Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

thecut.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 140 posts

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#121

Post by pavel_lishin »

sarnu wrote: post #97
Illniyar wrote: post #88

You go raise three children. I can barely handle two.

The dynamic totally changes with three kids. I have three kids, and when one of them is not at home (doesn't matter which one) the atmosphere changes completely, hard to describe how. What I want to say: Having three is different from having two, but not necessarily harder. They have more things to handle between themselves. I could not bear to raise a single child. That must be really hard.

> I could not bear to raise a single child. That must be really hard.

Can you go into this a bit more? I have a single child, and just thinking of trying to raise another one makes me feel like my lungs are deflating.

(If this isn't a good venue for this conversation, you can email me - my email is in my profile.)

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#122

Post by dev_north_east »

curun1r wrote: post #98
bhouston wrote: post #78

Population shrinkage is not healthy for a society.

Breeding under the replacement rate does not imply population shrinkage. It's a better strategy for a rich nation state to have lower birth rates and poach the best and brightest from other countries. That increases the wealth of native-born citizens as well as improving the lives of those who immigrate whereas overbreeding disperses accumulated inherited wealth.

And brain draining the countries of the emigrants? Maybe we should be working to fix those places up and not hoover up all the talent.

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#123

Post by EADGBE »

wccrawford wrote: post #114
dqpb wrote: post #76

Technically, isn't it the youngest child going extinct and the middle child left to take on the role of the youngest?

Whenever a couple has any kids at all, there is always a youngest child and an oldest child. Sometimes, they are the same child. There is not always a "middle child" because that requires at least 2 other children to exist. You're trying to say that the "third child" is going extinct, which matches what the article is saying in a different way.

> Whenever a couple has any kids at all, there is always a youngest child and an oldest child. Sometimes, they are the same child.

Technically, that's an only child and that has articles all its own...

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#124

Post by war1025 »

Fnoord wrote: post #100
war1025 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it was supposed to be a joke about how there is only a middle child if there is an odd number of children.

That's a matter of perception. The way I see it, every child who is not either the youngest or the oldest is the/a middle child. With 3, that's #2. With 4, that's #2 and #3. With 5, that's #2 and #3 and #4. Though usually the context is that parents have 3 children because that's the most common version of having more than 2 children. When I look at people who I know and their families, I can report that the middle c…

I was just explaining the joke the guy was trying to make.

My dad was one of 8 siblings, and my mom was one of 6. So I guess I have a lot of egocentric aunts and uncles.

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#125

Post by EADGBE »

sarnu wrote: post #97
Illniyar wrote: post #88

You go raise three children. I can barely handle two.

The dynamic totally changes with three kids. I have three kids, and when one of them is not at home (doesn't matter which one) the atmosphere changes completely, hard to describe how. What I want to say: Having three is different from having two, but not necessarily harder. They have more things to handle between themselves. I could not bear to raise a single child. That must be really hard.

This is entirely true, also have three kids; 1 yr, 3yr and 6yr. When the little one is away, the older two are way more rambunctious and rough with each other (even fighting). When the middle is away, there's no more boy and so things tend to calm down a bit; the older does her own thing, or lets her youngest sister do anything and doesn't make a peep. When the oldest is away, the two younger ones will have similar effects on each other like having the middle away.

It's really weird.

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#126

Post by EADGBE »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #121
sarnu wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dynamic totally changes with three kids. I have three kids, and when one of them is not at home (doesn't matter which one) the atmosphere changes completely, hard to describe how. What I want to say: Having three is different from having two, but not necessarily harder. They have more things to handle between themselves. I could not bear to raise a single child. That must be really hard.

> I could not bear to raise a single child. That must be really hard. Can you go into this a bit more? I have a single child, and just thinking of trying to raise another one makes me feel like my lungs are deflating. (If this isn't a good venue for this conversation, you can email me - my email is in my profile.)

I was as scared to have/not-mess-up my second child as I was with my first.

By the time our third came, I shrugged it off as "well I've already got two... what's a third?"

If I found out we were having a forth, I'd probably feel the same.

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#127

Post by EADGBE »

carlmr wrote: post #119
sarnu wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dynamic totally changes with three kids. I have three kids, and when one of them is not at home (doesn't matter which one) the atmosphere changes completely, hard to describe how. What I want to say: Having three is different from having two, but not necessarily harder. They have more things to handle between themselves. I could not bear to raise a single child. That must be really hard.

Yeah, this rings true from experiencing two kids at my home and visiting single children and multi-children families as a kid. The single children where very demanding on their parents. The only source of attention and entertainment is the parents, so this makes sense. Two children entertain themselves a bit more, but like in duopolic situations you have the most extreme competition. This leads to a lot of fights ove…

Single child here, I didn't feel as demanding; however I certainly had a friendship-style relationship with my parents that all my other friends (none of them single children) didn't have with their parents.

In my experience, usually one child of a set seems to always be a lot more demanding than others.

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#128

Post by EADGBE »

icebraining wrote: post #105

It's interesting that the article doesn't have a comment to make about other familial arrangements brought about by shorter marriages and relationships. For example, I'm older than my brothers, yet the oldest of them is not a middle child, because he's not a brother of my other brothers. When families start spreading like this, a kid can be both a middle-child and a firstborn simultaneously - it becomes relative. And…

Agreed, especially as normal as it is now.

I've had conversations with our daughter about friends and their families. Nuclear families are uncommon now. It's just what it is. And seeing enough unhealthy marriages; it's probably a lot better that way than the old adage to "stay together for the kids".

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#129

Post by Fnoord »

war1025 wrote: post #124
Fnoord wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a matter of perception. The way I see it, every child who is not either the youngest or the oldest is the/a middle child. With 3, that's #2. With 4, that's #2 and #3. With 5, that's #2 and #3 and #4. Though usually the context is that parents have 3 children because that's the most common version of having more than 2 children. When I look at people who I know and their families, I can report that the middle c…

I was just explaining the joke the guy was trying to make. My dad was one of 8 siblings, and my mom was one of 6. So I guess I have a lot of egocentric aunts and uncles.

My last comment was regarding families with 3 children, and it is anecdata, sure.

Re: The Middle Child Is Going Extinct

#130

Post by wool_gather »

TangoTrotFox wrote: post #110
squarefoot wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting point. Also culture could play a role here; it is possible that concerns about overpopulation are primarily shared among those people who are less responsible for it (living in "western" industrialized countries), so that by having less children they rather reduce the number of people sensitive to the problem than limiting overpopulation in significant figures.

It's not just concern on this one issue. In general fertility tends to be strongly correlated with low education, low income, and high religiosity. This is true both inter and intra nationally. Think about what this means. Currently each day about 353,000 babies are born. As people who are educated, wealthy, and secular choose to not reproduce to the point of replacement - it is in a way condemning the demographics o…

Well pointed; it's a thing that needs to be considered, but it's a tough position to take and hold. It's an unfortunately short hop from a fact-based "we need to figure out how to create better outcomes" to a really nasty sort of proto-eugenics that says something like "poor people shouldn't be allowed to breed". And proponents of the latter may act like (short-term) allies of the former.
Post reply on HN