BIRTH ORDER

As stated by Alder’s birth order theory, every child is given a fair treatment in a family; his views were based on the theory that the order of the birth of the child had an impact on the level of preference they were given.  The prevailing familiarized formula such as “Middle-Child Syndrome” stated the view of the contrasting treatment of children in line with their rank in the family which focuses on the belief of middle children being abandoned and unseen. Television shows such as “Malcolm in the middle”, which are being presently aired are also based on the different issues and problems faced by a middle child in the American family of boys. In this research, scrutinization will be done about the impact which the sequence of the births in a family has on the psychological well-being of a person.

Based on the birth order theory, the most gregarious, convivial and the ones with the fantasy prone personality which often leads to deterioration is the second born children.  Youngest children, on the other hand, are being more vigorous and due to the reliance on others, they are being mollycoddled by parents. (Eckstein & Kaufman, 2012).

In the scholastic circles, prevailing community and media, tremendous value of consideration is being embraced by the birth order topic. Due to its correlation with almost every civilization, it has achieved prominence.  Everyone has a specified rank with which they are being distinguished, thus becoming a personal tag for them even if you are the youngest of 8 children or the only one in a family. In a child’s life, the tagging of birth by parents, family members and other adult initiates at a very young age and they then begin to invoke the child as such.

FIRSTBORN CHILDREN

They are said to be fastidious, determined, managerial, intrusive, reliable, formed, skeptical, highflyer, ambitious, enthusiastic and have high self-esteem.  Their urge to shield, aid and escort others indicates that they grasp the notion of power at a young age. As soon as the new siblings are born, the first born may start feeling despised due to the mother’s affection for the new baby and due to this realization, they may urge the need for appreciation which they used to gain before the birth of their siblings.

This situation is stated as being “dethroned” by the younger sibling according to Adler (1964). The firstborn may tend to become rigid and dictatorial as life goes by. Their ability to commence new adventures decline and they develop a hostile view towards taking risks due to their fright of losing the top position.

Various features of a family structure are related to the firstborn child. Parents are more likely to be highly desperate during the first time. They become concerned even if a single delay occurs, rejoice every small triumph while keeping the record of all the landmarks. The firstborn tend to be more robust and charismatic ones.  They are often subject to a lot of oppression in order to gain success. Furthermore than the parental behavior, the firstborn child is often amazed by the competition followed by the new siblings. This then gives rise to conflicts among the siblings. On the contrary, the idolization of the first born by the younger siblings often makes them the leader of the children.

MIDDLE BORN CHILDREN

 

They acquire disparate range of personalities. The habits of many of them are triggered by the fact that they’ve never experienced the limelight. The youngest has his place as the entertainer of the family while the firstborn always tends to be attaining and trailblazing.

The middle or second born child usually feels disassociated.  Their perceptions about being neglected and scorned due to being the same as the other siblings leads them to strive for gaining recognition from their parents. In the family photo albums, they are more likely to have a fewer single clicks than the firstborn child. This then gives rise to uncertainty and their further relationships in life gets afflicted. Moreover, in some cases, the middle child becomes pessimistic, desolated and start to glance the life from a tragic angle.

The middle child conspire guidance from the firstborn child and lacks enthusiasm. Their feelings about being out of place and not being among the milestone achievers often leads them to cope with adversity. They are the natural arbitraries and usually avoid clashes. They have a huge social circle and may be highly devoted to the peer group. They have magnificent social skills and grow with an altruistic standpoint comfortably. And indication is that they are more prone to become entrepreneurs. Karen E. Klein, a Los Angeles-based writer, suggested that a middleborn’s resilience in ideas and intrinsic strategic know-how makes their entrepreneurship more outstanding.

Alfred Adler (1964) believed that the middle child feels squeezed out of being in the notable and affluent position. The child may have difficulties to find a place and become an assailant of inequality and is deep down enforced to look for harmony within the family.

THE YOUNGEST

The youngest child is considered to be the merrymaker of the family and the one who is confident enough to put his luck on test. They are usually treated as the baby of the family and extrovert enticer. The patrons of this theory state that the youngest of the family is the alluring and captivating friend.

The youngest child is usually coddled or “pampered” more than any other sibling. According to Adler, this “pampering” is one of the worst behaviors being awarded to the child by parents.  As soon as the youngest enter the adulthood, this “pampering” becomes the reason of self-centeredness, reliance and immaturity. Moreover, if their parents and siblings are dictatorial and high-handed, the youngest children are more likely to become considerate and manipulative.

ONLY CHILD

The only child may acquire the characteristics of either the youngest or the firstborn child. According to Adler, it is stated that the only children are more likely to be coddled and spoiled by their parents, especially the mother, because they do not have any adversary for their parent’s warmth. Furthermore, he suggested that if the person does not invariably gains praise and affinity, then this could later turn into the root of social complications. They learn to rely on themselves, to be on their own and do not encounter any obstacles in being the solitary. The only children, who are being the loners by nature, may show gregarious features if he/she is longing to socialize. On the contrary, due to the unavailability of comrades, naturally gregarious children may learn to show solitary qualities by being satisfied to focus on their perception.

According to Den Berg (2003), the only children and the firstborns are more likely to be political leaders than the middle or the youngest ones.

TWINS

One of the twins tends to act as the firstborn, who is the influential one. Yet this can sometimes not be the case. Due to their proximity, they tend to be utterly assured; however they most of the time have distress being desolated and get lonely easily. Misery and segregation issues often arise as soon as anyone from the two gets married. Twins, specifically the identical ones, are more likely to be much closer than the normal siblings. More often than not, a discovery has been made on the fact that the firstborn children have welfare in academic and professional activities while the later-born have an ease in establishing and sustaining personal relationships. (Kidwell, 1982)

 

Firstborns may benefit from the incompatible recognition from their parents while the later-born urge to stake time with the earlier born ones. A time-use data developed by Price (2006) indicates that at the same age, the earlier born gets more parental time than the later-born.

Paulhus, Trapnell  and  Chen  (1999) made a discovery that the ‘higher-status’ of the firstborns must be turned down by the later-born ones as they are always pursuing substitute practices to be identified in their parents’ eyes. Consequently, they promote an adult character patented by “compassionate social style, a struggle for singularity, and political views that are both democratic and lenient”. In other words, they are born to insurgent. The previous evidence is persistent to the consequence of this study that the later-born are more defiant and the firstborns are more succeeding and they are being nominated as the most diligent as compared with the other siblings. On the other hand, acceptable, broad-based and unruly are the qualities that mostly describe the later-born (Paulhus et al., 1999).

Butcher  and  Case  (1994) scrutinized  the  influence  of  siblings  on  the  education  of men and women born between 1920 and 1965 in the United States. The effect on the child’s academic fulfillment of the structure of the boy or girl’s siblings was investigated in this study. It was discovered that the preferences of a woman’s education was methodically concerned by the sex distribution of her siblings, whereas the men’s choices were not. Those women who are raised with brothers mostly receive more education than women who has any sisters.

Birdsall’s (1991) forecast was based on the fact that due to expanding family income and the financial independency of the older siblings, the spending on later-born children becomes greater. However, it should be kept in mind that firstborns do not have to originally battle for the time and recognition of their parents (in Argys, Rees, Averett & Witoonchart, 2006). A child’s behavior and upcoming success may also be affected by the ways that how the synergy takes place among the siblings according to their birth order. Essentially, the achievements of the older siblings may be embraced as objectives and their declines may function as warnings and moreover, the older siblings could act as supporting mentors (Zajonc, 1976).

By the provision of some quality time with an adult figure, older siblings somewhat take the place of parents; this aids the firstborns due to their contingency of being a teacher from an early age. It is not feasible for parents to give their firstborn and second born child the similar treatment as both the financial and time resources that parents bestow to children vary with the sequence of birth. The firstborn obtains parental investments before the second child arrives; the investment in the last born continues after the firstborn is fully grown and self-sufficient (Gugl & Welling, 2010).