patrick.net

I love mine too TPB. My MIL treats me like the daughter she never had. I really consider her more like a good friend. Older generations have so much to offer us especially if you're into backstories and history.

But there are the families that are more toxic than supportive. And then distance is a good thing.

Mdovell, I found your commentary on the entertainment value of a home very interesting and have caught myself in that same trap when house hunting. The irony is we entertained so much more in the teeny places we owned. Taking care of the larger places just takes up so much of our time. Of course, the kids are older now and going to all their extracurricular activities and playdates is a huge time allotment. We could downsize but I get stuck in the thought that in our 50s some of my friend's homes are already twice the size of our last home. Would they want to visit me in the small one or would they feel claustrophobic? I already have one friend w/four kids that insists we stay at her uber sized home so her kids can all have their individual areas away from the adults w/their favorite electronics diversion if necessary. There are some nice smaller homes we've walked away from due to this fear.

I, too, had an awesome m-i-l. We stayed in touch until she died and she was an awesome woman and a wonderful grandmother. A scholar in her own right. All those mother-in-law stories are just that - stories.

All of the teevee shows about house selling & buying on HGTV/DIY tend to focus on entertaining, not necessary living space. Seems like that's important to some people. I believe that it's more the people, not the home, that makes it party friendly.

Multiple generations under one roof are a good idea, but our culture currently doesn't support it. We're selfish and want our own stuff. But if we can't pay our bills, we move back home. (?) It seems to have a negative connotation.

Parents should argue in front of the kids - and they should show the kiddies that disagreements are part of life. You know, verbal disagreements, not knock-down/drag-outs with name calling & such. The only way kids can see that it's okay to argue but not to degrade the other person is by example.

I don't believe that people should stay together for the sake of the kids, per se. If that's the only reason they're together, that's pretty destructive. But people are too ready to throw in the towel over stupid crap. I don't buy that juvenile delinquents are created when people stay together for the children. Juvenile delinquency & behaviors happen for many reasons and it's too simplistic to say that it's the parent's fault and all they should have done is split up.

Before a family is dissolved, counseling should be mandatory. And parents should do their best to remain in the same area so that the children can continue daily contact with both parents. It should be illegal for parents to move away and take the children out of state - unless the other spouse moves to the same area, it's wrong to take kids away from their parents and expect them to be emotionally healthy. This should be the same whether they live with mom or with dad.

But multiple generations under one roof probably cut back on delinquency. All those people watching the kids and giving support.

Ellimae,

The reason the husband's mother (wife's mother-in-law) is universally demonized in American culture is that she is the one that understands what the son's wife is up to, and is looking out to protect her son. She is the only person with the cultural and generational background sufficient to see through a lot of the crap that modern American wives have been pulling, since, I dunno, the 50s or maybe even since the days of female shortages on the pioneer trails.

The reason the wife's mother (son's mother in law) is unpopular is that she sometimes supports whatever the daugther does, and also likes to interfere in everything, in the usual mother-daughter battle style.

We live in a Matriarchical society, and we have for a long time, especially here in the US.

Mother-in-law and daughter-in-law are enemies from birth in Chinese culture, they will chew each other out if placed under the same roof. Son-in-law, however, generally get along with the father and mother-in-laws.

The reason is, the mother-in-law in east Asian culture typically had to endure years of suffering with no earning ability in the husband's household. When she is eventually a mother-in-law herself, she has usually become a psycho. Chinese women particularly avoid mother-in-law who was widowed at an younger age and never married to bring up a male kid. That kid would be her entire life and entire asset.

I personally do not want to live in a multi-generational home, although I get along with both sides very well, at a distance. Elderly have different living habits, and different mindset. Some of them refuse to become a background under the same roof, so you have lots of control issues to fight about. On a selfish note, some elderly have lots of health issues that you would rather not deal with. I know of such examples of being woken up in the middle of the night often to send them to emergency room, such intensive care, if you can afford it, is better left to the professional or you will have no life of your own.

When I am old, I don't want to impose myself on my kids either, because I don't want to be imposed upon when I am younger. I don't want to be their burden, so I prefer to live close by, but not that close to be sharing a house.

