Does not seem wise or prudent; any chance they're half siblings that visit each parent on different weekends?

It's not that creepy. Depends on the kids of course. I stack my kids up in a tent like sardines, and I'm in there too. We aren't sleeping together; we're sleeping next to each other. Easier to pull off in sleeping bags.

It IS however, pretty stupid to expect the kids to accept those accommodations for long. It's not a gender thing. Kids regard their same sex siblings with the same disgust as their other sex siblings. They aren't gonna mess around.

Really going on an OT tangent here, but I just did a search for this particular episode to see if I could find out a little more, and read this description of one of the Beachfront Bargain episodes: Greg and Kam want a retreat to escape the family's over-scheduled lives. What is wrong with people these days? Why not simply admit that they want to buy a vacation home, instead of "blaming" it on their "over-scheduled" lives? Don't like your schedule? Change it. No need to go out and buy additional property to "escape" it.

Sorry ... I'm on a tear today where this kind of stuff is concerned. My morning started out with a devotional that I subscribe to (you'd think that would be a good way to start the day, no?), and I found myself thoroughly annoyed at the mom who wrote it and claimed that taking kids from one activity to another and having recently moved and enduring the "stress" of new friendships had turned her life into "a constant struggle to survive." (Her exact words.)

Seriously. What have we become? (And my apologies to the OP. I should have really started a new thread with my tangent. I'm happy to delete this if you'd rather not see it here.)

I don't know...

I had close elderly relatives who grew up with a single bedroom in the entire house and sometimes it was the two parents in one bed and their adolescent child in the other (in the same small room, i think there was a curtain) and sometimes it was a sister of the wife in the same room and the adolescent on the sofa, and sometimes it was the wife and sister in one bed and the husband and son in the other. (This was the Depression and the Aunt and the Father were both seasonal itinerant workers) Of course the child was an only child so perhaps there was no activity even between the parents. (This was also a house with no central heat, a woodstove or two and a pump for cold water in the kitchen. The juggling of the sleeping arrangements probably varied by how cold the winter was.)

I have a male friend who is my age whose father was gone, his mother was a drug addict and he sometimes had to live in a small apartment with an aunt or a grandmother and sometimes he slept in the same bed as one of them. and he was a teenager.

(On the other hand I know people my own age who were molested or at least sexually bothered by relatives of theirs of either sex on a regular basis and none of them lived in the same house, or by older male siblings who did not sleep in the same room).

I would think it would be very odd for two adolescents of opposite sexes to be sharing a bed in a regular house on a nightly basis, but I'm not so sure sleeping on the sofa in a living room on a weekend here and there bothers me that much.

I don't think that sleeping in the same bed is going to engender incestuous sexual feelings. I don't think it works that way. That's either already there or it isn't and if it happens I doubt it's going to be on a sofa with the parents in the next room of a small apartment anyway. And who knows maybe one of the kids has already identified as gay, it seems to be happening at incredibly young ages now.

I don't find it creepy in the least-- it's a weekend escape not a way of life. In the summer all of us kids used to sleep together in the only upstairs bedroom with air conditioning. Never once did I think about my brother in an inappropriate way. Never once. I do agree with Fori though that this isn't likely to be an arrangement the kids go for much longer-- but not for the reasons that would make it "creepy".

Nor do I have an issue with the condo as an escape from overscheduled lives. Anyone with kids in sports who don't yet drive understands this. My sister has this and she often travels oos for work. Yes, she knows she could get another job but this is what makes sense-- the sports keep her kids out of trouble and builds great life skills.. and the job is what they need financially to live their lifestyle and get their kids through college. It's a choice, admittedly, but it doesn't make it less of an overscheduled life.

I do take exception to the wording of your daily devotional.. "a constant struggle to survive" is surely insensitve to those who do have a real struggle to survive.. but then I am not reading it in context.

Funky said it perfectly.

