New data from EU agency Eurofound shows a sharp increase in the number of young adults still living in their parental home. Across all 28 member states, the percentage of people aged 18-30 who were still living with their parents had risen to 48% by 2011. There is no doubt that the underlying reasons for the increase – youth unemployment, the economics of austerity, increased deprivation – are cause for grave concern. To project, however, largely northern European cultural norms on to those statistics and make assumptions about what they mean more generally, may be too simplistic.
"Really we see that multi-generational households have very low life satisfaction and a very high level of deprivation and perceived social exclusion", says Anna Ludwinek, one of the co-authors of the report. It seems to me equally likely that these might be the result of the underlying unemployment and the resulting poverty. Ludwinek goes on to link living at home with a lack of independence.
She is right, of course, in the strictest sense of independence as an individualistic or even lonely pursuit; but in an era of widespread anxiety for the demise of family values (and there are many positive ones), there may be another way of looking at this. If one looks at a family as a unit, at a time of scarcity, reducing consumption is an entirely rational economic response. Sharing arrangements are undoubtedly more efficient than single setups. The reasons for considering a flatshare of four or five entirely unrelated young people as being independent, and a family of five continuing to share a roof until circumstances change not, are largely cultural. Clearly, each arrangement has advantages and disadvantages.
During times of economic hardship the last thing we should be doing is superimposing guilt or a sense of failure on families unwilling or unable to fragment. It is simplistic and naive to suggest that all these young people are a burden to their parents. Contrary to the generalisations contained in the report, the extension of the family unit beyond the rather arbitrary age of majority may be beneficial to both parents and children, both financially and psychologically.
It seems to me a huge leap and a projection of very specific values to assume that all parents roll their eyes and sigh with exasperation at the news of a child coming back to live with them. Many smile and embrace them with deep satisfaction – not at the circumstances which have forced this, but with relief and gratitude that familial love can provide a safety net. One of the results of the crisis in Greece has been that many cannot afford fees for nursing homes, for instance. Many of the younger people living at home actually look after their elderly parents.
One must also look at the housing situation today against what it was 20 or 40 years ago, both in terms of prices, but also in terms of properties available. The ONS published inflation figures today which show that, despite overall inflation cooling, house prices rose by 6.8%. Rents last year rose by 5.1% compared with the year before. All this against a background of enormous youth unemployment, job insecurity and stagnating wages. For decades, the housing market geared up for infinite growth and prosperity, converting swaths of large houses, suitable for sharing, into small one-bedroom units, in order to maximise rent revenues. In contrast, many parents tend to still live in larger properties. Young people study longer and marry and have children later, on the whole. Given that, what are the compelling reasons for disbanding a family unit while it is still functional, other than to spread consumption and bring about debt-fuelled growth?
Regrouping into a family unit, in response to a harsher economic climate, is a rational and propitious thing to do – the realistic alternative being a further loss of living standards or mass homelessness. Looking at the minority of cases where people don't have family to fall back on, makes it clear how catastrophic the absence of that support can be.
At a time when the social safety net is being systematically dismantled, it is perhaps time for a deep re-examination of the idea that family relationships are a set of responsibilities to be discharged by a particular date. A family is much more; it is a nexus of love, solidarity and support, intelligent and responsive to outside circumstances. A reduction in consumption, a less wasteful model of living, a pooling of resources – these may be, both economically and environmentally, positive developments arising out of a disastrous set of circumstances.
