Supreme Court - Kids after 18 need stay permission from parents/ reverse will follow

Re: Supreme Court - Kids after 18 need stay permission from parents/ reverse will fol

I fully agree with u parvathi. In fact this was actully practised in India calling it VANAPRASTHA

 

Re: Supreme Court - Kids after 18 need stay permission from parents/ reverse will fol

In the case quoted the parents do not want their DD to live with them , so what should they do if she insists on living with them ? Think they are following the much admired system of the west.
It should cut both ways, there should be no expectations from parents and children from each other.No looking after and no moolah.

 

Re: Supreme Court - Kids after 18 need stay permission from parents/ reverse will fol

In the article quoted, I would say the judge has also followed social dictats!! Initially he talks about 'children', but when it comes to married children, he separates the daughters, who apparently get certain rights by law with her marital family... Does it mean, as a daughter, I dont have any rights at my parental home?? No rights translate to no responsibility for some people.. So what if the parents, have no sons, (like mine)?? If the judge had said married children in general, that would have been much better and knocked some sense in to the minds of some 'children' who think it is their parent's duty to look after them..

This is also going to give more ammunition to those in-laws who think once you are married, you should 'forget' your parents and to those daughters who are bent upon causing trouble in their parental homes, because they are just 'guests'... Saying all this, he has expressed his opinion... though I wish people would learn to take things in context as what he has said applies more specifically to this context!!

Mythili

 

Re: Supreme Court - Kids after 18 need stay permission from parents/ reverse will fol

In my opinion...Children shud move out of their parental homes once they stand on their own feet. Even if they are not married. They are adults and high time they learnt to live on their own.
The above shud apply to both genders.
Ch ildren need to take care of parents wen they are unable to live alone and take care of their needs. Under no other circumstance should parents and children live under the same roof. The girl should have equal right to take care of her parents. The boys family should not be put on a pedestal simply bcoz they have a son. This change has to come in our society where a girl is expected to minimize contact with her family post marriage. There is no law prohibiting the girl from meeting her parents other than the mother in law!

 

Re: Supreme Court - Kids after 18 need stay permission from parents/ reverse will fol

Ever wondered what asking 18 yr old kid to be financially independent would entail ? Welcome to the west...
Kids are burdened with student loans and work two jobs trying to get a decent degree. At an age when they should focus on getting education they worry about interest rates trying to hold a roof over their heads .
It aint that rosy. But for our parents I dont think most us will be here earning our fat paychecks with zero student loans .

 

Re: Supreme Court - Kids after 18 need stay permission from parents/ reverse will fol

The ruling is based on the fact that under DV act 2005 the bride gets "rights" in "inlaws" personal property and hence she loses right on her father's personal property(personal property, not ancestral property, the girl continues to have rights over that). The ruling is opposite of what many readers here are understanding it to be and in many sense reflect the gender biased rules of India, which gives newly married DIL rights over ILs property.

Regarding the reverse, do parents have right to stay with their child? This another gender biased law, CrPC 125 which gives parents, right to mantainance over sons and not on daughters. So old age retired parents have "right" to sue son but not daughter to take care of them, financially and physically.

Indian law is no way going westward(which is gender nuetral), it is amalgam of Hindu law, which gives all responsibilities to Grahast man, selectively adding western tenets of feminine rights. What we end up with is: DIL has no legal responsibility towards ILs but she has legal rights over their property.
Wife is first in line of inheritance if a married childless male dies intestate, but in case of female dying intestate, her husband gets rights only it has been more than seven years of marriage.

In any case, I welcome that ladies here prefer to have west style laws. I have personally written to NCW, that it seems many ladies suffer from having to stay with inlaws. Why doesnt NCW, taking cognizance of such suffering propose two amendments, take away the DIL rights over ILs personally aquired and anscestral property, and make 125 gender nuetral(which shall give legal option to DILs parents to stay with her). But NCW replied that they do not see that such an amendment would benefit ladies.

 

Re: Supreme Court - Kids after 18 need stay permission from parents/ reverse will fol

@ jag there is a point in what u say.... so I guess u can stay with ur parents till u get a job. Then what prevents the "earning" adults from finding their own space even if u have a job in the same city as that of ur parents? I would say People should move out of their parental homes irrespective of gender once they start earning. especially if u r married.

These days I actually see a lot of adults in 30's who have no clue of handling any stuff on their own nor have any sense of responsibility as mom/dad looks into it. And the best way to inculcate responsibility is by running one's own establishment. would like to know how others think

 

Re: Supreme Court - Kids after 18 need stay permission from parents/ reverse will fol

There are two sides to every story. On one hand it is very unfortunate that our "boys and girls" of marriagable age are as savvy and worldly wise as a pair of challenged babies. That is to a large extent a problem with out way of bringing up our children - deprive them of the opportunity to make their mistakes, live and learn the hard way. Net result, I have seen elderly people above 60 whose parents lived long struggling to take decisions on their own - because they were always told what to do.

On the other hand think of the practical problems if in a country with a population of more than a billion (a huge percentage of it young people) all young adults were to leave home and look for a place to set up home. Housing is so expensive, jobs already limited, paying ability low. Where are the homes? What will happen to the prices of housing? So in practicality, it is really easier said than done.