Only children 'happier' according to this study...

[edam]

Interesting stuff for those of us with only children. Although I'm amazed apparently we make up half of all households - not in this neck of the woods or amongst my friends and family.

Also think it has to be balanced with what it's like to be an only child as an adult, especially coping with elderly parents and parents dying. I know my mother has felt desperately lonely at times - she has friends but no-one who shares her childhood memories.

(My strategy is to hope ds will remain very close to his cousins, who are fortunately very close in age - at least there's someone who will know who he's moaning about when he complains about me in later years!)

Telegraph 15 November

Only children happier than those with siblings
Only children are happier than those with brothers or sisters, according to new research which shows that sibling rivalry can have a serious effect on a child's emotional wellbeing.

More than half of the children surveyed said they had been bullied by a sibling, and one in three said they had been hit, kicked or pushed on regular occasions. Others complained of name-calling and having their belongings stolen.

The Understanding Society study run by the Institute for Social and Economic Research concluded that happiness declines the more siblings there are in a household.

Other reasons for only children being more contented include not having to compete for parental attention or to share a bedroom with a sibling, said Gundi Knies, a researcher on the project

Dr Ruth Koppard, a child psychologist, said: "In an average home, the more children, the less privacy for each child. Some love sharing a bedroom with a sibling but they would rather choose to do it than have to do it."

Homes with just one child make up nearly half of all families in Britain.

The study, to be published on Friday, questioned 2,500 young people. It also found that seven out of 10 teenagers are "very satisfied" with their lives and children from ethnic minorities are happier than their white counterparts.

I am an only. I didn't like it much as a kid, felt i was missing something, and my needs were usually second to my parents (a step dad, didn't know real dad so a bit different that way too).

My mum died 4 years ago and her mum (my gran) is still here, 90, disabled and miserable. I have had to move her into a care home near me to support her. I never thought i would be mid thirties having to sort this out on my own. I would love to share that load with a sibling.

As a teacher its also worth bearing in mind that children live in the moment. If they had had a ruck with a sibling the morning before the study then the results would definately be effected! My year 5 class are CONSTANTLY falling in and out of friendships, its what they do. Siblings do the same, its normal.

I have 2 sons (who adore each other) and I am hankering for a third!

I think you're right when you say that no one should say their choice is better than anyone else's (or really comment on it either, actually!) FlameGrilledMama - but like a few other people posted - just because you have siblings doesn't mean you get on or supposrt each other, sadly.

thereisalightanditnevergoesout oh I agree in either case you are going to have children who recieve more negatives of their family make-up than positives but I just don't believe that either choice is neccesarily better IYSWIM both have positives and negatives and you have to decide on those based on what your family wants and can offer.

Makes me laugh that the article talks about siblings kicking and fighting etc like it's detrimental to a person's long term pschological wellbeing. I have fond memories of me and my sister (i had two) fighting like two ally cats, but think it was the basis for us being really close when we were older despite a 7 year age gap. We're best friends now and laugh about it We are competitive in some ways, but it's a standing family joke and we never take it too far and would fight to the death for each other. I've always hated being the youngest though, but if you ask my sisters they would probably say there are drawbacks being the middle and eldest child too.

In my experience only children tend to have more self confidence because they haven't been able to rely on older brothers and sisters and have to make their own way in life, including their own friends etc.

So - really, the conclusion should be that the article is actually daft and pointless, shouldn't it?!

I wonder how long they spent on it?

thereisalight - and others - I think it is worth reiterating at this point that the study is based on in depth questionnaires with 2,500 children, as part of a study following the lives of 100,000 people in 40,000 households.

So you may dislike the conclusions, but it is not simply a trivial article dashed off by a thoughtless journalist.

However, it is also worth bearing in mind that whilst it looks as though the data on individual perception of happiness is probably pretty robust (that is to say, onlies are more likely, statistically speaking, to report themselves content), there is no formal analysis of the reasons why.

Those put forward are simply suggestions by the researchers based on other answers to the questionnaires.

Yes takver and I am sure if you looked you can find study's showing advantages of siblings here There were loads I picked the first one I came upon so how about a little less judgement and a little more acceptance of there being more than 1 valid choice in life.

Are you one of the researchers, Takver?

One question that I think would be interesting, would be whether eldest children are equally statistically likely to report themselves more content.

