Of Joint Families and Power Games

I think it would be grossly unfair to impute all the power games to the older generation alone. Maybe in traditional Indian joint families, where females were brought up in a suppressed manner and were then required to go and live with the husband's family, the balance of power was almost always against them. Not necessarily so any longer. Nowadays one comes across increasing incidence of harassment of parents/ in-laws as well.

The most problematic aspect of the entire scenario is ascertaining what constitutes 'harassment', be it by the older generation or the younger. Often what is perceived as 'justifiable expectations' by one party, as part of living in a joint family set-up, is felt to be 'harassment' by the other, who feels imposed upon.

The whole issue basically turns upon 'atittude' and 'communication'. If (which is very, very rarely the case) both parties have an attitude of acceptance towards the joint family set-up, they tend to communicate and sort out their differences. This is to be seen in rare cases where the benefits accruing to both parties are palpable as well as clearly perceived by both (for example, where the earnings of the younger generation augment the financial position and stnadards of living of the whole family, while the older generation enables the younger generation by taking on the housekkeping and child-rearing functions). The day-to-day adjustments of joint family living thus become a minor trade-off for these larger perceived benefits.

However, where even one party perceives itself as self-sufficient (the older generation is financially secure, or the younger generation does not require child-rearing and housekeeping support), joint family adjustments become an irksome yoke around the neck. In such cases the institution of joint family is often seen to regress to a 'free-for-all' in which the relatively non-aggressive party rapidly becomes the victim and is, more often than not, mercilessly bullied till it either strikes back or breaks free.

There is, however, one point on which I would seriously like an opinion: I have known cases where parents have refused to come and live with their children in other cities, for fear that they would then be tied down into their children's household chores and childcare. Such people are generally alluded to as 'sensible, clear-thinking' parents. Why then, if the reverse happens (children declining to live with their parents in their hometowns and seeking better livelihoods in other cities/countries), is there an inevitable stigma, a smidgen of guilt, attached to them?