Downstairs
We discussed this new living arrangement at length before we took the plunge. We focused on the benefits that would come from combining our collective equity and purchasing a future that would look brighter for everyone.
We could afford a house that would fit all our needs. We agreed on the location. And we liked each other well enough to believe we could live happily ever after.
The fact the equity part was uneven was acknowledged right from the beginning – that was part of the benefit package for the upstairs people. The fact that the downstairs person was of an age that preparing for a future where she would require more assistance on the day to day was also acknowledged, this was the part of the benefit package for her. The mutual benefit package was even Steven – all three of the participants in this new living arrangement were taking a step in a happier direction.
So far so good – we are four weeks in – apart from the pit bull in the garage thing and the broken washing machine door thing and the coal miner in the backyard thing – we are off to the races.
There are a few things I should point out as our collective story moves forward. We three are all oldests – we’ve spent our lives breaking ground for siblings. We are all of strong character (I was going to just say ‘strong’ when it occurred to me that I’m not anymore – pickle jars frequently get the better of me). We are all older than forty (some of us more older than others). We didn’t come into this arrangement blindly – we knew about all of these wonderful (cough) qualities before we took the plunge.
The house has three layers, I live in the bottom layer (not lair as one would normally consider a good place to put a mother-in-law/mother). The upstairs people are learning to cope with a mother-in-law/mother in the basement. The downstairs person is learning to cope with not actually being ‘the mother’ in this house. It’s a bit tricky at times. The unfazed occupants are Chester and Fergus.
Multigenerational living is not a new concept, in the days of yore it was all the rage, (in fact it was all the norm – it is still the norm in many cultures). But it’s new to me. I’m not sure if we have come together as business partners or shareholders or if we need to form a strata. I do know we are family and will always have each other’s best interest at heart. I’m not sure what will happen when we disagree on something (which is bound to happen at some point). I’m a parent – my instinct is to lead. The upstairs people lead for a living. Who’s the boss?
Upstairs
“Paradoxically speaking…”
I have lived in multi-generational homes at various times of my life. I grew up living with my grandparents and lived for a period (or two) as an adult with my family. I’ve always been lucky enough to authentically enjoy living with my people, they are some of my closest friends and living with them isn’t a chore, it’s an opportunity to have people I love close to me. Sunday dinners can happen any day of the week, and catching up on the news of the day doesn’t require a phone call, just a call down the stairs. There are people all over the world who would jump at the chance.
When you live in a multi-generational home, conflict happens. It’s just a natural thing, especially once the kids are not small anymore. My dad used to have a saying; “as long as I pay for the tar paper on the roof, I make the rules.” But what happens when everyone is paying for the tar paper? These decisions are tricky enough when there are two adults in the house, what happens when there are three, or more? Strata rules could work I suppose: “Section 5.1.2 clearly states that the temperature shall be set at 19.5 degrees during the day and 17.5 degrees at night…” but the more realistic version is that we pick the battles that are worth fighting. This approach has utilitarian elements to it; the issues that are really important we stand our ground, and the ones that are less critical we allow to move along the path of least resistance. The trouble happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object. This is known as the “Irresistable Force Paradox.”
According to Alder (2004), “the paradox arises because it rests on two incompatible premises—that there can exist simultaneously such things as unstoppable forces and immovable objects. The “paradox” is flawed because if there exists an unstoppable force, it follows logically that there cannot be any such thing as an immovable object and vice versa.”
For me the lesson is that there can never be both an immovable object and an unstoppable force in the same paradox, or three-level detached home. The fact that we are family requires that we always need to find the limits of our immovability or unstoppable-ness and be willing to be moved, or stopped. There are no winners in a paradox.
There is always another solution, and even when we do disagree, at least we do so looking each other in the eye.
Reference:
Alder, M. (2004). “Newton’s Flaming Laser Sword”. Philosophy Now. 46: 29–33.