Gen Z afraid to drive

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

allantois

Conversation Starter
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
4,898
Reaction score
6,370

I’m seeing this quite a bit with my young adult patients and I don’t question patients’ driving habits. It just comes up with their parents driving them to the appointment. Usually also goes with having a lot of other types of anxiety/low motivation for work/school. It’s really become a great puzzle for myself and colleagues on how to approach some of the issues these patients are having (staying home, playing video games and not having any motivation to drive, go to school/work, hang out with anyone). My leading theory is their parents have really let it get to this point over the years. I cannot imagine my own parents letting me stay home and do nothing after I graduated high school, but at the same time I was also very motivated to go to college/drive/make connections, etc.

Members don't see this ad.
 

I’m seeing this quite a bit with my young adult patients and I don’t question patients’ driving habits. It just comes up with their parents driving them to the appointment. Usually also goes with having a lot of other types of anxiety/low motivation for work/school. It’s really become a great puzzle for myself and colleagues on how to approach some of the issues these patients are having (staying home, playing video games and not having any motivation to drive, go to school/work, hang out with anyone). My leading theory is their parents have really let it get to this point over the years. I cannot imagine my own parents letting me stay home and do nothing after I graduated high school, but at the same time I was also very motivated to go to college/drive/make connections, etc.
The most effective approach seems to be the *very prestigious* accomodation-based treatment. It is quite difficult to implement effectively but tremendously effective and doesn't require any buy-in from the patient. The parents are over time encouraged to identify the behaviors they are engaging in which allow the 'child' to exhibit problematic behavior (or from an evolutionary perspective, behavior that outside the existence of the accommodation would be considered maladaptive). When effective, the removal of the accommodations leads to rapid behavior change as life becomes more difficult much more quickly. There are some cases where it leads to a power struggle and the child/young adult digs in their heels and just does even less but at least half of the time that you hear that the issue is that the parents are continuing to accommodate in subtle ways. There are rating scales to assess for accommodating behaviors and books on the topic. It is mostly applied to OCD and school refusal but it works for many types of avoidance.
 
The most effective approach seems to be the *very prestigious* accomodation-based treatment. It is quite difficult to implement effectively but tremendously effective and doesn't require any buy-in from the patient. The parents are over time encouraged to identify the behaviors they are engaging in which allow the 'child' to exhibit problematic behavior (or from an evolutionary perspective, behavior that outside the existence of the accommodation would be considered maladaptive). When effective, the removal of the accommodations leads to rapid behavior change as life becomes more difficult much more quickly. There are some cases where it leads to a power struggle and the child/young adult digs in their heels and just does even less but at least half of the time that you hear that the issue is that the parents are continuing to accommodate in subtle ways. There are rating scales to assess for accommodating behaviors and books on the topic. It is mostly applied to OCD and school refusal but it works for many types of avoidance.
Just wanted to add that these are often parents that have limited ability to tolerate their own anxiety or distress. My front office person is my secret weapon to shore these parents up while they are waiting for their kid. She worked as a program manager in residential treatment before I nabbed her so definitely understands how to manage and support kids and parents with these issues. Anybody have any specific book recommendations?
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
1) population rise, urbanization, access to mass transit there will be slowing driver trends.
2) I've seen more of the young ones not driving, too.
3) I've seen some of these older young ones, 24+ voice a desire to finally want to learn to drive, or a job opportunity at XYZ now forces the issue, etc. I.e. their growth/maturity/adult demands finally have no choice but to kick in.
4) Main stream media is already starting to post and pump out opinion pieces accosting American "car culture." Perhaps cars are the new "gun culture" in the eyes of the left?
5) Inflation is real, purchase power is declining, vehicle costs are escalating, fuel prices are ticking up; simply put, affording a vehicle is an expense not all can handle. And when you have teenage kids, that can mean not teaching them to drive.

6) Meh. I just moved to the country, and selfishly, if you don't drive, probably aren't going to live in the country. That means less traffic, and less people for me. Wasn't a focus for me when I was in a metro either. Got bigger fish to fry in appointments than driving. Those that were motivated knew how to request friends to assist, or simply pay for a driving school to teach them. Not really an issue, just a symptom of other bigger changes at play.
 
1) population rise, urbanization, access to mass transit there will be slowing driver trends.
2) I've seen more of the young ones not driving, too.
3) I've seen some of these older young ones, 24+ voice a desire to finally want to learn to drive, or a job opportunity at XYZ now forces the issue, etc. I.e. their growth/maturity/adult demands finally have no choice but to kick in.
4) Main stream media is already starting to post and pump out opinion pieces accosting American "car culture." Perhaps cars are the new "gun culture" in the eyes of the left?
5) Inflation is real, purchase power is declining, vehicle costs are escalating, fuel prices are ticking up; simply put, affording a vehicle is an expense not all can handle. And when you have teenage kids, that can mean not teaching them to drive.