Lots of good analysis in this thread. I would offer that the US culture has a strong individualistic streak, or atleast it used to, rejecting communism at any cost.
Even in strong multi generational families, a sense of "to each according to need, from each according to ability" develops. On the margins it stifles certain personality types and rewards others. This gets layered and eventually works the system down to mediocrity.
US culture has definitely taken it too far the other way in recent years, hence the housing bubble. But the evils on the other side are just as anti-productive.

Ellimae,
The reason the husband’s mother (wife’s mother-in-law) is universally demonized in American culture is that she is the one that understands what the son’s wife is up to, and is looking out to protect her son. She is the only person with the cultural and generational background sufficient to see through a lot of the crap that modern American wives have been pulling, since, I dunno, the 50s or maybe even since the days of female shortages on the pioneer trails.
The reason the wife’s mother (son’s mother in law) is unpopular is that she sometimes supports whatever the daugther does, and also likes to interfere in everything, in the usual mother-daughter battle style.
We live in a Matriarchical society, and we have for a long time, especially here in the US.

Ah, the joys of painting w/ a broad brush.

What you wrote is not my experience at all. My M-i-L (wife's mother) always sides w/ me in any disagreement w/ my wife. My F-i-L OTOH always sides w/ my wife - she's a princess and can do no wrong in his eyes.

But my wife doesn't pull and more crap than I do. We have fights but that's because we're different people and we think differently. Different genders also view the world in different ways. But at the end of the day we've been able to sort everything out by just talking about it. That's what drives me crazy about "chick flicks" - EVERY problem in those movies could have been avoided if the two people had just talked. Instead they jump to conclusions and craft elaborate scenarios to justify their feelings... Wait, what was I talking about again?

My parents almost never cause drama except when we come home to visit and we have to divide up time between each set of parents. But I think that has more to do w/ my being an only child.

Anyway, I watch these stereotypes play out in movies w/ mild amusement. I have no problem telling other people what I think or calling them on their BS. The key is to just talk about stuff.

Now don't get me started on my wife's brothers and sisters ;)

Sure, but individual experiences are just single data points. What matters is the average experience, or the typical experience, or the median experience.

Sometimes one has to paint with a broad brush to color what is true but seldom or never is spoken.

What is typical or average? It seems to me it depends who your peeps are.

IE, if you chose people who respect personal boundaries to be around you its amazing how much less stress and drama occurs. (I really wish I figured this out a lot earlier in life. )

That's why I think only groups of people who are mutually respectful of others could pull off multi-generational living.

For many years my family had three generations under one roof. My maternal grandmother (93) still lives with my parents, who are nearing retirement age. It's not a panacea. For example, grandma doesn't want to see her friends anymore (but always loves seeing them), but that makes it hard for my mom to live her own life. And if the house belongs to the parents, there can be control fights. My sister and BIL argued with my parents (mostly mom and sis) because they don't see personal boundaries the same way.

I'm curious, are big multigenerational homes in Asia and Europe physically laid out the same as US homes? It seems like many conflicts could be resolved by private space.

No truer words were ever spoken. Conformity itself is an empty goal. What else explains the high rate of divorce and the dumbing down of the debt society? No, thanks. I’m staying single, free and away from it all.

Thats a good point. I wonder what the divorce rate is in countries with multi generational households.

I am not saying there is a connection or not. But it would be a real pain in the butt to have to move 3 generations out of a house everytime there was a divorce, which is quite frequent in american culture.

No truer words were ever spoken. Conformity itself is an empty goal. What else explains the high rate of divorce and the dumbing down of the debt society? No, thanks. I’m staying single, free and away from it all.

Thats a good point. I wonder what the divorce rate is in countries with multi generational households.
I am not saying there is a connection or not. But it would be a real pain in the butt to have to move 3 generations out of a house everytime there was a divorce, which is quite frequent in american culture.

The thought of multiple generations having to move out due to divorce is funny, but frightening. I really belive that our culture is so transient that for the most part multi-generational housing wouldn't work the same. It has to be taught from day one, otherwise it's probably not gonna work.

