Parental support for young adults in Europe

Pergamon

Children andYouth Servim Review, Vol. 21, NOIJ.11112, pp. 915-935. 1999 copyright8 1999 El8fxier science L.td Printed in the USA. All rights nscrvcd 019%7409/99/s-see front matter

PI1s0190-74o!q99)ooo61-4

Parental Support for Young Adults in Europe Ian Dey The University of Edinburgh Sue Morris The Scottish Parliament Information

Centre

American interest in the “boomerang” generation is paralleled by European concern with the transition of young people to adulthood. This paper focuses on parental support for young adults. Though family policies across Europe are diverse, there seems to be a general shift from state to parental support for young adults-despite limited knowledge of the capacity and willingness of parents to give it. This paper discusses changes in the experience and expectations of young people and their parents. It considers a research agenda to explore the kinds of support that parents give, their reasons for offering or refusing support, and the ways in which support is provided or negotiated. It emphasizes the multi-dimensional nature of both youth-adult transitions and parental support, the dilemmas parents may face in providing support, and variability in its extent and reliability-while noting the limitations of the “welfare” perspective which informs European concerns.

“Parenthood is for life ” Margaret Thatcher 1990 “Parents wash their hands of I6 year olds ” The Independent 1998 This paper looks at an issue that has hit the headlines in North America but still remains a rather neglected aspect of family policy in Europethe parenting of young adults. In North America, the “boomerang” generation has attracted the attention of researchers, who have analysed the characteristics of young adults remaining in or returning to the parental home (Mitchell & Gee, 1996; Sassier, 1996; Veevers et al., 1996; Ward & Spitze, 1996a) and the implications of co-residence for family relationships and dynamics (Ward & Spitze, 1996a; White & Rogers, 1997). The issue of “co-residence” in North America forms part of a wider research agenda concerned with inter-generational transfers (Hogan et al., 1993) and elder care (Coward et al., 1996) and how these are differentiated by Reprints may be obtained from Ian Dey, Department of Social Policy, University of Edinburgh, Adam Feguson Building, George Square, Edinburgh, EH8 9LL United Kingdom [[email protected]].

915

916

Dey and Morris

factors such as ethnicity (IshiiKuntz, 1997) and gender (Ward & Spit=, 1996b).

In Europe, on the other hand, the issue of parenting of young adults tends to be framed in terms of support for young people making the transition to adulthood (Jones, 1995a, 1995b; Morrow & Richards, 1996). Research has explored the social needs which young people may experience in establishing independent homes, in finding employment, in forming families or investing in education. Interest in child-adult transitions has also been stimulated by concerns over the “social exclusion” of young people, and political preoccupations with youth unemployment, teenage parenthood and juvenile crime: an unholy trinity, conflated in the pathologising concept of a youth “underclass” (MacDonald, 1997). This paper sets the issue of parental support for young adults in the wider context of European family policies and trends, considers what we can learn from existing family studies, and discusses the need for further research in this area. Though the issues are European in dimension, we discuss them in greater depth in relation to one country, the United Kingdom. Studies of transition to adulthood in the UK have focused primarily on the experiences and perspectives of young adults (Jones, 1995b; Jones & Wallace, 1992; Morrow & Richards, 1996). In this paper we shift attention to the role of parents, now faced with new or extended responsibilities. As research has yet to focus directly on parental support for young adults, the paper reviews instead what evidence we can glean from existing studies of family support and child-adult transitions. However, a word of caution is required before we begin. In referring to parental support for “young adults” in Europe, we cannot offer precise and consistent definitions of what constitutes either a “parent” or a “young adult”. Like most common concepts, their meaning tends to be conventionally informed rather than rigorously defined (cf. Lakoff, 1987). These terms are inherently ambiguous, and what they mean varies according to context (for example, legal, social or biological) as well as country. Thus practice varies across Europe, for example, with respect to the age at which children become regarded as independent adults (Hantrais & Letabher, 1996, p. 9). For the purposes of this paper, we shall generally-if rather arbitrarily-take “young adults” to refer to the generation aged 18-25. Those in this age range are generally seen as “adult”, at least in some respects, but not generally expected to be entirely independent of their parents. These “young adults” obviously include older “teenagers”, though the overlap with the teenage population (not generally regarded as adult) is limited.

Parental Support for Young Adults

917

Our “young adults” also include the younger end of the so-called “boomerang generation”, though the latter can even include adults remaining or returning home in their late 20s and early 30s. As young adults progress beyond their mid-20s however, they are generally expected to become more or less independent of parental support. Whatever age range is chosen, the important point is to focus on a stage in the life cycle where expectations of continuing parental support coexist with the partial attainment of adult status.

