I just want to say that this line brightened up my day. I almost spit out my tea from laughing.

[teresajs]

This is a topic I struggle with.

Both mine and my husband's parents are divorced and remarried, making four full sets of "parents". We are far-and-away the most responsible members of our generation. Our siblings and siblings are less likely to contribute significantly to the care or support of any older relatives.

Now in their 60s, our parents are all doing well enough but are starting to show signs of slowly declining health. Of the four couples, only one seems to be sufficiently prepared, financially... Not because they have the most money saved/invested but because they make informed decisions about their investments, are cautious with their spending, and are planning for the long term. The health and financial well-being of one or more of these couples could change significantly in the next 10-15 years.

And that 10-15 timeline corresponds almost exactly with the date our youngest should be finishing college (which we plan to help pay for) and the beginning of our own retirement. Should we reduce our support of our children's education in anticipation of supporting our parents? Should we change our plans to retire to support parents who themselves retired earlier than their investments could actually support? And if we help one parent to the full extent they need, how will that impact our ability to help our other parents? How will our personal relationship with each parent affect the level to which we're willing to help?

I have no answers to these questions...

[Ego]

I so regret showing up to help.

Alzheimer's Association support group in OC. They may be able to help you find ways to lessen the load or spread the burden more fairly.

http://www.alz.org/oc/in_my_community_support.asp

[Sclass]

Thanks. And sorry for venting. It's has been a tough week.

[Ego]

This is the perfect place to vent. Please continue to post your experiences here. It may not seem readily apparent now that you are in the midst of it, but this is extremely helpful for those who may go through something similar in the future.

I just wish there was more we could do to help.

[JamesR]

Thanks OldPro, great counter argument to the majority of the thread

[Sclass]

Thanks Ego. I was afraid I was losing it and taking things OT.

I've had a week of sleepless nights to think about what is really going on. The neighbor threatening me has really brought things to a head.

This whole thing really can mess up ERE. And I think that is what the OP is about. Just because you freed yourself from corporate servitude doesn't mean you're free. The conflict comes from deep down where you know saying "I Resign" to your parent is not the same as it is to some jerk boss. Paying mommy and daddy's bills because they weren't like us just makes things harder.

Owe is a strong word. It's all about control. I'm not sure I like to think of myself as some kind of debtor who has lost control. Here we like to own debt and free ourselves. It's in our nature.

Early retirement in 2012 put me in the crosshairs of my dad. You all are warned. You have money and time for others to try and take.

[1taskaday]

Funny that this thread has brought this point up,it's the reason a lot of middle-aged women continue to work even though financially they need not.
After a little probing they will often admit it.

They do not want to be the "door-mat"carers for grand kids and elderly parents and parent-in-laws.

Something similar to how the burden of elderly parental care is often placed on the single daughter with no kids.

After all why would she not do it?...no kids...what else is she doing?...

[Sclass]

After all why would she not do it?...no kids...what else is she doing?...

I feel this kind of thing falls disproportionately on females. Maybe I'm wrong. I've met many middle aged women IRL who complain that they are going through the same thing. One actually said "because I'm the girl I guess." That one hated her brother.

That totally sucks. I'm not sure why I got singled out. I showed up. I don't like to admit it to myself but that's prolly it.

[OldPro]

I do not mean to suggest or imply that elder care is an easy thing to deal with at all. I'm only suggesting that there is always another side to the story.

Sclass, you are acting in what you know is the right and responsible way for YOU to act. How your Father and siblings act is their responsibility and as a firm believer in Karma, I am sure that they will get their just deserts in time. It is always difficult to accept how unfair some things in life seem to be but the fact is that life simply is not fair in many ways. I suggest doing some research and reading on the 'unfairness of life'. Here is a place to start. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/hi ... ons-3-ways

I always remember my own 'eureka moment' in this regard. It came while driving on a busy city commuter highway. A guy lane changed and cut me off and I was cursing him out loud. My Brother happened to be in the car with me and said to me, 'why are you cursing him like that? He can't hear you and wouldn't care if he could. Who is it that is going to get an ulcer over it, him or you?' I realized he was right, I was in fact self-harming by letting it get to me.

We cannot control how others behave but we can control how we behave and doing what is right is always the right thing to do. Leave it to others to self-justify the unjustifiable. Their day will come.

[RealPerson]

Few if any parents want to have to rely on their children to support them in their old age. But they should not have to ask themselves, 'will they support me if I need supported.'

Great argument you give here OldPro. Just like there are parents who abandon their children, there are children who abandon their parents in need. Children, especially younger ones, really don't have free choice. The parents decide much for them. For older parents, that is different. If the parents chose to live unwisely and spend eveything they earned, is that really the child's problem to solve? The child has no real choices. The parent does. So the child-parent analogy doesn't hold water 100%.

In the end, it still is about love, not obligation. If I ever need help from my kids, I hope it will come from love, not from a sense of them owing me. And I surely hope that if I need help, it will not be because of my foolish decisions, but due to circumstances beyond my control.

[RealPerson]

Few if any parents want to have to rely on their children to support them in their old age. But they should not have to ask themselves, 'will they support me if I need supported.'

Great argument you give here OldPro.

After reading this again, I thought it might come across sarcastically. It was not meant that way. I think you presented a good argument.

[OldPro]

Understood RealPerson.

In regards to your comment, "If the parents chose to live unwisely and spend everything they earned, is that really the child's problem to solve? The child has no real choices. The parent does. So the child-parent analogy doesn't hold water 100%.", I would agree but only up to a point. The fact is that being an adult and/or a parent does not mean someone will not make unwise or stupid choices in life and end up in need of help to live a basic life. We can say they 'should' have been wiser but if they weren't, then what is, is.

