Parents of three, do you feel less bonded to your third?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the middle child you lose the bond with, if you had it to begin with. The baby is often the favorite, or the one you are most connected to. The middle loses their role.

As a parent of three, both my middle child and I would agree with this. I wouldn't say we lost the bond, but she rightfully feels like the stereotypical middle child at times.

Me too! I'm the superfluous middle that wishes my parents never had me.

+1, my role in the family has always been to have no problems or issues and to take up no space and require no attention or resources. I don't really understand what the point was. My older sister also always resented me and her feelings were validated by my parents. My younger brother has special needs. There simply was nothing left for me.

True! I always felt guilty about asking to anything because I felt unworthy of resources. Right down to the point where I didn't ask my parents for money when I was starving in college. They're worth 10s of millions so in retrospect this was dumb, but I really felt I couldn't ask. I lost 20 lbs off my already slight frame and they didn't really notice. I think my mom mentioned my clothes looked ill-fitting and rolled her eyes that it must have been a fashion choice for me. Then before I could even say anything the subject was changed to more important things like my siblings...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the middle child you lose the bond with, if you had it to begin with. The baby is often the favorite, or the one you are most connected to. The middle loses their role.

Maybe for you, but this is a generalization that does not account for ages, temperaments, etc. This question also wrongly presumes that a parent cannot be strongly bonded to three children. OP is a troll.

It's rare for parents to be equally bonded to all children, especially once you are in the 3+ category. It's ideal, but not that common. Some kids handle it better than others.

DP. Is that based on your personal experience? Or studies or something? I’m thinking about families I know with 3+ kids (my siblings, my friends growing up, extended family, etc) and I think most parents did have strong bonds with all their kids. Of course I grew up UMC with emotionally healthy people. Ymmv.

Based on years of private practice as a therapist, largely to UMC families, middle child syndrome is absolutely a real phenomenon. There is a great deal of literature on this. Birth order isn't everything, but there are common dynamics in families with 3+ children, and the overlooked or invisible middle child is quite common. Often layered with other dynamics.

I don't think this dynamic is automatic, and conscientious parents can take steps to counteract it. But people thinking if having more than 2 children, at any socioeconomic level, should be aware of these issues.

You sound like an idiot who read an Atlantic article on this topic seven years ago and can’t be bothered to even look it up to make sure you got your facts straight. There are pros and cons to every position in a family and BONDING has much more to do with ages, genders, emotional health of parents, spacing of children, marital health, etc. To say middle child syndrome is real and people should really think about it when having more than two kids is stupid and irresponsible. Plenty of people have two kids and aren’t bonded to one or both because of all of the things I listed.

The OP can’t even be bothered to say why they asked this question and it’s because they are a lot stirring troll who clearly is sad somewhere they can’t or don’t have three kids. As a parent of three- it’s great. Sorry you missed out OP!

Why are you so mad? It makes no sense. If your family with 3 kids is happy, share that. You are one family, one data point. It is strange to be angry about this if you are, as you claim, so content.

Right? The rage in that post was out of control...

[Anonymous]

These middle children sure sound like the stereotype! No responsibility for themselves, just blame for others. Marcia, Marcia,Marcia. I haven’t met middle children who fit the stereotype so well!

Thankfully, my middle child is nothing like that.

Again, personalities not birth order.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These middle children sure sound like the stereotype! No responsibility for themselves, just blame for others. Marcia, Marcia,Marcia. I haven’t met middle children who fit the stereotype so well!

Thankfully, my middle child is nothing like that.

Again, personalities not birth order.

The stereotype is not for middle children to be irresponsible -- if anything they are often over-responsible because they are expected to be very independent from a young age.

The "irresponsible" stereotype gets assigned to youngest children, who don't always have incentive to develop independence and self-reliance because there is always someone older around to help them out.