Family Policies in Europe Comparative research on family policy in Europe is a rapidly growing area, and a wide spectrum of family policies have been identified and analysed across Europe, and especially across the European Union. A general “welfare” perspective provides the broader context for national family policies across Europe. However, one of the primary messages emerging from comparative research is the wide extent of European diversity in conceptions and values associated with family policy and practice (Ditch et al., 1995; Dumon, 1990; Hantrais & Letablier, 1996; Kamerman & Kahn, 1978). Countries vary widely, for example, in the extent to which they respect family privacy, or differentiate according to traditional gender roles (Millar & Warman, 1996). Especially in terms of the interface between work and welfare benefits, the United Kingdom is often perceived as being more comparable with the United States. The general approach to welfare in the UK is thus set rather apart from the rest of Europe, where the US example is not widely accepted or followed. Despite its recent rapid growth, the comparative analysis of family policy in Europe is still in its infancy - and research into the parental support of young people making the transition to adulthood is barely beyond the point of conception. There is, however, a general recognition that young adults are at a particularly crucial stage of their lifecycle. During this stage, young adults tend to occupy a dual status as both independent and dependent. They are rarely fully autonomous, but on the other hand their dependency on their parents is not usually total. It is generally assumed that trends across Europe are extending the time taken by young adults to make the “transition to adulthood”- and thereby prolonging dependency on their parents during this transition stage (European Commission, 1988; European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Welfare Conditions, 199 1).

918

Dey and Morris

As yet, though, very little information is available about the parenting of young adults. This topic is not high on the research agendas of European family policy makers. This is mainly because family policies in most European states generally do not extend to support for children aged over 18. Moreover, there has been relatively little debate about whether families should continue to support dependent children who have reached adulthood (Dumon, 1990; Millar & Warman, 1996; Ruxton, 1996). Though the family as a provider of welfare is an established area of social policy research, recent attempts to produce typologies of the welfare states of western Europe have concentrated on the state as the main provider of welfare, tending to leave the family out of focus (see for example, Esping-Andersen, 1990; European Commission, 1994; Mishra, 1993). Thus research on the role of the family in providing welfare has tended to be undertaken outwith a comparative framework, though with some notable exceptions to this rule. Kamerman and Kahn (1978), Dumon (1990) and more recently Ditch et al. (1996) and Hantrais and Letablier (1996) provide general accounts of the nature, extent and role of family policies in a number countries across Europe Countries can be classified as having more or less explicit family policies, with the UK being toward the least explicit end of the spectrum. However, all these studies take an approach to family policy that focuses on children up to the age of 18. The literature on family policy in Europe is dominated by national policies on divorce, child support and childcare. These issues have been been highlighted in a Europe witnessing rapid social change: notably, a general increase in divorce rates between 1960 and 1994; a general increase in the number of lone parent families with children aged under 15 since 198 1 (Eurostat, 1995a); and the increasing participation rates of women with children in the labour market, at least since the early 1970s (Hantrais & Letablier, 1996). These trends have encouraged a focus on the implications of family change for younger children, even though they may also have significant implications for young adults. A recent review of research on outcomes of divorce (Rogers & Pryor, 1998) suggests that older children in step-families may be more likely than younger children to experience adverse outcomes with regard to educational achievement and family formation. As already noted, family policy in Europe, despite the growing importance of the European Union, is characterised primarily by diversity. It is difficult to draw comparisons due to the varying conceptions of the family and different statistical methods used (Hantrais & Letablier, 1996). There is little consistency in the treatment of young adults in relation to house-

Parental Support for Young Adults

919

hold composition, particularly given the more fluid family boundaries arising with the erosion of marriage. Differences in definitions of a “child” are evident when national legislation and policies are examined. Millar and Warman (1996) found a general family liability to maintain relatives, including young adults, in a number of EU states, but especially in Southern Europe. In contrast, the UK and Ireland have no legal obligations to support relatives, even though there are no clear statutory duties either. Some legal obligations to support young adults exist in Austria, France and the Netherlands, but these are not strictly enforced. In Germany there are legal obligations on parents for support of unemployed, unmarried children aged under 25 and any children they may have. The Scandinavian countries, on the other hand, have explicit legal obligations on the state for care of adults aged over 18. Family policy measures such as family allowances, child benefits and tax relief for children are also treated differently across European states. Child benefit ceases at age 16 in some countries and at age 27 in others, with a range of different age and education-related criteria in between these extremes. Some countries recognise the financial implications to parents of later labour market entry and high unemployment levels among young workers, and extend family allowances and child benefit beyond the age limit in certain circumstances (Hantrais & Letablier, 1996). A number of countries also raise the age limit for receipt of child-related tax allowances in similar circumstances. While most countries provide some maintenance grants and loans for further and higher education students, the degree of financial support varies widely across Europe (Eurydice, 1999). Some countries give students financial support in their own right, others means-test parental income, and others give very little financial support (Millar & Warman, 1996). However, it seems likely that assumptions about parental support for young adults are changing significantly. A recent study (Millar & Warman 1996) of family obligations in fifteen European countries suggests that parenthood is increasingly defined as a life-long relationship which gives rise to unconditional parental obligations: marriage is moving away from being defined as a life-long relationship, giving rise to unconditional obligations, and providing a focus for state activity... Parenthood, however, is increasingly defined in this way across all these countries [and] the expectation that parents will help support their adult children is common in both Southern Europe and in countries like Austria and Germany and seems increasingly expected elsewhere. (p 48)

