I did not know about this until just now. This is bullshit, plain and simple. I'm all for supporting your parents if you want to and have a good relationship with them, but the government forcing adult children to support their parents is total bullshit. I can't believe these antiquated laws are still on the books and being used. There have been cases of adults successfully being sued to pay for their parents bills.

http://law.psu.edu/_file/Pearson/FilialResponsibilityStatutes.pdf
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2919.21

(A) No person shall abandon, or fail to provide adequate support to:

(3) The person’s aged or infirm parent or adoptive parent, who from lack of ability and means is unable to provide adequately for the parent’s own support.

tk421;762443 wrote:I did not know about this until just now. This is bullshit, plain and simple. I'm all for supporting your parents if you want to and have a good relationship with them, but the government forcing adult children to support their parents is total bullshit. I can't believe these antiquated laws are still on the books and being used. There have been cases of adults successfully being sued to pay for their parents bills.

http://law.psu.edu/_file/Pearson/FilialResponsibilityStatutes.pdf
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2919.21

The alternative is having all other tax payers chip in and support them.

My father as the oldest male in the family didn't get married by choice until his parents passed away. He felt it his duty to care for them. As he continued to age I couldn't imagine doing anything but have him move in with us so that I might be able to be certain of his daily needs.

The crazy thing is it used to be understood that families cared for each other...now it has to be mandated.

Seems reasonable to me. There's zero doubt in my mind that there's an ethical and moral responsibility, don't see the problem carrying it into the legal realm.

queencitybuckeye;762731 wrote:...there's an ethical and moral responsibility, ...

Unfortunately that's slowly eroding in our culture. In the far east the elderly are revered. In the U.S. they are treated like outcasts and expected to be cared for by the government.

Seems the OP's beliefs are being outnumbered here. Maybe the OP doesnt really like his parents? LOL

Con_Alma;762725 wrote:The alternative is having all other tax payers chip in and support them.

My father as the oldest male in the family didn't get married by choice until his parents passed away. He felt it his duty to care for them. As he continued to age I couldn't imagine doing anything but have him move in with us so that I might be able to be certain of his daily needs.

The crazy thing is it used to be understood that families cared for each other...now it has to be mandated.

+1 be accountable and take care of your family. Dont be a lazy ass and send them to some retirement home where I have to pay for them with my tax dollars.

I think it a very wise and noble thing to care for one's parents when it becomes necessary.

Having said that, I do NOT think it ought to be mandated by law.

People NOT taking care of their parents/other family members is relatively newb in society. I take care of my mother and stepfather, out of choice and not by law.

That being said, I don't like the thought of some law telling me that I have to. But I understand the importance of bringing the problem to light also.

Pick6;762760 wrote:+1 be accountable and take care of your family. Dont be a lazy ass and send them to some retirement home where I have to pay for them with my tax dollars.

I did not know that Nursing homes were run on tax dollars. Thought the family had to pay for the nursing home.

My parents took care of me, so I will definitely take care of them when they need it. But some parents suck and I don't think I would feel bad about leaving them in a ditch once they get older.

Con_Alma;762725 wrote:The alternative is having all other tax payers chip in and support them.

My father as the oldest male in the family didn't get married by choice until his parents passed away. He felt it his duty to care for them. As he continued to age I couldn't imagine doing anything but have him move in with us so that I might be able to be certain of his daily needs.

The crazy thing is it used to be understood that families cared for each other...now it has to be mandated.

So if you're estranged from your parents, you should be mandated by law to take care of them?

My parents have made it clear to my siblings and me that they are doing whatever it takes to be sure we do not ever have to support them financially. If they ever needed cared for because of their health one of us would step up and take care of them if it's what they wanted.

I believe it's your duty as parents to make sure your kids never have to take care of you financially. My parents are already at the age where they're starting to need some help around the house and there are certain places they don't like to drive. I have 3 sisters and we and our husbands do whatever they need. I will do anything I can for them but am very thankful they have taken care of themselves financially and will do the same for my kids.

The only reason not to take care of your parents would be if you were abused as a minor either physically, sexually or emotionally and it caused irreparable harm. Is being struck a couple of times because you were a petulant child completely out of line physical abuse? Probably not. Is being repeatedly hit inflicting bruises and broken bones by a drunk/high father or mother physical abuse? Yes. What lies in between is where the hard questions are.

