grandparenting in the 21st century

Barbara Bomberger wrote
Because in my family it IS reasonable. Family helps each other and we dont
feel it a burden.

And this may be true. But I suspect for many on the board, were the
parents of the adults, asked out of the adult children's presence, the
answer would not be what you suspect.

I think there have been alot of assumptions here about what grown
children think it is okay to expect of their parents. I would bet
dollars to donuts that the paren't expectations woudl be much
different.

Wow. Pretty scary. Grandparents have always played a key role in
keeping families afloat -- almost as important as parents themselves.
See, e.g., a brief discussion of research into how people living
longer (i.e., long enough to be grandparents) enabled human evolution:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5378189/

And now, there seems to be another great shift going on. People are
living even longer, but their expectations for their old age are
different. The "me" generation has reached their senior citizenship,
and they have better things to do with their time than to hang out
with grandkids.

I guess we'll make it through this transition OK, since "first
worlders" are having fewer kids and we have a variety of non-family
childcare options available to us, but, IMO, there is really no
substitute for having a family member to call on. The best laid plans
should be expected to fail. And I think grandparents benefit
enormously from being "needed" as well -- not just visited every now
and then but really relied upon -- but maybe I'm wrong there. And, for
kids, there's no subsitute for a grandparent.

I have always been concerned about the fact that my DH and I will
probably never be able to retire. We both work in low-paying
professions and we have 3 kids who will need us to cover their college
costs, since college loans no longer actually cover the cost of
college. It's made me wonder who will help my kids when they have
their kids? It *should* be us, IMO, but it may not be able to be. And,
as social security is set up for failure, I suspect our situation (no
retirement) will be quite common. That's sad, I think.

One thing that scares me is that I don't feel old NOW-but by the time this
baby is 18, I will be 50, and my husband will be 51. BY the time this child
is likely to be having children, I suspect that we'll be quite old-since I'd
really like her to get through college and settled financially first (which
is the major reason why I'm going to be 50 by the time she finishes high
school). I can easily see my grandchildren knowing me in the same way I knew
my great grandparents, just because the generations are spreading out. My
brother has only now (age 29) really started to even consider the
possibility of marriage-before now, law school and general life was more
important to him.

And, that also does increase the possibility of having to deal with severe
illness in one of my parents while my child is young and at home-my MIL died
of a brain aneurysm this past year, and another close family friend died of
ovarian cancer in her mid 50's, a few months before her first grandson was
born. Both are grandparents who will never see most or all of their
grandchildren, and none of the grandchildren will remember their
grandmothers.

On 10 Sep 2004 09:00:05 -0700, (Nevermind) wrote:



And now, there seems to be another great shift going on. People are
living even longer, but their expectations for their old age are
different. The "me" generation has reached their senior citizenship,
and they have better things to do with their time than to hang out
with grandkids.

First of all (or maybe not, since we've discussed this before_. It
has little to do with "spending time" with grandkids or with kids.
While I cannot speak for anyone else, I spend a great deal of time
with my grandkids. The issue is "supervision" of grandchildren and a
long term committment of a specific time. I see my family hours upon
hours, all the time. That was never the issue.

And I think you have a wrong interpretation. first of all, I am not
the "me generation" thats a bit younger than I. What most women my
age are is the "sandwich generation" taking care of at least a
generation on each side. And unfortunately there are limits as to
what can be done there. We also live in a mobile society. I do not
expect that I will ever live in the same town as my children, although
that may change. My last son will live at home during college, but he
has plans as to wear to go and when. And one child lives in the
cayman islands, so for me, this discussion is fairly moot.

I guess we'll make it through this transition OK, since "first
worlders" are having fewer kids and we have a variety of non-family
childcare options available to us, but, IMO, there is really no
substitute for having a family member to call on. The best laid plans
should be expected to fail. And I think grandparents benefit
enormously from being "needed" as well -- not just visited every now
and then but really relied upon -- but maybe I'm wrong there. And, for
kids, there's no subsitute for a grandparent.
I think th at a grandparent and child can have a wonderful
relationship without the grandparent being relied upon or being a
caregiver. My personal experience as a child was that it was
exceptional. My grandparents babysit for anniversaries out and so on,
but other than that they were the "spoilers".

I have always been concerned about the fact that my DH and I will
probably never be able to retire. We both work in low-paying
professions and we have 3 kids who will need us to cover their college
costs, since college loans no longer actually cover the cost of
college. It's made me wonder who will help my kids when they have
their kids? It *should* be us, IMO, but it may not be able to be. And,
as social security is set up for failure, I suspect our situation (no
retirement) will be quite common. That's sad, I think.
Well, this is more a finiacial issue however. First, we figured the
greates gift we could give our kids was to let them know that we were
taken care of in our "old age". Therefore we have put almost all of
our long term savings via 401K. We have told our children that we
will help with college as we can, be we will probably not pay the full
tuition. This has not hindered themd. In additon to loans, there are
grants, part time jobs, and a myriad of alternatives. We have helped
them pay off the loans as we are able.

