Community› The Bump Message Boards› Multiples
Multiples
New Discussion

Having 1 + Twins doesn't really equal a middle child right ?

Skylarv217Skylarv217
in Multiples

So I always wanted 3-4 kids and DH was and is supportive of that but he is adamant that he wants 2 or 4 , bc/ he doesn't want the "middle child" . He has his reasons and that's fine with me. 

But my thing is we have a 4 will be 5 year old by babies due date, and then we will have the twins. But with twins its not like there really is a middle child is there. They reach ages and milestones somewhat together. There will go to school and parties together and drive at the same time. If anything I'm worried about DS feeling left out.  

I know this may be odd but what do you think? 

Report Reply to Post

Re: Having 1 + Twins doesn't really equal a middle child right ?

  • macchiattomacchiatto member
    I've thought about that, too, if we end up having Twins + 1. I agree with you. (And that's one reason why we're not telling the boys their birth order till they're much older; I find it a little odd when people make a big deal out of their multiples' birth order, referring to a multiple as "my oldest" or "my youngest" as if there were a meaningful age difference between them.) I'm sure you could still end up with one who feels left out; may be the singleton, may be one of the twins if for some reason your oldest and the other twin have more in common and click better. I think any time you have more than two kids there's that possibility of one feeling left out, but I'd agree with you that you won't have a "middle" child.
    fraternal twin boys born january 2009
    Report Reply
  • Loading the player...
  • Skylarv217Skylarv217
    I like the idea of not telling the birth order until older, i could see kids getting really bent out of shape over... i'm older and blah blah blah... i agree that it really doesn't matter !
    Report Reply
  • MamaCrystalMamaCrystal

    Yes, I'd say that having 1+twins doesn't really equal a middle child.  However, we have 2+twins and I feel like our 2y/o is sort of a middle child.  He has it a little rough... not yet big enough to do the "cool" things his brother does (like play soccer or go to school, he cries a sad cry every time he can't), and not a baby anymore to get the same attention his sisters do.  Now that our 4y/o started school again though, I have more of a chance to give our 2y/o some one-on-one time... if the girls are content ; )

    ETA:  Should have clarified.  Obviously he's A middle child... it just feels like he's the ONLY middle child out of 4.  Kind of an interesting dynamic.

    ~Crystal~ SAHM to Sam (5), Hugh (3), Mary & Grace (22 months) : )
    Report Reply
  • caitdanacaitdana member

    I am the youngest of 3 (the older 2 were twins) We always new the birth order. I am not sure what the difference is in a non-twin family but it was always normal to us. We all turned out to be stereotypical to our birth order. Oldest twin is very anal retentive perfectionist, middle child is the odd ball (he was the only boy too so that was hard on him), and then me the attention needy baby of the family. My brother even joked this weekend when we all got together that we all still played our parts.

    Lilypie Premature Baby tickers
    Report Reply
  • macchiattomacchiatto member

    Funny; a MoM friend of mine just posted this on FB about birth order, and it mentions twins:

    https://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/39459807/ns/today-parenting/?gt1=43001

    fraternal twin boys born january 2009
    Report Reply
  • ewiley28ewiley28 member
    I'm hoping the dynamic proves that way.  Our son will be 3.5 when the twins are born and in my head, that equals done.  But we are concerned about the 3 problems, so keeping our mind open to four now even though we originally said 2!
    Report Reply
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards
"
"