Any only children here with an only child?

[RockinSockBunnies]

Apologies if subject title is a little odd but couldn't think of a better way of phrasing it

I'm an only child, ambivalent about how I feel but since I've known nothing else I suppose it's not much of an issue for me.

I'm also a single parent to an only child. DD is almost 8. Whilst I still have a fair few years in which to meet a DP/DH and do some breeding, at this rate, DD will be a teenager or will have left home by the time she has any siblings!

Are there other MNs here who have no siblings and are finding that their DC is in the same position? Are you worried about things such as a lack of cousins, aunts, uncles, relatives in general (I know that it's something that's a bit of a concern for me).

Thankfully DD is very outgoing and not at all unusual in her class for being an only. At least one third of her class of 30 are only children so it's not much of an issue for her. Nonetheless, I still worry!

Anyone else in the same boat?

Well, I'm an only and I have 3, but 2 of my good friends are onlys and they have just one and are quite content with that. I had a great childhood as an only, and am very close to my dad (I was very close to my mum too, but she is now dead, sadly). I don't think you need to worry- there are advantages AND disadvantages to being an only. My DH has a sister and they are far from close, so our 3 only have cousins who live at the other end of the country, but they have plenty of friends / children of friends. I sometimes think us onlys have this idea of how fabulous it would have been to have had siblings, but it isn't always necessarily true!

I'm not an only, I have a younger brother, but nonetheless our family tree is rather like a beanpole. DB and SiL are TTC, but no success in over two years, so that may or may not happen. DH's brother meanwhile is estranged from the family, and very unlikely to ever have children, IMO. I do feel it's a bit of a shame ... but was hugely heartened by a post elsewhere by a woman describing the family Christmases she missed, just her and her parents. I said how reassuring I found this, given our circumstances, and she elaborated that she had never had extended family to hand either, but had had a very happy childhood anyway.

Jooly, I think your point about some onlies' rose-tinted view of siblings is quite right! My mum (only child) said (once, only once) it would be fair for DD to be an only child because, because ... she would have no brothers and sisters. She didn't really quite know what she had missed, or what DD would miss, or what I hadn't missed (I'm not entirely sure myself).

I'm an only with an only and we can't have any more so that's that. She has cousins on dh's side but they are all in the US. My parents are both dead.

I do wish she had more relatives that she could actually see. I found my own experience of onlieness rather claustrophobic - but my family dynamics were very dysfunctional and I'm hoping that it will be a more positive experience for dd (unless I turn into my mum...).

I did feel the loss of family over Xmas - it was very quiet for dd as all our usual pals were with family.

I know what you mean Acinonyx - highdays and holidays are tricky when they're so family-oriented if you don't have much family around and your friends are all spending time with their relatives

I am an only with an only. DH has one brother with one older (18) child who is therefore my DD's only cousin. Like Acinonyx I wish DD had more relatives she could see and I also found Christmas quiet due to friends obviously being with their own families.

Just a thought but everyone seems to bemoan having one child and it being a lonely expereince without many other relatives around but would it really be that much different with two children?

Surely an existence with two parents and two children can be pretty claustrophobic for the chidlren too with just their parents and one another to play with...?

My neice and nephew go absolutely stir crazy left alone for long periods with just their mum and dad one other to play with.

Surely the experience of being an only child is only as claustrophobic as the parents make it, or let it be, isn't it...?

Some families with more than one child can become very introspective and isolated. Some seem to think that by having several children they create self contained units that don't need anyone else.

My next door neighbours are very like that. They have 4 boys and they seem to be each others only friends. They rarely leave the house and no friends ever go in. Surely, that can't be good either can it?

Yes, I'm an only with an only. I didn't want to have just an only, but that seems to be the way it is. Yes, I worry for ds - and its particularly when he's a bit older - he is the only one that will be able to suceed etc etc etc...

However, having said that, I was happy at home. I wasn't happy at school - that's another story - but I did not feel lonely at home. I hope that I can do as well for ds.

Since I am an only, dd not only has no siblings, she also has no cousins (she sees her cousins via dh in the US about every 2 years).

You can have lots of playmates and playdates - but family can give you more continuity over a life time - people who remember your parents and your upbringing.

I am lucky to have a few old friends to share some of that with and I hope dd will have the same.

