Entitlement Revisited

Earlier on this blog, I discussed a blatant display of entitlement theory, that is, the belief held by children that they are entitled to their parents’ largess, which appeared in the “letters to the editor” section of the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal newspaper.

I was very pleased to see that this letter generated a significant response reflecting a more reasonable approach.  Here are some excerpts from a couple of the response letters:

How selfish of the letter writer to consider a parent’s home his inheritance. * * * A parent is not obligated to leave anything to their children.  It is nice if they can do so, but a parent should not base all their decisions on what they leave to their children.  Parents sacrifice for about two decades to help their children, and there comes a time when they need to think of themselves.  Trudy Trombley, Inheritance isn’t an entitlement, Lubbock Avalanche-Journal, June 30, 2008, at A4.

The letter reminds my of the many “vultures” I have seen through my 81-plus years who seem to have found some reason to think that an inheritance belongs to the heirs who might be fortunate enough to be eligible to be recipients of someone’s assets, which were normally acquired through the sweat and blood of the person possessing those assets. * * * All vultures I have seen, except the ones who fly on wings, are simply ignorant, selfish individuals who usually exhibit tendencies to not want to work for what they acquire.  B.J. Chenault, Assets belong to person who accumulated them, Lubbock Avalanche-Journal, July 7, 2008, at A4.