Dey and Morris

920

Developments in social security and educational policies have especially significant implications for young adults. In much of Europe, the direction of such policies is towards increased levels of support expected of parents of young adults still in the education system or trying to become established in the labour market. Housing policies are also significant, insofar as any variation in the availability of low cost housing is likely to have some impact on the ability of young adults to form of independent households (Jones & Wallace, 1992; Morrow & Richards, 1996). These changing expectations are certainly evident in the case of the United Kingdom. Eekelaar (1991) notes that the Children Act 1989 embodied the ideology expressed in the words of Margaret Thatcher: “parenting is for life”. As well as providing a firmer legal basis for parenthood as distinct from marital roles, a range of policies has gradually eroded state support for young adults and sought to shift responsibilities from state to family (Dean, 1998). Over the past decade, social and public policies have assumed that young adults in the 18-25 age group are not fully adult; that parents can be regarded as having some continuing obligations towards their children in this age group; and that those in this age group can be distinguished from older adults in relation to their social status, rights and responsibilities. For example: *Income Support claimants aged 18-25 receive a lower rate of benefit in the means-tested social security system; *the 18-24 age group are targeted to receive distinctive treatment in the Government’s welfare to work plans; *proposals for a minimum wage have set a lower rate (g3.00 an hour) for those in the 18-21 age group (the Low Pay Commission is to review the position of 21 year olds in 1999); and *current changes in the funding of university education (which replace maintenance awards by loans and require students to make a contribution to fees) can be expected to increase the financial contribution required from many parents. reductions in lone parent benefits will make young single mothers still more dependent on family support. l

These examples demonstrate the growing extent to which families and parents in particular - are expected - at least by the state - to provide support for an extended period while young people make the transition to work and economic independence. They illustrate the growing significance of age-related criteria in social policies. One account of post-war

Parental Support for Young Adults

921

developments concludes that ‘@milies are now expected to support their children throughout their teens and into their early twenties to a greater extent than ever before ” (Land, 1996, p. 200).

Demographic, Economic and Social Trends Changes in family policies in relation to education, social security and employment are thought to reflect and reinforce the impact of social and demographic trends across Europe. European states share a number of common demographic trends- notably low population growth rates, increased life expectancy, an ageing population, later marriage, increased cohabitation, and rising divorce rates. A shift to later motherhood is also evident across most European countries (Kiernan, 1998) and it seems likely that fatherhood shows a similar trend. Keirnan (1998) identifies three major trends in the transition to parenthood in Europe: later entry into parenthood, lower likelihood of parenthood and greater likelihood of extra-marital births. Delays in family formation may have extended the period before young people fully assume “adult” responsibilities. Even where family formation still occurs in young adulthood, its significance as a step towards independence may be weakening. As cohabiting unions are less stable, and marriages are tending to break up sooner (Haskey, 1998) a growing instability in the early years of family formation may also contribute to higher return rates to the parental home. Such trends vary across Europe, both between and within countries (Barbagli, 1997). Though on current trends one in three couples in Europe may divorce, estimates range from about one in two in the UK to one in ten or less in some Southern European countries (Kiernan, 1998). Fertility, once rates are corrected for delays in marriage and childbirth, has fallen much more rapidly in the south than in the centre and the north, where it shows relatively little change (Le Bras 1997). Segalen (1997, p. 11) suggests that the spectacular fall in fertility in Mediterranean countries may be explained by the stifling effect of “overexacting” family systems marked by close relations between parents and their adult children. Of course, this fall in fertility may rather reflect the later demographic transition in Southern Europe, or constraints on fertility arising from factors such as chronic housing shortages or high levels of female employment. Segalen’s argument nevertheless serves as a sharp reminder that variations in patterns of parenting of young adults may shape demographic trends as well as reflect them.

922

Dey and Morris

There seems little doubt that social and demographic trends in the United Kingdom are prolonging transitions from childhood to adult status. Over the two decades to 1995 the proportion of adults completing their education at school fell from 87% to 70%, while the proportion completing at university rose from 2% to 9% (GHS, 1997, p. 82). According to Jones and Wallace (1990), there is a consistent relationship between point of completion of education or entry into the labour market and subsequent family formation. Age at marriage has shifted towards the middle or late 20s while age at birth of first child increased from 24 to 28 in the two decades to 1992 (Utting, 1995). More women now give birth in the 30s than in their 20s and there has been a significant growth in childlessness (with one fifth of women in the UK now expected to remain childless). Even taking account of cohabitation, fewer people in their twenties now live as a couple than was the case in the past (Hasley, 1995). The likelihood of marriage or childbirth by age 25 has therefore declined considerably for recent cohorts (GHS, 1997, p. 186). High unemployment rates among young people are also a feature of changing economic circumstances across Europe. Youth unemployment rates vary across Europe- though it is difficult to obtain accurate comparative statistics due to methodological differences inherent in national statistical data. Nevertheless, overall youth unemployment in Europe undoubtedly remains high- of the I8 million registered as unemployed in the EU in 1994, five million were aged under 25 and nearly 50% of young people had been unemployed for longer than one year (European Commission, 1994). Youth unemployment in Europe stood at 21% in 1995, the same level as in 1983, with those under 25 two and a half times as likely to be unemployed as those over 25 (Ruxton, 1996). Rates were still higher for those at risk of job discrimination because of disability or ethnic@. Long-term evidence of falling economic activity, rising unemployment, changing work patterns and declining wage rates amongst young people in the UK also suggests the likelihood of increasing dependence on parental support. Unemployment amongst young men aged 18-24 rose sharply from a low of 6% in 1975, peaking at 22% in 1983 before falling to 17% in 1995 (GHS, 1997, p. 47). Amongst young women aged 18-24, unemployment has doubled over the same period, from 6% to 12% (GHS, 1997, p. 48). While unemployment rates obviously reflect economic cycles of growth and recession, trends in labour market participation reflect longer-term changes in economic structure. The proportion of young men aged 18-24 classed as economically inactive rose from 9% to 16% over the period 1975-1995, while the proportion of young unmarried women

