My mother, as the oldest girl, was responsible for all meals and laundry making sure the other kids got to school (a couple miles, walking) and generally holding down the fort. An uncle traveled out from the city and slept there at night, leaving very early the next morning to go back to work.

My grandparents were gone slightly over a week. My mother had just turned 12. Do you think we are currently raising our kids to be relatively incapable? I have friends that won't leave their 17 year olds alone for more than a couple of hours for fear they'll burn the house down.

... and in London -- I would take the train by myself up to the City -- and find my own way (on the subway) over to stores like Harvey Nichols and Peter Jones and Biba (a very groovy store back in the early 70s with the most amazing Deco decor)

I guess the circumstances just depend on the whole situation ...

My other grandfather who was much older (78 when I was born), had a full-time job at 12. (then finished HS and college as an adult). I am not necessarily condoning this, but I think the current infantilizing that a lot of parents do has something to do with adults that are 25-30+ who still can't manage on their own.

That's just one reason why people do not leave kids at home alone. Another: safety. My husband and I went to San Francisco for a week and hired a teacher to stay with our last child at home. My mother would have come down to stay, but she was also traveling. While we were gone that child had a juggling accident --- you can't make this stuff up, can you--- that required one trip to the emergency room and two subsequent doctors visits. We were able to stay in touch by phone and the teacher who stayed with him handled it as well as we could have.

The good old days are gone-- and good riddance to them. Your point about infantilizing 25 year olds is well-taken, but there's a boatload of difference between a petulant young adult and a twelve year old. I am not so sure that leaving a girl of 12 alone to care for a houseful of siblings is a very good idea whenever it happened.

What is interesting is how much my youngest sister begrudges the fact that I was in charge of her when she was so young. When she was 50 she decided to indulge in some revisionist history and told me how much she hates me because I was in charge of her. We haven't spoken since. Oh well.

Re younger people - I have 2 sons 25 and 23 and yes they are both at home. They have both just finished school and one has a job but the other one still doesn't. They both took time out from school, with our blessing, to travel, to work abroad, to be on their own, but we didn't pay for it.
I am a SAHM and have I done too much for my kids - perhaps but they have both worked since they were 16 because we don't have the extra money to pay for their social lives.

Most of their friends are still at home. We live in an extremely expensive real estate market and many of their friends stay at home to save for a down payment - they don't have cars or high end lifestyles, it's all about the downpayment.

In the past month I have asked both of my kids when do they plan on moving out. They looked at me as if I had just grown a second head and said "what do you mean?" Ok simple question - when are you leaving? And they both said "why would we - we like you and Dad. Why would we leave? We're a family". And apparently that is a common sentiment among their friends - they like their parents. (Or else the kids are taking us for a ride.)

A friend's 19 year old was arrested while they were in Australia. Similar situation that kswl mentioned. Kid was allowed a few friends over, but it got out of hand. My friend had asked the neighbors to call the police if they saw more than a few cars, but it seems no one made the call untill it was too late. I think the arrest was due to alcohol. With cell phones, texts, facebook, etc an unsupervised party location can be broadcast to hundreds in a matter of seconds.

And, no, I don't know a Lot of people whose kids are home at 30, but one of my friends has had parents show up at their kid's performance reviews At WORK (after college, we're talking), to make sure that nothing is said to "hurt their feelings."

I was dumbfounded by the words coming out of this kids' mouth-he either doesn't grasp the severity of what happened (could lead to criminal prosecution) or he's a complete idiot. I got the impression that he's so used to never being told no or always having things be arranged to suit him so that he doesn't have to accept consequences because there are no consequences. I know I'm not explaining this well, but it's definitely the entitlement attitude of too many young people who have never learned from the school of life.

This is not to say that it's appropriate to have 12 year olds raise their siblings, but to have kids be so coddled that they just can't function in the 'real world' once they're cut loose of their parent's apron strings is causing problems. We just don't give the kids the tools, much less show them how to use them. We seem to be too afraid that they'll hurt themselves, but we're doing them a major disservice.