6) Meh. I just moved to the country, and selfishly, if you don't drive, probably aren't going to live in the country. That means less traffic, and less people for me. Wasn't a focus for me when I was in a metro either. Got bigger fish to fry in appointments than driving. Those that were motivated knew how to request friends to assist, or simply pay for a driving school to teach them. Not really an issue, just a symptom of other bigger changes at play.
I don’t live in an area with mass transit and it’s not just them not being able to afford it; they don’t want to drive/learn to drive their parents cars either or really go anywhere
 
Some people don't have cars because cars/insurance/gas/parking cost a lot these days, and public tranportion and/or Uber is cheaper. But that's different from adults living in their parents' basement, playing video games, not going to school/work, being brought to their doctor's appointment like a 12 year old peds patient, and otherwise acting like a stoner. This is a societal issue, where it's acceptable to lead a stoner lifestyle.

If someone is provided food, shelter, clothing, money, tranportation, stimulation through video games/social media/streaming media, cannabis delivery, has someone else to take away the normal stress of providing for oneself, and there is no societal shame for doing so, then it is perfectly reasonable to lack motivation and experience tremendous anxiety at the thought at having to do bare necessities to care for oneself.
 
I get how this could be maladaptive individually, but societally...it's not a bad thing.
They’ll have to learn sooner than later. Better learn at a young age IMHO
 
Amazon product ASIN B092R18VZ3
This features rather severe cases of this phenomenon but it is a pretty solid book regardless. Centered around 'non-violent resistance' on the part of the parent, aka systematic non-accommodation.
Placed on order. Thanks. It oughta work because the severe is what I tend to get whether I like it or not. Had a referral once from across the country @McLean Hospital‘s OCD specialty clinic because the family dynamics were so severe and complex that they couldn’t help them. Just recently have had a couple of similar cases and not much success so probably need to shore this up a bit for the next family.
 
It's so funny you posted this because I was recently on my afternoon promenade when the thought popped into my head: Where have all the teenage psychiatric patients hopped up on goofballs drag-racing in my neighborhood gone? Dodging them used to give my walk a little sport. Sad to hear they're all layabouts now. When I was younger knocking down mailboxes with a baseball bat from the passenger's seat was practically a high school graduation requirement.

But seriously . . .
They’ll have to learn sooner than later. Better learn at a young age IMHO

Driving? Before the brain has finished developing?

I can't cite one specific study, but just seeing tweets over the years on micromobility and walkable cities, it seems like there are a lot of health benefits to societies where you don't need a car or to drive to do the things you mentioned (work, socialize, etc). People are in better shape, aren't as fat, are mentally healthier, etc.

Driving seems like a rather rational fear to me, and cars take up an inordinate amount of real estate for the amount they are actually used.

I would ask if these same patients refuse public transit, but it's so nonexistent most places, it's kind of a moot question.

In Sweden, I don't think the majority of my cousins drive (and they're now in their late 30s). There's just no need for it. And it's not part of the teen culture at all. I don't think you can get a license until 18, and it's very difficult to pass unlike the US.

When my mom immigrated to the US she was terrified to drive for quite a few years—I don't think she drove until her mid 20s.

I had to learn to drive at 16 because I went to a type of charter school that had no bus service. I was on Ativan at the time, and I even asked my psychiatrist if it was safe to drive on Ativan, and he said it would be dangerous if I wasn't on Ativan! Lol. I had so many near misses, times I closed my eyes because I had no idea what to do—I had no business driving. Despite all that, I ended up being a safer driver than a number of friends where it seemed like crashes were the rule and not the exception.

I understood all of your post except the driving part. Reminds me of the Sesame Street song "One Of These Things Is Not Like The Other."

I would not put driving in the same category as socializing, working, or going to school.

I wouldn't put using tobacco in that category either.

I'd put driving somewhere in a spectrum of: Fun but fairly dangerous recreation (driving can be fun but it is dangerous), unnecessary evil (unnecessary because we could do better and evil because of pollution, unwalkable cities, mass space taken up for parking etc), necessary evil (because we don't do better, but people in the suburbs still have to get around), and vice (again because we could do better).

Edit:

Going down memory lane after posting this. I went to high school with worldbeaters—people far smarter than me, and they were absolute idiots in cars. There were these two who drove in parallel to each other blocking traffic on a four lane road talking on their cell phones to coordinate exactly when to slam on the brakes so the people behind them would have to swerve out of the way, and there was one who drove with his door open collecting snow from the ground during a snowstorm (not even sure why). There were the mailbox vandals, but I didn't know them personally. Even the ones I knew peripherally who seemed like really good, well rounded people ended up being idiots. One who was in a group I went to prom with was driving us decided to just race the car next to us out of the blue, and we were probably going over 100 mph. These were all people who went to top colleges and done big things. But all were idiots. The one that surprised me the most was so virtuous, so high-achieving, so well-rounded, but she loved driving fast, and I didn't know until the summer after high school that she would drive drunk sometimes. She's a national book reviewer now and has been a CNN anchor and all sorts of things. She was brilliant, but absolutely dumb with cars. I didn't personally know anyone who died, but there were two people in my high school who did die in car accidents in my 4 year tenure, and this was a school of only 800 students. I just remembered two others: Two girls who would race each other back from the charter school to the "home school" (the public school). Crazy, dangerous speeds and driving. I can't think of one person other than myself who drove sanely—and I was not a good driver, but I'm the only one I can think of who *wanted* to drive safely.

I realized I never made my point: I think it's the absolute worst time to introduce driving. Historically it's a blight and best left to more developed brains when necessary.
 
