Gen Z didn't 'fail to launch' - their parents failed to let go

I’m not here to hate on Gen Z: most zoomers I know do not exhibit any of the helplessness and emotional stuntedness of which they are often accused. But stats don’t lie, and Gen Z does seem marred by a widespread ‘failure to launch’, broadly defined as failing to achieve the usual markers of adulthood by the appropriate age. Many zoomers are much slower than previous generations to get their driver’s licence, move out of their parents’ home, get jobs and start serious relationships. I’ve had front row seats to one such ‘failure to launch’. As a close family friend, I saw first-hand how a very privileged, talented and well-educated young man born in 1998 ended up never-employed, chronically single and living with his mum at 25. From the outside, you could be forgiven for thinking he just wasn’t very ambitious. But as I watched him emerge out of adolescence and come to a grinding halt, I came to a different conclusion. Spoiler alert? It was the parents.

This guy, let’s called him Ben, was born into a wealthy family (let’s call them the Smiths). Both parents came from humble beginnings, but rode the wave of the 80s financial boom. The dad worked his way up in real estate and the mum was in fashion. They came to parenthood late. Ben, the younger of two kids, was born when his mum was in her mid-40s. She packed in her professional pursuits to focus on her main project: creating the best possible existence for her two children. The Smiths set up an incredible life on paper. They lived across multiple homes, travelled widely, invested a lot of time and money into their children’s education and sports. They cared deeply and made sacrifices. To their minds, they probably couldn’t have done better: materially, their children wanted for nothing.

But like so many other Boomer and Gen X parents, buzzed on the golden years of capitalist abundance, they completely forgot to provide the things that money can’t buy. The point of this piece is not to dunk on this particular family (too much), but to show that the stunted Zoomers aren’t some weird iPad zombies that had everything handed to them and still failed. Rather, they’re young people whose parents failed to appreciate what young people actually need to thrive.

1. A real community

The Smiths moved around a lot. They were initially based in a big city where Mr Smith worked. Once the kids came along, they decided it would be best to live closer to nature, so they bought a gorgeous home in the Swiss countryside and moved there without the dad, who would visit on weekends. They thought this would give them the best of both worlds: city money and rural peace. In reality, Mrs Smith found herself entirely isolated in a foreign country with two small children, while her husband removed himself from day-to-day family life. After a few years, the Smiths bought a gorgeous apartment in the centre of a bustling Italian city to escape their rural isolation — except, once again, they had no family or friends in the area. Their community was transactional: a language tutor, sports coach, owner of the local restaurant, someone to help around the house, old friends who would occasionally visit for a weekend. The Smiths had no real ties in the community: the mum didn’t have any professional networks, the parents didn’t even speak the local language, they didn’t volunteer and they weren’t a part of any religious community.

Ben was quite obviously desperate to belong somewhere. He learned the local language, made lots of friends, loved the local football team, had opinions on local politics, and genuinely made the most out of being in those amazing locations. If anything, he was a much better expat than both his parents put together.