Identifying my birth order in my family is not so easy. My father has ten daughters of which I fall in the eighth place, and my mother has six children, four girls and two boys, of which I am in the third spot. Just taking this into account I would be considered a middle-child. If you take into consideration that when my parents were together they had three children of which I was the last-born, than it makes my order a little confusing. In saying so it makes my role in birth order a little hard to define. The only thing I know for sure is that I am not a first-born or an only child. Adler's beliefs about birth order, and predictions about eventual outcomes for first-borns, is that they get more attention from the parents and kind of set the stage for any future children. First-borns usually tend to be high achievers but not in a very radical way. Second-born, according to Adler's theories, have a competitive nature and strive to be different to kind of broaden the stage, if you will. Third-born and middle-births tend to be more unique but with high feelings of inferiority. They aren't paid as much attention and so have more freedom to discover themselves, also they have to try even harder for that left over attention and tend to require affection and praise. Last-children are babied and sometimes end up being lazy and/or self-centered, due to their lack of ability to overcome the pressures of their siblings. He describes only children as pampered and spoiled which could cause later difficulties in society if the person does not get lots of attention. Adler believed that birth order directly affects an individual's motivation and likelihood of future accomplishments. He clearly states that all children are treated differently, and that treatment is a direct result of where you place in the birth order. I find this all very interesting but don't necessarily agree. For example, my father had five daughters with his first wife; Susie being the oldest...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document