Last edited:
I struggle with parents who have allowed their capable or formerly capable? children to not launch. The ones I tend to get either started with school refusal due to legit anxiety or are
young adults returning to the nest with past or present SUD. Parents seem afraid to require anything that resembles being a productive member of society. A common theme is laying around smoking cannabis which inhibits motivation. It is unfortunate and hopefully this isn’t a common occurrence but more that my view is skewed due to this line of work.
 
I know plenty of immigrants who came to this country when they were older who didn’t drive. They drive absolutely horribly since they didn’t learn when they were younger. Most skills, are better acquired when you are younger. It would be nice if American cities were more European, but that’s not possible. These are kids not leaving their houses, whether by car, bike or on foot. In reality they can only go somewhere if someone drives them. Whether living in a rural area where that is the case makes that worse I don’t know. Telepsych is an interesting thing as it enabled us to have an even better understanding of these patients family lives since seeing a psychiatrist became so easily accessible compared to before so I’m not sure if we are really seeing at uptick in this issue or it’s gotten easier for families to come forward with this and seek help (albeit, those are the patients who would really benefit from getting out of their house more).
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I struggle with parents who have allowed their capable or formerly capable? children to not launch. The ones I tend to get either started with school refusal due to legit anxiety or are
young adults returning to the nest with past or present SUD. Parents seem afraid to require anything that resembles being a productive member of society. A common theme is laying around smoking cannabis which inhibits motivation. It is unfortunate and hopefully this isn’t a common occurrence but more that my view is skewed due to this line of work.
I have seen someone mentioned “stoner” lifestyle. The issue is that there’s no SUD going on in most of these cases. My stoner patients are a lot more productive than that. This looks more like severe depression almost bordering on negative symptoms with very little will to be integrated into society. One of our CAPs blames video gaming for this epidemic, but I suspect the story is more complex. Some of these also started with being home schooled (some as a result of COVID). If someone wants a European perspective on this, home-schooling is really not a thing in Europe either
 
Not sure how well known this is in Psych but this thread reminds me a lot of a documentary I watched about a significant number of kids in Japan who never launched to the point that they had a name for it called Hakikomori (may be misspelling it).

It’s been a few years so for all I know I read about it here in the first place but I figure some of y’all might find it interesting to read about it you haven’t.
 
My practice is in a highly affluent area and the vast majority of my patients are adolescents and have noticed this trend. Considering that most parents are rolling up from their million dollar+ homes in Teslas, Land Rovers, Mercedes etc, I dont think it's purely an economic issue.

With the rise of virtual schooling there are now legions of Aiden/Averys holed up in their room doing the bare minimum to pass their virtual classes and spend the rest of the day playing Apex/Roblox/Fortnite/whatever. Most of these kids just simply aren't interested in driving or going anywhere. besides their room.
 
I plan to let my kids loose with the tractor.
After a few years of that, the farm truck with chores.
Some of the lesser known positives of country living.
 
I plan to let my kids loose with the tractor.
After a few years of that, the farm truck with chores.
Some of the lesser known positives of country living.
College will seem like a picnic after farm labor, lol. Or as my father reported make home as strict and uncomfortable as possible so the kids leave asap. Seriously though our options were college, military or work but all required leaving the nest immediately after high school.
 
I have seen someone mentioned “stoner” lifestyle. The issue is that there’s no SUD going on in most of these cases. My stoner patients are a lot more productive than that. This looks more like severe depression almost bordering on negative symptoms with very little will to be integrated into society. One of our CAPs blames video gaming for this epidemic, but I suspect the story is more complex. Some of these also started with being home schooled (some as a result of COVID). If someone wants a European perspective on this, home-schooling is really not a thing in Europe either
In my experience it is a very small percentage of the failure to launch patients who have severe depression or debilitating anxiety and that segment tend to get better with meds and therapy.
 
Not sure how well known this is in Psych but this thread reminds me a lot of a documentary I watched about a significant number of kids in Japan who never launched to the point that they had a name for it called Hakikomori (may be misspelling it).

It’s been a few years so for all I know I read about it here in the first place but I figure some of y’all might find it interesting to read about it you haven’t.
Hikkikomori. I have definitely treated some young men like this in the US and it is increasingly recognized as a thing outside Japan, although they have a lot more of these folks who are now in their 40s and 50s.
 
Placed on order. Thanks. It oughta work because the severe is what I tend to get whether I like it or not. Had a referral once from across the country @McLean Hospital‘s OCD specialty clinic because the family dynamics were so severe and complex that they couldn’t help them. Just recently have had a couple of similar cases and not much success so probably need to shore this up a bit for the next family.

This is why I dislike working with pediatric OCD, so much of the time the real work is getting the parents okay with the idea that their kids can be upset or experience natural consequences of their choices. I too had one who spent three months at the program at McLean and they were seriously discussing surgery but then the parents were happy to simply rent their kid another, additional apartment when they felt that the place they were living in had been contaminated because a certain word was said by someone visiting.
 
This reminds me of the novel Dune. Even if you read Dune you might not know WTF I'm talking about cause this happened hundreds of years before the events in the novel. If you're a hardcore fan you'll know.