Parental Support for Young Adults

923

classed as inactive rose from 18% to 26% in the same period (GHS, 1997, p. 46). Unemployment rates and increasing periods of time spent in education and training for young adults are recognised as increasing the difficulties which may face young adults striving to achieve independence. Despite a steady rise in single person households (mainly a middle class phenomenon) these difficulties may have been exacerbated where, as in the UK, housing policies promoting owner occupation have reduced the accessibility of low cost housing to young adults (Dean, 1997). Jones and Wallace (1992) suggest that young people from low income families on leaving home increasingly rely on “intermediate” forms of accommodation, such as staying with a relative. Such trends have almost certainly increased the numbers of young people, notably those investing in training and further or higher education, who rely on their parents for financial assistance (European Commission, 1988). However, it would be misleading to emphasise only the growing obstacles which young adults may face in achieving adult status. The growth of mass education may serve as a route to more autonomous status for young adults, giving them opportunities and skills that in some ways reduce dependence on their parents. Moreover, Kruger (1990, p. 117) suggests that rising incomes, changing consumer patterns, more liberal sexual expression and expanding leisure facilities and activities for youth have made the “privileges of adult status” more accessible to young people in Germany. As Kruger notes, youth markets for leisure, consumer goods and lifestyle images (and greater sexual freedoms) are not confined to Germany. Also, the persistence of close relations with parents through early adulthood may be seen as a positive change in family relations away from formal roles and duties towards more expressive relationships between parent and child. While growing individualism may have resulted in a greater stress on the private responsibilities of parents to support their adult children, as Ferri and Smith (1996) suggest, it may also have transformed the grounds on which claims to adult status are based. Conceptions of “dependency” and “autonomy” need to be treated with due caution.

Dey and Morris

924

Parental Support of Young Adults It is difficult to confirm that these trends have prolonged the dependency of young adults on their parents. But if expectations of parental support for young adults are changing across Europe, it is clearly important to understand how far the parents of young adults can and do provide support for them. We need to know: what kinds of support parents provide; why parents provide or refuse support; and how support is provided or negotiated.

l

l

l

The diversity of European family policies suggests that wide variation can be expected in how these questions are answered. What Kinds of Support Recent UK studies of the process of “transition to adulthood” indicate that, of various forms of support received by young people, that provided by parents is generally most important (Alla& 1993; Hutson & Jenkins, 1989; Jones, 1995a; Morrow & Richards, 1996). Berthoud and Ford (1996) in their study of the financial costs of children suggest that grownup children living in a household impose additional costs comparable to those of younger children. Although attention tends to focus mainly on material assistance with income and accommodation, parental support in the current context has to be considered in broad terms. Eekelaar and Maclean (1997) use the concept of “social capital” to refer to the social resources children may draw upon from their families, mainly their parents. This recognition of nonmaterial as well as material forms of support is echoed in other research (Finch, 1989; Jones, 1995a, 1995b; Millar & Warman, 1996; Morrow & Richards, 1996). Thus parental support can encompass a variety of forms, including: l

l

l

l

financial provision personal practical

assistance; of accommodation; care, including emotional and moral support; assistance.

925

Parental Support for Young Adults

Practical

assistance

is something

anything, from help with transport-a

since it can include critical focus for family resources

of a catch-all,

in rural areas (Morrow and Richards 1996)--to using informal contacts to assist with job search. The latter is especially important given evidence that many young people find jobs through “informal” channels (cf. Raffe, 1988, p. 55; Windolf & Wood, 1988, pp. 68-70). As well as helping young adults achieve a socially productive role, parents may also use cultural as well as material resources to support them in their consumer activities. Indeed, consumption by young adults may be especially significant as a means of signifying social status and social differentiation (Baudrillard, 1998, p. 60). Of these various forms of parental support, UK research suggests that provision of accommodation by parents is increasingly significant in the lives of young adults (Hutson & Jenkins, 1989; Jones, 1995a; Morrow & Richards, 1996). Leaving home is often a protracted process involving one or more returns to the parental home before making the permanent transition to a home of their own (Jones 1987, 1995a; Jones & Wallace, 1992; Leonard, 1980; Young, 1984). A 1995 survey reported a slightly reduced tendency of young single people to leave the parental home since 1979 (GHS, 1997, p. 182). Analysis of longitudinal survey data suggests that half of males and a quarter of females in the UK were living at home at age 23, while 44% of men and 38% of women had returned at least once after leaving home (Jones, 1995a). A recent survey by a UK advertising agency found that one in nine men aged 30-34 was living with his parentsan increase of 20% in only five years (Fox, 1998). While this evidence suggests that the so-called “boomerang” generation is not simply a media myth, little is known for certain about this or other important forms of parental support for young adults. It does seems likely, though, that location in the parental home is critical in providing access to various other forms of parental support. There is some evidence that the UK experience is reflected elsewhere. For example, Attias-Donfut (1997) reports an increase during the 1980s in “home-sharing” between generations in France, including a rise amongst young adults in those staying on in the family home or returning to it for indefinite periods. Uninterrupted homesharing is particularly common amongst single adults (mostly sons) without children of their own, who might remain in the parental home for life. Even in the Nordic countries where the state has statutory duty to support those aged over 18, the Nordic family model includes “a small number of children [per family] who continue to reside with their parents and remain dependent on them until