One thing I'll note is that I'm always skeptical of parents who claim that certain negative dynamics don't exist in their family. Until I hear it from the kids (ALL the kids, not just the ones who are happy), I remain skeptical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the middle child you lose the bond with, if you had it to begin with. The baby is often the favorite, or the one you are most connected to. The middle loses their role.

Maybe for you, but this is a generalization that does not account for ages, temperaments, etc. This question also wrongly presumes that a parent cannot be strongly bonded to three children. OP is a troll.

It's rare for parents to be equally bonded to all children, especially once you are in the 3+ category. It's ideal, but not that common. Some kids handle it better than others.

DP. Is that based on your personal experience? Or studies or something? I’m thinking about families I know with 3+ kids (my siblings, my friends growing up, extended family, etc) and I think most parents did have strong bonds with all their kids. Of course I grew up UMC with emotionally healthy people. Ymmv.

Based on years of private practice as a therapist, largely to UMC families, middle child syndrome is absolutely a real phenomenon. There is a great deal of literature on this. Birth order isn't everything, but there are common dynamics in families with 3+ children, and the overlooked or invisible middle child is quite common. Often layered with other dynamics.

I don't think this dynamic is automatic, and conscientious parents can take steps to counteract it. But people thinking if having more than 2 children, at any socioeconomic level, should be aware of these issues.

100% correct!

My parents are wealthy and I've always felt invisible as a middle

Op here. This is so interesting to me. If anything I favor my middle and worry about the baby being ignored. I wonder if it just comes down to individual family dynamics.

The middle child dynamic comes into play more clearly as your children get older and their emotional needs become more complex. Right now your toddler gets attention because you’re still putting out fires and navigating tantrums.

The middle child invisibility starts after they stop screaming as their primary means of communication. At that point it’s common for the parent to still focus on the screaming baby. The first born has novelty of doing everything first to hold the parents’ interest. Meanwhile, the parents are tapped out on attention for the middle child. It’s hard to get excited for kindergarten graduation when you’ve already done it for your oldest and you’re just tired and want to nap. Of course, by the time your youngest has kindergarten graduation, you’re already feeling how quickly time flies and that this is your last chance to experience these milestones. This happens over and over again for sports, school, and anything else requiring parental engagement.

I can see how this might happen in some families, but I think any good parent can overcome this. We make sure to celebrate all our kids’ milestones — they each get a big birthday party with classmates, we took off work for all their events at school like pre-k graduation, chaperone their field trips, etc. They also have very different interests as far as extracurriculars, so we make sure they each get to do a couple activities at a time they’re interested in. We also take time to do 1:1 stuff with them, so they get time with just mom or just dad.

I just can’t envision my middle kid ever feeling like an afterthought. The fact he is my kid with special needs probably also affects things. If anything I’m overprotective and sensitive with him because things are more of a struggle for him.

Meanwhile my oldest is easy going and self sufficient so if there is a kid who could get lost in the shuffle it’s her, but I try to make sure she gets enough attention so she won’t resent her younger siblings.

Each family dynamic is so different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a 3rd. My brother was the oldest. My sister is 1.5 years younger and the two of the are close. I am 5 years younger than my sister. When my siblings went to college, I was still in middle school and ended up spending a lot of time with my parents. I hung around with my parents and their friends often on weekends and I learned our family tongue. My siblings can understand if we speak to them, but I am the only one that is fluent. I am also more bicultural for our family heritage than my siblings. That is one of the reasons that I am closest to my mom even though I'm a guy. My mother always thought she would be closest to her daughter and she is close, just closer with me because of the language and cultural ties. I also acquired my mother's love of cooking and that bonds us as well.

That said, my parents were amazing parents. They managed to convince all three of us that we were their favorites. My brother is the eldest first-born son, so from the family patriarchal heritage, he *KNOWS* he's their favorite. My sister is the only girl and she was always Daddy's girl and she KNOWS that she was my parents favorite. But I am their baby and the one that is culturally more like them and the one that speaks to them in their mother tongue, so I know that I'm the favorite. And, of course, I know that I'm right and they are wrong.