I think multi-generational households was/is the rule in agrarian societies, You know how it works, the oldest son gets the farm and gets to marry, and have a son that will in turn inherit the farm, and so on. The rest of the family plays supporting roles, work on the farm, an so on.

Anyway, this is the historical prototype of the multi-generational household. In some places, it has survived through some level of industrialization, in some form.

I grew-up in a multi-generational home (agrarian). I have never thoght of it being bad or good. Looking back, I am glad it was what it was, but then I was a kid and wouldn't know the difference as to what someone later on would had thought the way it was supposed to be. As multi-generational applies to now, I think it is a lot of nothing about nothing and one area I am not going to worry about.

I think multi-generational households was/is the rule in agrarian societies, You know how it works, the oldest son gets the farm and gets to marry, and have a son that will in turn inherit the farm, and so on. The rest of the family plays supporting roles, work on the farm, an so on.
Anyway, this is the historical prototype of the multi-generational household. In some places, it has survived through some level of industrialization, in some form.

I don't see to much of that anymore. I see the oldest son having to take over the farm, while the other children take different professions. Are freer to leave and marry young. When the wealth is divided it is pretty equal.

Multi-generational housing works out, not works fine, in Asia due to necessity, not because people like it.

Everyone I know who grew up there accept it because that is what they can afford, not what they desire. I have never heard from anyone who is living under the same arrangement saying that they like it, they may pretend to like it for saving face. Many couples sharing space with their parents don't even have enough privacy space for xxoo, why do you think there are such establishments as love hotels that rent on an hourly basis all over Asia?

People in Asia have to live with grandparents not because they love to, but because that is the way to save cost, and there are not a lot retirement homes to send them to. But once retirement homes takes hold, they spread like a wild fire, it only took about 10-15 years for everyone to start planning sending their parents there.

In Hong Kong, for example, every year there are loads of intra-family homicide which usually happen between in-laws that live together. It is a very undesirable, and compromising solution to the lack of money and lack of space. Although Americans will soon be out of money, I don't think we will ever be out of space.

I just don't know how this would work out with two brothers, or even a large family with many children. The brothers would fight over the house. But I have seen families stay in the same neighborhood. Many good points have been made here, not the least important being the social pressures tearing apart traditional families by the automobile a real estate industries.

Only certain love hotels that cater to extra-marital sex do the license plate covering. Most love hotels are legit and cater to couples that have to share living space with elderly, and the japanese style dwelling with paper thin wall is not exactly catering to having loud sex either.

In China, it has become customary for a guy to either buy a house or build a house (in rural areas) before a woman will even bother to marry him. That is why the housing price in China is so out of whack with their income even compared to the Bay Area, because independent housing has become a necessary tool to secure mating and reproduction right.

The most desirable husband material for an urban Chinese woman has now become: have both an apartment and a car, and both parents departed.

The in law set up is great for one in-law, very risky for two.

We bought a house with an in-law, and my parents are loving it. They get the condo living they wanted (no fixing or upkeep) but are saving about $1000/month, not including being able to keep about $200,000 in equity from the sale of their house.

My wife is cool with it, only because it her house, not my mother's. I had to drag my mom kicking and screaming, all the while listening to "I feel like I'm going to my death, I feel like I'm giving up!" She apologized for the that little outburst, once we ran the numbers and she realized this was her only chance for retirement.

We looked at over 20 in-law setups, and got one that worked. It took 3 years, 4300sqft, 5 acres, and almost $500,000. A sacrifice for us (kids) for the elders. I couldn't see this working in a 1500sqft ranch w/ 3 small kids.

I think that it should be said that as the USA depends more on immigration for population growth we'd find much of this to be more common.

Years ago I showed a picture of my house to some Haitians I went to college with. The response wasn't "Nice house" or "Good garage"
it was
"How many families live in that house"

The concept is getting old. How much stuff does someone need to warrent a space of a house just for themeselves? Things are smaller these days and portible. Big stereo's? Try a bose...big album collection? ipod, big tv? stream it to a laptop. lots of books? amazon kindle. clothing? spacebag.
Larger houses also mean large property taxes and heating/cooling costs.

