I cannot even begin to imagine losing any of my children (nor have I
any desire to do so), and I have no recollection of a sibling I lost at
too-early an age.
But even farther beyond my comprehension is the loss of an identical twin.
My
heart aches for Osmany De Oca, whose identical twin brother, Lance Cpl.
Osbrany Montes, was killed in Afghanistan Friday while serving his
country as a member of the U.S. Marine Corps, according to the Bergen County Record.
Osbrany Montes was 20.
Yes,
the twins and their older brother, Sandro Moreta, knew they were
risking their lives when they enlisted, but who honestly considers that
reality when they sign up?
I have read about identical twins and
loss and the permanent void it leaves within them. I have talked about
such loss with a friend who lost one of her identical twin brothers at a
young age, and the effect his death has had on her surviving
brother.
I hope that is all I ever know of it.
I hope my children never know any of it.
My deepest condolences go out to the De Oca family along with my deepest gratitude for the service and sacrifices of their sons.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Sick and sicker: immunity differences in identical twins
Jonathan and Matthew developed colds a while back.
Jonathan is on the mend now, racing the dog from the dining room through the kitchen, eating like a teenager and jumping from the sofa to the floor over and over and over again, ignoring my demands that he stop.
He's driving me crazy.
Matthew is curled up on another sofa, covered with a blanket and watching TV through half-opened eyes. It breaks my heart to watch him hold his ribs when hacking coughs overtake his body. I can't wait for the antibiotics to do their stuff.
He has walking pneumonia.
This medical inequity is nothing new.
A few weeks ago, Jonathan developed a fever that lasted for two days. Matthew caught the same virus, but his fever continued for seven days. A stomach bug that left Jonathan slightly dehydrated for a day as a baby left Matthew with bleeding ulcers and a month's prescription of Zantac.
When Jonathan develops an ear infection, Matthew often gets it in both.
My immediate reaction was to surmise that somehow, when the egg split, Matthew lost an immunity gene to Jonathan. It made sense. Matthew's always been sicker and he was born lighter, slighter, a bit more frail than his brother.
But I came to a different conclusion after doing a little research.
Recent studies are finding that epigenetics -- or the way in which genes express themselves in different environments -- is likely responsible for many differences that develop in identical twins, particularly when it comes to immunity.
Sometime after conception, either in the womb or outside it, one of the twins was likely exposed to a virus or bacteria that missed the other. In fighting off the intruder, he either gained any army (Jonathan), strengthening his physical fortress, or lost one (Matthew), weakening his defenses.
Their identical genes learned to express themselves in different ways when confronted by bacterial infections or viruses, resulting in permanently different immune systems.
Amanda Carpenter, a virology student, writes about an excellent example here. Identical twins born in 1983 were exposed to HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. Fifteen years later, one was relatively healthy and strong while the other was sickly and ill.
After studying blood samples from the pair, researchers concluded that environment, which led to a depressed immunity system in one twin, was likely to blame for their different reactions. Their shared DNA did not ensure a shared prognosis.
My hope for Matthew is that someday this will turn itself around -- that someday he'll be exposed to something that makes him stronger instead or weaker -- and that Jonathan's immunity will remain unchanged.
Who knows?
Maybe this is the one.
Maybe all that hacking and coughing that kept me up last night, worried that he will choke or stop breathing, is the just influence his genes needs.
Jonathan is on the mend now, racing the dog from the dining room through the kitchen, eating like a teenager and jumping from the sofa to the floor over and over and over again, ignoring my demands that he stop.
He's driving me crazy.
Matthew is curled up on another sofa, covered with a blanket and watching TV through half-opened eyes. It breaks my heart to watch him hold his ribs when hacking coughs overtake his body. I can't wait for the antibiotics to do their stuff.
He has walking pneumonia.
This medical inequity is nothing new.
A few weeks ago, Jonathan developed a fever that lasted for two days. Matthew caught the same virus, but his fever continued for seven days. A stomach bug that left Jonathan slightly dehydrated for a day as a baby left Matthew with bleeding ulcers and a month's prescription of Zantac.
