<p>Cutting off funding for your child’s education just because of who their roommate is?
All I can say is that THANK GOD this country isn’t filled with people like you…
This is a new generation…wake up
Open-mindedness will get you a lot farther in life.</p>
<p>Calmom’s posts re. housing in our time and our parents’ time brings back memories of an outraged mama arriving at our sorority house at 6 am on a weekday, insisting the housemother do a bed check to see if the actual girls in the beds matched the names of those who were officially supposed to be in the beds, then tracking her own daughter to an off campus apartment where she had been happily living for more than a year, exposed several other girls to their parents, and caused the firing of the housemother (an extremely sweet elderly widow in reduced circumstances who could never keep anyone’s name straight) because she hadn’t kept us safe or preserved our reputations. Oh boy, those were the days!</p>
<p>I don’t think the <em>rescued</em> daughter ever finished college after being hauled home in disgrace so that brings my digression back to the OP. at least sort of.</p>
<p>I think we’re all (including National Review mom) getting a little hysterical here.</p>
<p>First, I’d bet dollars to doughnuts that NR Mom (and of course, Dad, whose sole decision this would be according to traditional commonsense values) did NOT in fact refuse to pay their child’s tuition for her final quarter at Stanford. I am certain that they wrote a nasty letter to Stanford’s president, though.</p>
<p>Second, remember, we are reading a little screed in the National Review. Regardless of the facts – clearly the daughter agreed to take part in this system, and she may or may not have been perfectly happy with the outcome – how could Mom pass up a chance like this to tee off in print on liberal, edgy Stanford? After all – having withdrawn herself from the workforce 20 years ago – she needs to start doing something other than child care! Writing a talked-about NR piece is a great start. You go, girl!</p>
<p>Third, I wondered about that four-kids-to-a-room thing, too, but Sly Si’s post makes clear that this is probably four kids to two rooms, and that they could make the bedrooms single sex if they wanted. But then they wouldn’t have a living/party room.</p>
<p>Fourth, if I were a university general counsel, this WOULD get me to think a bit about the relationship between the university and co-op housing groups. I think NR Mom’s article has definitely exposed some gaps in Stanford’s documentation, but they won’t be there by the fall. (Almost 30 years ago my sister was in Synergy, I think. It was better than her other housing options.)</p>
<p>My son was in a quad one year. It was his own danged fault that he ended up there. He did not get his stuff in on time. The quad was an overflow arrangement with kids getting placed in doubles and triples as they opened up but my son was 4th on the 4 person list to be placed as he was there because he missed the boat on what he was supposed to do. The quads were also used as a place to to put kids who had to be moved for other reasons. If someone was a problem, for instance and they needed to separate roommates, and no one would trade, one kid would be put in the quad until other living quarters opened. As it turned out, the quad turned into a huge double for most of the year for my son, and he opted not to move out.</p>
<p>When parents are footing the bills for college, they do have the right to have their stipulations. Yes, some of them are unreasonable to some of us. I sympathize with a kid who HAS to be premed or engineering or parents won’t pay for college and the kid really wants to be a fine arts major. I sympathize when kids have to go to a certain list of colleges that mom and dad choose because they flat out don’t want to pay for anything not on the list. I know some folks who will not pay for any college unless it is affiliated strongly with their religion. It’s their money and their business.</p>
<p>I don’t think that at this time it is unusual for some people not to want to pay for male/female roomate combos. When dorms first became coed by building, there were parents who balked at that arrangement. I know parents from then that wanted their kids at single sex colleges. Parents still have kids at single sex high schools and elementary schools, and there are still single sex colleges. Some parents don’t want to pay for the single sex colleges, these days. It’s their money!</p>
<p>I think that when Mom and Dad are paying the bills, they have the right to dictate certain things about how the dependent child lives. For example, while the student may be an “adult”, if his parents are sacrificing to pay for the kid’s education, does the student have the right to just decide he’s not going to work over the summer because he wants to hang out at the beach all day, or just decide that he’s going to blow thousands of dollars on a luxurious spring break trip to Punta Cana while his parents eat PB&J back home? I think not. The family in this case seems troubled, which I think is skewing our reactions. In general, though, I think parents have the right to not subsidize a living arrangement for their kids that they as parents aren’t comfortable with. And those reasons could be moral or practical or completely irrational. I can see how a parent might be afraid her S or D is too immature to be able to sufficiently focus on his/her studies while living 24/7 with a GF or BF. </p>
<p>A dependent child needs to abide by his parents’ rules, whether they are reasonable or not–unless the rules are illegal. Frankly, I think this is healthy for the young person because their desire to do as they please and live with whom they wish will contribute greatly to their eagerness to get out on their own and become financially independent.</p>
<p>Cross-posted with cpt.!</p>
<p>Sometimes circumstances do arise where a parent has to examine the situation carefully. Knowing a number of kids of this age, many situations are manipulated by the kids. I know kids who don’t want to live in the dorms, and so at the last minute put their parents in a corner that they know their parents don’t like to get their way to live in a mixed sex or off campus arrangement. That deceit would bother me, and I really would not blame anyone who would refuse to be forced in that situation. An upfront conversation would go a lot farther for me.</p>
<p>But what to do when your 19 year old wants to live with her boyfriend off campus? And you really, really, really do not want to subsidize this arrangement.</p>
<p>Cardinal Fang, thanks for the succinct distillation of the matter. 
