Exactly At WHAT Point Is An Artist/Artists "Debt" Paid In Full?

[juicefree20]

I keep reading how Michael owes his brothers because of how they "helped" him get to where he ended up. Exactly at what point does ones debt end to their former group members & exactly how can one reasonably quantify the value of their "help"?

If the same kind of logic which many apply to Michael Jackson were applied across the board then wouldn't EVERYONE who ever started out with a group, then moved on to massive success APART from said group, also owe ALL of those former groupmates a piece of their solo pie?

Teddy Pendergrass received his first taste of massive stardom as a member of Harold Melvin & The Blue Notes. Teddy went to to carve out a massive solo career apart from them. So are the folks who believe this actually suggesting that because Harold Melvin & The Blue Notes "made" Teddy what he eventually became that he "OWES" Lloyd Parks, as well as the estates of Harold Melvin, Larry Brown & Bernie Wilson because of his SOLO success?

Paul McCartney began his career with The Beatles. So from what is being suggested, as he made his name with The Beatles, is he supposed to kick back a percentage to Ringo & the estates of John & George because they too "helped" him along?

Deniece Williams received her first world-wide exposure as a member of Wonderlove. With that as fact should she have had to give points to Stevie forever because she enjoyed a pretty nice solo career?

Does this mean that because Patti LaBelle received her first taste of global success as a member of LaBelle that after fashioning a rather successful solo career she now owes Cindy, Nona & Sarah for her SOLO success?

Does Diana Ross owes Mary, Cindy & the estate of Flo Ballard because despite her massive SOLO success, her first success happened to be with The Supremes. Does Phil Collins owe his Genesis bandmates? Is Michael McDonald is in deep debt to The Doobie Brothers & should Clyde Orange & the gang be sending their lawyers over to Lionel's home because he had his first taste of success with The Commodores?

Is this honestly what is being suggested? That ANY artist who has greater success on THEIR OWN owes the group members whom he/she started out with because that group was successful?

If this rule doesn't extend to every other person who broke awy from a successful group & went on to massive success apart from said group, then why should that "rule" apply to Michael & to Michael alone?

Furthermore, if we apply the same kind of logic which many apply to Michael Jackson across the board to everyone, then shouldn't that same logic apply to those of us in the "real" world?

As an example, all of us who have ever worked must've received some training or help from either a co-worker who helped us or perhaps a supervisor who pushed us along. If you've continued in the same occupation, do you also believe that you owe everyone who helped you along the way & if so, exactly how much of your salary have you generously offered those who helped you along your journey?

Just wondering.

[jillfoster]

The difference here, juice, is all those other people you cited aren't siblings. Family is supposed to take care of each other.

[marv2]

I was going to say that the difference is in the case of all those others, they weren't flesh and blood. The Jacksons took Michael from the cradle to the grave......literally! They were with him from the very start, encouraged him, trained him, nurtured him and yes disciplined him. I am sure not one of them tried to stand in his way when he went solo. My guess is that they were very proud of him because he came from them and he was also their brother and their son. When he was sick, they took care of him, fed him, gave him a roof over his head and sent him to school. These things are typical of most families. What is not typical is once one of them hits it big, that he totally leaves them out of it. He should have left them something man. I don't care what anybody else thinks about this, he could have left Marlon or Randy $1,000 even. I mean come on. Has it ever been determined why he supposedly did not like his family anymore?

I saw all of them accompanying him to court everyday during his last trial in 2005. Joe Jackson literally escorted Michael to and from the courthouse daily. I saw it. Janet and some of the others tried to stage an intervention when Michael had gotten deep into the drugs, etc. He shut them out and had help in doing so.

Technically, he may not owe them anything, but why be so cold blooded about it with your family when you are filthy rich?

[juicefree20]

Marv & Jill,

Thank you for your responses. While I somewhat understand the point that both of you are making, let me give another viewpoint.

Now it's truly stated that while one can choose their friends, they have no choice as to who comprises their family. Furthermore, they can't control how their family members treat them, nor can they control how their family members turn out to be. Very often, it appears as though your biggest enemies often are people who share your bloodline.

Before getting into Michael or anyone else, I'll give you my own personal experiences with so-called "family" members.

I have family members who while trying to pass, had their own family members either visit them after sundown, or if earlier than that, had them come into their homes NOT through the front door, but rather through the side or rear entrance.

