An example of sibling sharing:
One time when I was a kid, maybe 11 or 12, I got a whole watermelon as a birthday present. I’ve always loved watermelon, so I was delighted. My little sister wanted some, and said “You have to give me some.” There was no way I could eat most of it myself but I decided rashly that what she said wasn’t true at all — I didn’t “have” to give her some at all because it was a present. I kept telling her “I don’t ‘have’ to give you any!” and she kept saying “Yes you do! You have to give me some!” I wanted her to say “can I have some” but she wouldn’t relent. And I wouldn’t relent either. So of course it turned into a huge screaming fight. And of course eventually we ate watermelon together.

I wonder if the labels “only child” or “first child” or “last child” have any predictive value at all. For example when you say “she wouldn’t let me have a bite of her cake because she’s an only child,” it has no scientific value. You might as well say “She wouldn’t let me have a bite of her cake because she’s a Virgo.” If on, the other hand, you could accurately guess that someone was an only-child or first-child, etc, then it’d be interesting. Or if you could use it to predict their behavior.

James’s single-mindedness, and moderate, not-in-a-bad-way solipsism grounds me every day. When in doubt, ask James. He’ll no doubt tell you what he thinks. As an oldest sibling child, I have to dig to find out what I really think.

Go Cam! Go Only Children! Yay for having Opinions!!

Of course, in the United States, we would not wish to interfere with the free market. So perhaps the lottery would be necessary only for parents who have not made other arrangements. For instance, a poor couple might wish to donate their infant to a wealthier couple for a reasonable fee.

There may be a few small problems to overcome, but what’s important here, of course, is the mental health of our children. Only children are inevitably damaged. Won’t someone think of the children?

But I have heard it. Not as often as the similar rant about how Americans can’t help being arrogant imperialists, but often enough to grate, especially as the besiblinged Canadian parent of an only American child.

What weirds me out every time is that I, like every other oldest child in the universe, used to be an only. I survived more than two years of it before suddenly transmogrifying into an oldest. If it’s true that only children are incapable of change or flexibility in peer relationships as adults, at what age does this set in? Two? Eight? Twenty-six? Surely such mechanicals were just as incapable of change or flexibility when their first sibling was born, and they ceased to be only.

Which means, of course, that oldest children should be shunned under the same rubric. Only younger children have the skills necessary to survive in the outside world. Perhaps we should slaughter all firstborn children when they reach maturity, to make the world a safer place for younger children to live in? I’m sure many of them would be thrilled to come into their own…

I know I have regularly “stepped in it” in my life, but I suspect it has nothing to do with me having siblings.

I don’t actually believe that, but it’s something I’d like to say fairly often when people start going on about only children. Occasionally I will murmur, “Thank you.” If it’s someone I know well — like when my cousin was moaning about how terrible it would be if they couldn’t adopt a second child, because then her son would be an only — I will even more rarely say, “I love you, too,” in the same quiet voice.

I have been meaning for awhile to write a brief essay to the effect that you shouldn’t have a child if you can’t face the idea that he/she might turn out to be an only child.