When Jonathan develops an ear infection, Matthew often gets it in both.
My immediate reaction was to surmise that somehow, when the egg split, Matthew lost an immunity gene to Jonathan. It made sense. Matthew's always been sicker and he was born lighter, slighter, a bit more frail than his brother.
But I came to a different conclusion after doing a little research.
Recent studies are finding that epigenetics -- or the way in which genes express themselves in different environments -- is likely responsible for many differences that develop in identical twins, particularly when it comes to immunity.
Sometime after conception, either in the womb or outside it, one of the twins was likely exposed to a virus or bacteria that missed the other. In fighting off the intruder, he either gained any army (Jonathan), strengthening his physical fortress, or lost one (Matthew), weakening his defenses.
Their identical genes learned to express themselves in different ways when confronted by bacterial infections or viruses, resulting in permanently different immune systems.
Amanda Carpenter, a virology student, writes about an excellent example here. Identical twins born in 1983 were exposed to HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. Fifteen years later, one was relatively healthy and strong while the other was sickly and ill.
After studying blood samples from the pair, researchers concluded that environment, which led to a depressed immunity system in one twin, was likely to blame for their different reactions. Their shared DNA did not ensure a shared prognosis.
My hope for Matthew is that someday this will turn itself around -- that someday he'll be exposed to something that makes him stronger instead or weaker -- and that Jonathan's immunity will remain unchanged.
Who knows?
Maybe this is the one.
Maybe all that hacking and coughing that kept me up last night, worried that he will choke or stop breathing, is the just influence his genes needs.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
One birthday cake or two? An unnecessary stress
I have some advice for parents who fret over whether their twins should have one birthday cake or two, one birthday song or two, one birthday theme or two.
Forget it.
Who cares?
They don't.
Not at one and two years old.
Honestly.
Don't be embarrassed.
We've all been there, thinking that the wrong decision, the wrong move will forever scar our little babies and toddlers, particularly since they already share looks and DNA. How will they ever become individuals if we make them celebrate their shared birthdays as units?
As Matthew and Jonathan approach their fifth birthday, I can assure you that when it matters, they will tell you. They will tell you over and over and over again until you instinctively cringe whenever the topic comes up and make elaborate attempts at distraction.
For us, it started with cakes at three years old.
Matthew made it clear to me that his cake should have yellow frosting. Jonathan wanted blue.
They also wanted their own versions of the birthday song. They stressed these points with anyone who would listen for weeks prior to their birthday.
That was it.
We complied and they were happy.
Their fourth birthday was a yearlong obsession.
They understood, for the first time, what a birthday meant, and the excitement overwhelmed them.
Over the preceeding months, we made cakes for Dino Dan, for Dora, and for the dog. We celebrated on picnic blankets on the living floor, with paper plates on the dining room table and at Friendly's with the Birthday Bash dessert.
It seemed birthdays were all they thought about.
They started planning a full year in advance. Jonathan requested a chocolate cake with blue frosting and Matthew asked for a banana cake with yellow frosting. They wanted separate birthday songs once again and they knew exactly who they wanted to invite.
No more family-only parties.
They wanted the real thing.
Lots of friends.
We complied and they weree happy.
This year, the plans are even more elaborate.
They attend two different preschools together (two days at one and two days at the other). I had planned to bring treats only to the school they attend on their actual birthday. Not fair, they said, not fair to their other friends.
Fine, I said. They won.
So I decided to bring only one treat to each class, certain that the teachers would appreciate limitations on sugar consumption. Not fair, they argued once again. Jonathan and Matthew are two different people, each with his own birthday. They should each be able to bring a treat.
How could I possibly argue with that?
How?
I agreed, but only for the one classroom.
In the other class, we will bring drinks and a treat.
Their party requests are the same -- specific colors and flavors for cakes, separate songs and lots of friends. Thank goodness the community center is cheap. But they added one more thing this year -- pinatas. Not one, but two.
The argument was the same: two birthdays, two pinatas.
Ugh.
I had dug my own hole by caving to this premise before.
