Monday, October 5, 2009

First born

So I have long been a fan of studying birth order. It really intrigues me. Since there is a seven year gap between my older brother and me, I am considered by birth order specialists to be a first born (in my characteristics). I read Lehman's book a few years ago and really felt he was talking about me.
The last couple of days I have wondered if there is a correlation between a couple of observations. Firstborns are generally perfectionists and more responsible amongst other things. Then when you look at new parents; they are generally really careful with their first child. They don't want to do anything wrong and take all the precautions like boiling pacifiers, getting the right schedule down and making sure everything is done by the books. After the first child I have heard that these precautions ease up as they realize the baby will live without all these tedious tasks.
What do you guys think; is there a link between these two observations?

9 comments:

Aaron Marcelli said...

That is interesting. I guess it goes back to the nature vs. nurture. But in an instance like yourself, or my youngest brother who is 5 years behind his closest sibling and acts like a first born, parents would not be as precautions as they were with their actual first born child.

I'm also a first born and display some of the traits you talked about as well as being a list maker, which I know to be common of oldest children.

David Carrel said...

I was working on my lists this morning! haha. Boy Mr. Elliott really pounded down nature vs. nurture; my wife talks about that all the time. haha. I thought about the fact about the precautions of parents for "firstborns" that were not actual firstborns like myself and your brother. So I could be wrong, but I still think there might be a link.

Jewda said...

I think it's a double edged sword. Parents are overly cautious with the firstborn, but that child is also the practice child. My parents admit they didn't know what they were doing with Steve, but they learned enough to get them ready for the rest of us.

I also think that no matter how many kids we end up with, Sarah will still boil pacifiers and be a germ freak. After all, she was OCD before Jakob.

Aaron Marcelli said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Seda said...

There are a lot of variables at play here. First, as you say, the parents are more anal at the first kid. In addition, they are able to give all their child-centered attention to just one baby, while that baby is still a baby (multiples excepted). Third, there is no other child around. So, when Sam was born, he already had a big brother in place, and the interaction between the two of them began within 2 hours of birth. That affected both Trin and Sam. As Jewda points out, experience is a factor. And then there are the individual characteristics of the child. And the entire family dynamic. etc. etc.

Speaking of books, though, have you tried "Unconditional Parenting," by Alfie Kohn? It's really good.

Jeff said...

i think that the last born always needs attention and is the screw up child. Its even worse in a big family. At least thats what i heard. ha

David Carrel said...

I have not read that book Seda. Good observations everyone. Jeff, all I know is that the last born in your parents family was a big screw up!

Jewda said...

I'm not sure which Jeff you're talking about, but I'm defending both. Last born children tend to be the awesomest.

David Carrel said...

I was talking about you! ha.