The Center for American Progress just published an article, The New Housing Normal for Low-Income Families,  that cogently makes the case for why it’s not okay for families to “double up.” The article has also been posted here. Read it for the typical social policy response to sharing housing.

According to the author the problems with sharing housing are threefold: crowding, mobility and safety.  Of course these are issues. Crowding and mobility show up when sharing housing is a temporary solution to an emergency situation. Safety is an issue regardless of sharing housing.  It is not doubling up that is the issue, it’s the lack of options that create the problem.

I understand that the article is making a case for funding the The American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010, H.R. 4213, but I wish it didn’t do so by attacking the notion of doubling up. It’s enough to know that 16% of households are experiencing severe housing burden as I wrote about in my last post.  I also wish that there were a way to write housing policy to encourage people to share housing or at least not discourage it.

A nicely written article in a Vancouver publication called “Save the Planet, Save the Earth” describing the benefits of sharing housing. What caught my eye was the information of the ecological benefits of sharing housing.

The author, Chris Cannon, cites statistics that lead to the statement that if everyone lived in shared housing the gains in reduced CO2 emission would “make the Kyoto targets quaint.”  He writes, “Our structures account for the greatest portion of CO2 emissions in North America; more than a third of the carbon released into the atmosphere is the product of electricity from our residences and workplaces, and for every kilowatt hour used in a home, twice as much is lost in generation and transmission. The average North American household produces about 150 pounds of CO2 a day, nearly five times the global average, and twice that of Europe.”

Wow! So if, in North America, you move from living alone to living with one other person, you have eliminated  54,750 pounds of CO2 from the atmosphere in a year.  Probably a pittance in terms of the amount of green house gases generated daily, but still it’s a solid way to reduce your carbon footprint on the planet.

If you want to live sustainably – choose to share housing.  But find a home that suits you.  That’s the point of this blog, so keep reading.

The title comes from Sharon Aystk’s excellent posting on her experience of having her in-laws live with her and her thoughtful discussion of the benefits of multi-generational households. Go and read it. Also read the comments.

What’s amazing to me is the strong negativity of some of the comments.  It shows me how difficult it is for some people to consider altering their lives to make space, literally and emotionally, for their relatives. Of course, every family is different and no one on the outside can have the insiders’ experience of their family, but it seems sad to me. Our families should be a source of love both given and received.

Living alone might actually be unhealthy.   “Loneliness Harms Health” on the Association for PsychCentral.com summarizes the longer book, “Loneliness: Human Nature and the Need for Social Connection,” by Drs. Caccioppo and Patrick.

Their basic point is that loneliness has negative physical effects on the body. These effects become more pronounced as we get older. From the article,  this summary: “Loneliness not only alters behavior, but loneliness is related to greater resistance to blood flow through your cardiovascular system…. Loneliness leads to higher rises in morning levels of the stress hormone cortisol, altered gene expression in immune cells, poorer immune function, higher blood pressure, and an increased level of depression. Loneliness also is related to difficulty getting a deep sleep and a faster progression of Alzheimer’s disease.”

Sharing housing can do much to alleviate a certain kind of loneliness. Someone in the house to whom one can say “good morning,” and “how was your day?” provides  social interaction.  For elderly people this may be especially helpful, since they are often socially isolated when they can’t drive and their life-long connections with family and friends are gone due to death and infirmity.

What do you consider normal behavior in your home?  Is leaving the television on in every room simply the way you are used to living? Or is the opposite the case, where there are no media on in common rooms? Is dinner time at 5:30 or at 8? Does it matter? In the morning, is “normal” being perky and ready to chat, or is morning a time to silently come to terms with the day? Is “clean” a kitchen floor that you can eat off of or a general description of not having dirty dishes in the sink?

“Normal” is quite different for different people. Our assumptions about  “normal” begin with the families in which we were raised.  Many times these assumptions are unconscious. If we live alone and never with other people, we can go through an entire life living in our own “normal” ways without thinking anything of it. It is when we start living with others, people who grew up in different families, with their own idea of “normal,” that our assumptions bump into their assumptions. This can be uncomfortable.

This need not become a serious conflict, but rather may simply be a discomfort, a bump, a hitch, or something that happens where we can’t be on automatic pilot anymore.  So then you get to figure out whether your assumptions are part of your conditioning or part of who you really are.  This is a process of discernment. It is also part of your growth as an individual.  Shed what you don’t need, keep what is truly vital. Use the simulus from the discomfort to figure this out.

Communicate with your housemates. Compromise, accommodate, and adapt without giving up what is essential to you.

This is why it is so important that before you go to interview, think carefully about your daily routine and what you must have and what you can’t live with in a home sharing arrangement.  Think about what your “normal” is. See if you can get your assumptions of “normal” conscious,  so that you interview effectively and find a good house sharing arrangement for you.