Two pinatas it is.
We will comply and they will be happy.
I can't even imagine what their sixth birthday will be like, but I'm already starting to work on it, planning my arguments for less separation, less individualism, more focus on the fact that their shared birthday is part of what makes their relationship so special.
Yes, it's a selfish argument, but we have to draw the line somewhere before they drive us into financial ruin. We will not entirely comply, but they will be happy.
So my advice is to relax.
Children who can't barely form sentences have little or no concept of what a birthday is so much for whether a joint celebration defines them as a unit. Their birthdays will present enough opportunities for stress in the years to come.
Relax and enjoy.
Forget it.
Who cares?
They don't.
Not at one and two years old.
Honestly.
Don't be embarrassed.
We've all been there, thinking that the wrong decision, the wrong move will forever scar our little babies and toddlers, particularly since they already share looks and DNA. How will they ever become individuals if we make them celebrate their shared birthdays as units?
As Matthew and Jonathan approach their fifth birthday, I can assure you that when it matters, they will tell you. They will tell you over and over and over again until you instinctively cringe whenever the topic comes up and make elaborate attempts at distraction.
For us, it started with cakes at three years old.
Matthew made it clear to me that his cake should have yellow frosting. Jonathan wanted blue.
They also wanted their own versions of the birthday song. They stressed these points with anyone who would listen for weeks prior to their birthday.
That was it.
We complied and they were happy.
Their fourth birthday was a yearlong obsession.
They understood, for the first time, what a birthday meant, and the excitement overwhelmed them.
Over the preceeding months, we made cakes for Dino Dan, for Dora, and for the dog. We celebrated on picnic blankets on the living floor, with paper plates on the dining room table and at Friendly's with the Birthday Bash dessert.
It seemed birthdays were all they thought about.
They started planning a full year in advance. Jonathan requested a chocolate cake with blue frosting and Matthew asked for a banana cake with yellow frosting. They wanted separate birthday songs once again and they knew exactly who they wanted to invite.
No more family-only parties.
They wanted the real thing.
Lots of friends.
We complied and they weree happy.
This year, the plans are even more elaborate.
They attend two different preschools together (two days at one and two days at the other). I had planned to bring treats only to the school they attend on their actual birthday. Not fair, they said, not fair to their other friends.
Fine, I said. They won.
So I decided to bring only one treat to each class, certain that the teachers would appreciate limitations on sugar consumption. Not fair, they argued once again. Jonathan and Matthew are two different people, each with his own birthday. They should each be able to bring a treat.
How could I possibly argue with that?
How?
I agreed, but only for the one classroom.
In the other class, we will bring drinks and a treat.
Their party requests are the same -- specific colors and flavors for cakes, separate songs and lots of friends. Thank goodness the community center is cheap. But they added one more thing this year -- pinatas. Not one, but two.
The argument was the same: two birthdays, two pinatas.
Ugh.
I had dug my own hole by caving to this premise before.
Two pinatas it is.
We will comply and they will be happy.
I can't even imagine what their sixth birthday will be like, but I'm already starting to work on it, planning my arguments for less separation, less individualism, more focus on the fact that their shared birthday is part of what makes their relationship so special.
Yes, it's a selfish argument, but we have to draw the line somewhere before they drive us into financial ruin. We will not entirely comply, but they will be happy.
So my advice is to relax.
Children who can't barely form sentences have little or no concept of what a birthday is so much for whether a joint celebration defines them as a unit. Their birthdays will present enough opportunities for stress in the years to come.
Relax and enjoy.
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Someone Else's Twin: a review
 |
That, it is not.
The book is a case study, clearly academic in its structure, voice and format.
But it’s a fascinating and worthwhile read, regardless.
Someone Else's Twin tells the true story behind a lawsuit filed by identical twins and a singleton who were mixed up at birth in a Canary Islands hospital. The mistake was discovered somewhat by accident 28 years later when a store clerk who had met both twins and had noted their striking similarities insisted they get together.
The meeting threw two families into permanent turmoil.
