The Glade 4.0

Bolded on my part. Honey, you're 18. That's legally emancipated. And now, you're a tenant. That means, they can put conditions on your living in their house. As long as you are under their roof, you live under their rules. Don't like it? GTFO.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

I think only minors can qualify to petition for legal emancipation. She's 18 - an adult.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

A semantic quibble Either way, that part of the law does not apply to her.

Edit: Actually, let me walk that back a bit. Apparently, she lives in the People's Republic of New Jersey, where being 18 does not confer emancipation automatically.
http://www.divorcenet.com/states/new_je ... hild_in_nj

Holy ****. **** New Jersey.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

That isn't how it works for tenants, either. Your landlord can make reasonable rules for the preservation and maintenance of his property; he doesn't have any right to govern your lifestyle.

The parent-child relationship is not that of tenant-landlord nor employer-employee unless they specifically create that relationship. Just stop.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

That's a bad analogy, but even so - it's bad parenting. There are rules for the house, of course, but they can't run your life.

When someone is paying for your lifestyle, they can set reasonable expectations, especially as an adult child.

Do this, or we will no longer be supporting you. Because if you do *that* we will assume that to mean you think you're grown, and are desirous of freedom.

This entitled little twat wants her cake and the ability to also drink with her loser boyfriend. As well as being able to eat said cake. Parents aren't cool with that, so they say Ok, you're grown. Peace out.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Do we know that her boyfriend is a loser? All we really know is the parents disapprove of him and that he was suspended from school. These are parents who are sending their child to a private Catholic school. There could be any number of things that they find wrong with him, starting with them having already picked out someone else at church they want her to marry. As for being suspended from school, lots of people have been suspended from school. The rest did things that would have gotten them suspended from school, and just weren't caught.

I particularly like how everyone's overlooking the fact that she's an honor roll student. Just like her parents are, when you get right down to it. Banging genitals together and providing for the physical needs of a monkey body are not particularly deserving of respect by themselves. Hell, Foamy's parents did that for him, and they don't deserve a lick of respect from him. Furthermore, you aren't really capable of respecting your parents until you're an adult yourself, and you take a look at all your friends and it occurs to you that you had a better father than most of these clowns could ever hope to be for their children.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

"Reasonably". "Don't have a boyfriend because he MIGHT be a 'bad influence'" isn't reasonable.



Those of us that actually raise children understand that delivering ultimatums neither teaches them anything, nor helps the relationship. If you give them the freedom to **** up, and they do it a few times they rapidly start realizing they should listen to you of your own accord. Then, you get your way without having to deliver ultimatums.



About the only real problem with her behavior is that she sued them. We don't know that her boyfriend is a "loser" at all, and teenage drinking is hardly a reason to deliver "you're cut off!" ultimatums. If it's habitual drinking and grades and other areas of life suffer, then MAYBE (after making attempts to get them to understand how their behavior is self destructive). He got suspended? So what? I got suspended for fighting after someone took a swing at me and I hit him back. Getting suspended from school doesn't make you a loser or a problem kid; schools suspend kids for dumb reasons all the time.

It just isn't all about "I'm paying so I make the rules". Families do not work that way. Children do not learn to make good decisions if all their decisions are made for them and then one day "BAM Figure it out yourself."

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

I agree that if you're footing the bill for someone you can attach strings to your support, but the issue is whether you should do so. Assuming we're talking here about supporting family and/or close friends, I'm very much of the opinion that you shouldn't use such support as leverage to dictate the person's behavior except in very serious and clear-cut circumstances (e.g., to pressure a drug addicted family member into going to rehab). That kind of thing is almost never going to have the detached, transactional dynamic you seem to think it should. The personal nature of the relationship and the asymmetry of power will pretty much inevitably result in a coercive dynamic that fosters resentment on the part of the recipient and self-righteous/entitled dismissiveness on the part of the donor. Not exactly a happy or healthy kind of relationship to have with one's family and friends!

