Janissy wrote:
I take exception to your list just with these two items. I think parents actually do owe their kids food and shelter, a debt they assume simply by having the kids. (I am a parent, for the record, so I am not grumbling about my own parents but stating what I owe my daughter for having her as all parents owe their children.) However, that debt ends when childhood ends, something that many young adults don't realize and think their parents owe them support literally for life.
In quite a lot of societies, once the child becomes an adult and the parent becomes an elderly person unable to care for themselves (if that happens) the debt is reversed.
But I think the parent owing the child (too young to care for himself) and the child owing the parent (too old to care for himself) are the only actual debts.
If parents owe their children support up to adulthood simply for having them then when those children reach adulthood the debt is paid. The reversal of a paid debt is nonsensical. Caring for one's elderly parents is altruistic, following your logic.
In my case and in other cases where parents extend support for their children into adulthood, however, a new debt is formed. Which then leads to caring for one's elderly parents as payment.
That's my take on it anyway.
_________________
Chances are, if you're offended by something I said, it was an attempt at humour.