926

Dey and Morris

they are well into their 20s” (Hantrais & Letablier, 1996, p. 177). Here again, the European experience is diverse, with more Southern Europeans remaining at home than young adults do elsewhere - in contrast to Holland, for example, where there are high rates of independent living among young adults. There are also gender and ethnic as well as geographical differences in leaving home rates. In general, though, the number of young adults in Europe who live in the parental home has increased in recent years (European Commission, 1988; European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 199 1; Hantrais & Letablier, 1996). The growing literature on this topic in North America suggests that similar increases are taking place in the USA and Canada (Mitchell & Gee, 1996; Vevers, Gee & Wister, 1996; Ward & Spitze, 1996; White, 1994). UK research suggests that socio-economic status and family circumstances have a significant influence on the support available to children (Hutson & Jenkins, 1989; Pickvance & Pickvance, 1995; Rogers & Pryor, 1998). Differences in parental support may depend on whether one or both parents are in employment, and on whether young adults are in education or employment, unemployed, or involved in government schemes. Unemployment for example may place great strains on parent-child relations, particularly where household income is low (Hutson & Jenkins, 1989). Evidence on youth transitions suggests that class, gender and ethnic&y (and, we might add, illness and disability) continue to play a crucial role in structuring opportunities (Chisholm, 1990). Variations in family circumstances may be wide-ranging, including for example, any history of family dissolution and reconstitution; whether parents can call on other resources or have to meet other demands (for example, from grandparents); and whether young adults have themselves become parents. Research examining how resources are distributed within families has found wide variation between households in the extent of resource redistribution and in the way resources are managed (Brannen & Wilson, 1987; Pahl, 1989). These studies found considerable inconsistencies between accounts of resource distribution and management and what happens in practice. The research also suggests that patterns of resource distribution are related to how resources are produced; and further, that the material and symbolic significance of consumption varies according to social context. These issues have mainly been studied in relation to poverty and the gendered distribution of resources between adults but could usefully be explored in relation to parental support for young adults.

Parental Support for Young Adults

927

why Support is Provided or Not Assumptions of parental willingness and capacity to provide the support underpinning policies for 18-25 year olds are largely untested. Yet studies in the UK of family obligations in various contexts suggest that formal kinship roles are generally an unreliable indicator of the extent to which parents accept obligations to provide support (Eekelaar & Maclean, 1997; Finch, 1989; Jones, 1995a). Finch (1989, p. 169) emphasises the difficulty which parents experience in devising acceptable forms of support for young adult children at a stage where they simultaneously need help but also need “a measure of responsible independence”. Research indicates the important role played by mutual benefits or reciprocity in the negotiation of responsibilities. Eekelaar and Maclean’s 1997 study of the parental obligations of parents not living with their children also suggests that previous family relationships influence both whether support is forthcoming and the extent of support offered. These findings in relation to young adults are comparable with the results of several recent US studies which have focused on how far childparent relationships affect the relationships of young adults with their parents (Aguilino, 1997; Rossi & Rossi, 1990; Whitbeck et al., 1994). The experience in the UK may be closer to that of the US than it is to that other European countries. Kinship structure in the UK (or at least in England) is weak compared with other European countries (Finch, 1997), where acceptance of parental obligations tends to be invested in formal kinship roles and duties rather than predicated on how particular relationships between kin develop. Thus Camps and Hernindes (1997, p. 69) report that kinship relations in urban Catalonia “create rights and duties which an individual cannot refuse”. On the other hand, Attias-Donfut (1997) suggests that formal kinship structures have become rarer or less meaningful in the new family forms emerging in other European countries. Further study is therefore needed to investigate how far parents take account of past behaviour and developing relationships in determining their responsibilities and offering-or refusing-support. Research is also needed to compare the obligations parents accept for young adults with their expectations regarding younger and older kin. We need to examine how far parental expectations are influenced by the age, gender, ethnicity and capability of their child(ren)--and the influence of their own age, gender, ethnicity and capability in determining the obligations they accept. A “welfare” perspective tends to assume that parents act responsibly if they meet their obligations, which in effect means if they provide support

Dey and Morris

928

to their young adults. However, we should recognise that parents may also act responsibly when they refuse to provide support. Meeting immediate needs may conflict with longer-term objectives such as fostering independence. Parents may face various choices (or dilemmas) in offering or refusing support as a means of enhancing or inhibiting the development of personal autonomy. According to Hutson and Jenkins (1989, p. 46) parents see themselves as having to balance the need for support with the risk of “breeding apathy and sloth”. Resource distribution occurs within a tangled moral universe. For example, do parents: l

l

l

l

l

seek to minimise risks by offering support, or to maximise learning (“the hard way”) by refusing it? use support to meet current needs or to invest in their own or their children’s future? emphasise compensation for disadvantage or the capacity to benefit? emphasise equity or equality in giving support to siblings? take account of the consequences for their own benefit entitlement or that of the young adult?