You nailed it.</p>
<p>I think age matters. my D was not interested in even co-ed Bathrooms. Could be that she has no brothers and enough bathrooms in this house to not share with dad. As a freshman I would not be comfortable with her sharing a double dorm room with a guy, particularly one she does not know. As they get older, they make different decisions. I don’t expect to pull the money strings on lifestyle. I can’t control her life any more than my mother could control mine. I really don’t want to. I want her to make good safe decisions. I want her to do well in school so I will not pay for her to play, she must keep up her grades and scholarship. That is the only financial strings we have. Oh yeah she isn’t taking fancy vacations of we aren’t. It seems to be all about control.</p>
<p>TheGFG, I think you’re correct that the one paying the bill can dictate anything. What a slippery slope for parents when what they dictate is unreasonable. I think many will find themselves dictated out of their adult children’s lives.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Agree. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>ROFLOL I guess a lot of us find ourselves in that position.:)</p>
<p>Plus ca change. A friend was an undergrad at Stanford in the early 80’s. She went to see a friend at one of the dorms or co-ops one day, and was told to go thataway through the house. Opening a door, she came upon a naked not under the sheets heterosexual couple who were enthusiastically boinking away. They were utterly unembarassed, while my friend wanted to melt into the ground. They asked who she was looking for, told her which way to go, and then immediately returned to the activity at hand before my friend had left. </p>
<p>Of course, for all I know back then the bedrooms might have been single sex. So to speak. And thus would have been just peachy keen for NRO mom.</p>
<p>The virginal attitudes that some parents have toward their children cracks me up. If their little darling is in an intimate relationship with someone the living arrangements hardly matter. In fact if a student wants to room with a significant other it would indicate a more healthly lifestyle choice vs the random hook up for mere sexual pleasure.</p>
<p>As parent we need to scroll back to when we were our adult childrens age. Very few of us would have a good reason to pass judgement on our offsprings’ sex lives. And for many our sweeties are probably making better choices than we did.</p>
<p>To reply to the issue raised by BCEagle91, off-campus housing near Stanford is ridiculously expensive by any non-California, non-Manhattan standards. Really ridiculously expensive. Really, really ridiculously expensive.</p>
<p>I just checked out Oak Creek Apartments on Sand Hill Road. Admittedly, a very nice apartment complex–but in Palo Alto, they’re all pretty nice. A studio apartment with 1 bath, 508 square feet, is yours for the (low, low) price of $1525-$1985 per month, plus a $500 deposit.</p>
<p>Trust goes a long way toward having a happy, growing and sustained relationship with those we love. I don’t envision fighting with my kids over housing and am grateful that thus far I’ve been very pleased with their choices of housing arrangements. They’ve always asked for our counsel and we ask them their options and inclinications and are pleased with their preferences and choices.</p>
<p>Even back in the 70s when I was in college, folks had many different actual living arrangements which sometimes differed significantly from the “official” arrangements. It was always fascinating & abstractly amusing to me to see who poured out of the dorms during evening/early am firedrills on campus. We were not co-ed within the floors but you’d never have guessed by the folks who came out of the rooms.</p>
<p>originaloog, if we accept the either-or scenario you’re positing, then I suppose your point is sensible so long as you believe abortion is part of a healthy lifestyle. In that age group, 49% of pregnancies are unplanned. Maybe since I have an extended family member who, while on the pill, nonetheless got pregnant as a teenager (wreaking havoc on her life), I see things differently.</p>
<p>Apparently, no one seems to believe that there’s a third option besides the ones you suggest–that there truly are college kids out there who are virgins and that when their parents believe they aren’t sexually active, they aren’t deluded and have their heads in the sand.</p>
<p>Kids who are celibate and wish to remain so, would likely choose same-gender housing to avoid physical temptation until such time as they are emotionally and financially ready for all the possible consequences of intimacy. Their parents would want them to have that choice. And there will also be parents who want that arrangement for their kids regardless of where the child stands on the issue. </p>
<p>And count me among the number of people who were virigns until the wedding day.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, good for you, and I hope my D follows your example, but I won’t hold my breath…</p>
<p>Sometimes there are good reasons for parents not wanting to pay for things. This really comes down to an individual situation and choice. I know a number of parents paying for rooms for their kids when they are not living in them. For morality reasons, concern, I don’t know. I know I really would not like to pay for my son living with a significant other during college. Provincial, yes. Should I reconsider? Maybe. But right now I just don’t want to do it. For those 4 years when he is being supported pretty much totally by me, I feel that I want him focused on the school work and having some safe haven away from an intense relationship. I am willing to pay for the empty room. Also, I know of a half dozen cases this year where relationships went awry, and things got pretty nasty even without the necessity to find another place to live. It just gives a little bit of breathing room for kids not really ready to commit. Too easy to get caught with no escape hatch, and many of these kids are still very raw emotionally.</p>
<p>There is a long distance between hoping ones kid is a virgin until marriage and the idea that sex is a casual thing and living together is not a big commitment when emotionally involved.</p>
<p>But to return to the original issue, if we are to believe the column-- and it sounds plausible to me, given what I know about Stanford and co-op housing in general-- this student wouldn’t be “living together” with any of the other three students sharing the room. Nor do I think it’s likely that any two of the other three were “living together;” couples don’t usually want an audience. There’s every reason to believe all four would just be roommates, and the four-person sleeping area was chosen by the coop to allow for more public space in the house. The daughter’s sexual choices are irrelevant to this issue. And the mother is a fuddy-duddy control freak.</p>
<p>sounds to me like the daughter doesn’t care if she lives with guys or not, and was just too scared of her mother to tell her (i wouldn’t want to accept responsibility for that decision if that woman was my mother either…)</p>
<p>on the subject though, i don’t think it would be a big deal to live in a co-ed room, especially if there’s more than just 2 people. “hallcest” is so looked down upon as it is that i seriously doubt the relationships would be more than friends or roommates. most couples know that living in a dorm room together would be a bad idea, and if they don’t, then they’re the kind who spend every moment together anyway.</p>