A Comparative Analysis of Ryan Healy’s “Twentysomething: Be Responsible, Go Back Home After College” and Florinda Vasquez’s “The ‘Responsible’ Child”

A Comparative Analysis of Ryan Healy’s “Twentysomething: Be Responsible, Go Back Home After College” and Florinda Vasquez’s “The ‘Responsible’ Child”

           

Both essays, Ryan Healy’s “Twentysomething: Be Responsible, Go Back Home After College” and Florinda Vasquez’s “The ‘Responsible’ Child” deal with the issue of going back home after college, and whether its responsible or not. Healy states, “When you look closely it is glaringly apparent that moving back in with parents is one of the most responsible things a new college grad can do” (172). On the other hand, Vasquez states, “I have some major disagreements with this post blogger Ryan Healy, suggesting that it’s a ‘responsible’ decision to move home after college” (174). Vasquez essay is a response to Healy essay. Vasquez is a mother. Her views would be different from someone just using statistics like Healy. Vasquez is based on opinions, while Healy’s essay is based on facts. In Healy’s essay it states, “According to Monster.com, 60 percent of college graduates move home with mom and dad after graduation and the trend is on the rise” (172). Vasquez’s explanation for using her opinion states, “As I say, I’m probably a traditionalist, and my viewpoint is in line with my own experiences” (175). Healy’s essay is more agreeable because of his points on finance, parent support and transition period.

            In each of the essays Healy and Vasquez both share a common ground on financial support and moving back home. They both agree by basically saying moving back home is a good financial decision. Healy states this by saying, “However, moving home with Mom and Dad will immediately save you about $700 a month in housing cost” (173). Vasquez replies by saying, “ If the grad takes advantage of that – in a ‘good’ way – by working hard and saving up that money during this time period, he or she will be much better positioned financially for a more desirable lifestyle when the time to move out finally arrives” (174). My mom’s friend Latonya moved back home after college and was able to pay her debts back from college in six month interest free. For three more years, she stayed with her parents and was able to pay for her first home in cash. Using this parent support system definitely has its advantages according to Healy.

            Healy and Vasquez agree that parents’ support is a good thing but in different ways. Vasquez thinks there is a fine line between using parents and gaining help from them. Vasquez clarifies this by saying, “Unless the recent grad is paying rent and other housing expenses to the parent, and doing his or her own laundry, errands, cleaning, etc. – that is, approximating living on one’s own as closely as possible under the circumstances – I’m inclined to think “my house my rules’ applies, especially if there’s also some amount of ‘my support’ involved” (175). Healy goes in a different direction with the idea of parent support. Healy thinks having more time to look for a job will give the graduate the best opportunity rather than just trying to get any paying job. Healy states, “By moving home after graduation, you have little or no rent, which allows for more freedom when searching for a job” (173). Healy thinks that being able to go out and look for a better salary is an advantage of living with parents. 

            There is a certain transition period both authors can find a common ground on. Vasquez wants to raise a functioning adult as any mother would. She believes that independence is the key and coming back home is going to hinder the graduate more than helping. Vasquez states, “And I’d suggest that rather than going away and coming back, one might ultimately arrive at the same place by attending a local university and living at home, preparing for a transition to independence after graduation” (175). On the other hand, Healy uses Jeffery Arnett as an example of transitions and quotes Arnett, “The period between college and adulthood as a self-focused stage where people have the freedom to focus on their own development” (173). Healy backs this up by saying, “Moving home for a while period enables an appropriate and productive transition” (173). In a sum, Healy thinks moving home helps graduate to make a better transition to the adult world.

            In conclusion, both authors agree to some degree on the main points of finance, parent support and transition period. As long as the graduate is on the right track, then moving back home is a responsible decision. Vasquez wants to raise independent adults. On the other hand, Healy wants grads to take full advantage of the support of the parents. His reasoning is the ultimate way to slash debt. He wants the grads to weigh out their opportunities rather than going through the word alone like Vasquez wants individuals to do. Vasquez’s example and reasoning are the most extreme cases. Healy, using facts, supports his statement that going back home after college is the most responsible thing to do after college.

Works Cited

Healy, Ryan. “Twentysomething Be Responsible, Go Back Home After College.” The Contemporary Reader, Ed. Gary Goshgarian. 10^th ed. Boston: Pearson Inc., 2011. 172-173. Print.

Vasquez, Florinda. “The ‘Responsible’ Child?” The Contemporary Reader, Ed. Gary Goshgarian. 10^th ed. Boston: Pearson Inc., 2011. 174-175. Print.