I believe it is academically well established that only and eldest children are academically more successful and have higher average IQ level (I've pasted in data from a study of nearly 400,000 Dutch 19 year olds below,other studies show the same results).

Because many parents value school success so highly, might it be that children with more siblings suffer because they are academically less successful?

Another interesting study from the Journey of Biosocial Science - link here:

"A quantitative review of the literature on the intellectual achievement of only children indicated that only children were never at a disadvantage in relation to any comparison group; nor were they significantly different from first-born children or children from two-child families. Moreover, only children were at a significant advantage in comparison with later-born children and those from large families. The consistency of these findings across subgroups suggests that interpersonal mechanisms are largely responsible. The strong only-child advantage on tests of verbal ability, together with the overall pattern of findings, implicates parent?child interactions as responsible for the family size and birth order variations in intellectual achievement."

Dutch study: (link here

In 1973 Lillian Belmont and Francis Marolla published family size, birth order and intelligence test data from nearly the entire population of 19 year-old Dutch men (386, 114 subjects). Belmont and Marolla found:

"Children from large families tend to make poorer showings on intelligence tests and on educational measures, even when social class is controlled."
"Within each family size (i) firstborns always scored better on the Raven than did later borns; and (ii) with few inconsistencies, there was a gradient of declining scores with rising birth order, so that firstborns scored better than secondborns, who in turn scored better than thirdborns, and so forth."
"In general, as family size increased, there was a decrease in Raven performance within any particular birth order position." For example, a thirdborn born child from a 3-child family would be expected to score higher than a thirdborn child from a 4-child family. A thirdborn child from a 5-child family would be expected to score even lower, and so on.

no, thereisalight, but I am capable of reading an article, looking at the number of subjects, research method, etc. and forming an opinion on whether it is useless journalistic pap, or potentially interesting research.

That'll make a lot of people feel better, then.

Flamegrilledmama, I am absolutely certain that there are also benefits to having siblings. TBH, my personal opinion is that family size matters far less than the relationship within families and within wider communities.

But I do hate it when people dismiss things simply because they don't like the answers

x posts.

And I'm not, I suppose, is what you seem to be implying.

Thank you.

'no, thereisalight, but I am capable of reading an article, looking at the number of subjects, research method, etc. and forming an opinion on whether it is useless journalistic pap, or potentially interesting research.'

And I do hate it when people are intellectually arrogant just because they can link from an academic journal.

thereisalight

"That'll make a lot of people feel better, then."

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what that means? You're sounding cross . . .

Just wanted to point out above when you asked 'I wonder how long they spent on it' that the answer was 'quite a long time, and a lot of people' !

I'm really sorry, I didn't mean to offend you - will go away now (at least for the moment).

Yes. There will be a reason I am sounding cross.

You are perceptive at least.

'But I do hate it when people dismiss things simply because they don't like the answers'

you have no idea whether I have one child or twenty so how would you know if I dont like the answer IMPE it is wrong for me I just don't believe that having a certain size of family is better.

I think my ds has the best of both worlds. He's an only, but he has four half-brothers and sisters, the youngest of whom is twelve years older than him! They live a hundred miles away, but always turn up for family occasions.

But he has their support, and as he gets older, the age differences will evaporate.

He's certainly got more toys than any kid I know!

Takver, do you think as an oldest child I should be responsible and stay quiet about those studies you cite. Or rush gleefully to tell my youngest (third) sister?

She's an occasional MNer so might see this...

edam - Well, like flamegrilledmama pointed out, there's always other studies. There's no doubt one saying that eldest children are awful in some other way . . .

Hi Takver, well I for one found your post really helpful. The way academic research is reported in the media, it is HARD for many of us (me included) to discern how robust the findings are likely to be.

I still think the evidence chimes with common sense. And that is entirely compatible with accepting that there are loads of advantages to siblings, and loads of happy big families.

Interesting that some posters on this thread
seem to deem kicking,fighting,punching,name calling and stealing possessions to be "normal" amongst siblings-if the child wasnt a sibling it would be deemed bullying.
I think this study is very interesting-there seems to be an idea in general life that onlies are spoilt.This study seems to indicate that there is a minimum standard of parental attention,personal space and standard of living that children need to be happy and the more children you have the less likely they are to get this.