I found this quote from a NY Times article (July 16, 2008) about HomeShare. In it Kirby Dunn, director of HomeShare Vermont is quoted as saying, “When you look at the data on people living alone, they tend to die younger and be sicker. We’ve done surveys, and people say they’re happier, sleeping and eating better and feel safer in their homes with someone around. If I sold you that as a drug, you’d pay thousands.”

Isn’t that the truth? So why aren’t more seniors sharing housing?

A note of warning.  Though this blog is dedicated to the idea that there is a good housemate for every person and that sharing housing is a great idea, there are people who are not good housemates. Those housemates I call “nightmare” housemates, because their behavior can make home far from the haven it should be.  This is why it is so very, very important to interview carefully and check references. It is why it is important to be clear during interviewing about your expectations of sharing a home.

Nightmare housemates are those who is unable to live cooperatively with others. They don’t acknowledge that their behavior affects others and are impervious to requests for changed behavior. There are different ways of being a nightmare housemate.

Assuming/insisting I have more rights than you

It is the householder that most easily falls into this trap.  After all it is their space before you came along. However, once the conditions of your living together have been established in the interviewing phase, changing the conditions “because it is my house” is a great way to alienate a housemate. A more subtle (true) example comes from the interviews I did for my book.  The rental for the apartment came with one parking space.  While the householder had a car, her housemate didn’t.  Though they split the rent evenly, the householder felt that  that the space was “hers” and would demand that the housemate’s boyfriend move his car when she came home after he had parked in it for an evening.

Refusing to modify behavior

To live cooperatively, you have to be willing to make minor adaptations in your behavior.  Whether it is remembering to turn off the porch light or discarding your leftovers before they turn moldy, those requests made by housemates are to be considered. One nightmare housemate, rather than responding simply to requests, she launched into long-winded explanations for why she did what she did, as if the explanation would justify the behavior and she would ignore the request.  Good housemates are able to make minor adjustments for the comfort of their housemate.

Not following through on requests/promises

No one likes to nag.  No one likes to have to repeat requests, and by the way, the receiver doesn’t like it either. Actions speak louder than words. If a housemate has made a request and you have agreed to it, do it.  If there is a chore list that is part of the conditions of living in that household, do your chores.  Pay your bills on time.

Are there other ways in which individuals can be nightmare housemates? Maybe, but I think that this pretty much covers it. In sum, the nightmare housemate is a self-centered person. Avoid them.

Not everyone is self-centered.  You can find a good housemate for you.

A rather short guide to sharing housing, from other side of the world, down under.

It’s a short version of what is in my book (waiting for publication). The problem with a short version is that it offers advice, but doesn’t say how. I’ve written down quite a lot of “how,” some of  which can be found in this blog.

One thing I have noticed, in Australia they use the word “housemate” much more commonly than Americans do. I like the word and use it rather than other variations. I discussed this briefly awhile ago.

Absolutely.  In addition to the other benefits of reducing housing costs, there are other advantages for two single parents sharing their home.  How well it works depends of course on the adults, the children, and the space being shared.

The first advantage is that the children can play together. This of course depends on the ages and genders of the youngsters, but even children of different ages, when thrown together, figure out how to do stuff. (That is, if they are not addicted to television and video games, but that’s a different issue.) The nice part for the parent is that when children are occupied with each other, they are not seeking parental attention. In one shared housing arrangement, the two adults each have part-time custody of their children. The children enjoy being together so much, and each parent finds it so much easier when both children are there, that the parents are seeking to synchronize their custody arrangements.

The second advantage is that the parent has another adult at home. Depending on the housemate relationship, she may have another person to talk to about her adult life. She can have someone to exchange babysitting so that she can go out while the adult is home and then reciprocate the favor. For quick errands she can leave the child at home with the other adult rather than have to disrupt the child to accompany her. The other adult is there.

It’s very important to consider how the space will be used. Whereas a single person sharing housing usually has a room and the rest of the house is shared, it may be that each single parent will want to have her own living room/play area in addition to the bedroom(s).  Like everything else, this depends a good deal on the personalities and choices available where they are living.

Choosing to share housing with another parent is a good idea.  All the guidelines for selecting a good housemate apply. Interview carefully, know what you can live with and what you can’t, and check references. Beyond those guidelines, make sure you have reasonably congruent approaches to parenting.

Make sure your child also has an opportunity to interview the prospective housemates.  If there’s something that he doesn’t like or trust, pay attention.  Children have good instincts, and it will be their home, too!

“We have better instincts.” That’s what my new friend Mary said to me when I was telling her about the idea that more senior citizens could be sharing housing.

That’s a hopeful idea. Seniors have spent a lifetime of living. Even if they haven’t shared their housing, they have certainly met many people through work and social activities.  They have had the opportunity to observe and to participate. They’ve learned when their first instinct about a person turned out to be true and when it didn’t.

It would be interesting to read stories about interviews when you immediately knew it would or wouldn’t work with the home seeker. Do you have such a story?