Wihtout knowing your age (and this is a complete jump off topic), I
have to say that we started saving the max in our 401K the minute we
were married. It started when I was an at home spouse and he had a
low paying job, and I can tell you that it was tough! Althoug I
probably forgot everything I everlearned god knows how many years
later, we managed, and managed well. I was at home for fourteen years,
and have clothed a kid for about fifty bucks a season at one time (and
that was the high end).

Please make your retirement your priority.

"Donna Metler" wrote in message
t...
One thing that scares me is that I don't feel old NOW-but by the time this
baby is 18, I will be 50, and my husband will be 51. BY the time this
child
is likely to be having children, I suspect that we'll be quite old-since
I'd
really like her to get through college and settled financially first
(which
is the major reason why I'm going to be 50 by the time she finishes high
school). I can easily see my grandchildren knowing me in the same way I
knew
my great grandparents, just because the generations are spreading out. My
brother has only now (age 29) really started to even consider the
possibility of marriage-before now, law school and general life was more
important to him.


By the time DS is 18, I'll be 60 and DH will be 62 so I hear you about the
age thing. Further, our parents *are* old. My parents were slightly older
than average when they married and had children (my father was 39 and my
mother was 33 when I was born). DH's mother is around 80 or 82 (DH is the
youngest of five children).

So, we have the situation of having young children and elderly parents.
Luckily, both families are strong. My sister seems to visit our parents at
least twice a week, helping out with everything from checking accounts and
major investment portfolio tracking to doctor visits to grocery shopping.
I visit once a week and also do things with and for my parents.

My parents made sure when we were growing up that we knew we may some day
need to care for one or both parents. They did the best they could to set
up their lives to be independent - they are financially set for the rest of
their lives; they live in a retirement community, et. etc. But in the end,
they still need us (the kids), and we gladly help them. In fact I would be
hurt if they said "Eh no, we don't expect you to help" or worse, "No we not
*want* your help". They helped all of us whenever we needed it and they
could do something. They can't always help (e.g., they live too far and are
too elderly to babysit my children for even an hour) but they do what they
can.

So, for the OP who thinks watching a 9 YO once a week for 6 months is too
much, well, visiting an elderly parent and doing their taxes and taking them
to the doctors (and it will be plural) and helping with new-fangled
evices - all for the forseeable future - may be too much for the daighter.
It's okay to say no, but there's no reason to get angry because the daughter
asked the question.

Jeanne

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 14:50:04 -0400, "Bruce Bridgman and Jeanne Yang"

It's okay to say no, but there's no reason to get angry because the daughter
asked the question.

Jeanne


and this I agree with...

"Donna Metler" wrote:

One thing that scares me is that I don't feel old NOW-but by the time this
baby is 18, I will be 50, and my husband will be 51. BY the time this child
is likely to be having children, I suspect that we'll be quite old-since I'd
really like her to get through college and settled financially first (which
is the major reason why I'm going to be 50 by the time she finishes high
school). I can easily see my grandchildren knowing me in the same way I knew
my great grandparents, just because the generations are spreading out. My
brother has only now (age 29) really started to even consider the
possibility of marriage-before now, law school and general life was more
important to him.

Hey - who are you calling old here?

From my POV, even if she takes 10 years to get through school, that
would make you - what? 60? - which I don't think of as OLD. 80 is
old. 60 isn't :-}

And, that also does increase the possibility of having to deal with severe
illness in one of my parents while my child is young and at home-my MIL died
of a brain aneurysm this past year, and another close family friend died of
ovarian cancer in her mid 50's, a few months before her first grandson was
born. Both are grandparents who will never see most or all of their
grandchildren, and none of the grandchildren will remember their
grandmothers.

This has always been the case - it is just that in the 'old days'
people not only had children earlier but often died sooner.

My sister's oldest child just barely managed to get married and have a
child before she was 40. Two of my children had their first baby at
19 and 20, and two of them were 29 and 30.

My mom's family has a tradition of 4 generation portraits. My mom has
one with each of her maternal great grand mothers (and she remembers
at least one of them who died when she was 9), I have one with my
maternal great grandfather, and my dd#1 has one with my maternal
grandfather. Almost all of my grandchildren and great nieces and
nephews have one with my mother who turned 95 in July.

My maternal grandmother and grandfather were both 27 when their first
child (my mom) was born. My maternal grandmother's mother was 26 and
my great grandfather was 28 when their first child was born, so when
my grandmother (the second child) was born, they were 27 and 29. My
great great grandmother was 26 when her oldest child (my great
grandmother) was born. So it wasn't always the case the people in the
old days had their children young.

