How does birth order work in adoption?

Question

A question that was asked yesterday got me to thinking. In natural families, birth order plays a huge role in family dynamics. For instance, I was the middle child - I was forgotten, cast aside, I had pretty major attitude problems. When I learned about birth order, I realized my personality fit perfectly with the middle child, my older sister's personality fit with the "first" child, and my baby brother's personality fit with the "baby" profile. My parents actions toward us fit with this profile. Our whole family could have been a case study for the birth order personality people.

So, when children are adopted, does the natural birth order follow them? Or do they "adopt" the birth order in their new family? Is it a good idea to take children out of their natural birth order into a new family where they will have a "new" birth order? For instance, if the adoptee is the first child of his/her natural parents, should the child be adopted into a family where s/he is...

Answer 1

My first child was his mother's first. My two youngest were the two youngest in their family as well.

I think your question is interesting because I noticed right away that our children's dynamics reminded me of how my family worked when I was growing up.  I realized it was birth order.  I think their adjustment ended up being easier because, whether they were conscious of it or not,  they were in familiar roles in the family.

Answer 2

when i was looking into foster care adoption, they told me to keep the birth order and not adopt a child that would be in the middle.  either oldest or youngest . . .

Answer 3

this is a really interesting question. I've never really thought about it before.

I too was a middle child in a family with three kids and I fit the role perfectly. in my opinion children change to fit the roles they are given.

when I went to live with a family with four boys younger then me I changed to fill in the role of oldest. and Wes the oldest of the boys I was living with took on the role of a younger kid. ie less responsibility's more free time.

I wonder if there has ever been a case study of this. it would be interesting to find out.

Answer 4

Interesting question.

When we adopted, our bio son was 13 years old.  It was important to him that he remain the oldest child in the family, so we respected his wishes when we chose to adopt.

My daughter (10 at the time of the adoption) did have a change in the birth order, in the sense that she was the oldest before and now had an older brother.  There were some adjustments here, which we identified and worked with her on.  One thing we did was to make sure that she got appropriate age-related priveliges, such as a later bedtime, more freedoms, but also more responsibilities as well.  It's worked out pretty well, big brother gets his driver's license soon and she's already let him know that he'll need to take she and her friends to the mall, etc.  Having a big brother does have its perks, too!  And she certainly does not have the "middle child" personality!

I've heard different ideas about adopting out of birth order.  Some feel that it's always a bad thing, others disagree.  I am of the opinion that, like anything else, it depends on the individuals involved.  If we were to adopt again, I think it would bother my daughter if there was another older sibling, but conversely, I don't think it would bother my youngest son.  The opinions and comfort level of the children already in the home definitely need to be respected!

But you're right, it is something that adoptive parents need to consider and prepare for.  It's not just the children already in the home that may need to adjust for a change in birth order.

Answer 5

I can tell you what we were told in our classes in foster to adopt.

Birth order should be considered for both your children and the kids you wan to adopt and or foster. They spent some time on this explaining the explaining how it can affect the hole process and can lead to disrupted placements. If you are adopting a teen who is/was part of a group (for some reason not adopting their siblings) the recommend keeping the same order. If they were the oldest now they come into your home and are the baby they MAY not be able to handle the change. They would be used to be the one that takes care of everything and that can lead to behavior problems then you want to give them back.

Or if you have a youngest then you bring in someone younger a sibling rivalry will happen similar to if you gave birth but your child MAY (this is all may happen and they have seen it happen many times nothing is a definite you need to know your family) resent the child even more than a birth child because they are "not really their sibling"

I can give tons of more examples but you get the picture

Now with all of that said my good friend has an adopted sister. She was adopted as a teen and is only a few month different than the middle child. They have no issues as described above.

Answer 6

We recently had a baby placed with us. He came from a foster family with four older siblings. We also had a foreign exchange student when he got here and will have one more (short term-summer) and possibly a fall semester student before he finalizes.