When that happens then yes it is the child's problem to solve if the parent cannot solve it for themselves. Responsibility is not assigned based on 'blame', it is assigned based on who has the ability to deal with the problem. You don't give responsibility to someone to solve a problem when they don't have the ability to solve it do you?

That said, there is a difference between giving help that is needed and enabling continued poor decision making. Just throwing money at a fiscally irresponsible person doesn't help them, it enables them to continue acting badly. Figuring out what is help vs. enabling is not always easy to do either.

Consider this real life example that I am aware of. A widowed mother has less income than her monthly costs. As a result, she is eating up the little capital she was left with when her husband died. She is working at age 60 and when she reaches government pension age, her pension will not cover her existing costs either, so she will have to continue to work until she no longer can. Her income plus capital may last until her pension begins and then her working income plus pension may cover her costs but only for as long as she can continue to work.

Now she has an alternative. Her daughter has offered to have her live with her. She would be able to live on her current working income and live on just her pension when she begins to receive it. She could keep what capital she has left and not have to work once she starts getting her pension. Sounds like an easy decision doesn't it.

BUT, her daughter has a husband and 2 grown children living in her house. The mother would get A bedroom to herself and that's all. She would not have her privacy or her independence. She would not have her own place. Her daughter is willing to take her in but not also take her dog in. The dog would have to go. She loves her dog. The daughter is a bit less fussy about housekeeping than her mother is. The mother would have to live with that too. Put yourself in the mother's shoes. That to her does not sound the least bit desirable, in fact it sounds pretty much like hell to her. So will she move? Not until she is forced to do so. Nor would I want to have to make that decision no matter how logical it might seem. Not every factor in a decision is about logic.

So would it be enabling bad decision making if instead the daughter simply gave the mother enough money every month to meet the difference in her income vs. costs? Or would it be helping the mother to live a decent life as she wants to live it?

[Sclass]

Consider this real life example that I am aware of. A widowed mother has less income than her monthly costs.

Hey, thanks for the link to the unfairness article. It made me feel better.

As for this story about the widow, we don't have a whole lot of sympathy around here for folks that live beyond their means. Isn't that what she's doing and wants to continue doing with her daughters help? (Free rent is a major subsidy)

What ever happened to tightening the belts and doing what it takes to survive?

Years ago I got kicked out of a rental by my aunt. She wanted me to take my cousin with me. When he saw the slums I was prepared to live in he said "I cannot live there, it must be in Niceville and Comfortburg." I left his 20 yo spoiled butt behind. His mom begged while he whined "whattabout me where do I go?" I said see you, and moved to the slums and survived. Its called getting by.

I also offered my services to put down my pals dog around the same time. The dog was the difference between living in married student housing or off campus dog friendly rentals which cost a lot. They chose the dog and financial misery.

You know I see the connection. Daughter struggles. Buys a home. Now she gets a piece of it taken away from her as her reward by a person who didn't have the same discipline. It feels a lot like my situation of I have freedom because I carefully planned for it and basically bought it...and now some schmoes who did not have the same discipline want me to pick up the slack for them by taking it from me (I'm speaking of my siblings who are running away from the fire as fast as they can).

[OldPro]

LOL, you're welcome for the link Sclass but I think you have missed the point of the widow scenario I gave and how to connect the two.

The widowed mother made bad decisions in life. Not because she chose to but because both she and her husband were just the way they were. Not too bright, fiscally irresponsible and too giving in their lives. Sounds like a lot of very normal, average, nice people to me.

The daughter could insist her Mother learn to live within her limited means and come live in a bedroom in her house. Of course, the mother would be miserable doing so (as would I in the same circumstances) but hey she would then be living within her means and fiscally responsible. But would that really be helping or solving the problem? I don't think so.

The best answer is for the daughter to give her $500 a month and let her live on her own happily. Life isn't fair Sclass, accept that and what it means. Would it be fairer for the mother to support herself? Yes. Would it be fairer if siblings helped contribute towards the money the mother needs to live a basic but happy life? Yes. Is either happening? NO.

So you go from what IS, not what you wish WAS. Then you accept it isn't fair and move on. Put 'fair' behind you. By concentrating on the behaviour of your father and siblings, it is only YOU that is suffering because of it. Yet you insist on holding on to 'fair' and not putting it behind you.

There is a story (parable) of two monks who belonged to a particularly strict religious order. One day they were walking along the road and came to a woman sitting and crying on the bank of a stream. They asked why she was crying and she told them she was afraid to try and cross the stream as she might be swept off her feet and drown. She had to get to the next town because her daughter was sick and so she wanted to get to her. One monk picked her up and carried her across so she could go on her way.

After she left them the second monk said to the first, 'I can't believe you picked her up. Our vows strictly forbid the touching of a woman under any circumstances.' The first monk replied, 'she needed help and I gave it. I think God will forgive my transgression of my vow in this case.'

The two monks walked on a bit longer and the second monk finally spoke again. 'I still can't believe you carried that woman and broke your vow.' The first monk replied, 'I did carry her but then I put her down and moved on with my life. You my friend are still carrying her'.

[Ego]

So you go from what IS, not what you wish WAS. Then you accept it isn't fair and move on. Put 'fair' behind you. By concentrating on the behaviour of your father and siblings, it is only YOU that is suffering because of it. Yet you insist on holding on to 'fair' and not putting it behind you.

Absolutely not!

By all means, accept what you can't control. But do not blindly accept things that are causing you to suffer if you have a measure of control over them. Or if you can influence the situation in some way.

Yeah, sure, the monk put her down and walked away. Sclass is, day after day, carrying her. While his siblings do nothing. He's got every right to be pissed if he so chooses.