(no subject)

[tresjolie9]

Reading this article while watching Teen Mom, and various episodes of Intervention in the background. I always wonder if whoever pens articles like this for The New York Times, has ventured outside their middle class New York Metropolitan Area background? Yes, they are going to get loads of people like me from New York saying "oh yes, I agree." But I wonder how someone from an area where expectations are completely different, where people often have a home and kids by the time they hit 20 or even 25 see articles like this?

Comments

[squee4242.livejournal.com]

I dunno. I think they touched on that a little bit in the article, but it's a tough question:

Young people spend their lives lumped into age-related clusters — that’s the basis of K-12 schooling — but as they move through their 20s, they diverge. Some 25-year-olds are married homeowners with good jobs and a couple of kids; others are still living with their parents and working at transient jobs, or not working at all. Does that mean we extend some of the protections and special status of adolescence to all people in their 20s? To some of them? Which ones? Decisions like this matter, because failing to protect and support vulnerable young people can lead them down the wrong path at a critical moment, the one that can determine all subsequent paths. But overprotecting and oversupporting them can sometimes make matters worse, turning the “changing timetable of adulthood” into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

[tresjolie9.livejournal.com]

Interesting point, which I can't quite answer, I think nowadays everyone "grows up," at different rates. And I also think that 20s are becoming an increasing and confusing time in life.

I think schooling is what lumps us into age related clusters, and all kinds of confusion begins once school ends.