Editorial: You owe them - Court says take care of your elderly parents

Sacramento Bee ^ | 11/27/6 | Editor

[A. Pole]

What the Ayn Rand crowd has to say?

[xzins]

I child owes his parents more than any employer "owes" a retirement plan or a health plan.

There is no logical reason other than the retention of valued employees as a business decision for employers to be responsible for their retirees.

Family ties, faith, and DEBT of love are the ethical reasons a child owes his parents.

[Tax-chick]

"You know as well as I do," Placer County Commissioner Colleen M. Nichols said in the opinion, "that you're under no legal obligation to pay for your parent's expenses just as you're under no obligation to pay for your child's expenses once they are over the age of 18."

It sounds like Commissioner Colleen needs to start reading the applicable statutes before she issues rulings.

[TruthNtegrity]

While I don't disagree with the net result, it is yet another example of the Courts making law, when that is the purview of the Legislature.

I also think Baby Boomers get a bad rap. I don't know one of them that isn't voluntarily helping their parents while still paying college tuition for their kids.

My brother and sister predate the Baby Boomer years (born in the early 30's) and if they were supposed to be more generous towards out parents, let's get on record that this Baby Boomer (me) was alone in helping our parents. Some generalizations don't turn out as written.

TNT

[NonValueAdded]

Just another log on the fire of the end-game for the boomers. Why should a rich child be able to leave their parent destitute and a ward of the state, supported by the rest of us? In turn, if the parent was a no good abuser and the child's success is in spite of rather than be cause of the care received, just how obligated should they be?

What it will eventually lead to is the "quality of life" excuse for euthanisia of the elderly who become too much of a burden. It probably doesn't matter, though; in 15 to 20 years out, Sharia Law will probably have it covered.

[wtc911]

I'm a first wave boomer, so are my brother and sister. We paid off mom's mortgage and all her debts and bought her a car after dad died.

[poobear]

It is a sad state of affairs when society needs a court ruling to obligate people to take care of their elderly parents.

[Raymann]

Unlike conservatives, I don't speak for other objectivists, that would be insulting.

But this is an easy question, I'd say that one would have a moral obligation to help out their parents but no duty. certainly not one to be enforced by the law.

When you have children, you willingly take that obligation upon yourself, it's not the same however with your parents. I have several great aunts and uncles rights now that I don't speak to because they don't help to take care of their mother, my great-grandmother. They made their choice, I made mine and the law has no business getting involved.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Be careful where this will lead. While the moral obligation is there, once you establish state enforcement, you are going to get state funding. Look what the state pays for that first child-parent period of obligation. So now you will get the obligation/bailout in reverse. The state raises children, now it can ease people into the grave?

[Carry_Okie]

We owe our kids too.

[WolfRunnerWoman]

Coming to a jurisdiction near you..."I am being neglected because my son wont visit me"

Flame away, y'all, but my DH and I have actually had the cops call our home because his mother was not getting enough attention. This from the woman than had a psychotic break and nearly killed him as an infant...and that is just one item on her hit parade. Her most recent most accomplishment was to physically abuse my DH's Alzheimer's suffering father (now dead and in a MUCH better place).

Everybody in the family is contributing to her care and feeding and it will never be enough. If this opinion leads to more of her BS in my life, her skinny but is going in a home. Some elders are not the sweet little old folks they are made out to be.

[babble-on]

well to be fair, the case was part of a divorce where the wife didn't see why her husband's choice to fund his Ma should cut into her share of the assets.

[Major Matt Mason]

I also think Baby Boomers get a bad rap. I don't know one of them that isn't voluntarily helping their parents while still paying college tuition for their kids.

Sorry, but boomers have earned their bad rap with full marks. Not all boomers, of course, but a large enough portion of that group, particularly some with enough financial resources to more than handle the job. Why do you think the nursing home industry is booming?

[RobRoy]

In the context of this divorce case, I think the third was correct. It was used to calculate alimony.

[RobRoy]

>>I also think Baby Boomers get a bad rap. I don't know one of them that isn't voluntarily helping their parents while still paying college tuition for their kids. <<

Don't take this personally, but apparently you have a very small circle of acquaintences.

[WolfRunnerWoman]

"Why do you think the nursing home industry is booming?"

See my #12 above.

[LeGrande]

I think the next thing we will see is parent support laws (just like child support).

Isn't the Nanny State great :)

[Valpal1]

" Penal Code Section 270c specifically provides that "every adult child who, having the ability so to do, fails to provide necessary food, clothing, shelter or medical attendance for an indigent parent, is guilty of a misdemeanor."

The court was not making law in this instance. Apparently you missed the last sentence.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

The first step beyond the state claiming it to be an enforceable moral obligation will be the complaints from those who haven't got the means. What about their love for their elderly parents? So the state will have to help....on and on until the elderly are simply handled by the state. To an extent that happens already with Social Security and Medicare.

This is where the morals of society can put pressure on people to act without the enforcement of government.

That said, it is a very complicated matter when you had no power over anything for the first 18years of the relationship...and then not much for the next 40years either as bad and very bad choices are made.....and then BANG! -- you are stuck with the tab to deal with all the consequences until the person dies. This will boost support for awful things like euthanasia unless humans can stop being human.