grown up child at home

elvis86

halibut2209 wrote: »

Yes, because that's the only possible explanation

Going by what the OP has said, I can only conclude that there are 5 people in his/her home who aren't working/are working few hours, and are keeping any income/benefits that they do receive. He/she said that he/she has 4 kids, so I think it's a reasonable assumption that the 5th scrounger is a partner?

green111 wrote: »

I now have 4 grown up children living at home and no longer recieve any tax benefits, meaning that I am now having to try and support 6 adults on 1 persons wage.

He/she makes no mention of being in receipt of any benefits, any DLA or housing benefit etc, and says he/she is trying to support 6 people on one person's wage. So I can only presume that the only thing preventing the 4 kids and the mystery 5th person working (or working full time) is idleness, and the only thing preventing them giving the OP some contribution from their benefits/wages is selfishness and the OP's continuation to tolerate it.

I can only go by what the OP posted.;)

elvis86

Kittendreich wrote: »

One thing I would consider is that if they have all never worked it is a bit unfair on the younger ones if the elder ones have had a free ride for several more years. If you don't think you would be strong enough to get them all to tow the line immediately - give the eldest a 1 month warning of what you will be expecting to be paid in board and then all the others will be told that this will apply at that age too - then you will be treating all of them equally.

It sounds like these kids already have a warped view of what is "fair" (ie paying their parent nothing whilst he/she struggles to support them). I certainly wouldn't be reinforcing these attitudes by ensuring that they are all allowed to enjoy the same amount of time being bone-idle and selfish.

Mupette

elvis86 wrote: »

It sounds like these kids already have a warped view of what is "fair" (ie paying their parent nothing whilst he/she struggles to support them). I certainly wouldn't be reinforcing these attitudes by ensuring that they are all allowed to enjoy the same amount of time being bone-idle and selfish.

Your making a lot of assumptions based on very little information.

Do you know for a fact that they are all bone idle.. do you..

elvis86

"Jimmy didn't work and paid nothing for 5 years, as you're 2 years younger, I'll allow you another 2 years of being bone-idle, Jimmy, just to make it fair..."

I don't think so. Boot them all out of the door at 8.30am every day to go jobhunting, and don't let them back in unless they give you the majority (or even all) of their benefits. Maybe allow the one working part-time to keep some spends as an incentive.;)

heretolearn_2

It's hard to believe that not one adult in a household of 6 has been able to find a full-time job of any sort. Either it's an area of outstandingly difficult recession with practically zero jobs for anyone, or they don't have any skills/qualifications/experience to make an employer want them.

What is the real reason none of them work? Do you feel like you are being taken advantage of or are there genuine reasons for all of them? Is it time to start some tough-love?

OP it sounds like you work hard and are trying to do your best for everyone. But you can't carry on like this. If they move out they will get more benefits to help them and it'll encourage them to stand on their own two feet. I know it's hard to get started to find somewhere - do any of them hve friends in a similar situation - I've known families do a 'kid-swap' - they each change houses, become official lodgers in their friends' family house, and that way get housing benefit without having to get together a deposit/advance rent etc.

elvis86

Mupette wrote: »

Your making a lot of assumptions based on very little information.

Do you know for a fact that they are all bone idle.. do you..

What other explanation could there be?

Again, based on what the OP has said, it's fair to presume that none of them are disabled and therefore unable to work, else she wouldn't just be "trying to pay for everything from one person's wage", she'd also be in receipt of some benefits, surely?

So the only other explanation is that they're unemployed. Which means that they should be in receipt of JSA. And as the OP has explained that she is "trying to pay for everything from one person's wage", presumably they're not giving her any money from their JSA?

Peanuckle

The whole reason they aren't contributing to the household is because you allow them not to. If you want them to then you need to speak up and say so, and point out that if they don't contribute then you'll give them the phone number of the local homeless organisation.

You're enabling them to sit on their rears and live off your wages so isn't it about time you grew a pair and acted like a responsible parent and make them grow up? Or are you planning on posting on the eve of your retirement to ask how you can get your 4 adult children to move out so you can afford to live on your pension?

I apologise for being blunt but sometimes you need to remember the phrase "cruel to be kind", both in relation to my post and also in how you ought to force your children to act their ages and start being the adults they should be.

looby75

elvis86 wrote: »

What other explanation could there be?

Again, based on what the OP has said, it's fair to presume that none of them are disabled and therefore unable to work, else she wouldn't just be "trying to pay for everything from one person's wage", she'd also be in receipt of some benefits, surely?

So the only other explanation is that they're unemployed. Which means that they should be in receipt of JSA. And as the OP has explained that she is "trying to pay for everything from one person's wage", presumably they're not giving her any money from their JSA?

or the partner could have a disability which means they are unable to work, or could have recently been made redundant and not eligible for JSA due to the OP's income.

There are lots of reasons why the OP might be supporting a none working partner, that doesn't mean they are bone idol.

pinkclouds

elvis86 wrote: »

I can only go by what the OP posted.;)

The OP has not posted any information about their (supposed) spouse. I can imagine any number of possibilities ranging from being a homemaker and enabling hubby's work patterns to being disabled (before or after having kids) and unable to work outside the home. But it's all pure imagination as no facts have been given. The other adult could even be an elderly parent/grandparent, perhaps requiring additional care. That would be a particularly tough circumstance, placing extra pressure on the OP to find a fast solution.

If there is a short-term cashflow crisis, then pay the housing bills and approach your local church or a suitable local charity about food hampers. If there is a long-term financial black hole... perhaps you'll have to officially kick your kids out to enable them to go on the council house waiting list. Finally, do not shield your family from the realities - the kids need to know that any financial contributions would make a difference and your entire family needs to be aware of any possibility of losing their home. Too many secrets rarely make for happiness.

I'm sorry there are so many tough choices to make. Life sucks sometimes. Try and stay positive and remember that God helps those who help themselves. An alternative saying is: you make your own good luck. Good wishes to you.

elvis86

looby75 wrote: »

or the partner could have a disability which means they are unable to work, or could have recently been made redundant and not eligible for JSA due to the OP's income.

There are lots of reasons why the OP might be supporting a none working partner, that doesn't mean they are bone idol.

I reiterate, based on what the OP has said:

looby75 wrote: »

I now have 4 grown up children living at home and no longer recieve any tax benefits, meaning that I am now having to try and support 6 adults on 1 persons wage.

No mention of anybody being in receipt of disability benefits etc.