This crazy ***** needed to hit by the brick wall of reality sooner rather than later.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

Have you EVER met an 18 year old girl in your life before? The only thing atypical about this situation is the lawsuit, which almost certainly wasn't entirely her idea. Furthermore, the reality is that she's basically been a kid that delivered the grades and the athletics up to this point. Her parents needed a reality check as much or more than her. When a kid is doing well, you don't closely control them to make sure they stay good. You give them MORE freedom, and guide them in how to use it.

Like RD said, sure you CAN deliver ultimatums. That doesn't change the fact that it's stupid to do so, and teaches the kid nothing - especially not how the real world or jobs work. The relationship is not the same.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

The issue here is some people seem to believe they can set *any* expectations and then the child is an entitled waste of humanity if she makes any kind of objection at all.

We don't even know what the "conditions" actually are. I'm still thinking there's a good chance one of them is "you can't have sex until marriage" which is absolutely unreasonable.

Just a reminder, this 'child' is an adult.

There's where you're wrong.

ANY condition one sets as a provision for support for another adult is reasonable. It may not, however, be legal, but that's besides the point.

It takes 2, X. I offer, you accept...or not. That's why it's reasonable, because both parties have a choice.

If you think for a second, for instance, that two adults entering into an agreement to have expectation of sex in exchange for monetary consideration is reasonable, then you're a hypocrite if you believe two adults entering an agreement to NOT have sex as a condition of monetary support is unreasonable. It's two sides of the exact same coin. I think your "absolutely unreasonable" argument is a farce and you're just projecting hatred of that particular moral code...or you're just having parent issues, or some combination of the two...but I digress.

Nobody is twisting this princesses arm. As it stands, she has found someone willing to support her lifestyle, so good on her. It's the crap she's pulling by trying to stick her parents with the tab that I find unreasonable.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Getting paid to not have sex with anyone is not the "other side of the coin" to getting paid to have sex with a specific person. By your logic, if getting paid for doing work is reasonable, then a non-compete clause in a contract that prohibits the individual from getting paid for doing any kind of work for anyone else is also reasonable. But of course this isn't the case, and non-compete clauses in contracts are limited in what they can prohibit exactly because it is completely unreasonable to bar someone from working for anyone else entirely.

Are you also OK with indentured servitude, debt bondage, and and people outright selling themselves into slavery? Because both parties technically have a choice there, too.

In my opinion, parents have a moral (if not a legal) obligation to set reasonable conditions on the support they provide. This is especially true when you consider that most of the aid programs/resources that exist to help kids go to college are meted out based on the wealth of the parents. In today's job market where it's getting to the point where you need a college degree to work retail or work in a call center, a female teenager with wealthy parents that gets kicked out at 18 with no support is in serious trouble.

Sure it is. Absolutely and without a doubt. Both are matters concerning the exchange of certain sexual activity behaviorisms for monetary compensation. The same thing, categorically, from somewhat opposite sides of the spectrum of sexual activity.

You know it undermines your position though, so you argue it's not the same thing. That's where your issues come into play, either consciously or unconsciously, and the only reason I point this out is for your sake, to give you a chance to look at it logically. Think about it or don't, it's no skin off my nose.

Now, whether or not I'm OK with any of that, whether it's moral or not, that's got nothing to do with my argument at all. Whether it's healthy for the family dynamic is irrelevant too. Adults entering into verbal contracts for anything is reasonable. Not necessarily smart, legal, moral, convenient, etc, etc, ad nauseam...but reasonable.

And there's my argument in a nutshell. Had I negotiated payment for it beforehand, and had you agreed to exchange something of some worth for my participation in this discussion, you'd now owe me whatever we agreed you'd owe me, regardless of your opinion of my argument.


That's the way it works, and it's reasonable.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

That's absurd. If any and all conditions were reasonable, no choice would be necessary.