In Dune, much like Star Trek, better technology led to a better quality of life. Unlike Star Trek, where humans used that better quality of life to enlighten and spiritually/intellectually enrich themselves, humans became weak, spoiled, entitled, and let technology like AI, robots, and "thinking machines" run the world.

Eventually the sentient-machines decided they didn't need the then-parasitic humans anymore and decided to kill them off. A war starts and humans fight back and take back control. Humanity re-embraces religion and it's mostly centered on being anti-Luddite-no computers which is an insult and offense to God.

Seems as time goes by technology is making people less and less independent. I'm seeing this mimic Dune and not Star Trek.
 
Last edited:
One of our CAPs blames video gaming for this epidemic, but I suspect the story is more complex.
I'd argue it's more of a technology in general concept, but videogames offer the repetitive dopamine surge through instant gratification that is slightly more tempered by other aspects of technology like social media.

College will seem like a picnic after farm labor, lol. Or as my father reported make home as strict and uncomfortable as possible so the kids leave asap. Seriously though our options were college, military or work but all required leaving the nest immediately after high school.
Ah yes, I like utilizing this approach with cluster B malingerers on the inpatient unit by tapering or holding their benzos until they get uncomfortable and demand to leave. It's a surprisingly effective means to a necessary end.

Seems as time goes by technology is making people less and less independent. I'm seeing this mimic Dune and not Star Trek.
Idk, I get more of a Wall-E picture:

 
The episode of Star Trek TNG that introduced Barclay, Hollow Pursuits, a character addicted to the holodeck, is what I'm seeing with today's youth. I'm not trying to be judgmental. If I could be in a holodeck all the time I would be despite knowing it'd be unhealthy.

We as a society listen to the news based on opinions we want to hear, not the facts that are going on. We have video games acting like a drug.
 
This reminds me of the novel Dune. Even if you read Dune you might not know WTF I'm talking about. If you're a hardcore fan you'll know.

In Dune, much like Star Trek, better technology led to a better quality of life. Unlike Star Trek, where humans used that better quality of life to enlighten and spiritually/intellectually enrich themselves, humans became weak, spoiled, entitled, and let technology like AI, robots, and "thinking machines" run the world.

Eventually the sentient-machines decided they didn't need the then-parasitic humans anymore and decided to kill them off. A war starts and humans fight back and take back control. Humanity re-embraces religion and it's mostly centered on being Luddite-no computers which is an insult and offense to God.

Seems as time goes by technology is making people less and less independent.
I’d prefer to avoid spoilers tbh but I’m currently 2/3 of the way through Dune and either the last 1/3 is about to get really wild or you must be describing stuff that happened in the sequels.
 
I’d prefer to avoid spoilers tbh but I’m currently 2/3 of the way through Dune and either the last 1/3 is about to get really wild or you must be describing stuff that happened in the sequels.

The Butlerian Jihad is discussed in like the first 50 pages, this is all stuff that is part of ancient history at the time of the first novel.
 
Some people live in cities with public transportation and just don’t like driving, too. It’s a vibe shift. The youth don’t drive like they don’t “date” or listen to rock ‘n roll bands.
 
As written above. Although prequels later written gave a lot of detail they were not written by Frank Herbert. Herbert's Butlerian Jihad was only done as far as I know in outlines. There was also a Dune Encyclopdia that came out in the 80s that explained it but more as an outline.
Right, that’s why you’ve got those guilds of specialists like the Mentats and the Spacers, everything, even Astro-navigation and industrial management, has to be done by hand.
 
Some people live in cities with public transportation and just don’t like driving, too. It’s a vibe shift. The youth don’t drive like they don’t “date” or listen to rock ‘n roll bands.
Its not actually the lack of driving that bothers me it is the lack of drive. If they live in a city and elect to take public transportation most notably to their job I would have no complaints.
 
Some people live in cities with public transportation and just don’t like driving, too. It’s a vibe shift. The youth don’t drive like they don’t “date” or listen to rock ‘n roll bands.
They don't in-fact date. They have delayed psychosocial development. The work and problems that CAPs encounter is seeping into general adult psychiatry
 
They don't in-fact date. They have delayed psychosocial development. The work and problems that CAPs encounter is seeping into general adult psychiatry
Aren't problems in psychiatry constrained to deviations from culturally normal behavior? You're describing it as normal for this generation. It's not insane to not want to breed like rabbits at 20 years of age working minimum wage jobs with virtually no social safety nets.

And if we want to go casting aspersions as it not being developmentally normal not to date because it's an innate part of being human, what should we make of parents relinquishing the developmentally normal and innate role of raising their young and putting them into institutions so they can "lean into" their work? That's probably at least in part the explanation for the arrested development you see. But I would call it at least in part a healthy adaptation rather than a problem, though. I'm an antinatalist, so I'm happy for them to remain single and child-free.

There's a subreddit on reddit I finally had to block because of the number of young (20-30s) people who have children who are absolute idiots. They made my blood boil. All of them had boyfriends/girlfriends and children with multiple partners, and so many in the planning stages of their weddings after starting multiple families (I consider having children starting a family), and they inevitably were delaying the wedding (despite already having had children with multiple partners) because they were waiting for the perfect prom-night wedding they could afford. The immaturity was astounding—shuffling children between two immature parents who each had chaotic dating lives (this was the norm). These people cannot handle being adults, and the children are the collateral damage of their teenage-like love lives that revolved around the most immature drama and jealousy over their step-children receiving attention from their new boyfriend/girlfriend.