This is interesting and funny, PP. Thanks for sharing.

[Anonymous]

I’m the oldest from a family w 3 kids. If anything, my parents are more bonded to my youngest sibling than they are to me or my middle sibling. In our family, my middle sibling had the most problems so that child got my parents’ attention, and the youngest was the most agreeable, go with the flow kid who was also the best athlete of 2 very competitive parents. So, in my family my 2 younger siblings got all my parents’ attention and I as the responsible oldest kid was not given much attention at all.

Op, in your situation I’m sure this dynamic will change as your kids get older. If your youngest is still a baby, it’s easy to see why you’re not as bonded yet. A lot of parents don’t bond well w their kids until kids are no longer infants, are verbal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These middle children sure sound like the stereotype! No responsibility for themselves, just blame for others. Marcia, Marcia,Marcia. I haven’t met middle children who fit the stereotype so well!

Thankfully, my middle child is nothing like that.

Again, personalities not birth order.

Lol! Thanks for your stupidity. OMG, I needed that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the middle child you lose the bond with, if you had it to begin with. The baby is often the favorite, or the one you are most connected to. The middle loses their role.

Maybe for you, but this is a generalization that does not account for ages, temperaments, etc. This question also wrongly presumes that a parent cannot be strongly bonded to three children. OP is a troll.

It's rare for parents to be equally bonded to all children, especially once you are in the 3+ category. It's ideal, but not that common. Some kids handle it better than others.

DP. Is that based on your personal experience? Or studies or something? I’m thinking about families I know with 3+ kids (my siblings, my friends growing up, extended family, etc) and I think most parents did have strong bonds with all their kids. Of course I grew up UMC with emotionally healthy people. Ymmv.

Based on years of private practice as a therapist, largely to UMC families, middle child syndrome is absolutely a real phenomenon. There is a great deal of literature on this. Birth order isn't everything, but there are common dynamics in families with 3+ children, and the overlooked or invisible middle child is quite common. Often layered with other dynamics.

I don't think this dynamic is automatic, and conscientious parents can take steps to counteract it. But people thinking if having more than 2 children, at any socioeconomic level, should be aware of these issues.

100% correct!

My parents are wealthy and I've always felt invisible as a middle

Op here. This is so interesting to me. If anything I favor my middle and worry about the baby being ignored. I wonder if it just comes down to individual family dynamics.

I have 3 and I think your question is very interesting, OP. I worried when my 3rd was little, too. Everything is fine and I feel very bonded to all of them.

Thank you. It just feels like I know the older two so well and the youngest is still such a baby it's like I don't know much about her if that makes sense.

I’m PP. It makes sense to me. I hope you’re not taking seriously some of the bashing going on here. You asked an honest question that is on your mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's the middle child you lose the bond with, if you had it to begin with. The baby is often the favorite, or the one you are most connected to. The middle loses their role.

+2

I take pains not to overlook our middle kid.

[Anonymous]

No, I am most bonded with my youngest. My older two are close together in age. Youngest gets a lot of attention.

Sadly I feel least bonded with my oldest. It may be his age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the middle child you lose the bond with, if you had it to begin with. The baby is often the favorite, or the one you are most connected to. The middle loses their role.

Maybe for you, but this is a generalization that does not account for ages, temperaments, etc. This question also wrongly presumes that a parent cannot be strongly bonded to three children. OP is a troll.

It's rare for parents to be equally bonded to all children, especially once you are in the 3+ category. It's ideal, but not that common. Some kids handle it better than others.

DP. Is that based on your personal experience? Or studies or something? I’m thinking about families I know with 3+ kids (my siblings, my friends growing up, extended family, etc) and I think most parents did have strong bonds with all their kids. Of course I grew up UMC with emotionally healthy people. Ymmv.

Based on years of private practice as a therapist, largely to UMC families, middle child syndrome is absolutely a real phenomenon. There is a great deal of literature on this. Birth order isn't everything, but there are common dynamics in families with 3+ children, and the overlooked or invisible middle child is quite common. Often layered with other dynamics.