I too am an only with an only, and despite vowing as a teenager never to have an only, I find myself in this situation. There is no physical way I can have another and i have had to come to terms with this.

Dh has 1 brother who has an only, but we have never met this child (Long story!) so dd has no cousins to relate to. However,we have some great long term friends with 2 children and DD slots in so naturally with them that they are like surrogate cousins. Family links are important I guess, but if its not to be then good friends can make up for it.

Yes Christmas was quiet for us, but when DD is a little older I guess we will go on a holiday then as with only 3 fares to find its possible.

When I was little we lived in an isolated farmhouse and so meeting up with friends was hard. This has made me determined to live in a village with good transport links so that DD does not face this when she is older. However, at the moment she likes nothing better than staying in playing with her toys and us!!

I'm t.t.c at the moment and only planning on one. DH and I are both onlies.

I'm pretty much an only of an only too. Whilst I did have cousins on mums side, their relationship was so strained that I only saw them once a year. My relationship with my nan also suffered because my aunt was very much her favourite and as such her children were too. So having a sibling isn't always a guarantee of a happy extended family life!

Gunnerbean's comments put it perfectly.

I had a good childhood with lots of activities / contact with other people and we always made Christmas magical.

I do think that it's important for parents of onlies to maintain their independence though, DH was very much the centre of his mum's world and we've had some difficulties in cutting the apron strings on her side (even at 32!). This may not have been as hard if their were other siblings to share the 'burden'.

I'm an only with an only (by choice)

I just wanted to add here that for some people who dearly wanted more than one child but weren't able to because of fertility issues, have you considered adopting?

We have a friend who was adopted by a couple and he was their only child.

When our friend married he and his wife had a child of their own but after that he felt very strongly that, as an adopted child, he wanted to do the same for another child so their second child is adopted and was adopted as an older child, not a baby. Babies are notoriously hard to come by apparently but that didn't bother them anyway.

Adopting an older child, rather than having another of their own, has enabled their first child to have a sibling of his own age and their two boys get on so well together.

For many people who battle with infertility issues for years it means that even if they do manage to have another child they can never really grow up as playmate to their first child as the age gap is often too great.

I know that adoption is not for everyone but it is surely worth considering if you really do feel that you're doing your only child a disservice by not providing them with siblings isn't it? Adopting would solve the problem and children are very accepting.

Adoption can be very rewarding. Our friend and his wife have certainly found it to be the case.

Me. DH has one brother who seems unlikely to have a family and lives in another country anyway.

But I don't intend to have another child.I was quite happy as an only.

We have considered adoption but we are too old now to adopt a child younger than our dd and would not consider a child older than her.

We considered adoption before we had dd but I am very ambivalent about it. I am adopted myself and perhaps carry too much baggage to make that particular leap of faith.

I have been involved in adoption counselling for many years and I know that adopting older children in particular can be a very challenging experience. Ironically, now that I actually have a child, I feel more confident about the idea.

I can understand your friend wanting to do for another child as was done for him - I do feel the same. But I can't do it in that way.

Message withdrawn

My mum was one of 8, my dad one of 3 so me and my sibs had lots of aunts & uncles but we didn't see much of them or our cousins.

Aimsmum - hooray! A single parent only with an only! I think we may be a rare breed

hi there
I am an only with an only - my mum couldnt have anymore too many MC.
and me my Dd was born 12 weeks early so i know deep down i couldn't do it all again.
I had a nice childhood always asked my mum for a sibling , but DD always tells everyone she wouldn't like any and she would rather have a dog!
Dh is one of 4 and they dont all get on, so DD has plenty of cousins.
I can always spot onlies...can anyone else?

Hi bettymaud

I'm interested in your comment that you can always spot an only. I was just wondering what it is you think that makes them so easy to spot?

I have an only and I've often found before now that people assume that I have older children too.

There are a few onlies in my DS's class and I wouldn't say that they particuarly stand out from the rest. For all I know, when I first knew them and saw them picking up their children without any others in tow I could have assumed that they had older siblings who weren't at the school too.

So what is it that makes the onlies stand out for you?

Is it the fact that their parents are always having to drag them along kicking and screaming because they've just had to tell them (very reluctantly of course) that they can't have what they've just demanded ?

Or is it their ponies that give them away?