How much stuff does someone need in getting older? An old professor of mine was in his 60's and he said after awhile you don't need new things. How much of a waredrobe do you need? The desire to impress people drops off like a rock when people get older.

"We looked at over 20 in-law setups, and got one that worked. It took 3 years, 4300sqft, 5 acres, and almost $500,000. A sacrifice for us (kids) for the elders. I couldn’t see this working in a 1500sqft ranch w/ 3 small kids."

Although I feel a similar pressure in a need for individual space, I had to laugh when remembering that in my story above of the Sicilian family they all lived in a small ranch and did raise 3 kids there. Like I said closest family I've ever met. They did, however, have a 46' sailboat to get away from it all with. The yacht club and islands where they used to raft up w/other boats was a whole different world away from the four walls. Myself I'd take the small house w/the sailboat w/all the included social opportunities. To each his own though. Differences are the spice of life.

It is not just about living space, it is about difference in living habits. I would rather live in an one-bedroom apartment with my family than sharing a 3500 sq ft house with my in-laws (the same goes with my wife).

Old people like to store things, left-over food in the fridge, packaging from your Amazon orders, just everything. Because they have a poor memory, they leave things to rot. If you share a living space with them, pretty soon your space will morph into a warehouse, and your fridge will longer have space for your food. They turn up the volume of everything despite the hearing aids, and lots of them are incontinent, in varying degrees, as a result, they smell, and their bathrooms are soiled. If they still cook, they usually eat a different diet from yourself, and they cook a lot slower, leaving you no time to use the kitchen. I know all this because I have lived with my grandparents, and I have talked to many people who was forced into multi-generational living before. Quite opposite to what some Americans think, many Asians hate multi-generational living, some of them go to such extremes of emigrating to seek space of their own. In fact, it is worse for the US because in other parts of the country, the elderly can take public transportation. Here, you will become the chauffeur some day down the road.

It is possible to do it if you have separate kitchens, separate bathrooms, separate living rooms and of course separate bedrooms. Which means, living under the same roof in the traditional setting of an one-family house will simply not work.

Multi-generational living is not a virtue. When our ancestors were practicing it, the average expected life expectancy was around 45, and the "elderly" never got stuck in an incontinent, semi-conscious, frail or bed-bound situation for long. For us, we could be dealing with a much frailer elderly for 20, 30 years.

Now, if you throw in the siblings, grown with their own families all living with grandparents under the same roof, that is a guaranteed path for disaster. Nobody I know who went through this ever said anything remotely nice about it.

OO,

That's a good perspective.

However, I would say that grandparents can come in many different types. Some are heavily marked by war, famine and traumatic events such as the cultural revolution or the like. Others may be more middle-of-the-road. It really depends, does it not.

A potentially good aspect: It may have the benefit of developing some perspective in the younger generation. And perhaps even in the older generation, if one is lucky ;)

You bring up a good point OO, totally separate space as in in-law apt or duplex style living makes things go much smoother.
With all due respect, it does seem like you're painting a broad brush about older people. I had one grandmother who lived until she was 90. She didn't smell at all. She didn't hoard things. Her small older home was always clean and well kept. She was in pain toward the end but tried to always be charming for visitors. It also sounds like you never lived w/roommates. I had 3 roommates in my college apt. Nobody ate the same thing. Nobody approached housework the same way. Beer usually helped solve that problem but really is it that big of a crisis? It's up to those involved whether every little detail becomes a power struggle or a pissing contest.
My 78 yo MIL who is starting to have a myriad of ailments has a nicer home than mine (w/preteens) It's like a museum over there. They just did a $50k improvement on their kitchens and baths. Now she has an awesome kitchen w/a beautiful sunlight pouring in. I've asked but they won't take me in . : )
The idea that its impossible to have sex w/in laws in the house puzzled me. Do you have sex in front of the kids in your home? If not, what's the diff? Chances are the oldsters can't even hear anymore.