No, I'd not be comfortable with it. When we were kids and we all shared a hotel room, mom and I always used one bed, dad and brother always shared the other. My cousins were raised in a 2 bedroom house. Once they got older, Mom and Dad got one room their daughter the other and the son had a makeshift bed in the dining room.

Every family vacation I took with my parents included one hotel room with two queen beds one for them and one for the kids, my brother and I. This occurred through our young teens. Nothing creepy happened...we all wore pjs. It was how they could afford to show us the world.

It is ill-advised. With all the blended families, young people being left alone on their own many many hours each afternoon, the lines are very blurred...and sorry to interject reality incest is very live and well out there.

I don't think it's appropriate. Don't forget---they're 10 and 12 NOW. What about when they're 14 and 16?

Lucy, I like your phrasing--inappropriate rather than creepy. That's what I was trying to express and for exactly the reason you mention.

Pal, I"m not implying there is a drive toward an incestuous relationship here, however putting a pubescent boy and soon to be pubescent girl in bed to sleep together as a regular routine when on vacation, regardless of their familial status, is inappropriate in my opinion and not a healthy choice for a family to pursue. Twin beds in one room, maybe but not sleeping together in one bed. If they were 6 and 4 YO, maybe but not a 12 and 10 year old together and not future bedding down as they are 13/11 and 14/12 etc etc.

There, I said it :).

I"m with Pal on the issue of creepyness, and I'm with Idaclaire on the "struggles" of HGTV house shoppers, lol. When I watch Tiny House Hunters I about die laughing at the reasons people give for wanting to live with their three young children in a house the size of my den. "Togetherness" "Quality time" "Travel". All wonderful goals that people are wise to pursue, but which do not require living in a shoebox. Every city or town I've ever lived in--even the ones with just two stoplights--had areas of small homes (with actual plumbing!) where people could live if their goal was less space and lower costs. But if you watch HGTV, you'd think it a fate worse than death to move to a "lesser" neighborhood when you could put a 65K trailer in someone's back 40 and have a composting toilet, LOL.

I did see that episode. They had opportunities to purchase properties with sufficient bedrooms for each to have one. I thought it was extremely selfish of the adults to go for what they liked over the comfort and privacy of their entire family. They got a large master bedroom. They could have also bought a sofa that opened into a bed along with the Murphy bed that would have been considerably better but no she just had to have a sectional which was not a sofa bed. There are sectionals that are. I think in just a short amount of time this current sleeping arrangement will be completely inappropriate. The master was so large they could have put multiple single beds or sets of bunks and everyone sleep in one room but with their own beds. That's exactly how our beach house used to be. One big room with several beds. I didn't like that episode at all.

HGTV = Fake news

I think it's inappropriate now. Children start "playing doctor" at much earlier ages than people think, and especially now that girls are reaching puberty at earlier and earlier ages: A girl starting at age 8 is consideredin the normal range. Why would you put them in such a situation where curiosity would even be tempted?

runninginplace,

Sure, increasingly awkward for one or the other over time as needs for personal privacy evolve? I agree. I am sure I shared a large hotel bed a few times with my opposite sex adolescent sibling in the same room with my parents rather than have us all in separate rooms.
But on the other hand, through attrition, I had my own bathroom during my entire adolescence and even when it was just me and my parents at home, I locked the bathroom door. So I will agree with the privacy aspects of this in relation to it being an ongoing thing.

But right now they are 10 and 12. When they are 14 and 16 the arrangements may have changed by then. The apartment may be different by then.

I did not see the show but unlike ravencajun, I find the idea of parents putting their wants ahead of their kids to be a refreshing outlier in today's child centric parenting style world that is producing more narcissists than ever before. Both kids at their ages should only be vacationing together with the parents for less than eight years so why make long term expensive fiscal purchases based on their short term needs not yours?