I was babysitting, both for other families and my younger siblings, when I was 12. Heck, I started feeding my baby sister and changing her diapers when I was 7 (with adult supervision). My parents would leave me in charge of the younger kids (ages 14, 12, 8 & 7) for a weekend when I was 16.

But after I left home for college, they would ask me to come home and look after the younger kids when they had to go away--they simply didn't trust my younger brothers to look after the two youngest kids.

My two older brothers? One was allowed to look after us; the other was definitely not.

Some states have laws now about how old a child can be before you can leave them alone in the house, or alone with younger kids. So leaving a 12 year old in charge of younger siblings might not be an option today.

The key word is "responsible." Some people, no matter what their age, are simply not responsible. Some people are. I know a kid who at age 6 could have been left by himself without harm. His younger sister? Her parents don't trust her alone at 11, because she gets wild and crazy ideas and has to act on them immediately--she's the type who wants to make a pair of wings and jump off the garage roof to test them out.

To some extent, parents can teach responsibility, if they try hard. But there's always the individual element that comes into play. My siblings and I were all brought up the same way. But we all exhibit varying degrees of responsibility even today, as adults in our 40s and 50s. My sister--I'd trust her with anything. My oldest brother--still skating through life on a wing and a prayer.

I look at other things like cooking. I do need to teach my kids to cook, I know it. Why haven't I? Part of it is laziness and the other part is it figuring out how to teach with the different dietary and budget constraints. The other part is I need to get dinner going quickly and I am stressed around 5. Just the way life is. They have been taught how to clean their bathroom and do their laundry, so a start.

Of course, there are other questions. Perhaps our lives have become much more complex, so it is more difficult to prepare kids for that complex world. I also am starting to question the notion within society of you are 18 and now you are out. There are many places in this world where the families are multigenerational and that may not necessarily be a bad thing.

We have four kids, and at age 10 my oldest could hold down the fort in terms of caring for younger siblings, making simple meals, dishes, laundry, etc. Many of her friends had never changed a diaper, cooked a meal or turned on the clothes dryer.

I wonder about that as well. I have two friends and one of them has been waiting since her sons were 14 to kick them out of the house. These are nice kids and have done their parents proud but she wanted to be able to put all of her time to her DH and not to her kids. She is critical of me because mine are still at home.

The other one has daughters and although they went to the university in our town she insisted that they live on their own while going to school - however she paid their rent, all their living expenses and their tuition. A lot of us can't afford that. She also helped with med school expenses and down payments for one of them, and down payments for the other, gave them all cars, still pays for their holidays, etc. So sure, they're living on their own but they're dependent on the Bank of Mom and Dad.

I guess my point is that there are so many different types of families and the way we construct ours is often dependent on our own upbringing and is also often a function of our own finances, our own thoughts/beliefs of how to get our children to independence (does that make sense?) and our own understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of our children.

Up until now my goal was to help my kids get the education that they needed (high school) and then the education that they wanted (university, etc.) and to launch them into their 20's being responsible and kind people. My goal now is to help them, when and if necessary with emotional support and guidance, get to the age of 30 as happy and strong adults. Pie in the sky ideals, maybe.

My daughter, who is 11, is much more capable of things like meal prep than my sons, age 17 and 20, are. All raised in the same house in a similar way, but DD really WANTED to learn how to cook (especially bake) things, while the boys have shown no interest. They are slowly starting to, mainly because they've had to -- like when DH and I are out. Am I ready to let DD cook unsupervised? No way. And so far, she stays home alone only for brief periods (less than an hour).

I think this is a judgment call based on what your kids are like (my oldest, while he is the "biggest", also has ADD and serious executive function issues and needs more reminders about things than my youngest does), where you live, and your family's needs. Fortunately I work very flexible hours and I'm able to be home in the afternoons when my kids get home. If I had to work long hours, I'm sure my kids' level of responsibility for a variety of things would be very different. I don't think they have been coddled, but there's no reason for me to have them make dinner for the family, for example, when they have homework to do and I really have nothing else that I need to do at that time of day.