But other than that children should expect to take care of their parents if they ever reach a point they can no longer take care of themselves. It's the cycle of life.

O-Trap;762946 wrote:I think it a very wise and noble thing to care for one's parents when it becomes necessary.

Having said that, I do NOT think it ought to be mandated by law.

If you don't think that it should be legally mandated, then what is the alternative? The way I see it you either require it by law, force taxpayers to bear the burden, or leave them out in the cold.

Fly4Fun;763123 wrote:The only reason not to take care of your parents would be if you were abused as a minor either physically, sexually or emotionally and it caused irreparable harm. Is being struck a couple of times because you were a petulant child completely out of line physical abuse? Probably not. Is being repeatedly hit inflicting bruises and broken bones by a drunk/high father or mother physical abuse? Yes. What lies in between is where the hard questions are.

But other than that children should expect to take care of their parents if they ever reach a point they can no longer take care of themselves. It's the cycle of life.

What if their parents didn't take care of them? I know several people who were raised by their grand parents, lots of people who are deadbeat parents and there are plenty of parents who are completely uninvolved in their children's lives.

Fly4Fun;763123 wrote:The only reason not to take care of your parents would be if you were abused as a minor either physically, sexually or emotionally and it caused irreparable harm. Is being struck a couple of times because you were a petulant child completely out of line physical abuse? Probably not. Is being repeatedly hit inflicting bruises and broken bones by a drunk/high father or mother physical abuse? Yes. What lies in between is where the hard questions are.

But other than that children should expect to take care of their parents if they ever reach a point they can no longer take care of themselves. It's the cycle of life.

I don't believe there has to be abuse for parents and children to not want to be part of each others lives.

Don't see the big deal, or the surprise. The baby boomers pretty much destroyed this country economically, obviously they are going to need even more help going forward.

Manhattan Buckeye;763136 wrote:Don't see the big deal, or the surprise. The baby boomers pretty much destroyed this country economically, obviously they are going to need even more help going forward.

Your generation is as culpable for electing those responsible as mine, sir.

se-alum;763100 wrote:So if you're estranged from your parents, you should be mandated by law to take care of them?

It's sad that it is being mandated.

coyotes22;763098 wrote:I did not know that Nursing homes were run on tax dollars. Thought the family had to pay for the nursing home.

Medicaid is jointly funded by both State and Federal dollars. If the individual has the funds to pay they are required to do so. If they do not they apply for Medicaid.

Con_Alma;763139 wrote:It's sad that it is being mandated.

Agreed...you shouldn't have to take care of an estranged parent. Finally we agree on something.

se-alum;763142 wrote:Agreed...you shouldn't have to take care of an estranged parent. Finally we agree on something.

You have a very liberal interpretation of my posting. Keep searching for the topic that we agree on because this isn't it.

krambman;763126 wrote:If you don't think that it should be legally mandated, then what is the alternative? The way I see it you either require it by law, force taxpayers to bear the burden, or leave them out in the cold.

I see it the same way. However, the same logic could be applied to transcend familial lines. What of those who cannot afford to take care of them? What of those who were abused by them, or who had terrible relationships with them? Moreover, why not apply that same logic to ANYONE?

The problem I have with it is it is a burden that is not the consequence of a person's actions (can't really help having parents). As such, once I am an adult, the law ought not subject either of us to responsibility for the other. Once I am an adult (18), if my parents CHOOSE to allow me to remain in their house, that is their choice, but they are not legally obligated to do so.

So, while I would contend that any person who loves their parents OUGHT to take care of them when needed (this is currently happening in my family), I don't think they should be required to.

I generally don't like trying to appeal to emotion when it pertains to the legal side of things, which is why I would opt for the third option you mention (tipping your hand a bit by calling it "out in the cold" ). I just see too many problems with the notion that someone can be legally forced to take care of someone else that is not a minor of whom they have custody.

How does this scenario play out, which is a 100% true scenario in my case:

I am my fathers only biological child, though he has a few step-kids. I haven't had contact with my father since I was 12 years old. He packed up and moved from Ohio to Indiana without telling me when I was 12 or 13. I legally changed my last name to my mothers maiden name when I was 16 years old.

Would I be legally responsible for supporting the sonofabitch? I'd rather leave him out in the cold.

I would have no issues supporting my mother if it came to that but there is no damn way I'd give a dime to support my father.