I don't think this dynamic is automatic, and conscientious parents can take steps to counteract it. But people thinking if having more than 2 children, at any socioeconomic level, should be aware of these issues.

You sound like an idiot who read an Atlantic article on this topic seven years ago and can’t be bothered to even look it up to make sure you got your facts straight. There are pros and cons to every position in a family and BONDING has much more to do with ages, genders, emotional health of parents, spacing of children, marital health, etc. To say middle child syndrome is real and people should really think about it when having more than two kids is stupid and irresponsible. Plenty of people have two kids and aren’t bonded to one or both because of all of the things I listed.

The OP can’t even be bothered to say why they asked this question and it’s because they are a lot stirring troll who clearly is sad somewhere they can’t or don’t have three kids. As a parent of three- it’s great. Sorry you missed out OP!

Why are you so mad? It makes no sense. If your family with 3 kids is happy, share that. You are one family, one data point. It is strange to be angry about this if you are, as you claim, so content.

The OP is clearly a troll because they won’t provide the reason for asking this question and this is a weird thing for someone to start a thread on. Like what is the point? For everyone to agree that if you are a child in a family of three you will not be bonded to your parents?

I had someone on here call me an overbreeder for having three children. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone like that started this thread so they could feel morally superior for only having one or two children.

OP already explained her reason but you missed it in your haste to call her a troll. She has three children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the middle child you lose the bond with, if you had it to begin with. The baby is often the favorite, or the one you are most connected to. The middle loses their role.

Maybe for you, but this is a generalization that does not account for ages, temperaments, etc. This question also wrongly presumes that a parent cannot be strongly bonded to three children. OP is a troll.

It's rare for parents to be equally bonded to all children, especially once you are in the 3+ category. It's ideal, but not that common. Some kids handle it better than others.

DP. Is that based on your personal experience? Or studies or something? I’m thinking about families I know with 3+ kids (my siblings, my friends growing up, extended family, etc) and I think most parents did have strong bonds with all their kids. Of course I grew up UMC with emotionally healthy people. Ymmv.

Based on years of private practice as a therapist, largely to UMC families, middle child syndrome is absolutely a real phenomenon. There is a great deal of literature on this. Birth order isn't everything, but there are common dynamics in families with 3+ children, and the overlooked or invisible middle child is quite common. Often layered with other dynamics.

I don't think this dynamic is automatic, and conscientious parents can take steps to counteract it. But people thinking if having more than 2 children, at any socioeconomic level, should be aware of these issues.

100% correct!

My parents are wealthy and I've always felt invisible as a middle

Op here. This is so interesting to me. If anything I favor my middle and worry about the baby being ignored. I wonder if it just comes down to individual family dynamics.

The middle child dynamic comes into play more clearly as your children get older and their emotional needs become more complex. Right now your toddler gets attention because you’re still putting out fires and navigating tantrums.

The middle child invisibility starts after they stop screaming as their primary means of communication. At that point it’s common for the parent to still focus on the screaming baby. The first born has novelty of doing everything first to hold the parents’ interest. Meanwhile, the parents are tapped out on attention for the middle child. It’s hard to get excited for kindergarten graduation when you’ve already done it for your oldest and you’re just tired and want to nap. Of course, by the time your youngest has kindergarten graduation, you’re already feeling how quickly time flies and that this is your last chance to experience these milestones. This happens over and over again for sports, school, and anything else requiring parental engagement.

This is true for both me and DH, who were both the second child of our parents but followed by the third who was the baby and the only girl/boy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Title says it all.

May I answer if I have four? My fourth is my last, and she and I are the most tightly bonded. It might be because I'm the youngest child of four, so we "get" each other. She's now 25, and we are thick as thieves. We share nearly all interests and hang out together all the time.

[Anonymous]

I’m a mom of 5 children and the answer is absolutely no! I world assume every parent with more than one child already knows this to be true.