When I was in high school, my mother went back to work full time. I came home from school every day to a list of 2-3 jobs that I had to do before she got home from work. I can't imagine doing that with my high school aged DS, whose typical day includes soccer practice until 6 pm plus at least two hours of homework. He has certain things he does to pitch in around the house -- empties the dishwasher, does his own laundry, etc -- but with the expectations on high school kids these days, it's hard to find time in their day for "chores"! I didn't have nearly as much homework or after-school activities when I was in high school.

Teacats, that's amazing. I can't imagine my parents ever leaving me like that, although I bet I could have done it. I think kids living in the city are more self sufficient because they can walk places or use public transportation instead having to rely on someone to drive them around

I raised my kids to be independent too.

There is not a right or wrong answer or response to "times have changed". I had a horrible upbringing and had no childhood due to the responsibilities of my younger brother and sister and the fact that at age twelve I was expected to get a job and pay for all my own necessities. My money often came up missing.I did have at least one parent home at night though. When I became an adult I was fully equipped to support myself but desperately needed direction.

By some weird fluke my boys are very grounded and goal oriented. Sometimes I worry that they are too well grounded. I know that sounds weird but they are both like little old men at 21 and 25. My youngest sons girl friend says that sometimes it can be lonely when you are in your twenties and do not drink, club hop or do drugs because most do one or the other in their age bracket. My husband and I both were so different at their age so we can't quite comprehend how we pulled it off.

I guess the answer is to go between the lines.

Times have changed but they are the same only different :)

I've heard of such things and it always dumbfounds me! It's not only shocking that a parent would do it, but that a kid would let him or her--- although I would guess this behavior probably belongs to mothers rather than fathers.

Agree also that the smaller size family probably contributes a lot to the lack of child responsibility for others. As each of our three came along it was astonishing how old the former "baby" seemed when a new one was born!

The nature of families evolves over time as our civilization changes, and the nature of our responsibilities towards each other changes within each family over time as well.....the child becomes "father to the man." I hope that the family unit remains intact a thousand years into the future, since it seems the best place for individuals to get a good start in life---- however long that happens to take :-)

In my state a child had to be 11 years old in order to babysit or be left home alone. My oldest was 7.5 years older than the next child and my DH was out of town a lot, so I was so happy when my oldest turned 11 and I could run to the store for a gallon of milk, etc. while I left him with the 2 younger kids. It was usually for no longer than half an hour, and I had him take the Red Cross babysitting class first.

Back when we were in HS, my friends and I babysat for a family where the oldest boy was 13. He was a very bright kid, but not someone you want to leave in charge of anything. The younger child was actually more savvy than him.

I also agree that in large families the older kids do more of the childcare duties. Look at the Duggars. I don't watch this show, but from what I understand, the older kids do a lot of the work. I became an aunt at 13, so I learned to change diapers.

My friend and I, at about 10 years old, would take a city bus to the pool, swim all day, eat lunch at the diner across the street, and there was never a safety issue at all. The pool complex was always pretty packed, but there were never any fights or vandalism. But, there is no way it would be allowed today.

There was just as much riff raff then as there is today, I think we just didn't have as as much knowledge of it as we do now so neighborhoods "felt" safer. In a way it was just a facade.

I think the old saying of "wanting better for our kids than we had" has outgrown it's usefulness. I think many of us had it as good as it should be and never realized it. My daughter saw me struggle to provide, helped out where she could from a very early age and was expected to do well both socially and with her education. She was held accountable when she didn't and I think that is a serious problem today. A lot of parents are just too distracted with their own issues to focus on teaching their children responsibilities and the repercussions of bad choices. Some parents over compensate and others are just too lazy or distracted with their own problems to engage with their kids.