So if you're seeing the end result of that immaturity being that people don't date, I say great. It's better than jumping into dating like an idiot and creating messes that psychiatry/pscyhology won't be able to fix. Why make immature people move forward? It's like if someone failed all their flight courses, and you concluded the problem was that they weren't piloting a commercial airliner.

There must be a reason these people don't date, and I would respect it. The alternative is worse: Dating despite having good reason not to. But even if you believe they should be dating, I don't know why you wouldn't want to explore the reasons why rather than racing to the end result.
 
Aren't problems in psychiatry constrained to deviations from culturally normal behavior? You're describing it as normal for this generation. It's not insane to not want to breed like rabbits at 20 years of age working minimum wage jobs with virtually no social safety nets.

And if we want to go casting aspersions as it not being developmentally normal not to date because it's an innate part of being human, what should we make of parents relinquishing the developmentally normal and innate role of raising their young and putting them into institutions so they can "lean into" their work? That's probably at least in part the explanation for the arrested development you see. But I would call it at least in part a healthy adaptation rather than a problem, though. I'm an antinatalist, so I'm happy for them to remain single and child-free.

There's a subreddit on reddit I finally had to block because of the number of young (20-30s) people who have children who are absolute idiots. They made my blood boil. All of them had boyfriends/girlfriends and children with multiple partners, and so many in the planning stages of their weddings after starting multiple families (I consider having children starting a family), and they inevitably were delaying the wedding (despite already having had children with multiple partners) because they were waiting for the perfect prom-night wedding they could afford. The immaturity was astounding—shuffling children between two immature parents who each had chaotic dating lives (this was the norm). These people cannot handle being adults, and the children are the collateral damage of their teenage-like love lives that revolved around the most immature drama and jealousy over their step-children receiving attention from their new boyfriend/girlfriend.

So if you're seeing the end result of that immaturity being that people don't date, I say great. It's better than jumping into dating like an idiot and creating messes that psychiatry/pscyhology won't be able to fix. Why make immature people move forward? It's like if someone failed all their flight courses, and you concluded the problem was that they weren't piloting a commercial airliner.

There must be a reason these people don't date, and I would respect it. The alternative is worse: Dating despite having good reason not to. But even if you believe they should be dating, I don't know why you wouldn't want to explore the reasons why rather than racing to the end result.

I appreciate the perspective. The issue isn't that the patients don't drive or don't date (there is nothing inherently wrong with either of those things); it's that they are staying home and doing absolutely nothing; maybe playing video games. Perhaps, they don't want to work minimum wage jobs, but they also don't want to go to school to improve their job prospects. They are totally reliant on their parents who never asked anything of them. This is a ticking time-bomb as sooner than later the parents will not in-fact be able to take care of these "kids". In fact, the intervention usually lies with the dysfunctional family system and the parents which makes it challenging since these patients are legally adults and individual psychotherapy and even more so medication efforts are often futile as there is often not an underlying diagnosable pathology. I am seeing these problems brew at a young age when parents demand all sorts of accommodations for their kids as to prevent them from experiencing any inconvenience in life. And now, I am even seeing some trends from teachers that kids should not even be challenged or assigned homework or be graded in school so as not to stress them out.
 
I appreciate the perspective. The issue isn't that the patients don't drive or don't date (there is nothing inherently wrong with either of those things); it's that they are staying home and doing absolutely nothing; maybe playing video games. Perhaps, they don't want to work minimum wage jobs, but they also don't want to go to school to improve their job prospects. They are totally reliant on their parents who never asked anything of them. This is a ticking time-bomb as sooner than later the parents will not in-fact be able to take care of these "kids". In fact, the intervention usually lies with the dysfunctional family system and the parents which makes it challenging since these patients are legally adults and individual psychotherapy and even more so medication efforts are often futile as there is often not an underlying diagnosable pathology. I am seeing these problems brew at a young age when parents demand all sorts of accommodations for their kids as to prevent them from experiencing any inconvenience in life. And now, I am even seeing some trends from teachers that kids should not even be challenged or assigned homework or be graded in school so as not to stress them out.
Sounds like they experience the opposite of the stressors in learned helplessness with the same outcomes. If there really is no underlying pathology, I wonder what leads you to (quite ironically) have the same worry their parents do: That they won't be able to cope. The parents worry about it in the present, and you worry about it in the future (once the parents are dead or can't care for them). When people go off to college don't they usually make a fairly abrupt break assuming no pathology? There's a movie on this subject I like (that I doubt you can extrapolate to your patients since it's comedy) called Step Brothers—one of the few Will Ferrell movies that really excels. It, at least, has a positive outlook on making the break.
 
Divergent perspective:

1) Socialization takes place increasingly online, over time. Sex is a strange exception to this.
2) Therefore independent transportation has less importance to younger people.
3) there are low effort, low cost, alternatives to getting a drivers license. Rideshares are substantially cheaper than a drivers license + insurance+car payment.
4) media sells fear, directed at caretakers, including of the dangers to driving.
5) in addition to a shift towards online socialization, there is a cultural shift in willingness to send nudes. This is much easier than previous ways of seeing people naked.
5) The above creates a perceived low need, combined with an objective and subjective high barrier to entry. Not driving, using rideshares + other sources of transportation is an easy solution.
6). We are all wondering why kids these days don’t want to drive. They are wondering why people want to drive. Maybe it’s not a fear, so much as a perception that it’s a useless endeavor.
 