It is not just about living space, it is about difference in living habits. I would rather live in an one-bedroom apartment with my family than sharing a 3500 sq ft house with my in-laws (the same goes with my wife).
Old people like to store things, left-over food in the fridge, packaging from your Amazon orders, just everything. Because they have a poor memory, they leave things to rot. If you share a living space with them, pretty soon your space will morph into a warehouse, and your fridge will longer have space for your food. They turn up the volume of everything despite the hearing aids, and lots of them are incontinent, in varying degrees, as a result, they smell, and their bathrooms are soiled. If they still cook, they usually eat a different diet from yourself, and they cook a lot slower, leaving you no time to use the kitchen. I know all this because I have lived with my grandparents, and I have talked to many people who was forced into multi-generational living before. Quite opposite to what some Americans think, many Asians hate multi-generational living, some of them go to such extremes of emigrating to seek space of their own. In fact, it is worse for the US because in other parts of the country, the elderly can take public transportation. Here, you will become the chauffeur some day down the road.
It is possible to do it if you have separate kitchens, separate bathrooms, separate living rooms and of course separate bedrooms. Which means, living under the same roof in the traditional setting of an one-family house will simply not work.
Multi-generational living is not a virtue. When our ancestors were practicing it, the average expected life expectancy was around 45, and the “elderly” never got stuck in an incontinent, semi-conscious, frail or bed-bound situation for long. For us, we could be dealing with a much frailer elderly for 20, 30 years.
Now, if you throw in the siblings, grown with their own families all living with grandparents under the same roof, that is a guaranteed path for disaster. Nobody I know who went through this ever said anything remotely nice about it.

These are all generalizations about the elderly - the worst of things that people have attributed to old people all lumped into one post. Some people do have issues - but the same could be said for you. Your lifestyle is probably not acceptable to some other people. You might not be clean enough, or might be too clean. You might smell like garlic or sweat or aqua velva - my point is that I've specialized in working with the elderly for over 20 years and each one of them is different. And until you experience a life-altering health crisis, you may not understand the difficulties encountered by someone who is debilitated. Some people never become debilitated and are healthy until they die. Everyone is different.

Remember that you, too, are a unique individual - just like everyone else.

Of course everyone is different. And I just want to be practical about it so nobody enters into such a situation with rosy expectation. Age does take its toll on people. So being with mom and dad for a summer, over a weekend is very nice, but living with mom and dad day in and day out may wear you out.

Multi-generational living is often, not always, a compromise due to financial, work, or different types of constraints. It is not a solution to the housing crisis.

Don't forget the soul shattering nightmare of implausible plaid outfits with which one must contend.

LOL Mikey and don't forget being seen w/that guy w/dark socks under his sandals.

Was there ever a time when that look was acceptable?

missgredenko says

LOL Mikey and don’t forget being seen w/that guy w/dark socks under his sandals.
Was there ever a time when that look was acceptable?

Great. Now I have to buy a new outfit, too? The horror!

In terms of being a pack rat I think it generally depends. I had one in my family that supposedly kept every dress she ever wore. There's probably a good 90+ years of history somewhere in the house with that. The other pattern I see is you can totally forget about spending that much beyond basic survival. Food and ultilities...that's it.
Certainly public transportation can be a factor but there are towns and cities with local council on aging that might run shuttles...then again with the economy it could shut down..who knows

Land is about 50% of the cost of a home where I am. Our last appraisal pegged the land at about $200k (May 2009, and yes, they're still selling lots at these prices when they come up, but mostly chipped off for family) An in-law is not a duplex. I would say an in-law works for either mom or dad, but very rarely for mom and dad. If it were just one of them I could get away with shoving him/her in a closet, but with both of them here there's a witness.

So where will you be going, and when can we expect you to be gone?

Losers? Yeah as if everyone can plunk down the $1,000 or so per month for an apartment. Privacy in 2009? peace and quiet? Where are you talking about.

The idea of taking over land as if someone is a mini dictator is over. The trend towards less keeps going. You don't need a huge stereo or tv. You don't need a ton of clothing, you don't need a big kitchen or bathroom...

Also who said that having kids is actually development? If that were the case then india and china are more developed than the USA. Trends are changing.

In some cases, if adult children were to move in with their parents, the parents would be the losers.