I think they started leaving me alone all day long during the summer and school vacations when I was 11 or 12. I wasn't responsible for anyone else (no younger siblings), but I was responsible for NOT burning the house down in their absence.

Lots of my friends the same age were also being left without supervision. We used to meet up at local swimming holes, getting there by riding our bikes.

There was long before cell phones - so no one checked up on us during the day.

I have no clue if things were safer back them, or if the lack of 24/7 news coverage just made us think we were safer.

No one I know got into serious trouble, or burned down the house, or drowned....

I don't have kids. If I did, I'm not sure that I would allow them the same freedom and flexibility that my friends and I had 35 years ago either though.

It is a really interesting question.....

Not everyone is like this of course though it seems to be the case with the majority. We do know a couple families who have raised their kids to be pretty independent, self sufficient adults.

My niece, who is now 29 dealt with this type of thingonce or twice when she was about 17 and basically handled it the same way. And I think she would have called the police to her own house had she felt it necessary.

My mom did not work until we were on up in school and then she only worked part-time now and then - tailoring her schedule to ours. We also always lived out in the county - never in a city location, so I think that makes a difference too. I had one friend "across the highway" that I was allowed to go to her house at a certain age. There was a little store on down the road from her, we could walk there at a certain age. We were in walking distance of our elementary school! We lived on acreage and my grandparents lived nearby - also an aunt and uncle. There are about 6 houses on that road. During a good part of our childhood, we had neighbors down the road that had a son and a daughter, one neighbor that had two girls, and then later a girl and boy moved into that house. We were friends with all these kids. My mom believed in us being outside and not in front of the tv. (See where I get it??? LOL) We played with Barbies at some point, but we "built" them houses outside. We "cooked" outside. The two girls father had a wagon that had been used for something at work - like a covered wagon. He pulled it into one of the wooded areas and that was our gypsy wagon. There was a sinkhole on the land up behind my grandparents, and we'd play in that area. So we were allowed to go on our own - but not much chance of something happening. My sister and I were taught to cook and clean and even sew. At a certain age we were expected to help with household chores (keeping our rooms clean, dishes, etc.). As we got older we were taught to cook and even had fun occasionally cooking a meal for the family. We were taught to do laundry as we got older too. My brother came along 10 years after me (7 after my sister), and we learned how to take care of a baby then. He was our doll! I started babysitting fairly young - loved it and was much requested. I had my favorite few kids that I babysat often. Funny that I do not have kids of my own!

I am grateful that our parents taught us these things. I work with college students and I am amazed at the kids who cannot cook, do their own laundry, etc. I'm also amazed at the number of kids who have never held down any kind of job!

We were never left alone at night until we were much older. Usually we'd want to go to our grandparents anyway. My sister and I grew up pretty responsible and self-sufficient, my brother grew up babied. LOL He could cook, etc. when he got married, but being the youngest (and so much younger) and the only boy, I guess it was only natural we all spoiled him.

tina

When I compare my kids, young adults ages 30's-40's, and *some* of my grand kids, the difference is amazing! I tried telling them when they were raising their kids they were too easy, but they couldn't see it. Consequently, a couple of my grandkids are like what I described above, it's sad, and the parents are paying a price for it.

What really becomes interesting in the mix is when I consider my 11-year-old. She is basically in charge of her diabetes, we keep an eye on things but she doses her insulin, etc, herself and asks us for help when needed. When she is out among friends, she will still count the number of potato chips for a serving and do all that she needs to do. She blows me away. Out of my 4, she definitely is the one with the personality for handling that and there are very serious implications if she were not handling it right.

The two excuses are "Well, s/he didn't want to seem to be trained and we did not want to break her/his spirit/punish her/him." And "We are too busy to deal with this. You do it if you have a Problem with it, you're the teacher."

Unless those children have disabilities not known to the teacher,my guess is that their parents are afraid the kids will have an accident at school and as a precaution theyre wearing pull ups. That's a little different.