Answers to questions such as these could provide greater understanding of variations in parental support at this stage in the life cycle of the young adult. How Support is Provided Research on how young people make the “transition” to adulthood is particularly illuminating of the tensions and challenges experienced by young adults. However, studies of transition in the UK have focused primarily on the perspectives of young adults rather than parents (Jones, 1995b; Jones & Wallace, 1992; Morrow & Richards, 1996). It is likely, though, that parental support of young adults occurs at a crucial stage for parents as well as their children, in their respective movements between autonomy and dependency. Significant changes in patterns of family support may begin to emerge, with some parents turning to their children for direct or indirect support during this period. In any event, young people may be expected to make an increasing contribution to the household, notably through rent or board. Studies of “transition” to adulthood locate issues of support within a more or less explicit time frame, albeit one either imposed by the researchers, or informed by the perspectives of young people themselves,

Parental Support for Young Adults

929

rather than of the parents providing or refusing support. A review of the UK literature by Morrow and Richards (1996) identifies five main components of “transition”: l

l

l

l

l

leaving school and entering work or higher education; leaving home to set up an independent household; involvement in sexual relationships; becoming a parent; becoming a full adult consumer.

These components are mirrored in a recent Dutch study of life transitions to adulthood (Iedema, 1997) which also suggests that the transition period for young adults has lengthened for recent generations. While these components of transition are generally accepted within the literature, various authors stress different dimensions in the transition to adulthood. For example, Jones and Wallace (1992) argue that adulthood cannot be a reality without underpinning rights to at least minimum economic independence from parents. Hutson and Jenkins (1989) found that young people themselves stress the importance of age (with 20 to 21 as a watershed) and behaviour (acting responsibly, independently and with other adults). Jones and Wallace (1992) argue that these various transitions have all become more complex and less standardised in recent years. The concept of “transition” implies that support is a temporary process culminating in particular outcomes: the basic assumption is that young people making this transition achieve adult status. However, the process and components of “transitions” can be treated as an object of inquiry rather than a frame of reference for research. Perhaps parents assume obligations of a more enduring nature, or aim to meet immediate needs. Support may be based on inter-generational transfers over the life-cycle, or the current fultilment of reciprocal obligations by young adults. Even where “transitional” frameworks are recognised, parents are likely to have different views of the end-states to be achieved and the signposts which mark their achievement. We can expect wide variation across Europe in parental perceptions of how progress towards full adult status is expected to proceed, as young people may be expected to achieve adult status at different rates, at different ages, along different dimensions. Transitional frameworks may reflect varying conceptions across Europe of adult status and the boundaries that define the obligations of parental support. There may also be more or less acceptable ways of providing support within the family context, related, for example, to preserving or enhancing

Dey and Morris

930

independence (Finch, 1989) or to the difficulties which young people experience in asking for support (Jones, 1995b). Research is needed to examine whether parents determine the forms and levels of support themselves, or consult or negotiate over these with their young adult children. Do parents follow rules or guidelines in reaching decisions, or take each situation “as it comes”? Do parents provide support without strings or insist that certain conditions are met? Clearly there is potential for considerable conflict (cf. Bainham, 1993), particularly where parents seek to control the activities (such as sexual behaviour) of their children. As Morrow and Richards (1996) note, however, no research has been done on variations in parental control of the sexual activities of their young adult children in the family home.

In Conclusion Given the limited research on parental support for young adults, the evidence we have reviewed is inevitably suggestive rather than conclusive. It lends some support to the view that social trends and family policies are increasing the significance of parental support for young adults across Europe, but not without equivocation. The trends delaying family formation and entry into employment may be less important than supposed, if, for example, these have become less significant in defining adult status than changes in attitudes, behaviour or patterns of consumption. We can be confident that the experience of young adults and their parents varies widely across Europe, both across countries and within them, given the continuing salience of factors like income, class and gender in structuring opportunities. Thus research evidence suggests that parental support, though extensive, is also uneven. It is also unreliable, at least in the sense that we cannot automatically assume that young adults receive it. Indeed, we have little systematic knowledge as yet about the circumstances in which parents are willing and able to support young adults. How far are parents willing to make sacrifices to support young adults, to what ends - and with what conditions? What do parents see as the benefits as well as costs of providing or withholding support? If the family is conceived as a means of providing welfare, how do parents face up to the dilemmas this entails? Do parents predicate support on some conception of transition to adulthood, or is it based on satisfying immediate needs or some form of inter-generational exchange? How far are parental views

