" Oh yes. Paying the mortgage and the taxes by yourself without even the possibility of a 2nd income if you lose your job takes all those financial pressures right off! ;) Nor does it mean you aren't a "family type", because you may still have aging parents and grandparents to take care of."

I've heard this line of thought quite a few times from some of the "perpetual singles" I've known. One woman used it a lot when, as a member of a volunteer community group, she was trying to sluff off more of her own responsibilities onto the shoulders of some already overburdened single parent. That really used to bug me. AARRRGGHHH!

What I've noticed among my own family and friends is that it's most often the siblings who are parents themsleves who volunteer for/are entrusted with the daily responsibililty of caring for aging parents. The others contribute money - which they do seem to have a lot more of! - but time? Hmmmmmmmm

As far as second incomes go, as long as a couple remains childless they can be ahead of the game (except maybe at tax time!), but put a baby or two into the equation and it changes entirely. Daycare expenses alone can eat up half of that second income, and feeding/clothing/educating/paying for the dental and medical needs of another human being, or two or three? So much for making a dent in the taxes or mortgage!

Single people also have more freedom to move, change jobs, go back to school if they're unsatisfied in their work. At least the possibility of a temporary reduction of income affects no one but oneself.

Of course these situations are not "universal" - every family is different. There's probably lots of financially strained singles out there who are "burdened" (?) with the care of aging parents and other family responsibilities. But honestly, I've never known any, and I've found the opposite scenario to be quite common.

What all this has to do with being a "grown-up" does seem a bit tenuous, though!

daylia