Unless those children have disabilities not known to the teacher,my guess is that their parents are afraid the kids will have an accident at school and as a precaution theyre wearing pull ups. That's a little different.

That's one way to force people to grow up in a hurry, but surely you would not advocate that for everyone, especially nowadays?

That's one way to force people to grow up in a hurry, but surely you would not advocate that for everyone, especially nowadays?

And surely you're not suggesting she is? I certainly hope not because that would really be reading into something that just isn't there.

For years old people have been lamenting about "kids today," and yet the world continues to survive and progress.

.... Kids! You can talk and talk till your face is blue!
Kids! But they still just do what they want to do!
Why can't they be like we were,
Perfect in every way?
What's the matter with kids today?

from Bye, Bye, Birdie 1963

As for my reference to Anthony, it's the extreme as to what a young person *might* do when life is not as they want it to be. Let's face it, with many of these youngsters who have babies, it's the grandparents who end up raising the children, which wasn't the case when I was growing up.

"The good old days are gone-- and good riddance to them. Your point about infantilizing 25 year olds is well-taken, but there's a boatload of difference between a petulant young adult and a twelve year old. I am not so sure that leaving a girl of 12 alone to care for a houseful of siblings is a very good idea whenever it happened." kswl, apparenty you didn't live in the "happy days" era, cause if you did, you might take that back. It was a time of innocence, RESPECT and INTEGRUTY, and children always minding their parents, if they were smart! At 12, a girl was much more mature than one of today, even though today's girl might look more mature, she certainly isn't~responsibility was expected to be learned at a young age. My Mom and Dad both worked at age 12, and handed the money over to be used for household expenses. Now that may be a little extreme, but that was the way things were 'back then', and it was acceptable, as was taking care of several siblings.

The bottom line is, parents don't feel or think kids should have it a little rough, especially if their own life had some hardships, but it's the hardships that build character and teach lessons, NOT the easy road. ;o)

So, kids learn things differently today, maybe at 30 instead of 12, but they are still beautiful creations.

IMHO, that is giving a kid a "pacifier".

When do kids learn to be quiet for 10 minutes and not cause a ruckus? So what if they are bored? Why isn't Mommy or Daddy using the shopping trip to model positive behavior and teach about math, and choices and budgets.

And this isn't just young parents either. I don't think that age has all that much to do with being a good parent. Some people were blessed to be exposed to it all their lives. It comes easily for them.

I do think for others they know what they Don't want to do, and really are not sure what to do instead. So they do nothing and the kids end up with a lack of structure. This may not be ideal. But it is most certainly better than some "old fashioned " parenting methods like hitting and verbal belittling.

When I read the thread about all the stuff that parents "need" to send along to college for their inbound freshmen, I knew I was reading comments from parents who don't think their kids should have it a little rough.

Nicely said, Bumblebeez!

For the record, I'm not even thirty yet and I married, have 2 beautiful children (one of which is 10 years old...you do the math), university AND college degrees, I own my own house (2nd house actually), and have paid off all my student loans by myself. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!

My oldest nephew, age 12, had surgery several months ago. He has medical issues that make anesthesia more difficult to administer and more risky. The surgery was at a hospital 500 miles from his home, and only an hour from my house.

My younger nephew, 7, and niece, 10, stayed with me for the week their brother was in the hospital. Trust me, I've spent a lot of time with these kids and I know exactly what causes fights and disagreements when they are at home. For the entire week they were with me, they were as good as gold. Several things happened that would have caused tantrums or tear at home, but they accepted them calmly at my house. They helped do chores. They made get-well cards for their brother.

The first night they were at my place, my little nephew said to me, "I've never had a sleep-over before." His way of saying that he was a little scared and nervous and missing his parents. And my niece must have overheard him from another room, because she came swooping in and hugged him and told him that she was there to take care of him. Usually, she's trying to steal his cookies and push him off the computer and make him stay out of her room.