Yet another family member, an aunt whom had moved out of town was visiting [[unbeknownst to her SLIGHTLY darker brothers & sisters) & was riding the train with her children & a sister who remained here in N.Y. Quite coincidentally, my mother & sister happened to get on that J train a mere few stops away. My sister who hadn't seen this aunt in years looked across & noticed her & my other aunt & brought them to my mothers attention.

This "aunt" who grew up in the same house that my mother did, this same "aunt" who once came to our home when we had parties & things as such, DID NOT introduce her sister & niece to her children as their cousin & aunt. In fact, she didn't want her kids to know that they had a aunt & cousin whom were obviously black.

Yet another aunt had a child, a child that she cast aside, giving him to my grandmother to raise. When the child was about 3 years-old or so, the child went up to her & called her "mama". She hit the child in the eye with a wire rack, pointed to my grandmother & told him, "THAT'S your mama".

She NEVER treated him right, not even when he went to Vietnam & at no point, did she ever act like his mother, nor as an aunt to her darker hued nieces & nephews, which meant just about all of us. At no point did she ever treat us as an aunt would treat nieces & nephews. Hell, she treated some of her own brothers that way & according to her, my mother set the family back 50 years due to marrying an obviously black man.

And this woman had absolutely no problem moving into our home in St. Albans with her sister, her obviously black husband & their 3 children. Until she purchased her home in Flatbush, circa 1965, after which she had no further need for association, thereby continuing her her delusion that she wasn't just as black as the rest of us were.

In one of those crazy twists of fate that life often deals out, the very same son whom she had rejected & denied for more than 50 years buried her just a few months ago. Despite all of the years of treating him like nothing, her husband died years earlier, leaving her by herself because frankly, she never developed any relationship with most of us. And the only folks who wanted to deal with her had already died.

So once she began deteriorating from the ravages of Alzheimers, guess who ended up taking her 3,000 to his California home & along with his very Black wife, both ending up taking care of her after 60 years of treating him like garbage?

Worse still, yet another aunt decided to sue him after his mother died because somewhere along the line, this sister who she DID NOTHING to help despite also living in California, once promised her 25% of her estate once she died. Adding further insult to injury, a few short years earlier this same aunt who decided to sue him was suffering with breast cancer.

Guess who helped her out when she was on the balls of her ass, going so far as to come by to make sure that she was attended to, giving her money, driving her to doctors appointments & when she recovered, actually GIVE her a car, his wife's car with the approval of his wife? Guess who helped her out years earlier when she was unemployed for years & actually had her living with him when she was down on her luck?

And the thing is it's not as though he was trying to rip her off or to get over on her. He was simply trying to get the house sold in a depressed market, but it wasn't moving fast enough for her.

Ironically, the aunt that died got that home in the mid 60s & the first time that I ever was in that house was just a few months ago when I went there on my cousin's behalf in order to make sure that whatever remained was either thrown out, or placed into storage.

Not even in death did was that barrier to her home removed, as I merely made it to her former garage.

I offer these experiences not to bitch or moan or because I feel the need to engage in online therapy. I only offer this up to illustrate that although many of us have a lot of opinions about what SHOULD be, or how we THOUGHT that things work in the lives of others, very often we offer these opinions with exactly ZERO knowledge of how things actually WERE.

We may THINK that we know exactly what goes on in families, but often times, we don't even know the half of the story. Come on, how many people do you know of whom if you hear them tell it have this perfect life with perfect kids & perfect spouses & perfect families, only to later learn that all of that was nothing more than camouflage or a lie?

Every smiling face isn't a happy one & if walls could talk, the stories they could tell. None of were actually there, but Michael was. I doubt very seriously that he did anything based upon some insane vendetta against his family.

However, they know better much more than you or I. But if recent events are a fair indicator, then that speaks volumes more than any of our speculation.

And it doesn't paint a very flattering picture

[juicefree20]

Now, let's address another aspect of this, something which while one of the oldest adages ever, still hold true to this very day...

"Many are called...few are chosen."

Much to their chagrin, many ex-lead singers of successful groups discovered this to be true. And we know that the record shows that the overwhelming majority just don't successfully make that leap to solo stardom.

Tons of lead singers whom had massive success with their group went to to have some very subpar solo careers. Tony Williams of The Platters, Clyde McPhatter of The Drifters are but a few who found their fortunes as soloists to be a far cry less than when they were with their group. I could name a whole lot more, but you get the point.

