Emerging Adulthood or “Failure to Launch”?
These terms are used for those children in their twenties. They are also sometimes called “boomerang kids”, meaning those kids that start or finish college or jobs and decide to move back in with their parents. I read this excellent article about it in the New York Times Magazine. It’s about the age group of my children, my friends children and even my residents.
When we were in our twenties this period of our lives was marked with: completing school, leaving home, becoming financially independent, marrying and having a child. In these days and age, the twenty something are characterized by:
- One-third of people in their 20s move to a new residence every year
- Forty percent move back home with their parents at least once
- They go through an average of seven jobs in their 20s, more job changes than in any other stretch.
- Two-thirds spend at least some time living with a romantic partner without being married
- The median age at first marriage has climbed from 21 for women and 23 for men in the seventies of the previous century, to 26 for women and 28 for men in 2009
The question discussed in this article is whether emerging adulthood should be viewed as a new development stage in growing up, like adolescence did in the beginning of the previous century. For parents the most important question is whether it’s a good thing to let 20-somethings meander or not?
maybe if kids take longer to choose their mates and their careers, they’ll make fewer mistakes and live happier lives.
Or should parents cut them off and tell them just to find a job and get on with their lives.
As the settling-down sputters along for the “emerging adults,” things can get precarious for the rest of us. Parents are helping pay bills they never counted on paying, and social institutions are missing out on young people contributing to productivity and growth.
I think somewhere in between, what do you think? The article goes further about the neuropsychological and sociological explanations of this new phenomenon with interesting interviews of scientists. So enjoy over at NYT.
Mark Hallen
August 23, 2010 @ 3:05 pm
Society should respond to this “new” lifestage by upending the traditional life stages entirely and putting retirement before our working years. Here’s how it would work:
Upon leaving school, our emerging adults enter a period called, let’s say, “Chronocide,” (from “chrono” meaning “time” and “cide” meaning “to kill”) that lasts until age 30. During this period of killing time, they are supported by the equivalents of Social Security and Medicare, the cost of which would be deducted from their pay during their working years which would last until they die. Think of the advantages of such a system:
1. You could have retirement while you’re young enough to enjoy it and drive more than 25 miles per hour.
2. You’d have your whole 20’s to find yourself and decide what you want to do with the rest of your life. Literally.
3. The government could subsidize your “years of self-enlightenment” instead of your parents. But you’d only be living off the government for a finite number of years, unlike now, when some people have the audacity to do it for decades.
I’m sure some cynics out there will find some flaws with this plan, but, really, I don’t want to hear them.
I think it’s because my brain is still maturing.
Christina
August 31, 2010 @ 6:29 pm
It’s tough on everyone involved when adult children move home or stay at home — the adult kids, the parents, any younger kids living at home, and especially step-parents, if there are any. It’s becoming a more and more common problem, and communication and planning are the most important ways to keep the situation livable for everyone.