Gunner wrote: "I know that adoption is not for everyone but it is surely worth considering if you really do feel that you're doing your only child a disservice by not providing them with siblings isn't it? Adopting would solve the problem and children are very accepting"

No one should EVER consider adoption as a way of solving a problem within their existing family - they could be in for a huge shock to find that an adoptive child might bring with him/her a whole set of other problems. A child shouldn't be adopted to provide a playmate for an only child. A woman should only consider adoption if she desperately wants a child as a son or daughter not a sibling for their bio child.

Amandathepanda - I'm not sure I understand your logic. There are plenty of threads on MN in which women have said that one reason they had a second (or third) child was to provide their first child with a sibling. Why is it wrong to apply to adopt for the same reason? Surely the reason people apply to adopt is that they feel their family is incomplete as it is. Whether you express that as wanting another son/daughter or wanting a sibling for an existing child amounts to pretty much the same thing, in my view.

Of course, applicants for adoption have to be aware of some of the issues which may arise, especially if adopting a child who has been taken into care because of very difficult and traumatic family circumstances. But I still don't see why 'solving a problem within their own family' is not a valid reason for applying to adopt - isn't that why anyone applies, even if their individual reasons are different? There is a lot of adoption amongst my family and friends and I don't think any of them have been motivated only by an altruistic desire to help a child in need of a home, even thought that was a very large part of it.

Am name-changing regular, BTW.

Sorry but that is a very preachy standpoint.

I'm sure people who adopt aren't stupid and naive. The adoption process is a long and drawn out protracted affair and I'm sure that by the time the adoption is finalised most people are going into it with their eyes wide open. Sure, things will always crop up which will need to be dealt wtih but most of it they will have been prepared for by social workers etc. There is more than enough opportunity for people to drop out along the way if they are daft enough to think that adopting an older child would be a bed of roses!

At the end of the day, if people are genuine about wanting to adopt - whatever their reasons may be - the best outcome all round is that the family get the child they want and the adopted child who would otherwise not have a stable and loving home, gets one. It's a win/win situation.

How many people out there do you think adopt a child for purely altuistic reasons - i.e. that their only motivation in adopting a child is to give a child, who would otherwise not have one, a loving home?

I should think that in the list of reasons why people adopt, top of the list is because they can't have children of their own for one reason or another.

So, if you look at it like that, the vast majority of adoptive parents are looking to adoption as a way to solve a problem in their lives. Incidental to that is that the adopted child ends up with a stable, loving home.

It's not a "preachy" standpoint, Gunner, it's my point of view which just differs from yours.

But at the risk of being accused of preaching again, it's not acceptable adoption language to say "they can't have children of their own" - my daughter was adopted by me but she is most definitely my own.

Sorry amandathepanda but I could have said exactly the same to you. My initial point of view differed from yours too and you didn't like it - hence your shouty use of the word "no one should EVER".

Of course your daughter has most certainly become your own child - since you adopted her. But she is not your biological child, so hence in that sense she is not "your own". That doesn't mean that she's not "your own" in absolutely ever other sense there is - now, you are her mum and she is your daughter. That was my point. Most people adopt because they are unable to have their own biological children. There is a distinction, of course there is, and it cannot be ignored. If there was not, then why do so many adopted children want to seek out their biological parents?

I think it is an irrefutable fact that the primary reason for adoption is people who want to have a family and are unable to have children of their own for a variety of reasons. They want to have what they would otherwise not be able to have. Adoption affords them the opportunity to have that.

I'm sure there are many people out there who are able to have their own biological children but instead decide to adopt to offer a home to a child who is already in the world (in fact I have a friend who was adopted himself and did just that) but I believe that people who fall into this category are vastly in the minority.

Most people adopt for purely selfish reasons and I don't mean selfish in a pejorative sense - I simply mean their reasons for adopting are motivated by their own needs and wants - they are not being purely selfless in adopting.

I will state again, for the avoidance of any doubt, that this doesn't detract from the fact that these people make excellent parents and the children they adopt are loved every bit as much as they would be if they were the biological children of their adopted parents.

I have no agenda, I am simply stating facts.

Sorry the following sentence:

I think it is an irrefutable fact that the primary reason for adoption is people who want to have a family and are unable to have children of their own for a variety of reasons.

Should have read:

I think it is an irrefutable fact that the primary reason for adoption is people who want to have a family and are unable to have biological children of their own for a variety of reasons.