The most difficult & awkward phase in any young stars career is that leap from "cute" kid, to adult star & this holds true not only for young singers, but for young actors & actresses as well. Shirley Temple went through it, Alfalfa Switzer went through it, Spanky McFarland went through it, Frankie Lymon went through it, as did a host of others who never quite successfully bridged the gap from child star to adult star.

The fact remains that despite their help, NO ONE, not even his brothers could've predicted how huge Michael was going to become.

And even if true that he started out with them & they indeed "helped" him out, then I would argue that it was a mutually beneficial situation.

As I recall it, it would seem to me as though they also enjoyed the trappings of success while Michael was with them from 1968 or so up to 1984. It seems to me that they got paid what he got paid, flew in the same jets, slept in the same hotels, ate the same food, bought nice cars & houses & even got a girl or 10 along the way.

I remember all of those issues of "Right On", "Tiger Beat" & "Blues & Soul". I read them just like you did & it seems to me that if Michael benefitted from THEIR help, then they certainly benefitted from HIS help, being the primary lead & drawing card & all. So it would appear to me that they reaped some pretty good benefits from the association along the way. You & I should be so lucky.

A reasonable person would conclude that giving them nearly 20 years of his career should've been more than sufficient.

[juicefree20]

Jill & Marv,

I don't want you to believe that I don't agree with you by overlooking your feelings about family & ones obligations to family because I believe that family is paramount. For some time now, 10 years this October to be exact, many times when I could've been out doing me, I've tended to home. Fortunately, there have been some breaks in the waves where I've had extended periods where normal revisited. But when it got/gets hectic, man...it's hectic.

Due to unforseen circumstances which have been beyond everyone's control, I've basically had to put my own life on hold for a bit because when necessary, that's what family does. Hell, before last Saturday I hadn't shot so much as one show this entire year. No one asks for this kind of thing, you can't always see it coming & sometimes you can & you just brace for it & then do what you have to do, that is, if you can do anything about it at all.

This is not to suggest that I'm doing cartwheels about this, nor am I complaining. It merely comes down to the fact that sometimes one has to choose what's more urgent...their own needs or the needs of another. And then you simply make a choice based upon what you know to be the right thing to do, that is if you're able. Everyone's circumstances & consciences are different. Either way, you do what you can.

Likewise, since my grandson was born, I tend not to schedule anything on the weekends that he's here, which is every other weekend because I want to spend as much time with him as I can. He's only going to be this age once, the time is going to go by fast & I don't want to miss a thing. Besides that, I can't get enough of that little guy.

And trust me, I'm not saying any of this because I'm looking for a doggie biscuit, any more than I was accepting one when some used to try to praise me for having custody of my son from the day that he was born.

There's no badge of honor for doing what one should be doing & there were times that I got pissed-off at people congratulating me for doing something that millions of mothers have been doing for centuries, which is nothing less than I should've done under the circumstances as they were at the time. There was no crazy tragedy involved, no tale of horror involved. It was simply what was best for all concerned, so I did it.

There's no parade with ticker tape for doing what you should be doing, so I definitely agree with you that family should look out for family.

However, family also looks out for family by not doing things which will embarrass them. This obviously includes NOT writing songs which denigrates ones sibling. Family also looks out for family by NOT trying to embarrass & manipulate ones sibling into acquiescence to ones will by constantly releasing statements which announce that their sibling will be involved with things, while knowing full well that their sibling wants no part of what they're announcing.

Family also looks out for family by allowing one to spread their wings & to grow, not to act as an albatross around their neck. Family looks out for family by one growing to a point where one can hold their own in their OWN right, without needing or expecting someone to be the wind beneath their wings forever. Family looks out for family by not expecting them to hold down their household & yours as well, especially when you had the same leg up that they had.

Perhaps had this not appeared to be the case, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Family is supposed to be many things but very often it proves to be that no one can do you in quite like family or friends & regardless of their behavior, no matter how much it may suck, it's supposed to be excusable because well...they're family.

I don't subscribe to that theory because there's a limit to all things, even when family's involved.

[marv2]

Marv & Jill,

Thank you for your responses. While I somewhat understand the point that both of you are making, let me give another viewpoint.