Besides the Internet and sending nudes (I guess? I'll go with it), I think younger people see it's not that difficult to transform cities and the alternative is quite grotesque:



Follow some of the micromobiliity and e-bike (very big with younger generation) accounts on Twitter and you can see massive change of cities with before and after pictures where roads for cars have been turned into promenades for people and bikes with vegetation and outdoor cafes.

Edit: It's not just younger generations. There are long time veterans of Silicon Valley that are leaving because they refuse to go back to work in person with the long commutes after having been able to work from home. They like the work but say they spend hours of their day in traffic and it's not worth it. Those are people who have launched (to a very successful degree) and are, to an extent, rejecting cars (at least very long car rides).
 
Last edited:
I think this thread is revealing the underpinning of youth counter-culture. Like in Japan, there is a growing movement of "rotters" in the US, AKA LDAR (Lay Down and Rot). This is somewhat tied to the involuntary celibate movement however less extremist and more individualistic.

It is a lifestyle of anti-striving. A sort of hedonistic nihilism which focuses on maximizing mundane activities (games, sports, eating out, etc). These folks may want to stay home, not drive, not work, etc. A relationship would be taxing. A career would be pointless. They may work for several months (i.e. 6 months), while living very frugally, so they can save enough to cover 12 months of rotting (call of duty, rent paid, etc).
 
I think this thread is revealing the underpinning of youth counter-culture. Like in Japan, there is a growing movement of "rotters" in the US, AKA LDAR (Lay Down and Rot). This is somewhat tied to the involuntary celibate movement however less extremist and more individualistic.

It is a lifestyle of anti-striving. A sort of hedonistic nihilism which focuses on maximizing mundane activities (games, sports, eating out, etc). These folks may want to stay home, not drive, not work, etc. A relationship would be taxing. A career would be pointless. They may work for several months (i.e. 6 months), while living very frugally, so they can save enough to cover 12 months of rotting (call of duty, rent paid, etc).

This just came in my inbox moments ago.

"For adah crandall, a high-school student in Portland, Oregon, a daily annoyance is family members asking when she is going to learn to drive. Ms Crandall, who is 16, has spent a quarter of her life arguing against the car-centric planning of her city. At 12 she attended a school next to a major road down which thousands of lorries thundered every day. When a teacher invited a speaker to talk about air pollution, she and her classmates were galvanised. Within a year, she was travelling to Salem, Oregon’s capital, to demand lawmakers pass stricter laws on diesel engines."

Oh those slackers—always traveling to state capitols and demanding better better urban planning!

That, in turn, is starting to create more support for anti-car policies being passed in cities around the world. From New York to Norway, a growing number of cities and local politicians are passing anti-car laws, ripping out parking spaces, blocking off roads and changing planning rules to favour pedestrians over drivers. Anne Hidalgo, the socialist mayor of Paris, boasts of “reconquering” her city for its residents.

Yet somehow sitting in what is essentially a la-z-boy, cruising while listening to music, occasionally mauling young children and squirrels is the antithesis of hedonism.

Why can't they grow up, head to the outlets, park, enter a store, get back in the car, drive another fifty feet, park, and enter another very similar store? It's that youth counter-culture!

Edit: As far as them only working six months a year I haven't heard of that, but they're getting a year's worth of work out of them in six months. Retail has become tyrannical if you aren't up to date on how the service class is being treated. They're working harder than ever. They are demanding more and more, and if they can't bleed a turnip dry for even more stock buy-backs, they just close the stores and don't care. Some of the pharmacies in my town are shuttering, not due to lack of willing labor, but because they want to extract even more from the stores they do leave open. They have the staff selling credit cards, doing all the shots, etc., cutting their hours, and paying techs the same as any other service job. My long-term pharmacist just finally quit for a marijuana dispensary after not being able to take it anymore. He documented to me the goings ons and it was just insane. They were expected to absorb all the scripts from another store that the chain shut down in the same city without increasing labor at all. Maybe there are some slackers, but the ones who are out there are in the trenches.
 
Last edited:
:bang:Couldn't find the head blowing up emoji, but let me be brief but start with the disclaimer that I only read the first 3 or 4 responses and had to say something briefly. The responsibility for generation Z's failure to fly is completely a predictable outcome from the way generation Y handles children. I think I can speak for the other 22 of the other 24 lettered generations when I say that if you were not waiting in line at the DMV on your 16th birthday, there was something seriously wrong with you. Of course we would all like to have our older siblings and parents drive us around like they were our servants if they are willing. As Ye sow,...

Of course there are a couple of exceptions. NYC is where a vehicle is economically unlikely. SF might be an other and maybe Chicago. Most everywhere else doesn't have a comprehensive transportation system that can keep you from playing driver for your children. If you can afford to finance an old car and you haven't, that makes you an enabler. I can't say make your kids man up, but probably grow up is appropriate. Limiting 16 year old's mobility isn't a successful way to control their propensity towards bad decisions. Trust me, they will figure that out even if you are driving them all over the place.

