SER HIJO UNICO

by Jill Pitkeathley, David Emerson

He aquí el primer libro dedicado a explorar qué significa y cómo afecta a las personas la experiencia de ser hijo único. El autor parte del hecho de que, en la actualidad, el número de hijos únicos está creciendo en la medida en que los matrimonios se separan cada vez más pronto y las parejas empiezan a formar sus propias familias cada vez más tarde. Y, a partir de ahí, se plantea una serie de preguntas indispensables para comprender este fenómeno. ¿Qué hace que un hijo único sea diferente? ¿Cómo pueden hacer frente los hijos únicos a las dificultades que supone el hecho mismo de ser distintos? ¿Por qué se sienten siempre solos, incluso cuando se hallan junto a sus seres más queridos? ¿Por qué creen que deben serlo todo para sus padres, cargar con todas las responsabilidades y culpas? Aquí el lector encontrará valiosos consejos que le ayudarán a comprender estas cuestiones y a conseguir que la vida sea más fácil para todos. Y no sólo eso, sino que además, a través del testimonio de sesenta hijos únicos que hablan abiertamente de sus experiencias y comparten con nosotros sus problemas y ansiedades, podrá llegar a saber cómo deben enfrentarse los hijos únicos a las relaciones interpersonales, las amistades, el trabajo y tantos otros temas importantes en la vida de una persona.

Genres: Psychology, Nonfiction

352 pages, Paperback

First published October 1, 1994

Reviews

[Brianna · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although gathered casually and not scientifically, the interviews presented and conclusions drawn in this book are quite eye-opening and thoroughly useful. I found many, many similar experiences shared to be ones to which I could completely relate. I have gained such an enlightened understanding as to the origins of so many of my behaviors and feelings. So many quirks and character flaws I thought were just randonly mine I now understand to be directly resulted from my upbringing as an only child. I definitely recommend this book to all only children - you will be surprised to read your own thoughts, feelings, and perspectives in these interviews.

4 out of 5 stars only because one does have to take this information with a grain of salt, as the data was sampled from a mere 60 people, casually interviewed sharing their personal subjective experience and self reflection. When I picked up the book I was expecting a more authoritative and scientific approach to the topic, but these results are fascinating regardless and definitely worth the read.

[Sue Ellen · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was expecting more than a bunch of quotes taking up the right side of the page with all that blank space on the left side of the page.

[Benjamin · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book was written in a way that is easy to read. I think that it is wonderful first step into examining the "only" population as a minority group in sociological studies. I'm very appreciative and thankful of the authors for shedding some light on the field; I hope that this book serves as a gateway into future studies and examinations of the worldview and unique life-history of only children. The book's purpose is to examine the social organization among early childhood for onlies (Part I) and analyse its impact on adulthood, social functioning as well as relationship building (Part II). It also includes tips for parents and partners of only children which I didn't read because I'm not currently interested in seeking insight from this stage in life because its not a stage I'm at yet. So this is primarily a review for the first two parts. 75-80% of the book. Nonetheless, the book is primarily geared to a specific type of only child experience that may or may not be the norm--due to a biased sample selection that may be intentional (i.e. use of specific facts to support a central thesis/argument) and/or unintentional (i.e. built in bias from survey model or limited selection of "only" population who is willing to reflect and share their stories). I'm not entirely sure of the criterion for the sample, but it is largely based in the UK and there are many other cultural, race, and socioeconomic variables that are not controlled or mentioned in the sample selection For example, the data may be biased because most only children who have time to reflect on this specific challenge in their lives may be pulled from a middle class majority population who has the luxury to delve into this specific childhood experience. That is not to say that this middle class didn't have other valid and equally significant challenges in life, but just that other minority group populations in working class statuses may have had different social and cultural jeopardies such that they can not readily hone and examine their challenges as an only child. For this reason, it is important to note that the book is not a neutral analysis of only children experience, the data is supportive of an underlying argument/thesis that only children seem to be less emotionally aware, more socially mature, in addition to a general pattern for requiring the need for personal space and introversion. Due to the limitations in the sample selection, I think that this is an extremely bold and daring proposal/insinuation; the book impetuously attributes many behavioural characteristics and social patterns of only children for the sole reason of growing up without other children and being only exposed to adults. I think this is a fallacy in the book because correlation should not imply causation, especially when multiple variables are not taken into account. Personally, I wasn't able to relate too much to many of the things because a lot of the book is focused on the adversities and challenges for only children rather than a resilience/strengths perspective. It focused on how certain social organization among parentals controlled their human development and it made things seem like a passive role for the only as if they were not able to cultivate other types of childhood relationships. For myself, I don't think that I dwelled on being a small family unit without siblings because my mother and myself proactively seeked childhood friends for me to spend time with and enjoy and this was done extensively throughout my childhood--so I didn't identify with a common pattern of not being able to deal well in friend groups or intimacy with others of my same cohort. Additionally, minority groups in the US tend to cluster together as a collective family unit and so it was not the lonely Triad family structure for family gatherings as they had depicted for the Western individualized nuclear family structure. Since there sample size is too small for conclusive scientific basis, it is important to take all of the findings/observations with a grain of salt. In summary, some parts are relatable, and the advice is helpful, BUT this book has an argument/thesis that frames a specific only child-- one that seems to have been more passive in controlling their social organization in early development (less extroverted) thereby being heavily controlled and emotionally impcated by their parents desires (unable to fully develop sense of self through ones own vision as well as a a prevention of developing a self-reliant resilient mindset to have more control and independent living free from parents). In turn, the book popularizes this type of only child to have issues in adulthood with sharing, personal space, intimacy, and an overdeveloped sense of responsibility.

[alMira estandarte · Rating 5 out of 5]

i want to read