07.22.2010
In connection to my entry on siblings, I want to talk about an article in Time Magazine about single children also called "onlies."[1] Odd name, but ok.
Let’s pause for a moment.
First, when you’re childless, people are pushing you to have kids.
Second, you finally have the child everyone’s been praying for you to have and then they’re on you to have a second one.
[My cynical remark: Why the hell are we so baby-crazed?]
Ok, back to the article.
According to the US Department of Agriculture, “the average child in the US costs…$280,050 – before college.” The author then writes that in their household, milk is $50/month and diapers have been about $100/month. For starters, people push you to have kids without thinking about the financial consequences.
[I just realized the author and I are the same age and she’s writing for Time. Dammit!]
Ok, back to the article.
Apparently the recession has altered women’s desires for kids and women are either waiting longer, not having them at all, or are choosing to only have one child. This was a trend during the Great Depression too. I wish my reasons for not having a kid yet were that simple.
Over 120 years ago, a gentleman by the name of Granville Stanley Hall researched families with children and, according to his “research,” discovered that the single children were “oddballs” and “misfits.” Hall concluded that an only child wasn’t able to adjust to life as well as those who had siblings.
As society grew and pop culture evolved, the myth that single-children are over-privileged and self-centered began to permeate. But the reality shows something different. Single children, like firstborns and those with one sibling only, score higher in measure of intelligence and achievement and there wasn’t enough data to support that they are lonely, selfish or unadjusted. [As a side note, my former boss was one of the most lonely, selfish and unadjusted people I have ever met and she had an older sister. So that theory is blown. At least when it comes to her.]
Ok, back to the article.
As for the “spoiled” characteristics, I bet that was begun by someone’s jealousy. Single children don’t have any resources to share and they get all of their parents energy and money. It doesn’t matter how much money the parents may make, it all goes to one child. This attention and treatment that they get comes across in how the child achieves at school. He/she tends to excel more than those with siblings.
I understand all this. And I understand that parents say they have more time for themselves and each other with just one child because, despite the feelings of already being pulled in different directions, it’s just one child. As mentioned above, the resources don’t have to be dispersed.
But upon reflection, I try to envision growing up without my sister. Yes, having my mom all to myself would’ve been nice. Perhaps my mom would’ve invested more time and energy in me. Perhaps I would’ve been listened to more. Perhaps I wouldn’t have been so privy to the money issues and perhaps I wouldn’t have felt like I had to solve all the problems. Perhaps.
But I have memories with my sister that I couldn’t possibly ever have with anyone else. And when certain family things come up, my sister understands. Rob might try or a friend might try. But my sister knows. There are things I can share with my sister that is therapeutic for me (us) where I would otherwise feel alone.
I see both sides. I don’t think it’s right to have a second child because it’ll “make the current child feel better” or because society expects you to have more than one. I think it’s important to do what’s right for both parents and what makes sense for the family. From what I hear, having a child alters your life forever and, speaking from experience with a sibling, adding a second child now alters not only your life but also your firstborn’s. Forever. For better or worse.
No comments:
Post a Comment