Dorothy Rowe - Talking About Sibling Relationships

Dorothy Rowe began her talk by looking back over our history of understanding mental illnesses. She spoke of the revolutionary ideas of the 1960s, which placed the emphasis on self autonomy and contrasted this with previous models of mental illness where it was seen as having a largely physical base. Prior to the 60s mental illness was often seen rather crudely and characterised simply as madness in one form or another.

She talked about her previous publications before coming to the subject of this talk: siblings and the part they play in the development of the psyche.

She reminded us that it was, of course, John Bowlby who introduced us to the importance of the mother-child relationship and how when this relationship goes wrong it can affect us, without therapeutic intervention, for the rest of our lives. We now know a great deal about the importance of this maternal relationship. Yet there is not the same body of knowledge about siblings. Biographies and autobiographies often place a great stress on sibling rivalries and relationships, yet this is not reflected in academic studies about families. Rowe referred to the work of Dalton Conley (2004) The Pecking Order: Which Siblings Succeed and Why. She suggested that within all families there is a pecking order. Parents will put more of their resources into one child. And, what is more, children are very quick to work out what this order might be.

We have our longest relationships with our siblings. Underneath the surface of many lives there is often a wealth of hidden emotion surrounding relationships between siblings. There are also many secrets within families involving sibling relationships. Rowe gave examples of families where there are lost or dead siblings whose name is never spoken.

Dorothy Rowe gave examples of three sorts of sibling relationships. The first of these she classified as intense/loving. This is where brothers and/or sisters have a close and loving relationship. It might often grow out of the realisation that the parents are incapable of looking after them and they have to look after each other if they are to survive. The second she described as completely distant. This is where brothers/sisters have nothing whatsoever to do with each other. There are traditions in families of not speaking: these are often handed down through the generations. Thirdly, there is the largest group, where there is an ambivalent relationship between siblings. Here brothers and sisters can never quite relax with each other, can never quite be themselves.