One twin had been raised as a fraternal twin with the singleton. The other twin was raised as a singleton by a family that was not related to her. All three women struggled with their new relationships and identities and the results were heartbreaking.
It is a situation I can, thankfully, only imagine.
In reading Segal’s book, I had hope to learn more about nature-verses-nurture – about likes, dislikes, mannerisms, social preferences, habits and more that these reared-apart twins share despite their separate upbringings. I wanted to read about their differences, too. I had hope to learn more about my own twins and the influences we have, as parents, on their identities verses the natural influences of shared DNA.
I did come away with some of that.
The identical twins, for instance, developed an immediate report upon their meeting.
“Delia and Begoña accomplished in seconds what many sisters never achieve after a lifetime together – a mutually deep understanding of how the other thinks and feels,” Segal writes.
They found they had several remarkable mannerisms and gestures in common, like the way they ate and their physical reactions to anxiety. They both had an urge to clean and made careers of it while sometimes aspiring to more intellectual pursuits.
Yet one identical twin developed leukemia as a teen, while her separately raised twin did not, and their IQ scores differed more than Segal had expected. Interestingly, the women who were mistakenly raised as fraternal twins had closer IQ scores, a finding that seemed to surprise Segal.
But, when I finished this book, my interests in nature-verses-nurture felt selfish compared to what Segal’s truly explores.
As a result of the mix up, the Canary Island courts were faced with a daunting task, one which Segal was asked to help resolve. The courts had to place a price tag on the losses these women suffered and the pain they continue to live with as a result of their separation so many years ago. They had to decided how to make reparations and whether reparations could really be made at all.
In Someone Else‘s Twin, Segal touches on issues of nature-verses-nature, but she explores more deeply the very nature of family relations and their biological bonds. She dives into controversial questions about how we form a sense of self and how mothers identify and bond with their children. She explores the psychological bonds between non-biologically related siblings and the potential for harm when that lack of biological relationship is unknown.
Segal gives new evidence in the argument for openness with children who become one with families due to adoption, egg donation and sperm donation – all important observations in this world of high-tech fertility solutions we live in today. These children need to know who they are, where they came from or, at the very least, that they do not share their parents’ DNA.
With that knowledge, children have a chance to adjust to and appreciate differences in appearance, attitude, social preferences and behaviors. Without it – as in the case of the identical twin raised as singleton in an unrelated family – they can become lost – unsure as to why they are somewhat different, why they don’t fit in. Always struggling.
Though not the fastest read, Someone Else’s Twin is indeed fascinating and well worth reading. It is not what I had hoped. It is much more.
Monday, December 26, 2011
Happy Holidays!
Remember when I wrote that we never dress them alike?
We didn't.
They did.
We didn't.
They did.
Nothing, not even a desire for individualism, comes between a four-year-old boy and his brand new Thomas the Tank Engine t-shirt.
Happy holidays from our family to yours!
(Jonathan is on the left and Matthew, on the right in each photo.)
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
Want attention? Dress them alike.
It's rare that our twins are dressed alike.
Sure, we did it now and then when they were babies.
It was cute, especially for photos.
But it confused us and others and, as soon as they were able to grunt in the direction of a particular piece of clothing, Matthew and Jonathan made their own preferences clear. At this point in their lives, they find the idea of dressing alike generally repulsive.
So it was by mistake that it happened last week.
We were headed out to Target and the mall, intending to Christmas shopping and meet up with a friend for pictures with Santa. Neither twin wanted to wear his jacket. I agreed only if they each grabbed a sweater.
They grabbed precisely the same ones.
Coincidentally, they were both wearing gray sweatpants of slightly different shades.
I didn't think much of it until we entered Target.
Most often, passersby don't even realize Jonathan and Matthew are twins. I always assumed that we had naturally passed the phase where people cared -- when they were babies, sitting side-by-side in their stroller announcing their identical DNA to the world.
Babyhood was tough.
I always had to build in extra time for oglers. I didn't mind much because the twins were too young to understand that they were a side show of sorts. Besides, they made people happy. It was nice to see previously frowning folks stop and smile.
