If you are one of three, did you feel left out ( or that a sibling was always left out)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm one of three girls (the oldest) and am constantly the odd man out. This is also why I won't have three kids. I'm stopping at 2.

I thought I was stopping at 2 and got twins the second time around . . . so you never know!

Ahh, don't jinx me!

[Anonymous]

I am one of two, and I was often left out!

It doesn't matter how many, someone is left out at some point.

[Anonymous]

I am surprised at how many are stopping at two becuase of fear of someone being "left out". If this is the ONLY reason, it is a really dumb one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am surprised at how many are stopping at two becuase of fear of someone being "left out". If this is the ONLY reason, it is a really dumb one.

Well, that, and that daycare = my (imaginary) beach house mortgage

[Anonymous]

For us, it was more that it always came down to two against one, and the makeup of the two or the one constantly shifted. So nobody really felt left out. I was 4 years older than my sister, who was two years older than my brother. So my sister and I were closer on some things because we were both girls, but she and my brother were closer on some things because of their closer ages. My brother and I were both neatniks while my sister was a slob, so we sometimes sided that way.

Being one of 3 was fun.

[Anonymous]

Yes, it was always me and "the boys". There is 3 years between us and I am the oldest. I felt pushed into being the sensible, grown-up, mature one, while they were lumped together being boisterous and doing what boys do.

It's another reason why we won't be having 3.

The most convincing argument against having 3 though is that the middle child gets shafted. there are benefits to being the oldest and the youngest but the middle child really has neither.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it was always me and "the boys". There is 3 years between us and I am the oldest. I felt pushed into being the sensible, grown-up, mature one, while they were lumped together being boisterous and doing what boys do.

It's another reason why we won't be having 3.

The most convincing argument against having 3 though is that the middle child gets shafted. there are benefits to being the oldest and the youngest but the middle child really has neither.

Does s/he?

Did it happen in your family? It seems like in your situation the eldest got shafted.

I think the "middle child" syndrome is a myth, or rather that it gets played up more (or used as an excuse) than anything else. I know plenty of middles that are just fine, weren't shafted growing up, and are perfectly fine adults. But so many people love to talk about that "poor middle" child. Odd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am surprised at how many are stopping at two becuase of fear of someone being "left out". If this is the ONLY reason, it is a really dumb one.

Well, that, and that daycare = my (imaginary) beach house mortgage

Amen sister.

I have three and the amount we spend on childcare makes me crazy.

[Anonymous]

No, I never felt left out, but that's not to say that we three were always harmonious and doing things together happily either. Usually completely the opposite.

I was the oldest (girl) with two younger brothers and didn't much want to be involved with what they had going on anyway. I would love to have three kids and would never for a second decide not to just because I thought one would feel left out (nor would I have a fourth for that reason).

[Anonymous]

I am the oldest of three (girl, girl, boy, all within six years) and one of us was sometimes left out. Usually me or my brother. Depends a lot on personality and interests, though, and I still plan on having three myself!

[Anonymous]

I am the middle of three and never felt left out. During our childhood, I was probably the glue for my older and younger brothers because they were 4 years apart and really didn't have much in common. Once everyone got into college that age difference didn't matter anymore.

[Anonymous]

Oldest of three. Plus my siblings are twins. Ugh. I was always left out. As the oldest with the birth of my siblings I was suddenly supposed to grow up much faster I think. They always had birthday parties together, same circle of friends, loved each other to death...yeah I felt very very left out when I was young. It's okay now, but I still feel it. I love them to death, but I sure didn't feel that way during my childhood. It's probably not that dramatic if you don't have twins and a third...but with twins - it was horrible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We receive so many comments on this about having three. Did anyone truly feel left out or that a sibling was constantly left out because your parents did not have a fourth child?

In my family of three but little brother was definitely the left out one. Not on purpose, but my older sister and I (less than 2 years apart) were best friends and inseparable. Brother was a bit younger and gender also factored into it a bit. That experience made me feel that I'd rather have two kids or four, not three. But, birth order/gender/age gaps also have a big influence. Along with just how well personalities mesh.

[Anonymous]

I was one of 3 growing up ..all close in age..my brother and sister together and me alone..always.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oldest of three. Plus my siblings are twins. Ugh. I was always left out. As the oldest with the birth of my siblings I was suddenly supposed to grow up much faster I think. They always had birthday parties together, same circle of friends, loved each other to death...yeah I felt very very left out when I was young. It's okay now, but I still feel it. I love them to death, but I sure didn't feel that way during my childhood. It's probably not that dramatic if you don't have twins (identical) and a third...but with twins - it was horrible.

We have twins and have been considering a third and this has been a concern I've had.