When the kids find the arrangement awkward they can take turns sleeping on the floor and sofa....and if, they as adults do not like that summer house by all means they can pay for one that suits their wants better than their parents' free room.

the possibility of being damaged by parental over indulgence nowadays is far greater than the possibility that something inappropriate would happen with normal, well raised siblings sharing a bed once in awhile on vacation...

edited to add, if the ten and twelve year olds have cell phones there is far greater danger of something inappropriate happening to them in my opinion....young children with iPhones creep me out much more than this first world issue.

My guess: the boy will head to the floor in a sleeping bag.

I am going to point something out that's way off topic, but it's about behavior, motive and opportunity.

Back when there was a lot of lead paint around and in poor housing stock there was peeling and chipping lead paint on plaster and wood, there was a problem with children eating it. This is a condition called pica.

One of the solutions presented was to cover up chipping paint on woodwork with masking tape and to cover patches of wall around cribs and children's beds with paper. and tape, (since they were unsupervised when others were asleep).

Not every child in the household ate lead paint, only the children with pica.

Of the children with well-developed pica (who may have had other non-nutritive cravings), they found that even very young children, still in cribs, were carefully pulling the tape or paper away, eating the lead paint behind the paper, and putting the tape back into place, and some of them were waking up at night to do it.

So, they knew it was wrong, they knew they would get in trouble if they got caught, and they worked out methods to get around methods intended to stop them, in order to get their fix. Kids in cribs did this.

The only case of molestation between siblings that I encountered while teaching was between same sex children. The older brother had been molested by his father and than in turn inappropriately touched his brother. they did not share rooms nor beds. So should teens of opposite sex or not never share rooms or be unattended...

I did not see the show but unlike ravencajun, I find the idea of parents putting their wants ahead of their kids to be a refreshing outlier in today's child centric parenting style world that is producing more narcissists than ever before.

I agree.

I also realize that my comments and point of view are strongly colored at the moment by having just spent time with indigenous people with practically nothing in the way of material possessions who will walk through the jungle for days on end to bring their sick children to a remote clinic for medical treatment. I find that I have little to no tolerance for affluent people (and that includes pretty much all of us) who maintain that their carpool duties or the fact that their children are relegated to a public school education or any other first-world stressor in any way equals "a struggle to survive." I could link to the devotional where I picked this up for anyone who is interested.

There's a thread on the other side in which a young (I presume) mom has asked for advice because her very active toddler won't stop spilling on the stairs. I cannot wrap my head around the idea that a parent would not simply control where and when the child eats and drinks!

I hate to beat my mission trip like it's a dead horse, but we were told long in advance of the trip by those who have gone before us that we would be amazed at the behavior of the indigenous children. They are exceptionally well behaved. They don't fuss or cry, and if given a toy (or crayons or sidewalk chalk or any little thing), they are eager to share with their friends and siblings. I thought yeah, sure - I'll believe that when I see it. Well - I saw it. And now I believe it. I have never seen children (and we saw many in the week we were there) that were so agreeable. Even the little ones that were at the clinic due to illness did not fuss or cry much. It continues to intrigue me -- this difference in the way that the children in that culture behave compared to kids that I know and see on a regular basis. I suspect that the indigenous children, while surely loved and treasured, are also simply a fact and a part of family life, not held apart as though the sun shone out of their little behinds. I don't quite know how to put it into words, but there seemed to be a very simple expectation that the indigenous children would follow every bit of adult leadership. I know children in our culture who, at a very early age, are given a choice of where the family will vacation! There's a balance of power that has tipped dangerously in a number of families that I know.

I don't understand why so many parents don't discipline. I have observed this throughout the years in church, where a child's bad behavior is very noticeable. I'm thinking of one church in particular where communion is served each Sunday. Following the service, the little ones make a beeline for the front altar where they tear into the remaining Hawaiian bread, scattering crumbs all around, pushing and shoving as they fight over the last little bit. To me, this is inexcusable. If the parents won't put an end to such a disrespectful spectacle, then the clergy needs to do it ... But they don't, for fear of "offending." I just don't get it.