But I should have built it in extra time that day.
It started the moment we walked through the doors.
Two women walking toward us stopped, blocking our way. They stared at the twins, slightly stooped for a better angle, looking them up and down. Then they stood up straight and one women said with a bit of a puzzled look, "Are they twins?"
"Yes," I answered.
"I knew it," said one.
"Me too," said the other, and the two women carried on a conversation about Matthew and Jonathan's likenesses and differences as though none of us was there. I maneuvered the twins around them and kept walking.
Once we grabbed a cart and the twins were walking freely, not holding my hands, I figured we were safe. Certainly, no one would stop us if they were not on display side-by-side and if we looked really busy.
Would they?
They would.
Similar incidents occurred at least 6 more times during our 40-minute shopping excursion.
Some people were polite and brief. Others were a little more intrigued, yet still polite. No one else was rude like those two women. Shoppers just seemed attracted by the twinness, like they couldn't help themselves, and I found that kind of amusing.
When we left Target and arrived at the mall, Jonathan stripped off his sweater.
He was hot.
Matthew kept his on.
We attracted not a single comment or stare during our 90-minute trek through the halls, food court and arcade.(Okay, maybe a stare, but that probably had more to do with the rather "active" behaviors of Matthew and Jonathan and their preschool-aged friend.)
Not even Santa noticed.
At least, not until we were preparing to leave and Jonathan pulled on his sweater.
Their friend was gone by then, so it was just the two boys standing there, waiting for me to get my act together. Santa had risen from his chair and was greeting a children in the common area a few yards away. He looked at Jonathan and Matthew, who caught his stare and galloped over.
Santa gazed at them, and then lifted his eyes to me.
"Are they twins?" he said.
I swear I saw a mischievous twinkle.
Sure, we did it now and then when they were babies.
It was cute, especially for photos.
But it confused us and others and, as soon as they were able to grunt in the direction of a particular piece of clothing, Matthew and Jonathan made their own preferences clear. At this point in their lives, they find the idea of dressing alike generally repulsive.
So it was by mistake that it happened last week.
We were headed out to Target and the mall, intending to Christmas shopping and meet up with a friend for pictures with Santa. Neither twin wanted to wear his jacket. I agreed only if they each grabbed a sweater.
They grabbed precisely the same ones.
Coincidentally, they were both wearing gray sweatpants of slightly different shades.
I didn't think much of it until we entered Target.
Most often, passersby don't even realize Jonathan and Matthew are twins. I always assumed that we had naturally passed the phase where people cared -- when they were babies, sitting side-by-side in their stroller announcing their identical DNA to the world.
Babyhood was tough.
I always had to build in extra time for oglers. I didn't mind much because the twins were too young to understand that they were a side show of sorts. Besides, they made people happy. It was nice to see previously frowning folks stop and smile.
But I should have built it in extra time that day.
It started the moment we walked through the doors.
Two women walking toward us stopped, blocking our way. They stared at the twins, slightly stooped for a better angle, looking them up and down. Then they stood up straight and one women said with a bit of a puzzled look, "Are they twins?"
"Yes," I answered.
"I knew it," said one.
"Me too," said the other, and the two women carried on a conversation about Matthew and Jonathan's likenesses and differences as though none of us was there. I maneuvered the twins around them and kept walking.
Once we grabbed a cart and the twins were walking freely, not holding my hands, I figured we were safe. Certainly, no one would stop us if they were not on display side-by-side and if we looked really busy.
Would they?
They would.
Similar incidents occurred at least 6 more times during our 40-minute shopping excursion.
Some people were polite and brief. Others were a little more intrigued, yet still polite. No one else was rude like those two women. Shoppers just seemed attracted by the twinness, like they couldn't help themselves, and I found that kind of amusing.
When we left Target and arrived at the mall, Jonathan stripped off his sweater.
He was hot.
Matthew kept his on.
We attracted not a single comment or stare during our 90-minute trek through the halls, food court and arcade.(Okay, maybe a stare, but that probably had more to do with the rather "active" behaviors of Matthew and Jonathan and their preschool-aged friend.)