Now it's truly stated that while one can choose their friends, they have no choice as to who comprises their family. Furthermore, they can't control how their family members treat them, nor can they control how their family members turn out to be. Very often, it appears as though your biggest enemies often are people who share your bloodline.

Before getting into Michael or anyone else, I'll give you my own personal experiences with so-called "family" members.

I have family members who while trying to pass, had their own family members either visit them after sundown, or if earlier than that, had them come into their homes NOT through the front door, but rather through the side or rear entrance.

Yet another family member, an aunt whom had moved out of town was visiting [[unbeknownst to her SLIGHTLY darker brothers & sisters) & was riding the train with her children & a sister who remained here in N.Y. Quite coincidentally, my mother & sister happened to get on that J train a mere few stops away. My sister who hadn't seen this aunt in years looked across & noticed her & my other aunt & brought them to my mothers attention.

This "aunt" who grew up in the same house that my mother did, this same "aunt" who once came to our home when we had parties & things as such, DID NOT introduce her sister & niece to her children as their cousin & aunt. In fact, she didn't want her kids to know that they had a aunt & cousin whom were obviously black.

Yet another aunt had a child, a child that she cast aside, giving him to my grandmother to raise. When the child was about 3 years-old or so, the child went up to her & called her "mama". She hit the child in the eye with a wire rack, pointed to my grandmother & told him, "THAT'S your mama".

She NEVER treated him right, not even when he went to Vietnam & at no point, did she ever act like his mother, nor as an aunt to her darker hued nieces & nephews, which meant just about all of us. At no point did she ever treat us as an aunt would treat nieces & nephews. Hell, she treated some of her own brothers that way & according to her, my mother set the family back 50 years due to marrying an obviously black man.

And this woman had absolutely no problem moving into our home in St. Albans with her sister, her obviously black husband & their 3 children. Until she purchased her home in Flatbush, circa 1965, after which she had no further need for association, thereby continuing her her delusion that she wasn't just as black as the rest of us were.

In one of those crazy twists of fate that life often deals out, the very same son whom she had rejected & denied for more than 50 years buried her just a few months ago. Despite all of the years of treating him like nothing, her husband died years earlier, leaving her by herself because frankly, she never developed any relationship with most of us. And the only folks who wanted to deal with her had already died.

So once she began deteriorating from the ravages of Alzheimers, guess who ended up taking her 3,000 to his California home & along with his very Black wife, both ending up taking care of her after 60 years of treating him like garbage?

Worse still, yet another aunt decided to sue him after his mother died because somewhere along the line, this sister who she DID NOTHING to help despite also living in California, once promised her 25% of her estate once she died. Adding further insult to injury, a few short years earlier this same aunt who decided to sue him was suffering with breast cancer.

Guess who helped her out when she was on the balls of her ass, going so far as to come by to make sure that she was attended to, giving her money, driving her to doctors appointments & when she recovered, actually GIVE her a car, his wife's car with the approval of his wife? Guess who helped her out years earlier when she was unemployed for years & actually had her living with him when she was down on her luck?

And the thing is it's not as though he was trying to rip her off or to get over on her. He was simply trying to get the house sold in a depressed market, but it wasn't moving fast enough for her.

Ironically, the aunt that died got that home in the mid 60s & the first time that I ever was in that house was just a few months ago when I went there on my cousin's behalf in order to make sure that whatever remained was either thrown out, or placed into storage.

Not even in death did was that barrier to her home removed, as I merely made it to her former garage.

I offer these experiences not to bitch or moan or because I feel the need to engage in online therapy. I only offer this up to illustrate that although many of us have a lot of opinions about what SHOULD be, or how we THOUGHT that things work in the lives of others, very often we offer these opinions with exactly ZERO knowledge of how things actually WERE.

We may THINK that we know exactly what goes on in families, but often times, we don't even know the half of the story. Come on, how many people do you know of whom if you hear them tell it have this perfect life with perfect kids & perfect spouses & perfect families, only to later learn that all of that was nothing more than camouflage or a lie?

Every smiling face isn't a happy one & if walls could talk, the stories they could tell. None of were actually there, but Michael was. I doubt very seriously that he did anything based upon some insane vendetta against his family.

However, they know better much more than you or I. But if recent events are a fair indicator, then that speaks volumes more than any of our speculation.

And it doesn't paint a very flattering picture

Juice. What an incredible story! I can relate to it. Thank you so much for sharing that.

