The mindset behind this scandal is ultimately one of a Pro-Abortionist, since it views
Contrary to popular belief (and rampant misrepresentation), Catholic Social Teaching is not about 'socialism' or 'giving to charity', but rather it is a philosophy about how Society should think and act (hence the term "social," as it's used academically). So it is very important to distinguish the false "hippie" version of "Social Justice" (fixated on blindly giving to charity) with the true, dogmatic version, which involves embracing principles to make Society operate in fair and proper order (i.e. Justice) on all levels. The first and most important thing to keep in mind is that Catholic Social Teaching is, first and foremost, a philosophy and has nothing to do with political parties. Any attempts to place Catholic Social Teaching in a Republican or Democrat framework are bound to fail. Since Catholic Social Teaching is also founded upon Natural Law, it is thus the only true and self-consistent philosophy out there, meaning any attempts to force it into a "Conservative" or "Liberal" framework will likewise fail.
The 'bedrock' principle of Catholic Social Teaching, derived purely from Natural Law and amplified in the Gospel, is called Solidarity. Though the term isn't always used, the Church has always taught this concept derives first from Natural Law. Pope Leo XIII states the principle as follows:
Man's natural instinct moves him to live in civil society, for he cannot, if dwelling apart, provide himself with the necessary requirements of life, nor procure the means of developing his mental and moral faculties. Hence, it is divinely ordained [by Natural Law, in virtue of Creation] that he should lead his life - be it family, or civil - with his fellow men, amongst whom alone his several wants can be adequately supplied. (Immortale Dei, 3)Reason and Nature show that man was not made to live alone: he cannot provide for all of his needs by himself, he needs the help and assistance of others. Thus, he must rely on others to various degrees and they must rely on him. Solidarity is the principle by which man recognizes and lives by the fact he needs others to be fulfilled, and thus he must have a certain level of trust in mankind that they are looking out for him. In return, he must also be looking out for his fellow man. Many people think Solidarity only applies to the Gospel, where in we look out for others because we are Christian, but that's very incorrect. The Gospel only raises the standards by which we are to look out for others, particularly for the salvation of their souls, but the Gospel doesn't establish the bedrock principles, Creation does. The Parable of the Good Samaritan shows Solidarity goes beyond "religion," as the "heretical" Samaritan man rescued the "orthodox" Jewish man in need. It is when such acts are done in Christian Love, they are simultaneously fulfilling the Gospel as well.
A chief proof of Solidarity is shown from childbearing and rearing, which requires the cooperation of at least a spouse, but ideally also with an extended family. The child obviously cannot look out for themself and provide for their own needs, for without parental support there would be no next generation of humans. Plainly, one can see that simply protecting the child for the first nine months is insufficient. And from this, it is obvious that one cannot assign an arbitrary age by which the child must "fend for themself". So just as most (sane) parents know that a child cannot survive without assistance at ages 1, 5, 12, and even 15, this should lead them to realize that 18 is more or less arbitrary and not some magical number either. Of course, the duty of parents is to raise children so that they can survive and have their own family, but this principle is completely misunderstood by Conservatives who put a magical significance to "18 years old". The mindset has less to do with making sure the child is set and more to do with making sure the parents are set, meaning "now we can have the house to ourselves". This is plainly opposed to Solidarity and plainly Pro-Abortion, for it turns the parents' desires into (at least unconscious) self-centered motivations that will lead them to throw their child in the streets.
Sometimes an executive decision is needed for a rebellious child, but that's not what I'm talking about here. The great majority of children who are kicked out are not rebellious. It is heartbreaking to see children who are pressured (if not outright forced) out of the house once they turn 18 and graduate, as if the prior years meant nothing and as if there were no parent-child bond. This is like pushing a bird out of the nest just as it is beginning to learn to fly solo. The results are often tragic, with the child now having to turn to whomever will "befriend" them, which often times means having to settle for cohabitation or a low paying job that forces them to work full time for rent and leave no time for schooling. It's here where many turn to drinking as a way to cope with life "sucking" so much (which is ironic, since our society says if you're under 21 you're too "immature" to drink and only "mature" enough to fend for all of your needs). It is obvious that 18 year olds are still children in a very real sense, and still need assistance almost more than ever since they're in a major transitional phase. It is here where parents should be encouraging vocations and living as Christian adults, especially now that other young "adults" are getting into serious problems and making their futures very difficult with sins and other bad decisions.
Many parents will say they're only trying to get their child to make up their mind about college or a job, but this is still misguided as it is unnecessary 'life or death' type pressure. Not everyone is meant for college - not to mention the fact most college today is literally a waste of time, money, and full of sinful behavior and lifelong regrets - and nobody should be working out of fear. I believe good parenting will produce children who eventually do the right thing on their own, even with some healthy amount of parental pressure, precisely because of the true support they've received their whole life. Until that point, they can be good children at home, supporting the house through chores and whatever small ways they can, including regularly going to Mass and praying for the family. And how can we expect children to "honor your father and mother" when their parents don't show that care for them? How can a child be there to care for parents in their old age when the parent didn't pass on the value of being there for them?
There are many well meaning Catholics out there who unfortunately have this mindset, but it shouldn't be, and we should be educating them about what's right.