My mom was 28 when I was born and my dad was 33. In my mom's case,
she had given up on the idea of ever having any children because she
had great difficulty carrying to term and I think the same was true of
her mother.

While my mom knew two of her great grandmothers and both grandparents
(on her mother's side) but her paternal grandmother died when my
grandfather was 14. Her grandfather lived until she was 21 but his
parents died before she was born.

OTOH, my dad's father's parents were killed in a stage coach accident
when he was about 6, and he (my grandfather) died of a septic wound
from a thrasher accident when I was less than a year old, so I never
knew him.

My paternal grandmother died when I was 10 - I'd only met her three
times - once as a baby, once when about 5, and she died during our
visit when I was 10. I can't really say that I knew her at all.

This was because it was so expensive to travel then - we lived in MD
and my grandparents lived in Colorado. Plus his mom immigrated when
she was 14, so not many of the extended family members were known to
my dad because they were in Europe, or had ended up in a different
area of the US. (an aunt in Oregon, an uncle in California etc)

So not everyone has been able to know their great grand parents or
grandparents by virtue of where they live and I think this is perhaps
more true of the old days than it is now because we can travel so much
more easily now.

My dad did know his maternal grandparents who lived with his mom and
dad until they died when he was 7 and 13 respectively. His maternal
grandmother was 37 when his mom was born and 27 when her first child
was born and his maternal grandfather was 43 and 33 respectively.

I was only 23 when my first child was born, but I was 33 by the time
the fourth one came along. I was a grandmother at 42 and my youngest
grandchild was born when I was 63.

My children ARE dealing with their GREAT grandmother's increasing
disability - one of them (who is 44) is going over to her house once a
week to help her get rid of trash (like junk mail). My dad died when
he was almost 69, but the older girls remember him quite well since we
lived with them for awhile. DD#3 was only about 5 when he died and DS
was 3.

My husband's parents are both dead. They didn't know his dad very
well through circumstances beyond our control (his third wife wouldn't
let him see us), but his mom lived with us before she died. His dad's
parents were both 35 when they had their first child, and while his
grandfather had died, his grandmother lived with them before she died
(and she died after we were married)




grandma Rosalie

"Donna Metler" wrote in
t:

One thing that scares me is that I don't feel old NOW-but
by the time this baby is 18, I will be 50, and my husband
will be 51. BY the time this child is likely to be having
children, I suspect that we'll be quite old-

my son turned 4 last month. i'll be 50 next week. my parents
are 79 & 80, my grandmother is 98. Tom's 34, his parents are
in thier late 60s.

i strongly suspect that when your baby is 18 & you're 50, you
*still* won't feel old i don't plan on getting old until
i'm in my 90s... although i'm not convinced my grandma feels
old yet either.
lee

Barbara Bomberger wrote: On 10 Sep 2004 09:00:05 -0700,
(Nevermind) wrote: And I think you have a wrong
interpretation. first of all, I am not the "me generation" thats a
bit younger than I. What most women my age are is the "sandwich
generation" taking care of at least a generation on each side. And
unfortunately there are limits as to what can be done there.

I just wanted to mention that I think 'sandwich generation' is now
being used as a 'mobile' term -- it may have always been, and your
generation may have another media-determined nickname, but I don't know
when you were born ; ). I'm a Gen-X-er, but also a sandwich-gen-er,
helping out with my mother-in-law a few years ago, and having an infant
and a toddler at the same time. And my husband and his siblings, while
they range from late Boomers to early Gen-X-ers, (birthdays 1958-1968)
are mostly sandwiched, helping out previously with their mother while
many had little kids of their own, and they still have a 100 year old
grandmother that they're around for, too. But his sisters without kids
can't really be considered a part of their 'generation'[sandwich],
then, if caring for parents *and* their own kids is a requirement.
Y'know what I mean? So 'sandwich generation' can apply to members of
any designated generation, depending on whether or not they have kids,
and really, whether or not they choose to help out with the older
generation if the need arises.

Tina.

"enigma" wrote in message
my son turned 4 last month. i'll be 50 next week.

As my dear grandmother told me, "have your kids late so you can die out from
under them". At the time I was in my late 20s, newly married, and she was
tired of her (grown and reaching middle age) children moving back in with
her. Soon after that she moved into an active senior community, which
didn't allow anyone under 55. She figured it would keep her children from
moving in for a good 10 years. At 86 she still lives there, and lo and
behold, her children all have homes (and grandchildren) of their own.
Certainly, having children later in life pretty much makes the whole "will
grandma babysit regularly" argument moot.

Cathy Kearns wrote:

Certainly, having children later in life pretty much makes the whole "will
grandma babysit regularly" argument moot.



Yeah, I'm hoping to be well into my 70s before any grandchildren came
along. And of course, I have no idea whether my children will want
children of their own.

Clisby