It isn't "2 adults entering into an agreement" because one party has all the power coming into the relationship, and has a moral, if not legal obligation to help the other party transition into a state of independence and self support. That is your job as a **** parent. The entire time a child is growing up that's what you're supposed to do, and just because society draws its legal line at age 18 that does not mean you suddenly turn everything into a business transaction.

The fact that it's legal to do so and that it's possible to do so does not mean you should do so, or that you're being reasonable by doing so. All the normal "2 consenting adults" **** goes right out the **** window, up to the point that someone turns it into a legal matter. that's what she did in this case, and as far as the courts are concerned it IS 2 adults, but none of that makes the parents reasonable in their expectations in the first place.

Also, Xeq, quit worrying about sex so **** much. Waiting to have sex is not the horrendous oppression you seem to think it is.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

For those of you still trying to pretend that supporting another adult gives you the right to dictate to them, maybe you can explain why alimony payments don't give you any power over an ex-spouse?

For that matter, why don't you explain why I don't have the power or right to make rules for my wife? After all, I work 2 jobs; she works none. I provide all the support. Clearly, it's her "job" to take care of the house and kids, and I can make any rules I want and she must obey them, right? I'm supporting her! If she doesn't obey them, I should "fire" her if she doesn't, and I must be some sort of idiot if I don't!

Oh wait, that's right. My wife is an adult, and the fact that we have an arrangement by which I make all the money and she does most everything domestic does not somehow mean I gain dictatorial powers. Definitely not if I want to actually stay married which I do because I actually love my wife and value her more than some principle about money = control. The same applies to my kid; disregarding the mere fact that she makes more of her own money than I provide her the fact is that we have a very close relationship and she trusts me with almost anytihng because I DON'T act like a tyrant, holding her future hostage to my "principles". This is to the point that we discuss things you would pretty much never expect a young adult female to bring up with her dad.. and we'll leave that at that, so don't ask.

If you want to argue with results, by all means keep on, but I'm happily married with no sign of divorce anywhere on the horizon, and I have an adult kid that's going into her senior year of college, doing very well, has not been in trouble, and has a very close relationship with me. I'm feeling pretty good about how my view works out.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Congratulations...

Thanks!

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Because it's a travesty of justice. These happen from time to time.

_________________

Alimony is a travesty of justice. The fact that it doesn't give power over the recipients isn't.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Ah, you confuse things. Easily done, I suppose, when you can't consider the situation from any other point but your own.

While you're supporting your wife, you're not paying alimony. Alimony gives your ex-wife power over you while she's supporting herself after your marriage terminates. Go to work, pay your money, or you can actually (in some cases) go to jail. It's the recognition that a contract for a lifetime (more or less) partnership was agreed upon by both parties, with all ramifications therein. You're paying for services assumed to have already been rendered.



As long as there is no coercion, you can offer money for anything you want and it's reasonable to do so because it's the accepted method of exchange in our society for things of worth. It's not necessarily legal in all cases, but it's totally reasonable.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Reasonableness, by definition, involves concepts of fairness, equity, and moderation. Sure, money is an accepted method of exchange in our society for most things, but not for all things. And even when it is acceptable, the amount of money and the nature/extent of the good or service have to be proportional - hence the expression "reasonable offer". Moreover, you have to consider the totality of the circumstances and the relative power of the parties involved. In short, money isn't a panacea that automatically renders all offers and transactions "reasonable" by default.

It's reasonable to make an offer, it may not be reasonable to accept. It's called negotiation, and that's the reasonable method to achieve consensus in making an exchange for things of value.

Look folks, pick all the nits you want. If another adult wants to live under my roof and have me pick up the tab, I can dictate all the terms I want, or I can be as flexible as I want. It's the choice of the folks who's names are on the deed. There's the door, go find a better offer if you don't like mine, I won't twist your arm to get you to stay.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.