They even dealt with a major change in plans--they were supposed to go back to their parents on Thursday, but their brother started spiking a temperature, so I drove them down expecting to hand them off, and had to drive them back to my house for another few days--with no grumbling, even though I knew they were missing their parents and were *not* happy about going back to my house.

They were so good it was beginning to worry me.

A month or so after they all returned home, I asked my sister-in-law how long the good behavior lasted. I expected to hear that they both melted down on the long ride home. But SIL said that they were still eerily good for the first week back home--helping with their brother's care, letting him choose what videos to watch and games to play, fetching him things he couldn't get himself.

It was after that first week, when Oldest Nephew finally returned to school--a sign that he was better and life was back to normal-- that the melt-downs happened. Apparently it was two days of H-E-double toothpicks, and then everything was back to normal.

I think most kids, no matter what their ages, know when they need to step up and deal with things. I just don't think a lot of kids today get the chance, so they never learn how. And there are some unfortunate kids get taught that they don't have to do anything; their parents will always step in.

The only similarity is that both are of a certain age.

And for that matter if many of the things women said about men or their husbands in here were said about an ethnic group or about other women, they might be banned as well, but I don't necessarily apply them to Myself: it's not necessarily all about you stephf, no need to take it so personally.

I will fess up though, at 34 I absolute DO NOT have it all together. Any time I get cocky enough to think I do, life throws something at me, telling me to pay attention.

Same pattern too:

Original post throws out a scenario about how people used to do [X] but now young people do [Y] which is so much less worthy. Cue flood of memories by everyone who did [X],usually at least 30 years ago, and how well it worked. Attach comments about what a shame it is that [Y] is now the norm, how [X] was so much more virtuous and how [Y] is ruining the moral strength of our culture.

Let's see, every time college admission comes up we hear about how everyone got into Yale just by applying on a whim, took the SAT with no prep and got perfect scores, didn't take a dime from good old mom and dad, never phoned them either except once a week from the raggedy old dorm phone etc etc etc.

When it is child rearing we get this trope about times changing so that "kids today" are emotionally stunted, unable to launch and generally just not worth a spit.

What I seem to miss is anyone here admitting that s/he as a parent has actually raised one of these shiftless no-account young people. Everyone is quick to jump in about how bad parenting is, and yet none of us are one of those bad parents. Interesting...

And last but not least one comment in particular really grinds my gears as Peter would say: the theory that following high school the path of getting married, having a child and therefore foregoing educating yourself in favor of becoming wholly dependent on someone else to keep a roof over your head and food in your mouth and your helpless child's is the true act of a responsible adult-makes me first gape in astonishment and then laugh out loud. Literally.

I can give you an example of really poor child rearing: my sister for various reasons virtually ignored practically everything going on around her for several years, and provided the bare necessities of food, shelter, and clothing and that was about it. The oldest is extremely competent in every way and excels at everything she does. She kind of had to as she was in charge. The middle is fairly typical of her generation, gets things done under pressure and comes out okay (which is more age related than generational, I think): and the third dropped out of high school, has emotional problems, is an alcoholic and has been in jail. And for some reason has an intelligent, together girlfriend. But anyway, three kids from the same environment who turned out three different ways.

On one side of my family I have a moderate number of cousins who and have seen a similar variation among siblings, with the same nuclear family containing an asst. district attorney and someone who has been in jail. Sometimes I think we turn out how we turn out based on a sum total of a bunch of environmental and genetic influences, not just because of our parents.

As far as relying on parents, honestly there are a few things that my dad still does for me (he is 88). I could figure out how to do it myself at this point, but I am still glad he takes care of it.

I guess my point is that sometimes it doesn't matter how good your parenting skills are; sometimes no matter what you do, you could have a child who has emotional problems, drug or alcohol problems, or any number of issues.

My oldest is trying really hard to be Independent but it's always going to be more of a battle for him than it will be for my other kids.