Creepy? I think it's creepy that someone thinks that brother and sister sleeping in same bed is creepy.

Just wondering would it seem so inappropriate to some here if it were 2 girls or 2 boys? Playing "doctor" doesn't just occur between opposite genders.

What seems more inappropriate than the genders of the kids are their ages. 10 & 12 years is starting to need more privacy, I agree.

And I know this is reiterating what some others have already expressed.

It strikes me this conversation is ASSUMING a lot gender roles why. In this PC world of pan/trans all being "same same"--why does any of this matter? Most kids would choose a bed over the floor why do any other parameters matter?

I'm thinking the murphy bed is for show, and there really will be an air mattress or sleeping bag on the floor, just from what I know from other people. Also, the kids are at the age where they may not likely want to go with their parents anyways.

arcy,

lol, please: let's not go pointing fingers about who's making assumptions.

Your assumption seems to be that siblings left alone together are going to have sex with each other, because the only thing that's stopping them is supervision by others. Please correct me if that's not what you meant by "young people being left alone many hours each afternoon" , when the entire context of this thread is blood relatives.

Getting away from incest for a minute, I'm glad some gender roles are breaking down because I think it will be protective for young people to avoid sexual exploitation. For example the ideas that boys are always aggressors and girls should put up a brief protest but no really means yes. What a disservice to all the boys who are abused and all the girls who really did mean no. The more confident and knowledgable young people are the better armed they are to protect themselves against predators (although persistent predators seem to always find a way unfortunately). I know it's kind of a hot topic but it's really amazing the turn around in your mindset if you embrace consent culture instead of the dominant culture of shame, silence and avoidance when it comes to sex. Imagine all the awkward teenage encounters of your youth and how much better and less hurt everyone would've been had you been able to discuss your plans and limits openly with each other instead of just trying to guess in silence what the other person would put up with.

For young teenagers sharing a bed, it wouldn't be my preference. I grew up in a house with a lot of privacy and I liked it that way. my mom grew up with four sisters sharing the same bed and she despised it so I never had to even share a room with my sister. kids of that age have a lot of hormones and, trying to put it delicately, probably treasure their alone time at night if given the opportunity. Even younger, my goddaughters at six and eight prefer not to share sleeping accommodations, and it's very practical because one is a total night owl. Canadians like Scandinavians are notorious for wanting lots of personal space however.

I think of the young tweens/teens in my life, and how, in typical kid fashion, they are often found in various states of "sprawl" in the same room. On the sectional, on the floor, in the game room ... I am also hearing in my head comments like, "Get OFF me!" and "DAD! Make her stop TOUCHING me with her FEET!" If they were forced to share a bed, they'd do it because they are used to being in very close physical proximity. Of course, the requisite "touching" complaints would go right along with that.

I can guarantee you they wouldn't be thinking of touching one another sexually. That's most definitely not a given, simply because boys and girls are lying next to one another, and I too think it's creepy to instantly jump to that as a foregone conclusion.

I believe the reason most parents would seek separate accommodations for their youngsters is because they simply didn't want to hear the grumbling and fussing about somebody's "stinky pits" being too close to somebody else's delicate nose.

When moving to South Florida in 1986 and looking for an apartment for a one year lease so that we could shop around for a house, I was told multiple times that with a 12 year old son and 10 year old daughter, it was against the local municipality rental laws to rent an apartment with less than three bedrooms. I WAS looking for three bedrooms, but they were harder to find. There are laws that restrict rentals, but unfortunately probably not for purchasing a home. There is a very good reason for those rental laws, which usually state that a child cannot share a bedroom with a member of the opposite sex. It does not matter if you think it does not apply to you, check your municipal laws.

Well antiquated laws still exist everywhere and their obscurity varies from state to state. In North Carolina it is illegal to play bingo for longer than five hours. hmmm, what is the " very good reason " for that law I wonder...

