I suppose you could think of it in two ways.

Reciprocity: Did they treat you well and raise you right, or at least do their best? If so you might feel responsible.

Pragamtism: Is it a child's traditional responsibility to do so in your family/community? If so maybe you should feel responsible.

There's nothing that says a child can't teach their parents a few new things, or help them out in areas of weakness. Once you are of age/maturity to function in society as a responsible adult, I think we are obliged to take responsibility for humanity, or at least those within our own personal realm. I assume your parent's are included somewhere in both.

Imagine when your dad is 75 and he was just diagnosed with alzeimers disease and he needs continuous trips to the hospital. That is a time when we should be responsible for our parents.

My parents were rubbish, well they were good at first then they were absolutely rubbish.

I feel as though it was my responsibility to love them. Regardless of anything. They were the vehicle, in which I was given life. They are as much a part of me, as I am of them.

Part of growing up is realizing that your parents are just as everyone else; same feelings, same fears, same bliss, same 'shortcommings' and 'weaknesses' and fears and wounds (from their parents)... same moments of stupidity that everyone experiences. They do all they can, from moment to moment, as do we all.

I think that the notion of 'responsibility' is a whole 'nother issue..

My children have 'raised' me at least as much as I 'raised' them.

"Who dares teach must never cease to learn!"

I think you should be obliged to help your parents out in situations that you can help them out in since they raised / gave birth to you. If your parents are having trouble in their relationship, you should try talking to both of them then getting the story straight and siting down to talk to them, etc. If your parents get along well, there will most likely always be benefits there for you also. For example maybe you would go on more trips to places, more summer vacations, less arguments, allowance (maybe?), etc. There are many benefits for just taking the time to sit down and help out people in need as long as they are willing to take the time and sit down and give you the information that you require and then use your advice to put it into action. Now if they seem so helpless that they would most likely still hate eachother, etc regardless of what you said or tried to help them out with, then I would not help them. Ignorance is to be rewarded with ignorance.

I have sat down with my parents and talked to them about many things and it makes me feel better about knowing what was actually going on and trying to help them out rather than sitting in my room and ignoring the whole situation. If you take the time to help them now, there are more chances that you will have a better relationship when you grow older.

If you were in a marriage and you had two kids that were both very capable of helping you and your wife out in the situation, would you want them to?

I hope it's not going to be considered a 'responsibility'. Responsibility sounds so dysphemistic. It implies there has to be that mutual relationship there in order for one to excel, when really there is primarily oneself to blame.

Too many kids complain their parents have neglected them or treated them unfairly, holding them back. Too many parents complain their kids didn't turn out to be angels.

I support my parents because it's my own initiative to share something to them not because it's my responsibility neither they did their responsibility and returning the favor nor do I follow the custom.

I think its a good thing to take care of your parents; no doubt.

But at the same time, I don't believe children have any responsibility to do so.

• Children didn't ask to be brought into the world (at least not that I'm aware of); their lives are their own to do with as they please and owe nothing in return.
  

• A good parent equips their children with the practical necessities and teaching needed to go "out" into the world.
  

• I, personally, am not comfortable with my children taking care of me and I've taken steps - on several fronts - to avoid placing any burden on them.
  

• If I've done my job well, they'll succeed or fail gloriously by both their own actions and the flow of the events in their lives; I should be a memory to come back and visit when they desire - nothing more.
  

Yes, when children do care for their parents - as needed - this is both good and honorable. But I perceive no compelling reason they must.

Thanks

What other reason must there be, other than our human responsibility for all other humans - our moral responsibility to be kind and compassionate towards everyone?

Children did not ask to be brought into this world, but so what? What prevents that argument from extending to all ethical responsibilities: "I did not ask to live, so why should I refrain from randomly beating people up if I feel like it?" One might respond, "because randomly beating people up is harmful" and that is true - but it is also true that neglecting to care for someone is harmful.

A good parent does equip a child with the necessary tools to go out into the world. But one of those tools should be compassion for everyone, including the parents. Besides, if the parent did a reasonably decent job at equipping their child for adult life, shouldn't the child appreciate this love and effort by reciprocating that love and effort?

It is commendable that you have have taken steps to insure that your children will not have to take care of you, that is good parenting. But why should this preclude them from caring for you? I do not know your age, but I do know a number of elderly members of my own family - I have noticed that as they advance in age, as friends pass away, and as spouses pass away, that these elderly people becoming increasingly lonely and there is no better cure than the loving attentiveness of children and family.

It seems quite natural and proper to me that a good child should desire more than revisiting memories of parents; it seems natural and proper that they should desire to do whatever they can for their parents, even if it as simple as taking them to a movie, or dinner, ect when they can.

Or maybe I just read the Analects one too many times, but I am fond of filial piety to a great extent (though I do have some objections):

Filial piety - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think you might have misunderstood me.

I'm not saying we shouldn't - compassionate behavior towards anyone is to be commended and encouraged - I'm simply saying that I don't feel there's a compulsory responsibility to take care of one's parents, any more than anyone else, solely by virtue of the parent/child relationship.

I see this as one-way, in terms of responsibility, that the parent must take care of the child until it's prudent to 'release' them into the world; that this responsibility goes one-way in terms of "must".

Thanks