Umm, excuse me, but not ALL OF US were dependent on ANYONE to survive and managed to support a family, WITHOUT A COLLEGE DEGREE. Why some people think college is the end all of being responsible is mystifying to me.

The people in our family are all successful and live very comfortable lives, and for those who think money is the end all example of success, one is even a self made millionaire several times over (though miserable as all get out) and all of our successes were accomplished by hard work not a degree. The only one to finally go back to school and obtain a degree is my older sister. She was 53 when she received it, she will be in debt and paying it off for years. Worst part is, it hasn't helped her already successful career at all. So please don't dish out the "cr*p" about how important it is to drown yourself in financial debt for an education that these days gets you very little in return. Europe is a perfect example of what we are seeing happen here. A lot of educated people with no jobs has been the norm there for decades.

Besides, I think the point of the comment about being married with a family by 20 is the fact that most 20 somethings these days are too self absorbed and spoiled to be able to give a d*mn about anyone else but themselves, not to mention that they don't have the skill set needed to make it in the world on their own. Steph and Shee are absolutely exceptions to the rule where in "OUR DAY" it was the norm for kids to have chores and learn how to be responsible. Older siblings were always having to care for the younger kids and assume some responsibilities especially when their mother worked outside of the home. The kids of today aren't expected to lift a finger.

I also don't see why someone who recognizes these issues in their own life should be asked to speak up. The more important result should be that maybe the topic can help someone who's having problems with their kid(s) and sees what might be wrong and how to change it by the conversations here.

Or perhaps this is another example of changing times. My husbands parents got government jobs right out of high school and retired early with full pensions. Now, it doesn't matter how many degrees you have, you can't get a government job unless you are fluent in 2 languages.

Of course anything is possible, but I don't think it is common.

This probably has more to do with the state of the economy and the fact that many companies are still on a hiring freeze than the value of the education they've received.

FWIW, my husband has 2 masters (one in Physics from Russia, another in English from Sweden and is just shy of a third degree in computer programming). He's also fluent in three languages Russian, Swedish and English however, while living in Sweden, the only job available to him was delivering newspapers. He did that for 11 years while continuing his education at the University of Stockholm (for free). He recently turned down a government job in programming but he was not required to speak 2 languages; I think that is more dependent on what the position entails. He would also tell you the education is over rated especially if you have no experience to back it up.

I'm not saying this is true of everyone but I think one thing that is not taught in the colleges is common sense and a lot of the problems we have in corporate America today is because of bean counters and managers who think they know it all and haven't got practical experience or a lick of common sense to think their decisions through.

I think my kids will have an easier time finding a job with a degree of some kind, so why would I want them at a disadvantage? Of course there are exceptions, but why chance it?

There is the possibility of lack of common sense in all positions and whether someone works for someone else, or has their own business. We see complaints about this all the time on these boards.

This "bean counter" and manager will now keep her comments to herself!

Stephf, I have to respectfully disagree with you on that. The obvious result of more people getting four year degrees is more people competing for the same amount of jobs. The market becomes flooded with educated people (shouldering tons of debt) who can't find work. It's already happened. A four year degree just doesn't make you stand out anymore, no matter the economy. I'm not anti-degree, but if either of my children, who are 7 and 6, elect not to go to college and have a clear plan (a trade or two-year program), I won't force them into it.

My husband was recruited by a prestigious prep school out of high school (sports related) and decided to join the Army after his post grad year. He is a firefighter who started a successful side business a few years ago. Without a degree. I can't tell you how many of the firefighters with side businesses are making hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.

It's great that you have your degree(s) and you should be proud, but to each his own, I guess.

#1, I'm Canadian, where we have two official languages. In order to get hired by the government now you need to be able to speak both, it doesn't depend upon the position.

#2, I agree that having a degree alone doesn't not make you stand out from hundreds of other applicants, but that doesn't mean it's not worth getting a degree. Finding a job in this market takes not only education, but also a certain amount of charisma and a whole lot of luck.