Driving is a earned and not a right, but so is swimming and riding a bike. This one is above both of these in terms of normal maturation. It would be interesting to be in charge of a major university's admission process and use age at first issuance of a driver's license as a criteria and see how this compares to all of the measures they currently use. I'm betting it would fair well, excepting NYC and SF of course.
 
:bang:Couldn't find the head blowing up emoji, but let me be brief but start with the disclaimer that I only read the first 3 or 4 responses and had to say something briefly. The responsibility for generation Z's failure to fly is completely a predictable outcome from the way generation Y handles children. I think I can speak for the other 22 of the other 24 lettered generations when I say that if you were not waiting in line at the DMV on your 16th birthday, there was something seriously wrong with you. Of course we would all like to have our older siblings and parents drive us around like they were our servants if they are willing. As Ye sow,...

Of course there are a couple of exceptions. NYC is where a vehicle is economically unlikely. SF might be an other and maybe Chicago. Most everywhere else doesn't have a comprehensive transportation system that can keep you from playing driver for your children. If you can afford to finance an old car and you haven't, that makes you an enabler. I can't say make your kids man up, but probably grow up is appropriate. Limiting 16 year old's mobility isn't a successful way to control their propensity towards bad decisions. Trust me, they will figure that out even if you are driving them all over the place.

Driving is a earned and not a right, but so is swimming and riding a bike. This one is above both of these in terms of normal maturation. It would be interesting to be in charge of a major university's admission process and use age at first issuance of a driver's license as a criteria and see how this compares to all of the measures they currently use. I'm betting it would fair well, excepting NYC and SF of course.
So you have it all figured out without reading most of the thread, got it.

And generation Y handles Generation Z monolithically, got it.

(That kind of overlaps . . . more likely Generation Y are parents of Generation Alpha, but I digress.)

If you didn't get a driver's license at 16 (despite most countries requiring you wait to 18) you're an aberration, got it.

Some more words, got it.

The only places in the world with public transit happen to be in the US, got it.

Driving is integral to normal adolescent development—above swimming, no less—despite cars only existing the last century, got it.

Despite the youngest age at which you can get a license in the US being 16 and the typical age you apply for college being 17, the age at which you were issued a license would "fair well" as a predictor of academic success in college over other measures such as SATs (unless you're in SF or NYC, of course), got it.

Car accidents are the second leading cause of death among teenagers, so what is the bad decision you think parents foolishly believe not driving is keeping a teenager from? The first leading cause?

I don't get any of it.
 
My practice is in a highly affluent area and the vast majority of my patients are adolescents and have noticed this trend. Considering that most parents are rolling up from their million dollar+ homes in Teslas, Land Rovers, Mercedes etc, I dont think it's purely an economic issue.

Growing up with rich parents, in itself, is a form of weed and being a stoner. There's no motivation. You already have every material comfort. There's no need to leave the nest, with the corresponding decrease in standard of living, and spend your 20s and 30s working hard. For the CHANCE to finally re-achieve, in your 40s, the lifestyle you had while living with your parents? Why bother? Just hold on to that nice lifestyle and wait for your inheritance.

If your parents are very affluent, it is difficult to ever achieve the same lifestyle on your own, absent inheritance. This is part of being an affluent society. If your parents are poor, it's easy for you to achieve the same thing or even attain a middle class lifestyle. But even our poor can afford Jordans, iPhones, etc. Why bother getting a job?

I see this in adult children of physicians. They have a degree or two from good schools, but don't want to engage in the struggle of work. So, they pick up a booze or substance habit. But there are a minority who are driven to outdo their parents, "Hey PCP mom and dad who make half a mil, look at me, I'm now an orthopod who makes a couple mil!"

One of our CAPs blames video gaming for this epidemic, but I suspect the story is more complex. Some of these also started with being home schooled (some as a result of COVID). If someone wants a European perspective on this, home-schooling is really not a thing in Europe either

I've run across a number of weird residents and med students. Invariably, someone would explain, "They were home schooled." My response was always, "Oh, that makes sense."

It never fails that weird/anxious parents pass on their weirdness/anxiety on to their kids via nature and nurture.
 
I apologize to everyone I've been too brusque with in this thread.
 
This is an excellent thread. I see this all the time in my practice too. But the parents who are part of this dysfunction don't want help for them. They just want their kids fixed. They balk at involvement.
 
Right, that’s why you’ve got those guilds of specialists like the Mentats and the Spacers, everything, even Astro-navigation and industrial management, has to be done by hand.
Most of which they achieve through drugs. Maybe the young people today are on the right track....
 
Growing up with rich parents, in itself, is a form of weed and being a stoner. There's no motivation. You already have every material comfort. There's no need to leave the nest, with the corresponding decrease in standard of living, and spend your 20s and 30s working hard. For the CHANCE to finally re-achieve, in your 40s, the lifestyle you had while living with your parents? Why bother? Just hold on to that nice lifestyle and wait for your inheritance.

If your parents are very affluent, it is difficult to ever achieve the same lifestyle on your own, absent inheritance. This is part of being an affluent society. If your parents are poor, it's easy for you to achieve the same thing or even attain a middle class lifestyle. But even our poor can afford Jordans, iPhones, etc. Why bother getting a job?