I grew up in Miami and I never heard of such a law anywhere in S FL, voila. What municipality was this? I'm really curious.

I would point out that at that time it was also illegal for Publix to sell a bottle of wine before noon on Sunday in many S FL municipalities.

"I would point out that at that time it was also illegal for Publix to sell a bottle of wine before noon on Sunday in many S FL municipalities."

Still is illegal in some Florida counties. I know for sure that Pasco County (11:00 am) still has this law. Learned this as I tried to buy champagne for mimosas last Sunday.

Yeah, maddielee, in the early 90s I lived in Dania and there was a bottle of wine in my stuff when checking out in Publix. The checker just grabbed it and put it under the counter without a word. I was pretty mystified till she explained that I'd have to come back in 15 minutes.

Interesting that it's still in force some places. Dania changed the law a year or two after I moved there.

Up here we have no beer or wine in grocery stores or corner stores at all, and we didn't even have grocery or retail shopping at all on Sundays until the mid2000s! In fact, we had a referendum about it in 2004 and most people voted against!!!

I recorded and watched the episode. I typically skim the first part to see what the couple is looking for in a home, what the options are, the one they choose and then fast forward to see the before and after stuff. I did think it odd that the parents chose one bedroom housing. They showed their kids the Murphy bed and then took them in to see their really big bedroom. The parents also spoke about entertaining friends and family and I didn't see where that was going to take place.

I thought what they purchased and renovated was not congruent with what they said they were looking for in a home.

Our municipality JUST passed the "brunch bill" so that alcohol could be sold in stores and restaurants at 10 a.m. Sundays, effective immediately. There is a major sporting event here this week, so that was the primary motivation.

IN my state, ct. Up until a few years ago alcohol could only be sold m-s til 8 pm. The big super markets lobbied to change it until 10 pm and Sunday small idepentant sellers faught to keep the old blue book laws for many work the stores alone and now to compete with chains they work close to 24/7. Alcohol sales have not increased at all since the change.

I didn't see the episode so I'm judging only by what I've read here. I think it was selfish of the parents to get one big bedroom for themselves and expect brother and sister to share a bed. But I don't necessarily trust the story narrative they use in any of these shows.

I don't think brothers and sisters should have to share a bed, unless they're very young. I don't think it leads to incest or necessarily messes with the kids' heads. But there's an element of ewww, especially as puberty enters the picture with the embarrassment of periods and wet dreams in shared sheets. If they can't have separate rooms, at least give them the privacy of their own beds. Where's the respect, mom and dad?

I just was able to stream the episode and agree that it's a bit weird to expect kids the age of theirs to share a bed. Twin beds in a bedroom wouldn't be that odd to me, esp in a vacation home, but seeing them lying side by side trying out the Murphy bed just seemed wrong. Especially when there is plenty of room for a sofa bed, in addition to the Murphy, instead of the plain sectional.

I also thought it weird the way the dad kept picking up the son and moving him around (for a kid that age). Very strange, indeed.

Some of the comments hit a nerve. I have a 13 yo DD, 12 yo DS, 9 yo DS. When we travel using hotel rooms the older two choose to share a bed and the younger is on a blow-up. No one likes to sleep w/ the 9 yo because he squirms and is all over the place. It's their choice, we're all in there together, and nothing creepy is happening. The bathroom is there for undressing and the kids don't shower together. Drawing a line there makes more sense. I expected someone to share a bed, but I let them choose the arrangement.

I agree with Pal. Creepy is assuming incestuous behavior is likely between siblings. If that's true than sharing a room, which my boys do, isn't appropriate, either. My sister and I shared until I moved out for college. My older relatives told stories about 3-4 kids sharing a bed "back in the old days" because they only had so much room and furniture.

I watched an episode yesterday in which the man and his much younger second wife, who insisted on their new condo being "glam-glam", purchased the smallest unit shown for them and their FIVE children.--a one-bedroom--because it fulfilled her needs, and his need to have the master on the gulf side.