Sunnycottage - The people who are going into your industry these days - are they coming in with only high school or is something more expected/required now.
Twenty years ago you could get into many jobs, company training programs, etc without post-secondary education. That, for many careers, is no longer the case.

Sorry Boop, no offense meant by the term bean counters.

DD doesn't see them too frequently, so doesn't know if the other 3 kids have taken the same path toward education.

My point is, there are times when it's the child with the motivation because of a lifestyle he/she had while growing up, and possibly wanted more in their own future.

I totally agree with that statement. Things are different today than when many of us were starting out.

Sue also makes some good points and what's good for one child is not necessarily the right thing for another. I work with college students, and believe me, I have seen first hand that college is not for everyone.

Good point also about some people taking classes because they enjoy it or want to learn more.

tina

That a woman who goes from having her parents take care of her (high schooler), immediately to having a husband take care of her, without the consideration for first developing the ability to take care of herself financially if necessary, may be making a choice that can reduce the horizon of options available to her in the future.

And I agree. I have 2 daughters and want them to have the ability to support themselves comfortably, hopefully doing something they find stimulating and rewarding.

Twenty years ago technology consisted of a telephone, an adding machine and manually operated machines in most workplaces. Computers and computer driven technology weren't in existence in every workplace.

If one doesn't adapt their education and skillset to get to the starting line which clearly moved, one has no chance of participating in the race.

That a woman who goes from having her parents take care of her (high schooler), immediately to having a husband take care of her, without the consideration for first developing the ability to take care of herself financially if necessary, may be making a choice that can reduce the horizon of options available to her in the future. "

This is exactly what I was trying to say, and obviously not as clearly and eloquently as the words quoted above. Thanks for the much better phrasing Julie!

Ann

Most of my girlfriends have their Bachelor's, with quite a number of them having their Master's. I have my Bachelor's at this point, I'm fifty years old and my girlfriends a bit younger. Anyway, most of them, including me, have not worked out of the home in YEARS! I'm not sure I could find a really good job, at my age, and without any of the recent experience I would need to get a great job, if I needed one, even with my degree. And, my GF's would be in the same boat probably. Hopefully, none of us will need to be in the position to have to have a paying job, but, you never know.

Just saying, in our case, our degrees may not even matter, but, going to college (back then anyway) landed their hubby's with degrees and very good jobs. Except mine, I married my highschool sweetheart after college, and we were married for just a little over a year! Then a few years later married my now hubby who is more sucessful than first one, and he does not have a college degree.

In these times, it is scary to not have worked in many years, but, worth the risk, IMO, to have stayed home with my DS, and taking care of our home.

Times HAVE changed, in that college degrees don't get you that great job anymore, unless you are in a specialty field, like a doctor, etc.

My DS just assumes that he will go to college, though. Because he doesn't know any better that after high school is college!

That is simply not true. Many Federal jobs (in Ottawa, Quebec and New Brunswick especially) are bilingual imperative, but it's certainly not a requirement for *all* positions. Outside NB and Quebec, it would not be the norm for Provincial government jobs to have a bilingual requirement. I live in New Brunswick, the only officially bilingual Province in Canada, and even here there are English-only and French-only government jobs.

While you might not have the work experience of someone who has worked outside the home over the last 25 years, your college degree does count for a lot should you decide to return to paid work.

Many positions, even in smaller companies that can be more flexible, are listed as college degree preferred.

I was home when my kids were young, and then worked part time for several years when they were in their teens. I have been full time about 5-7 years now. Every job I have ever had, it has been a plus when interviewing. But I will say that anyone just starting out has to be prepared to work at entry level wages. So no you cannot expect to make as much as if you had 25 years of experience, but you would still have the qualifications to be considered for entry level positions that state college required or college preferred.

And additionally all of the community interaction that many SAH parents experience is very useful. My experiences using the computer and volunteering at my kids' schools and extracurricular activities gave me the up to date skills that were expected with computer use and networking. That plus my degree made me qualified.