ANSWERS: 14
  • I would say it is age discrimination. Can you imagine a complex that said no one over the age of 50 can live here? There would be a lawsuit right away.
  • I disagree...I think that older people pay alot of money for places like this to be with the age group and social setting. Could you see a bunch of elders living in the getto? How peaceful is that to spend the remainder of your life? Older people get messed over with benefits, government programs and medical treatment. Why not give them a place to pass away peacefully with out the noise and violence?
  • It's not age discrimination. The Fair Housing Act provides an exclusion for senior/retirement communities. As long as it's officially designated as "Over 55" or "Senior Housing," then children may be excluded. These communities must prominently display the fact that they are "Over 55" or "Senior Housing." If a community doesn't classify as such, then they have no legal right to exclude children. In my opinion, it's a necessary exclusion. Many seniors cannot rest comfortably when around children. My mother became that way in her last years. She would become extremely nervous when my children were around. It happened gradually and seemed to be out of her control. Additionally, many seniors are on medications that can cause them to react differently to situations. I believe this could lead to a dangerous environment in some cases. My mother was a gun owner. In her last years she was on heavy pain medications. She wasn't always in her right mind. Sometimes I would go to visit her and she would have a loaded handgun sitting on the end table or coffee table. Frequently her medications were sitting out. Any child could have taken those medications. So, I believe for the safety and comfort of all, it's a sound law. [edit]================================== A large majority of senior communities operate under an 80/20 basis. The 20 percent allows for live-in caretakers, underage spouses and children over 18.
  • I guess they feel if the grandkids want to see the grand parents, they can meet off grounds at the local diner/ MacDonalds and keep the mess that kids produce off the property. Its child discrimination but because of bylaws, the developer gets around it and the folks that don't have youngsters who will visit them, are fine with it. Seniors don't HAVE to go to a community like this with restrictions like this if they don;t want to. They can find a more open place to live.
  • Personally I wouldn't move into one of those area, but if a person wants to then it's their deal... I do think that the people living there should be able to decide themselves who they want in their area and who not. Even if it's fairly naff.
  • Retirement communities are for people to relax. What do children really do besides make messes and inconvenience everyone.....Whether it is age discrimination or not, just like the "No shirt, no service" policy, it's the establishments rules.
  • This was meant for older people that had problems and got out of hand. i think it sucks. Kids are humans and should not be banned from where humans live.
  • I love my children dearly, but I know that there are people out there who think of them as snot nosed destroyers of sanity. I'm just glad they have the foresight to go somewhere where there will be no children for them to get angry at. I don't think it's discrimination at all. Merely a preference.
  • If children were allowed, don't you think it would kill the whole concept of "retirement"?
  • Age Discrimination laws are designed to help assure that people over 55 are not treated unfairly in the workplace. They have no bearing on the senior housing market. It's a company's choice to target an audience of their preference and its preference who they do or do not do business with. If the term really had anything to do with senior housing, it would really be reverse age discrimination seeing that it would be young people being discriminated against. But since it only has to do with the workplace, it doesn't apply.
  • Though retired, I certainly cannot afford to live in a retirement community but .... If retirees can afford/desire to live where no children are allowed, and the developer/owner has mandated "no children" in the sales agreement, deeds, covenants,etc., (which is probably his legal right, as well as the desire of many retirees)then there is probably no discrimination. If he were to specify that people of any particudlar ethnic heritage, religion, etc., were ineligible for residency, then probably there would be discrimination. I expect, too, these communities DO NOT deny residents' grandchildren visiting for specified time limits.
  • It is discrimination pure and simple unless we are specifically talking about long-term care facilities. . Otherwise it's just a dodge to keep housing prices up. Just because it's written into law doesn't make it legit. . Moreover, it fractures societies along age lines such that the old and young people don't see each other except on special occasions. The worst of this is that the old people who live in these places, who are almost all retired, are not present in real communities to do the job of watching over what happens by day - and calling the police when things are not right. Or caring for children when an emergency comes up. . And finally there is the tax dodge which pisses me off more than I can say. People in these communities sometimes don't pay property taxes that go to schools on the grounds that there aren't any schools around them. This, even though their schooling was paid for by other people regardless of age. . Responsibility for society at large shouldn't expire just because you start getting social security and we sure as hell don't need more self-absorbed teenagers even if they are in their late sixties.
  • What gets me is the old people who move into all age communities and then gripe about the children. We can't move to a community that excludes the old people who gripe all the time because that would be discrimination.
  • It is age discrimination. Children are citizens just as much as seniors are. We are getting past skin color discrimination - now we need to get past age discrimination. Discrimination is wrong no matter what type it is. If old people are allowed to discriminate against the young, then I think the young should be able to discriminate against the old - how about separate grocery stores, post offices, even roads, so that the slow old people won't keep getting in the young peoples way? Doesn't that sound unreasonable and mean? Then so does reverse age discrimination against the young!

Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy