July 7, 2008
Oldest, youngest, or middle?
Written by Shirley Karr in Jaunty PostLast week several of us at church were discussing the needs of another member and how we can help her. She’s living with her parents, awaiting the birth of her first child, while her husband is stationed overseas and won’t be granted leave to come home until after the baby is born. They’re both young, barely a couple years out of high school.
One of the on-going challenges they’ll face, I pointed out, is that they’re both youngest children. That led to a discussion of how birth order affects personality. It was the first time I think I’ve ever discussed this topic with non-writers. Pretty cool.
All writers study psychology to some extent to help us create believable characters and bring them to life on the page. I had a huge “a-ha!” moment when I first read about birth order. It made so much sense!
Here’s the condensed version (and of course there are exceptions – this is a broad generalization): Oldest kids help take care of their younger siblings and may step up if something happens to Mom or Dad, so they learn responsibility from a young age. They tend to be mature for their age. A lot of CEOs and US presidents are oldest kids.
Youngest kids are the baby of the family, the darling. They’re often cute and charming and use this to their advantage. Sometimes they don’t mature as much as one would like because they don’t have to – someone else is always there to help them out of a jam.
Only kids — singletons — take on the traits of either youngest or oldest depending on a variety of factors, including their innate personality and how they’re treated. Vast amounts of research have been done on oldest, youngest, and onlies.
But hey, what about middle kids? Because they’re not the bossy one or the baby needing lots of attention, middle kids are often overlooked, even when it comes to research. The tiny amount of research on middle kids (oops, did I just reveal where I fall in my family’s birth order?) has shown that we tend to be easygoing, the peacemakers in the family. We had the privilege of being the baby for a while, become the oldest as elder siblings leave the nest, and never had the rude shock of some baby coming along and taking our place as the sole focus of Mom and Dad’s affections.
Paired in marriage, two oldest may butt heads and two youngest may flounder. Match an oldest with a youngest, though, and the odds seem more in their favor of having a long, happy marriage. And of course being the peacemaker, a middle matches well with any of the others, including other middles.
As a writer it’s important for me to know my characters’ birth order because it has so much bearing on why they do the things they do, and how they interact. In What An Earl Wants, Quincy is the eldest. As her father became ill and died, she took on more responsibility for her family and matured quickly. In the story she butts heads with Sinclair, her hero, who is the eldest in his family.
In Kiss From A Rogue, Tony is the baby of the family. The spare to his big brother the heir, Tony has to figure out where he fits into the world. At the start of the story he’s off for a carefree jaunt across the countryside, and by the end takes responsibility for the livelihood of an entire village.
So what do you think of birth order? Spot on or hogwash?
4:18 am | Share This
Margay Says:
I think there’s a lot of truth to the whole birth order issue. I am a middle child and I definitely am the peacemaker of the family. I also considered myself the bridge between the older set of siblings and the younger set; I linked them together - and I also spent my life trying to keep them on good terms with each other. Ah, big families. What do the studies say about that?
Emily McKay Says:
Interesting topic. I think birth order stuff is generally spot on. It definitely fits with my sister and I, even though we’re five years apart (and therefore more like singletons).
Youngest kids are also more creative. Which leads to an interesting tid bit about birth order. Most scientists are older children (over 80% or something). But most people who win the Nobel Prize for science are youngest children (again, something like 80%.)
Margo Maguire Says:
The types are 100% true for my three kids.
Crystal Says:
Spot on. I would love to read more about this. I am the youngest married to an oldest and we work very well together. I would go crazy if I was married to someone else like me. He is the responsible workaholic and I am the daydreamer.
Shana Says:
I think birth order is spot on. I’m an oldest middle. I have an older brother, but he’s 8 years older and moved out when I was very young. And, of course, you all know I have a litle sister in Ethiopia right now. I have most of the oldest traits, and I can remember when my brother would come home, and I had to cede some of my authority to him. I hated it!
USF is a youngest, and I think that element works well in our marriage. He’s way more laid back than I am.
Shirley Karr Says:
Interesting note about the scientists. I meant to add that youngest kids tend to be creative and often go into the dramatic arts, but forgot.
Buffie Says:
Very interesting!
I am the youngest of three. But my siblings are 11 and 13 years older. So I have traits of the baby and the oldest. The poor dh doesn’t know what to think when I tell him this is how it is going to be and then flash that smile and bat those eyes.
limecello Says:
I think birth order … depends. And a lot on culture too. Certain cultures, it’s the first born that wins it all. Sadly, I’m not the oldest. I also feel that I’m more of the “smoother-over.” Acting as a go between for my sister and parents. I also live closer to my parents, so somehow, since high school… my parents figured yelling at one kid was good enough, so when my sister did something stupid, I’d take the heat. (I… don’t see how that’s logical at all but whatever).
However, I do know there are advantages to being younger. Slightly lower expectations (haha yay- especially if they’re impossible). Also, everything I do is old hat - which goes both ways. I do something amazing? No big deal - older sibling has done it before. But also - going off alone, spending time with friends, sleepovers, etc- I was allowed to do that at a younger age than my sister.
I don’t think birth order has too much sway - experience, circumstance and culture plays in a lot… but of course middle children just have middle child syndrome
Fedora Says:
Ditto what Limecello said–I think birth order can definitely be accurate, but it also depends on personality and culture and gender and how many years in between the kids, and all that… Our middle child is a girl sandwiched by brothers, so I think although she’s the middle, I think in some ways it’ll be different than if she’d had two sisters…