Not even Santa noticed.
At least, not until we were preparing to leave and Jonathan pulled on his sweater.
Their friend was gone by then, so it was just the two boys standing there, waiting for me to get my act together. Santa had risen from his chair and was greeting a children in the common area a few yards away. He looked at Jonathan and Matthew, who caught his stare and galloped over.
Santa gazed at them, and then lifted his eyes to me.
"Are they twins?" he said.
I swear I saw a mischievous twinkle.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Holiday gifts for identical twins: the same or different?
Each year as the holidays approach, the same question appears on the online forums for parents of twins. Parents want to know whether they should buy identical gifts, matching gifts or different gifts for their same-aged children.
For certain items, it's obvious: if you buy a bike for one twin, you should buy a bike for the other.
For boy/girl twins, it gets easier as they get older thanks to social coding: a 7-year-old girl is likely to want Polly Pockets while a 7-year-old boy might want a Bionicle. But they will both probably want iPhones someday.
Some same-sex fraternal twins make it easy, too, expressing entirely different interests.
But identical twins present a different challenge.
As parents, we have to recognized that their shared DNA also means predominately shared brain chemistry. Their talents, skills and general interests tend to be the same or, at least, very similar. They also have the same body types, which might naturally lead them to similar physical pursuits.
At the same time, identical twins have choices about which talents, skills, interests and physical pursuits to cultivate. Those choices along with environmental influences help them develop as individuals with sometimes differing needs and wants.
So how does that translate into a holiday shopping list?
In the beginning, err on the side of caution. Babies are babies. They don't know how to share and they really don't care whether you want them to. Buy two of the same when it is appropriate to buy more than one of a particular item.
Don't do what we did.
We made the mistake of buying Matthew a yellow Animal Alley Good-Night bear for his crib when the twins were 4-months old. We bought Jonathan the blue Good-Night rabbit. The animals were equally soft and similar in shape.
We never thought they'd care.
We were wrong.
Four months old and already they were fighting over a toy. They both wanted that yellow bear in bed with them and they would scream and cry until they got it. An emergency trip to Toy-R-Us resolved the problem, but it was a long time before I made that mistake again.
By 16 months old, the boys had developed definite color preferences of their own. At this point, we could buy them the same toys, but in different colors. Jonathan got the blue dinosaur while Matthew got the green one. Matthew got the red truck while Jonathan got the orange one.
Everybody was happy.
There was no point in forcing entirely different toys on them. They wanted the same things and they were happy with the same things. We wanted to give our children gifts that they would enjoy, that made them happy. Receiving the same gifts in different colors made them happy.
But that stage doesn't last forever.
Even the closest of identical twins eventually differentiate, at least in the eyes of those who are paying attention. And that differentiation can make holiday shopping more challenging and more satisfying.
We are just beginning to see those changes in our guys at 4 years old.
Matthew and Jonathan still enjoy the same general things, like trains ... and more trains ... and more trains. Did I mention they like trains? And movies about trains? And train T-shirts? And books about trains? And anything at all related to trains?
But, this year, they want different engines.
Matthew wants 'Arry and Burt of the Thomas the Tank Engine fame while Jonathan wants Neville and Issobella. They both want the wooden Tidmouth sheds, so Santa will probably give that as a combined gift. They'll get some games they can play together and lots of books that each can call his own.
Jonathan might get a new basketball, his biggest sports obsession, but Matthew has no interest in that. Matthew would likely prefer more Legos.
And, well, that's probably about it for now.
They have plenty of different food preferences and they like different textures of clothing, but toys are for playing together at their age and they love playing together. So they tend to love the same types of toys.
And the holidays, for 4-year-olds, are all about toys.
I am anticipating more differences when gifts involve clothing, iTunes and Wii games.
Forcing identical twins to accept different toys will not foster individuality. Nor will forcing them to accept the same toys somehow make them inseparable. It's natural for them to lean the same way and it's natural for them to want to be a little bit different.