I would say that those people who consider living with their parents as adults as losing may not have the option to move in with their parents - could be their attitude or their holier than thou view of the world. Perhaps the parents wouldn't allow this type of child to move in with them under any circumstance, nor would they every want to move in with their children even if they were destitute. Certainly they wouldn't feel welcome in such a household.

For some people, family is a nuisance and that's too bad. But in some cases, it's a blessing for the family.

If we were to send everyone back to their country of origin, the American Indians would have their land back.

missgredenko says

I hear many young men and women asking, “Why can’t I buy a home like my father did?

It really does show how things have changed for the worse. My mother, who was born in 1902, had five brothers born between 1890 and 1900, none went to college--my mother the only one in her family with college education. By the time every one of the brothers was 25, they were self-supporting, married with at least one child and were buying a home. By the time I knew them in the 1950's, they all had comfortable homes, nice cars and my aunts never worked--they were truly the luckiest generation--came of age while blue-collar jobs were still plentiful, then had good pensions. None of them probably made more than $20K a year ever.

hydramatic the only problem with that though is well think about it. They didn't have an education so therefore they assumed that getting married, having children and buying a home were the only symbols of wealth and maturity.

Studies have shown that the more education someone has the less children they have. This is why you don't see rhode scholars on any shows on TLC! On the same note it's why they are promoting education in the developing world as it acts a mental birthcontrol. I'm not trying to put your family down generally what you described was pretty much the common thing to do.

Back then also there were far fewer rights for african americans, the top marginal tax rate in the 50's was 90%, lead paint, asbestos etc. The good old days really weren't all that good when everything is factored in.

Ever read the book the Cluetrain Manifesto? Basically it's these small statements about the future and then paragraphs explaining them. It's a free book written nearly 10 years ago. Well one thing was that the idea of place being a factor would no longer exist. Well yes and no. I think people need to be more mobile. If a company can move and he labor can't due to their own choices it can hold them back. If you are an employer and you know a job could move or at least require travel would you hire someone that has a mortage and kids? Probably not. Well what job these days doesn't move?

elliemae says

missgredenko says

LOL Mikey and don’t forget being seen w/that guy w/dark socks under his sandals.
Was there ever a time when that look was acceptable?

Great. Now I have to buy a new outfit, too? The horror!

Oh man I spilled my coffee on that one. I thought only older men favored that look.

"His income was 2.5x as much as the original price of the home."

Education had nothing to do with this part. We haven't fully embraced the damage of inflation to our discretionary income and savings ability. We don't fully acknowledge that although our paychecks are nominally greater than Mom and Dads we don't really have the same purchasing power. Plus there's the aspirational norms of today. I know darn well when I'm looking at $250k homes that I'm sure as heck not competing with anyone making $625k. No they're off looking at the million dollar waterfront homes.

In fact the last $250k home I looked at was bought by a 26 year old w/ heavy education debt.

Now can I buy a home at that 1974 ratio for my family? Yes, they exist in upstate NY if I don't mind living next to the sex offender apartments or where the bullets fly on a weekly basis.

When I was a child, one of the guys that owned a very large proportion of our town (wealthy) also lived in a home about the same size as ours on the other side of the neighborhood. His big splurge was when his kids started going to college he built another small addition w/a hot tub and enlarged one of his bathrooms. I do think the very rustic camp got an upgrade too. Very restrained compared to what we see today.

Obviously, times have changed. The richest people in town used to live in bigger homes, but not by much. It was considered to be gauche to flaunt your wealth, other than driving new cars and dressing a little nicer. That was before teevee and the media was in all of our homes, showing us the way that the upper crust and celebwhores live. Opulence has replaced restraint (we want it all, we want it now!).

It's funny that people are returning to values and living in smaller homes - but the smaller homes are still over 2000 sq ft for a family of 5 from what I've read. I have no room to speak, live alone in 1700sq ft (including basement, tho). Homes have become the status symbol, the urban myth of having the perfect grass and yard makes you a better person.

Getting back to the original post, I believe that multi-generational living is wonderful and can help when times are hard. But it takes a paradigm shift.