I see this in adult children of physicians. They have a degree or two from good schools, but don't want to engage in the struggle of work. So, they pick up a booze or substance habit. But there are a minority who are driven to outdo their parents, "Hey PCP mom and dad who make half a mil, look at me, I'm now an orthopod who makes a couple mil!"
That might be the typical experience if someone isn't mindful about that but I certainly think there are things that can be done to mitigate the effects of growing up with affluence. Making sure behavior = reward rather than existing = reward is at the crux of behavioralism and good parenting. Now if you spend all your time chasing even more money to leave an even bigger inheritance for your children without doing that work, I agree the expected outcomes are not going to be good.
 
It never fails that weird/anxious parents pass on their weirdness/anxiety on to their kids via nature and nurture.
This is changing now in past few years. The volume of people forced by covid to start homeschooling their kids, and those opting to continue is changing the demographic to be more mainstream. What once was more tiny pockets of fringe, or perhaps parents with DD children not able to to integrate with public school, is now taking on a much, much more broad population cohort.

There are a lot of parents upset with the liberal political indoctrination of their kids, the threat of Transgender promulgation of their children and as such are pulling their kids out of school. The voucher system is going to take hold across more states as result of parents fed up with the politicization of schools.

I too moved from a deep blue metro in a state that passed laws to teach sexual gender, including transgender topics, to kindergarteners. I have a 5yo. Hell no. They are just too young, perhaps 4th gr or 5th gr, sure a basic primer in their usual sex ed class. But at Kindergarten? I voted with my feet. Hell no. My kids are now in private school. I was a product of public school years ago, and even then things were already over politicized, pushing climate change fears and a myriad of other political propaganda. I listen to other family members that have just recently graduated or about to graduate highschool and the level of liberal propaganda being pushed is nauseating. I once embraced and understood the beauty and value of the history and what the American public school system was and looked forward to having my future kids experience the same. Fast-forward now, as a parent and where things are, nope. The system pushed too far into socialism and political indoctrination. Voucher systems will indeed destroy the public school system, but when the option is losing your child to unAmerican socialist propaganda versus fracturing a school system into silos of microcosms? I easily choose to sacrifice the public school system over my own children, bring on the vouchers. For those who can't afford private school while waiting for greater voucher roll out, I get and applaud their choice for home school. A slightly socially awkward child is far better than the next Greta Thundberg / antifa terrorist / bernie sanders growing up in your home.
 
Interestingly enough I am seeing the local Catholic schools with a more varied population recently. One parent mentioned the structured religion that he doesn’t support is far preferable as compared to the liberal influences in public schools.
 
Oh those slackers—always traveling to state capitols and demanding better better urban planning!
But how are they getting to those state capitals? Are they riding their e-bikes and taking ride-shares hundreds of miles to get there? Why would you assume they're in an urban environment? What transportation methods would you suggest for people in non-urban or geographically spread out urban areas where they need to travel 5-10 miles consistently multiple times per day? Are they still going to ride their e-bikes in the snow or are the towns that are struggling to provide basic social welfare needs supposed to create and maintain multimillion (or multibillion for larger cities) dollar public transit systems? You can try and urban plan all you want, but in many places it's just not feasible to be a functional adult without your own transportation. Never mind the significant social consequences of not having transportation.

However, what you pointed out is a very different phenomenon and set of individuals from those we're referencing. In some places it is often more reasonable to not own a car than to have one (NYC, Chicago, D.C, etc) and some places could (and probably should) be developed to be more like this. In many places this just doesn't make sense though, and the trend we're talking about is the growing number of people in Gen Z not driving (or barely leaving their residences at all) d/t excessive accommodations being made for them and then reporting psychiatric symptoms and problems because they aren't being accommodated. This often has nothing to do with available transportation and the lack of desire to drive is just a symptom of a more significant underlying problem.
 
So you have it all figured out without reading most of the thread, got it.

And generation Y handles Generation Z monolithically, got it.

(That kind of overlaps . . . more likely Generation Y are parents of Generation Alpha, but I digress.)

If you didn't get a driver's license at 16 (despite most countries requiring you wait to 18) you're an aberration, got it.

Some more words, got it.

The only places in the world with public transit happen to be in the US, got it.

Driving is integral to normal adolescent development—above swimming, no less—despite cars only existing the last century, got it.

Despite the youngest age at which you can get a license in the US being 16 and the typical age you apply for college being 17, the age at which you were issued a license would "fair well" as a predictor of academic success in college over other measures such as SATs (unless you're in SF or NYC, of course), got it.

Car accidents are the second leading cause of death among teenagers, so what is the bad decision you think parents foolishly believe not driving is keeping a teenager from? The first leading cause?

I don't get any of it.
The odds of getting in a fatal car accident are related to the age that children can get a license. The older the better and the earlier the worse, but it is up to each country to determine the set point. There is real pressure to let kids drive, and it does go poorly for more liberal decisions. Even though this is the second cause of death in this age group, no one in this age group dies very often so I suspect overdose is number one. It just seems weird to me that kids are not pushing to have their ability to drive like we used to. Talk about getting freedom.
Driving is a big deal.
 
Top