Parental Support for Young Adults

931

moulded by common European trends or mediated by different cultural traditions, social trends and policy agendas? Although, inevitably, we have raised more questions than answers, the issues we have discussed regarding the parenting of young adults are typical of the agendas that inform family policies and research in Europe. In a sense, we have merely extended current concerns over youth transitions, responsible parenting of younger children and family obligations to older adult kin to embrace the parenting of young adults. The general political context, of declining social programmes and growing reliance on family support, provides a tacit framework for analysis that has become all too familiar. Europeans will generally feel comfortable with an agenda which questions the level, extent and reliability of the support received by young adults. They will feel equally comfortable with an agenda that examines the costs and implications to parents of providing that support. To a North American audience, however, the issues that preoccupy us in a European context may seem rather outlandish. Research in North America tends to focus on the implications of young adults co-residing with their parents for family dynamics. The North American perspective places more emphasis on the psychological and inter-personal aspects of parent-child relations. European preoccupations with the forms and extent of family or state support for young adults reflect the prevalence of a “welfare” perspective that tacitly assumes social rather than personal responsibilities for meeting individual need. The welfare perspective has its merits, we suggest, since it focuses on the changing social and economic contexts in which the parenting of young adults occurs. On the other hand, the welfare perspective is also predisposed to present its subjects as “victims”. In this instance, the putative victims are young adults who suffer through prolonged dependency on unreliable sources of support, or the parents who now have to provide for them. Perhaps, then, a European audience could learn much from a North American perspective, with its greater emphasis on individual capacities and experience? But that must be the subject of another paper!

References Allatt, P. (1993). Becoming privileged. The role of family processes. In I. Bates, & G. Riseborough (Eds.), Youth and inequality. Open University Press: Milton Keynes.

932

Dey and Morris

Aqiuilino, W. S. (1997). From adolescent to young adult: A prospective study of parent-child relations during the transition to adulthood. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59(3), 670-686.

Attias-Donfut, C. (1997). Home-sharing and the transmission of inheritance in France. In M. Gullestad, & M. Segalen (Eds.), Family and kinship in Europe. London: Pinter. Bainham, A. (1993). Growing up in Britain: Adolescence in the Post-Gillick Era. In J. Eekelaar, & P. Sacevic (Eds.), Parenthood in modern society, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff. Barbagli, M. (1997): Family and kinship in Italy. In M. Gullestad, & M. Segalen (Eds.), Family and kinship in Europe. London: Pinter. Baudrillard, J. (1998) The consumer society: Myths and structures. London: Sage. Berthoud, R., & Ford, R. (1996) A new way of measuring relative financial needs. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Social Policy Research Findings (p. 109). Brannen, J., & Wilson, G. (1988) Give and take in families. London: Allen and Unwin. Camps, J.B., & Hemandez, J.C. (1997). Family, kinship and residence in urban Catalonia: The modernity of “Pairalism” In M. Gullestad, & M. Segalen (Eds.), Family and kinship in Europe. London: Pinter. Chisholm, L. (1990). A sharper lens or a new camera? Youth research, young people and social change in Britain. . In L.Chisholm, P.Bticher. H-H. Kruger, & P. Brown (Eds.), Childhood youth and social change: A comparative perspective. London: Falmer. Coward , R.T., Albrecht, S.L., & Shapiro, A. ( 1996). The perceptions of elderly patients about the possibility of discontinuing their coresidence with adult children. Research On Aging, 18(3), 325-348. Dean, H. (1997). Underclassed or undermined? Young people and social citizenship. In R. MacDonald (Ed.), Youth, the ‘underclass ’ and social exclusion. London: Routledge. Ditch, J., Barnes, H., Bradshaw, J., Commaille, J., & Eardley, T. (1996). A synthesis of national family policies 1994. Luxembourg: Commission of the European Communities. Dumon, W. (Ed.). (1990). Family policy in EEC countries. Luxembourg: Commission of the European Communities. Eekelaar J., & Maclean, M. (1997). The parental obligation: A study ofparenthood across households. Oxford: Hart. Eekelaar, J., & Sarcevic, P. (Eds.). (1993). Parenthood in modern society. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Martinus Nighoff. Eekelaar, J. (1993). Are parents morally obliged to care for their children? . In J. Eekelaar, & P Sarcevic (Eds.), Parenthood in modern society. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Martinus Nighoff. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of weffizre capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Parental Support for Young Adults

933

European Commission. (1988). Young Europeans. Luxembourg: Office of Official Publications. European Commission. (1994). Le Magazine, Winter Issue 3, 12- 13. Brussels: Directorate General XXII. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. (199 1). The paths of young people towards autonomy. Report of a seminar, Dublin: EFILWC. Eurostat. (1995a). Demographic statistics 1995. Luxembourg: Office of Official Publications. Eurydice. (1998). Key data on education in the European Union 1997. Luxembourg: Office of Official Publications. Eurydice. (1999, forthcoming). Key data on education in the European Union: Financial support for higher education students. Luxembourg: Office of Official Publications. Ferri, E., & Smith, K. (1996). Parenting in the 1990s. Family Policy Studies Centre: London. Finch, J. (1997). Individuality and adaptability in English kinship. . In M. Gullestad, & M. Segalen (Eds.), Family and kinship in Europe. London: Pinter. Finch, J. (1989). Family obligations and social change. Polity Press: Cambridge. Fox, G. (1998, March 18). Baby it’s cold outside. The Guardian. General Household Survey. (1997). Living in Britain: Results from the 1995 General Household Survey. London: The Stationery Office. Hantrais, L., & Letablier, M.T. (1996). Families and family policies in Europe. New York: Longman Publishing. Haskey, J. (1995). Trends in marriage and cohabitation: The decline in marriage and the changing pattern of living in partnerships. Population Trends, 80, 515. Hogan, D. P., Eggebeen, D. J., Clogg, C.C. (1993). The structure of intergenerational exchanges in American families. American Journal of Sociology, 98, 1428-1458