Gift shopping for identical twins is a challenge, but the challenge is simply one of concentration, of focusing on the minutia.It takes more energy to find those differences and similarities that make gifts for identical twins the perfect gifts.
But, otherwise, it is really no different than it is for other children.
And the thrill on their faces -- that thrill they share first with their twin as they rip off the paper and expose the treasure inside and then with their siblings and with us -- makes all that extra energy well worth the effort.
For certain items, it's obvious: if you buy a bike for one twin, you should buy a bike for the other.
For boy/girl twins, it gets easier as they get older thanks to social coding: a 7-year-old girl is likely to want Polly Pockets while a 7-year-old boy might want a Bionicle. But they will both probably want iPhones someday.
Some same-sex fraternal twins make it easy, too, expressing entirely different interests.
But identical twins present a different challenge.
As parents, we have to recognized that their shared DNA also means predominately shared brain chemistry. Their talents, skills and general interests tend to be the same or, at least, very similar. They also have the same body types, which might naturally lead them to similar physical pursuits.
At the same time, identical twins have choices about which talents, skills, interests and physical pursuits to cultivate. Those choices along with environmental influences help them develop as individuals with sometimes differing needs and wants.
So how does that translate into a holiday shopping list?
In the beginning, err on the side of caution. Babies are babies. They don't know how to share and they really don't care whether you want them to. Buy two of the same when it is appropriate to buy more than one of a particular item.
Don't do what we did.
We made the mistake of buying Matthew a yellow Animal Alley Good-Night bear for his crib when the twins were 4-months old. We bought Jonathan the blue Good-Night rabbit. The animals were equally soft and similar in shape.
We never thought they'd care.
We were wrong.
Four months old and already they were fighting over a toy. They both wanted that yellow bear in bed with them and they would scream and cry until they got it. An emergency trip to Toy-R-Us resolved the problem, but it was a long time before I made that mistake again.
By 16 months old, the boys had developed definite color preferences of their own. At this point, we could buy them the same toys, but in different colors. Jonathan got the blue dinosaur while Matthew got the green one. Matthew got the red truck while Jonathan got the orange one.
Everybody was happy.
There was no point in forcing entirely different toys on them. They wanted the same things and they were happy with the same things. We wanted to give our children gifts that they would enjoy, that made them happy. Receiving the same gifts in different colors made them happy.
But that stage doesn't last forever.
Even the closest of identical twins eventually differentiate, at least in the eyes of those who are paying attention. And that differentiation can make holiday shopping more challenging and more satisfying.
We are just beginning to see those changes in our guys at 4 years old.
Matthew and Jonathan still enjoy the same general things, like trains ... and more trains ... and more trains. Did I mention they like trains? And movies about trains? And train T-shirts? And books about trains? And anything at all related to trains?
But, this year, they want different engines.
Matthew wants 'Arry and Burt of the Thomas the Tank Engine fame while Jonathan wants Neville and Issobella. They both want the wooden Tidmouth sheds, so Santa will probably give that as a combined gift. They'll get some games they can play together and lots of books that each can call his own.
Jonathan might get a new basketball, his biggest sports obsession, but Matthew has no interest in that. Matthew would likely prefer more Legos.
And, well, that's probably about it for now.
They have plenty of different food preferences and they like different textures of clothing, but toys are for playing together at their age and they love playing together. So they tend to love the same types of toys.
And the holidays, for 4-year-olds, are all about toys.
I am anticipating more differences when gifts involve clothing, iTunes and Wii games.
Forcing identical twins to accept different toys will not foster individuality. Nor will forcing them to accept the same toys somehow make them inseparable. It's natural for them to lean the same way and it's natural for them to want to be a little bit different.
Gift shopping for identical twins is a challenge, but the challenge is simply one of concentration, of focusing on the minutia.It takes more energy to find those differences and similarities that make gifts for identical twins the perfect gifts.
But, otherwise, it is really no different than it is for other children.
And the thrill on their faces -- that thrill they share first with their twin as they rip off the paper and expose the treasure inside and then with their siblings and with us -- makes all that extra energy well worth the effort.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)