[marv2]

Now, let's address another aspect of this, something which while one of the oldest adages ever, still hold true to this very day...

"Many are called...few are chosen."

Much to their chagrin, many ex-lead singers of successful groups discovered this to be true. And we know that the record shows that the overwhelming majority just don't successfully make that leap to solo stardom.

Tons of lead singers whom had massive success with their group went to to have some very subpar solo careers. Tony Williams of The Platters, Clyde McPhatter of The Drifters are but a few who found their fortunes as soloists to be a far cry less than when they were with their group. I could name a whole lot more, but you get the point.

The most difficult & awkward phase in any young stars career is that leap from "cute" kid, to adult star & this holds true not only for young singers, but for young actors & actresses as well. Shirley Temple went through it, Alfalfa Switzer went through it, Spanky McFarland went through it, Frankie Lymon went through it, as did a host of others who never quite successfully bridged the gap from child star to adult star.

The fact remains that despite their help, NO ONE, not even his brothers could've predicted how huge Michael was going to become.

And even if true that he started out with them & they indeed "helped" him out, then I would argue that it was a mutually beneficial situation.

As I recall it, it would seem to me as though they also enjoyed the trappings of success while Michael was with them from 1968 or so up to 1984. It seems to me that they got paid what he got paid, flew in the same jets, slept in the same hotels, ate the same food, bought nice cars & houses & even got a girl or 10 along the way.

I remember all of those issues of "Right On", "Tiger Beat" & "Blues & Soul". I read them just like you did & it seems to me that if Michael benefitted from THEIR help, then they certainly benefitted from HIS help, being the primary lead & drawing card & all. So it would appear to me that they reaped some pretty good benefits from the association along the way. You & I should be so lucky.

A reasonable person would conclude that giving them nearly 20 years of his career should've been more than sufficient.

Oh it was definitely mutual in terms of helping each other out early in their careers. I would like to know when did things go wrong? When and why did Michael essentially estrange himself from his brothers and family? I know we do not have the factual answer here and I have only read bits about the cause of it from his mother. I just cannot believe that it was only about money on Michael's part.

[jillfoster]

I think this boils down to people's family life and how they view things. I have a family that all gets along for the most part, and takes care of each other gladly... so that's why I see things that way, other people who have had drama and issues in their family probably see it the opposite. I have that trouble when dating men. I find I get along great with men who are close to their mothers, because I'm close with mine... when they don't get along with their mothers, then it never works... they can't handle that I get along with mine...I guess they feel they should get ALL the attention and since they ignore their parents, I should, too.

[juicefree20]

Marv,

To be completely honest with you, this is one of the saddest things imaginable.

Remember back when we used to get up on Saturday mornings, get ourselves a bowl of AlphaBits [[because the J5 said that they loved their AlphaBits), then wait for their cartoon to come on, or for them to make an appearance on Soul Train?

There's no way that you could've told me back then that at some distant point in the future that we'd be having a discussion like this. If anyone had tried to tell us something like this back then, that would've been fighting words because it would've been totally unimaginable.

It seems to me that sometimes the worst thing that happens to kids is that they grow up to become adults. And somewhere along the line, life strips them of every ounce of innocence along the way.

And then I remember all of those school books like "On Cherry Street" & "Green Light Go" which seemed to promise us kids that with hard work & perseverance we'd have that storybook life.

They played us like violins because for most people, life sure didn't turn out to be what they promised us "On Cherry Street".

As regards the above stories, I have a few of them that I could discuss. But these examples were sufficient for making the point that I wanted to make. There are 8 million stories in the naked city & I know of people who have far more horrific tales to tell than mine are.

Frankly, I was fortunate

[juicefree20]

Jill,

This morning I was thinking about some of the people whom I knew when I was growing up, as well as some of the people I see today. And I'm telling you that in many instances, sometimes people's biggest enemies & detractors happen to be those who share their blood.

It's truly stated that no one can hurt you quite like family or friends because you usually learn to be wary of outsiders. But no one ever prepares you for the reality that sometimes, one must be equally wary of their own flesh & blood.

For varying reasons or motives & to varying degrees, this has proven to be true by folks as diverse as The Menendez Brothers, to Mookie right down the block.

No one has a lock on this kind of behavior, as it seems to be an affliction of both the rich & the poor. And if you ever REALLY want to see how family can really be, just watch what usually seems to happen & the way that people act when a family member dies.

