Is living at home, with your parents, the “in” thing now for grown children? According to the numbers compiled by the Pew Research Center, it’s a rising trend.
In a recent study, 32.1% of young adults (18 to 34) lived in their parents’ homes. That’s the leading living arrangement, beating out marriage, living with a partner, living alone or finding a place with roommates.
Experts say it’s a sign of the economic times, along with the fact that fewer people are settling down in marriage at a younger age.
The median age of a first marriage has risen in recent decades. In 1956, the age was 20 for women and 22 for men. In 2014 (the most recent data available), it was 27 for women and 29 for men. (Here’s a link to the study.)
The Census Bureau started keeping numbers on this situation in 1880. Since then, the most common arrangement was for young adults to live with a spouse (or to live with someone in a romantic relationship). That choice was at its highest in 1960, when 62% of young adults were married or “living together.” The most recent study put that figure all the way down to 31.6%.
|Are long lines ruining your vacations?|
“A variety of factors contribute to the long-run increase in the share of young adults living with their parents,” Pew Research said. “The first is the postponement of, if not retreat from, marriage. The median age of first marriage has risen steadily for decades.”
It added that “trends in both employment status and wages have likely contributed to the growing share of young adults who are living in the home of their parent(s), and this is especially true of young men. Employed young men are much less likely to live at home than young men without a job, and employment among young men has fallen significantly in recent decades.”
Do these trends reflect what’s happening in your life? Do most parents welcome their grown children back home, or have they had enough of direct parenthood and want some time on their own? Comment below …
Nearly half of antidepressants aren’t prescribed for depression, a report by the Journal of the American Medical Association showed.
The study, conducted in Canada but whose results would likely remain similar for the U.S., found that 55% of antidepressant prescriptions were specifically for depression. Some 18% were for anxiety disorders, 10% for pain and 4% for panic disorders. Two-thirds of the prescriptions for non-depression patients were given for conditions not approved by regulatory agencies to treat those conditions.
Some experts say the results are worrying because it means that patients in many cases might not be getting the proper medical advice.
|“Are people too reliant on meds for conditions such as depression, anxiety and panic attacks?”|
In any case, are people too reliant on meds for conditions such as depression, anxiety and panic attacks? Although many people do indeed require these medications, are they being prescribed routinely these days when other methods, such as counseling, might be more useful? Again, comment below.
Long airport security lines – are they necessary? This is a tough question that’s been in the news recently, as the Transportation Security Administration has shaken up its leadership after the agency faced heavy criticism as the summer travel season gears up.
The TSA administrator told Congress today that moves he made to reduce security risks helped lead to the long lines at U.S. airports. Peter Neffenger said that he ended a policy that allowed randomly selected travelers to pass through a line reserved for those who had received preflight background checks that categorized them as low-risk passengers.
He said his decision was driven by a report from the Inspector General that showed that undercover investigators were able to pass weapons and fake bombs through security more than 95% of the time.
According to the Washington Post, House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul, a Texas Republican, gave the congressional hearing a list of recent TSA issues, including three-hour security lines, passengers missing flights, passengers stranded overnight in Chicago and an 80% rise in wait times at JFK.
Any thoughts on the long security lines? Seems like they’re necessary, but there has got to be a better way to do it. There’s talk of privatizing the service, allowing a for-profit company to handle it. Would you favor that?
Share your views with your fellow readers.