From the article Boomerang Children Living At Home May Not Be Such a Bad Thing by Nancy

L. Anderson, the author is discussing the controversial issue of adult children staying at home
may be financially beneficial to both the parents and the children. The main idea of this article
is stated, which is clearly can be seen at the last sentence of the first paragraph. This is because
the topic is boomerang children. The author keeps on repeating the term in every paragraph
and sometimes refer to them as Baby Boomers. May actually be financially beneficial to both
the parents and the children is on the other hand, the controlling idea. The author is in favor
with the issue when the author emphasizes on the economic advantages that both parties will
gain through multi-generational homes as the arguments in most of the paragraphs. Some
biases are obvious when the author includes examples from the author’s observation and own
experiences. The author firmly stands on the argument that parents and adult children that
living together will gain mutual economic benefits.
The supporting details in this article are mostly weak because they are opinion-based
which comes from the author’s personal experiences and observation. The author includes
statistics from Bureau of Labor Statistics in the second paragraph, making it a fact-based
supporting detail thus, a strong support. Tough it is not obvious, but flaw still exists in the
reasoning when there is a lot of modal being used in support to the arguments such as “may”,
“could” and “can” thus, making the arguments questionable.
The supports seem directly related to the arguments as the author consistently switching
points between the benefits that boomerang children will gain as well as the parents when they
practice multi-generational living. Therefore, the supports are relevant to the arguments. Next,
the supports are subjective because most of the information comes from the author and
therefore affected the author’s personal judgement. The arguments are not complete because
the author did not provide adequate support to overcome points that can weaken the author’s
arguments. For example, the points from the author’s husband. The author only counters the
argument from the husband with a simple sentence which can lead to existence of reason to
doubt the accuracy of the author’s observations.
Nevertheless, the arguments are valid because the supports and evidences used are
relevance. Meanwhile, the arguments are not credible. Despite the author provides relevant
supports to the arguments but there is refutation of opposing points. When the husband
disagrees with the argument and the author admitted that many people agree with the husband’s
philosophy that young people need to become self-sufficient and independent earlier, the
author refutes the argument and pointed out that the issue is the attitude behind the
arrangement. Therefore, the argument is not credible because the author does not consider
opposing and other views.
From our point of view, we think that the author leaves the reader to make the inferences
and conclusions. We are able to infer and make conclusion from the indirect messages implied
by the author. In the article, the inference that we got is a multi-generational living it can cut
the cost of living for both parents and children. Where else, for the conclusion, parents with
boomerang children should consider multi-generational living as it brings a lot of benefits to
both parties.
The instance of deductive reasoning is in paragraph two. The text starts with an
observation from a specific case which is a research finding on the reason why adult children
are moving back home. The author inserted statistics on the research finding of unemployment
in the country as some evidences to the deductive reasoning. Later on, the text derives to more
general rule to make a conclusion that adult children have no other choice than to move back
with their families. Next, the instance of inductive reasoning is in paragraph nine. At the
beginning, the text is specifically on how some families wanting to embrace the multi-
generational living. The author shares her experience living in a multi-generational
neighbourhood to make it specific. At the end of the text, the author draws an inference that a
multi- generational living can save money.
The author’s purpose in writing this article is to indicate the readers about the adult
children also known as boomerang children living at home is not such a terrible idea. The
author emphasizes on how adult children living at home with their parents can be beneficial in
terms of financial and economic status. Moreover, the author also informed about how both
parties will gain mutual benefits through having a multi-generational home. The author’s
purpose is also to indicate about how boomerang children will become more independent with
their lives when living with their parents.
The author’s intended audience are specifically towards parents with boomerang
children as well as parents that are going to be facing this issue. The author wants to encourage
multi-generational home by stating that people have been doing it for thousands of years by
asking the question “Why can’t do it here?”.