Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Parent time

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 119 posts

Re: Parent time

#101

Post by hiidrew »

Tim Urban has a great post on this, helps you visualize the timing: https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/12/the-tail-end.html

Anyway, this makes me a bit sad considering I've recently moved a 15 hour drive away from my parents. Happy that they have a guest room and for remote work though.

It also makes me ponder the differences in western culture and other places. I know in some cultures family is much more integrated, e.g. the grandparents move-in instead of sending them to a home or something.

I love my city life but I do sometimes imagine living in a compound with my close family. I think it would be tolerable if everyone had their own space but was close in proximity.

Re: Parent time

#102

Post by rcarr »

sbaiddn wrote: post #96
Kaibeezy wrote: post #3

Parents could have moved to SF, just sayin’ ETA: One set of parents could have moved from east coast to west. They had enough savings and could have found a modest place in a nice peripheral location. We had good SV jobs and would have helped them. They never really liked where they lived, never made the most of it, and only stayed there out of inertia; I hated the weather and sprawly shabbiness, would never have mov…

How's it fair to uproot people from their communities, and their other children, at the twilight of their life to fulfill the material greediness of your kids?

Not material greediness if your kids do not have the financial means to move to you or if they have skills that are industry and location specific. Not everyone is a programmer that can work remotely.

Re: Parent time

#103

Post by sbaiddn »

rcarr wrote: post #102
sbaiddn wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How's it fair to uproot people from their communities, and their other children, at the twilight of their life to fulfill the material greediness of your kids?

Not material greediness if your kids do not have the financial means to move to you or if they have skills that are industry and location specific. Not everyone is a programmer that can work remotely.

Then they can't afford to live in SV, and they are probably better off financially living close to their family and where they grew up.

Re: Parent time

#104

Post by WirelessGigabit »

I won’t even get there. They’re in their late 60s. But I live on the other side of the globe. Time difference + cost of travel make it really hard.

It’s sad, because I’ve come to realize the asshole I was to my parents and I cannot help them now to make up for it.

Re: Parent time

#105

Post by rcarr »

sbaiddn wrote: post #103
rcarr wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not material greediness if your kids do not have the financial means to move to you or if they have skills that are industry and location specific. Not everyone is a programmer that can work remotely.

Then they can't afford to live in SV, and they are probably better off financially living close to their family and where they grew up.

This is an absolutely ridiculous statement. Throughout history, people have moved where the jobs are. You don’t escape poverty by staying stuck in a place with no opportunities. If you went to university and studied filmmaking for example you’re probably going to find a lot of work in LA, New York and other metropolitan areas. You’re not going to find work in a small village in the middle of Alaska. And sometimes you’ve got to slum it for a while to achieve financial independence.

And that’s presuming the reason for the financial distress is work related. There are tons of other reasons why someone might be in a poor financial situation. Maybe their spouse left them or died and now they’re a single parent. Maybe they’re a victim of fraud. Maybe they lost their house in a wildfire. Literally thousands of reasons.

Or should children just be happy to not have their own interests in life and instead just be slaves to whatever their parents wish until the parents die and the children are finally released of their bonds?

Re: Parent time

#106

Post by tasuki »

stantaylor wrote: post #74
luxurytent wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My anecdotal experience from speaking with other young parents: this is way more common than I anticipated!

As someone whose kids are both (ages 27 and 23) finally out of the house in the last couple of years--but no grandkids yet--I totally get this. I've very much gotten used to having my own time FINALLY, being on my schedule, etc. My son and his fiancee have talked about moving back in with us for a year or two to save money, and the prospect does't sound that appealing to me at this point. I'm happy that our son think…

Why did you decide to have kids?

Re: Parent time

#107

Post by Kaibeezy »

rcarr wrote: post #89
Kaibeezy wrote: post #3

Parents could have moved to SF, just sayin’ ETA: One set of parents could have moved from east coast to west. They had enough savings and could have found a modest place in a nice peripheral location. We had good SV jobs and would have helped them. They never really liked where they lived, never made the most of it, and only stayed there out of inertia; I hated the weather and sprawly shabbiness, would never have mov…

This. It is the responsibility of aging parents to move to where their children can earn a living, not the other way around. My grandparents lived around two and a half hours away from their daughter (my mother) and I and half an hour away from their son (my uncle). We were pretty poor after the financial crisis so it meant we could only really go visit once or twice a year. My uncle was away a lot (works in the mili…

Yep, that. Such feeble excuses. Ach, well, for our part we really tried hard to help them find a way, so at least we're not loaded down with guilt on top of all the sadness.

Re: Parent time

#108

Post by rcarr »

lo_zamoyski wrote: post #98
rcarr wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. It is the responsibility of aging parents to move to where their children can earn a living, not the other way around. My grandparents lived around two and a half hours away from their daughter (my mother) and I and half an hour away from their son (my uncle). We were pretty poor after the financial crisis so it meant we could only really go visit once or twice a year. My uncle was away a lot (works in the mili…

You may be overgeneralizing your particular situation. These sorts of things are subject to numerous factors and details that vary across families. You have three options: parents move closer to children, children move close to parents, or neither (both operate independently). Which is the best possible move is not the same everywhere and at all times.

You’re definitely right. But if there are no extenuating circumstances then I do think the default view should be parents move to kids rather than the other way around. At the end of the day, one set of people are shortly going to become unable to take care of themselves and the other isn’t. Whilst you still have the ability to do something about it, lessen the burden on your loved ones by moving closer to them rather than increasing it by staying put.

Personally, if I’m in terminal decline and have enough forewarning and ability left to do something about it, I think I’d be inclined to take myself out of the game and save my family the pain of having to spend thousands on care costs and watch me slowly wither away. I’d rather go out on my own terms with a bit of dignity and for my family to spend the extra inheritance money on whatever they want. But obviously that is a very personal decision and I wouldn’t ever cast judgement on someone for being for or against it. I will however, cast some judgement if you’re past seventy and burying your head in the sand about what’s coming down the pipeline rather than having a plan in place to lessen the burden placed on your loved ones.

Re: Parent time

#109

Post by Kaibeezy »

rcarr wrote: post #108
lo_zamoyski wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may be overgeneralizing your particular situation. These sorts of things are subject to numerous factors and details that vary across families. You have three options: parents move closer to children, children move close to parents, or neither (both operate independently). Which is the best possible move is not the same everywhere and at all times.

You’re definitely right. But if there are no extenuating circumstances then I do think the default view should be parents move to kids rather than the other way around. At the end of the day, one set of people are shortly going to become unable to take care of themselves and the other isn’t. Whilst you still have the ability to do something about it, lessen the burden on your loved ones by moving closer to them rathe…

... if you’re past seventy and burying your head in the sand about what’s coming down the pipeline rather than having a plan in place to lessen the burden placed on your loved ones.

Yep, that's really it. Just had something come down the pipeline today :(

Re: Parent time

#110

Post by rightbyte »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #4

I cant refind the website right now, but i once encountered an interesting website that took this concept further. It demonstrated that many of us have already spent between 95-99% of the time we will see our parents. Eg: * presume your parents have you at ~30 * Live at home 18years x 365 days per year = 6570 days * You see them a week per year for the remainder of their life = 50 years * 7 days per year = 350 days t…

On the other hand you have more to talk about when you see people more seldom.

And maybe you make them take care of your children.

Sounds less bleak that way.

Post reply on HN