Hutson, S. & Jenkins, R. (1989). Taking the strain: Families, unemployment and the transition to adulthood, Open University Press: Milton Keynes. Iedema, J., Becker, H. A. & Sanders, K. (1997). Transition into independence: A comparision of cohorts born since 1930 in the Netherlands. European Sociological Review, 13, 117-137. IshiiKuntz, M. (1997). Intergenerational relationships among Chinese, Japanese, and Korean Americans. Family Relations, 46, 23-32. Jones, G., & Wallace, C. (1990). Beyond individualization: What sort of social change. In L. Chisholm, P. Btlcher, H-H. Kruger, & P. Brown (Eds.), Childhood youth and social change: A comparative perspective. London: Falmer. Jones, G. (1995a). Leaving home. Open University Press: Buckingham. Jones, G. (1995b). Family support for young people. Family Policy Studies Centre: London.

934

Dey and Morris

Jones, G., & Wallace, C. (1992). Youth,family and citizenship. Open University Press: Buckingham. Kamerman, S. B., & Kahn, A. K. (Eds.) (1978). Family policy: Government andfamilies in fourteen countries. New York: Columbia University Press. Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, f;re and dangerous things: What categories teach about the human mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Land, H. (1996). The crumbling bridges between childhood and adulthood. In J. Brannen, & M. O’Brien (Eds.), Children in families: Research and policy. Falmer Press: London. Leonard, D. (1980). Sex and generation: A study of courtship and weddings. London: Tavistock. Millar J., & Warman, A. (1996). Family obligations in Europe: The family, the state and socialpolicy. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Mishra, R. (1993, September 9-12). Typologies of the welfare state and comparative analyses: The “liberal” welfare state. Conference paper, Oxford conference on comparative research on welfare states in transition. Mitchell, B. A., dz Gee, E. M. (1996). Boomerang kids and midlife parental marital satisfaction. Journal of Family Relations, 45, 442-448. Morrow, V., & Richards, M. (1996). Transitions to adulthood: A family matter? Joseph Rowntree Foundation: York. Pahl, J. (1989). Money and marriage. London: Macmillan. Phoenix, A. (199 1). Young mothers. Cambridge: Polity Press. Pickvance, C, & Pickvance, K. (1995). The role of family help in the housing decisions of young people. The Sociological Review, 43, 123-149. Pilling, D. (1990). Escapefiom disadvantage. London: Falmer Press. Richards, M. (1993). Children and parents and divorce. In J. Eekelaar, & P. Sarcevic (Eds.), Parenthood in modern society. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Martinus Nighoff. Raffe, D. (Ed.). (1988). Education and the youth labour market. London: Falmer. Rogers, B., & Pryor, J. (1998). Divorce and separation: The outcomes for children. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Rossi, A. S., & Rossi, P. H. (1990). Of human bonding: Parent-child relations across the life course. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Ruxton, S. (1996). Children in Europe. London: National Children’s Homes Sassler, S. (1996). Feathering the nest or flying the coop? Ethnic and gender differences in young adults’ co-residence in 1910. Journal of Family History, 21, 446-466. Segalen, M. (1997). Introduction. In M. Gullestad, & M. Segalen (Eds.), Family and kinship in Europe. London: Pinter. Utting, D. (1995). Family and parenthood: Supporting families, preventing breakdown. Joseph Rowntree Foundation: York.

Parental Support for Young Adults

935

Vevers, J. E., Gee, E. M., & Wister, A. V. (1996). Homeleaving age norms: Conflict or consensus? International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 43, 277-295. Ward, R.A., & Spitze, G. (1996b). Gender differences in parent-child coresidence experiences. Journal Of Marriage And The Family, 58, 7 18-725. Ward, R., & Spitze, G. (1996a). Will the children ever leave?- Parent-child coresidence history and plans. Journal of Family Issues, 29, 110 I- 1125. Whitbeck, L, Hoyt, D., & Hick, S. (1994). Early family relationships, intergenerational solidarity and support provided by parents of adult children. Journals of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 49,585594. White, L. K. (1994). Co-residence and leaving home - Young adults and their parents. Annual Review of Sociology, 20, 8 l- 102. White, L. K., & Rogers, S. J. (1997). Strong support but uneasy relationships: Coresidence and adult children’s relationships with their parents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59, 62-76. Windolf, P., & Wood, S. with Hohn, H.W. & Manwaring, T. (1988). Recruitment and selection in the labour market. Aldershot: Avebury Young, C. M. (1984). Leaving home and returning home: A demographic study of young adults in Australia. Australian Family Research Conference Proceedings, Canberra Vol 1: Family formation, structure and values, pp. 53-76.