Somehow it appears to me that the family structure just isn't what it used to be & just a simple perusal of the internet can give just a few examples of how dysfunctional the family unit has become where a lot of people are concerned.

It also seems to me as though 20 years of "reality" tv & talk shows where people became comfortable with spilling their varying dysfunctions in front of a national tv audience [[under the guise that they were becoming famous), has dulled the sense of a whole lot of people who in the past would've known better than to air their dirty laundry publicly.

I believe that today it's called "The NEW Norm". I simply call it nuts.

[Roberta75]

Michael Jackson's actions and attitude regarding his family seem so clear to me now. The Jackson's were raised by an abusive father and a passive mother who basically let the abuse occur. However much Katherine loves her children, and I believe she does, it is an enabling love that sadly didn't deter the violent beatings or the dysfunctional patterns that shaped their lives.

Michael's siblings seem to feel that they have a right to their brother's money, which I believe they don't. Michael Jackson made his own money with his own talent and rightfully willed all his money to his children.

IMO, and this is only my opinion, Michael's brothers and sisters don't deserve one dime.

Roberta

[marv2]

Michael Jackson's actions and attitude regarding his family seem so clear to me now. The Jackson's were raised by an abusive father and a passive mother who basically let the abuse occur. However much Katherine loves her children, and I believe she does, it is an enabling love that sadly didn't deter the violent beatings or the dysfunctional patterns that shaped their lives.

Michael's siblings seem to feel that they have a right to their brother's money, which I believe they don't. Michael Jackson made his own money with his own talent and rightfully willed all his money to his children.

IMO, and this is only my opinion, Michael's brothers and sisters don't deserve one dime.

Roberta

So much for being a good Christian woman, huh Roberta?

I was taught that if you did not love your brother [[or sister), you could not possibly love God!

[jillfoster]

Marv, I think the upshot of this whole thing is that Michael cut all of his sibling out of his will because the intervention they tried on him. I think it's just payback for what he sees as them "Wronging" him, when they were trying to help him. And it was obvious he needed help, because he ultimately killed himself. So much for him caring so much about his children.... he couldn't care enough to make sure he was still BREATHING to take care of them. And people are saying Jermaine is a bad person? Please.

[marv2]

Marv, I think the upshot of this whole thing is that Michael cut all of his sibling out of his will because the intervention they tried on him. I think it's just payback for what he sees as them "Wronging" him, when they were trying to help him. And it was obvious he needed help, because he ultimately killed himself. So much for him caring so much about his children.... he couldn't care enough to make sure he was still BREATHING to take care of them. And people are saying Jermaine is a bad person? Please.

Now that is a consideration that most people have not thought about. Using those heavy drugs and having children.

[jobeterob]

Legally, there is no requirement to support parents, let alone siblings. So, legally, there is nothing to any of this.

Morally, for many of us, it would be hard to watch a parent struggle; the connection is likely somewhat less with a sibling. But who would want to stand by and let them fail?

Sometimes, there is only so much you can do; some of the people mentioned in this thread have had significant drug problems and financial problems. How long can you on supporting a person like Marvin Gaye or TBoy Ross?

It's a lot of "them that's got shall get, them that's not shall lose". Diana Ross and Michael Jackson and Berry Gordy [[one or all) supported all the male Jacksons, Chico, Mary Wilson, TBoy, Cindy Birdsong, Mary Wells, Florence Ballard, and a less public list, some of whom are members of SD ~ the list is almost endless. Because they "got", some people believe they should endlessly support people that "dont", that at times are users and abusers. And that is counterproductive to these people achieving their own dreams and developing their own characters ~ if the support just goes on and on.

[milven]

Legally, there is no requirement to support parents, let alone siblings. So, legally, there is nothing to any of this.

Morally, for many of us, it would be hard to watch a parent struggle; the connection is likely somewhat less with a sibling. But who would want to stand by and let them fail?

Lately, I am seeing a lot of older parents struggle. But they are struggling because they are helping their adult children. Adult children who lived above their means, lost their homes, filed bankruptcy and moved in with mommy and daddy rent free and eating everything in the fridge while mom and dad spend pennies on themselves. Some people are just leaches and dependants. They should struggle. Others run into hard times through no fault of their own and with a little help manage to get back on their feet and become independent again. Hopefully, we can determine who are the leaches and separate them from those who can genuinely use and appreciate help.