After he finalizes, we plan to place either a single teenager or a sibling group of two school aged kids. Because he's had older kids around in the past and because he'll only be a little past his first birthday, we're not anticipating any problems.

I spoke to a friend who has adopted several children: She has two birth children and six adopted.  She told me that because her bio son was 5 by the time they adopted and that he took his role as oldest seriously, they respected that and never adopted older than him.  The rest of the kids, she wasn't as concerned about.  Even in the natural birth order thing, the "baby" is always "dethroned" every time a new child is added.

I want to keep my son the youngest; my "baby."  Someday, if he asks about younger siblings and I'm up to raising more kids, and we have room in the condo (I'm anticipating being around 50 at this point) I'd maybe consider adopting younger than him, but we'll see.

The other thing is that when two people with children from previous relationships get married, their kids don't always automatically fall into perfect birth order. They could easily have a different birth order in their home family and their non-custodial parent's home (physical custody anyway) and somehow everything usually works out.

Answer 7

Our youngest is adopted.  He is 5 years younger than our middle and 7 years younger than our oldest.  He is definitely fell into the youngest child attitude and characteristics.  I would say he fell into our family birth order 100%.

Answer 8

well really i dont think it does bc for me my daughter is my first born, but for her father she is his middle and for my baby coming it will be my second and it will be his forth, so really maybe birth order isnt anything to do with it and its just personality. my daughter acts like shes older or the same as her older sister and she acts like shes the middle and she acts likes she my baby. so i dont think it really affects the kids when theyre adopted what order they are and what order they will be, as far as birth order behavior goes

EDIT: but i think that goes for babies, i dont know if its so much fair to take a kid raised with all kinds of bro and sis and then adopt them as an only child, i dont know it really depends on the situation and the child and the family

Answer 9

Read   The Birth Order Book by Kevin Leman -- in the latest edition he outlines adoptive families

Answer 10

you know...this is actually a little bit of c**p.  kids are kids and the order they are born is just random.  my sister has 3 boys

2 are full brothers and her third was an oldest.  He's as normal as any "little" brother. And her youngest, a girl, was hers by biology.  She is definitely the princess in the house, but mostly because she is much younger and just naturally bossy like all the women in the family.  (Adopted or otherwise!) I think that however a kid falls into the family....they make it work.

Answer 11

Hi Gaia,

I've heard of birth order in adoption and assumed it was to preserve the birth place of children the adoptive family may already  have.  I haven't thought of it as a way of preserving what the incoming child may have had before.  I don't think that's considered when adoption placement decisions are made.  Perhaps it should be.

I was my mother's first born child, my father's third born, and second (middle) in the adoptive family.  Now I'm raising an only.  I would have preferred ultimately being an oldest myself because I think that fits best with what I've heard of profiles.  Not sure if it's scientific or not.  Interesting nevertheless.

julie j

reunited adoptee

Answer 12

Not sure what studies show, but I would think that it's best to keep birth order when adopting.

There is kinda "paying your dues" attitude with children, bio, foster and adopted.

If I had been in a home for 5 years and "top dog" and then they bring in someone older I wouldn't want that person thinking they could boss me around.

Answer 13

Interesting question.  My niece was the oldest child and suddenly found herself in the middle of our family pack.  This has been a difficult adjustment for her.  It also has been a huge adjustment to my kids.  But what is the alternative?  We love her and we help her as best as we can.

A good home is a good home.  Every blended family has difficult challenges to overcome. There will never be a "perfect" fit.   Kids should placed in loving, functional homes with individuals who are realistic and equipped to meet these challenges.

Answer 14

WOW! Gaia! Fabulous question!

I have no idea!! It was weird for me to go from the oldest to the middle child in my family when my parents adopted a teen and I was 10. (My brother asked my family adopt him - he was a foster child - and my sister and I were included in the decision making process but it was a strange adjustment.)

I would LOVE to see a study done on this!!