Full Siblings VS Half Siblings: Question....i am curious....

DH has 3 half siblings and 2 full siblings. The half siblings were 10-15 years older and raised with their father. He's only ever refered to them as brothers/sisters. However, as someone watching this relationship over almost 30 years, the differences are more than just "raised apart". When the half sibling's father died, his perspective was different than the ones grieving their father. When DH's "full" brother (mentally retarded his entire life, died of Lou Gerhig's disease at age 50), it was Dh and his sister (and father's) burden. Since Rusty grew up in a "home", neither family lives with him. but the "full" siblings were always in more direct contact than the "half" Bud has played grandpa to the half sibling's kids (7) and great grandpa to their 15 kids.. but he treats DD as his first grandchild. he lights up in a way he didn't when his step kids had kids. While its true kids raised in the same house would be closer, it seems there's more to it.. at least in DH's case. half sibling's have some different ties. those ties cause some experiences to be different. How important they are, i can't say. Completely discounting this reality feels, to me, like a "bury the head in the sand" mentality.

I don't think there is more to it at all. I think it's just a matter of whether you were raised together and/or have a good relationship or not. I have two half sibs and I never call them half. I grew up with them and we are all close. I am close to their other side of the family as they are to mine. What difference does it really make? My kids share the same firstmom but we are unsure if they share the same ffather. They look a lot alike but with different coloring and they are very close. Whether they share a father is irrelevant. Do you think their bond and relationship would change if they discovered that they do not share a father?

i think - if the father's are still in the person's life, they are a factor. ymmv

Fathers were not a factor with my sibs and I. I think it has nothing to dowith full or half but with relationships that exist in each individual situation.

I shouldn't play devils advocate here, but I'm finding myself thinking somewhat philosophically about this. My dad has a half sister (paternal- and THE sweetest woman on the face of the earth!), and J has three half siblings- the brother he was raised with with us, and one each (bro and sis) with M that he was not raised with and has seen 3 (bro) and 4 (sis) times in his life. I also have step-cousins that I just got in a huge fight with my mom about whether they should be considered and treated the same as the other grandkids (I think they should) in matters considering my grandmother's estate. But what's interesting to me is there is a lot of discussion in general about how biology does matter in many ways for many reasons, as regards children and parents. It's not the most important and it's clearly not the only thing that matters, has no impact on how we love our kids, but we never discount it completely, as it does have a role in many things. So I'm wondering why, with siblings, it's considered as not mattering at all and somehow inappropriate to admit or acknowledge that sharing one biological parent is different than sharing two? Beyond whether we are raised together or have good relationships or not, why would we say that biological distinctions are completely irrelevant in siblings when they are relevant in parent/children relationships?

It IS important for children if at all possible to have some biolical family in their lives. Even if it is a half brother or an uncle or aunt. At least they have ties to their bio family and they will be able to share history and actually be able to see other folks who may resemble them. Having a half sibling IS having a connection to a family member. So because you only share the same genes with half of a sibling that completely disqualifies that person as family? I'm so confused about that. I also find it odd that folks are saying that some of us have our heads in the sand or that it's innapropriate to "admit" that having half sibs is different. It simply is not different in any way at all. And if I feel that way, there are others that are bound to feel that way as well. Again, I was raised with my half sibs. They saw their father and I had mine and we are as close as sibs can be. So again, I think it's totally situational and dependent on each specific family. I'm ok that others may not feel the same way about their half sibs but please understand that some do feel very much the same about their full and half sibs.

sound like its the "head in the sand" reference that got you feeling defensive. i should not have used a slang term (fwiw - ymmv is short for your mileage may vary.. my attempt of pointing out that you may see things differently). I cannot see how potentially exposed to different genetic anomalies, a different set of cousins, aunts, and uncles can NOT be seen as never being _A_ factor in life experiences. I do not get it. Feel free to explain FWIW (for what its worth), some of these differences were not seen in DH's family until they got in their 40s and parents were dying I see half siblings much like i see adopted kids. They are a 100% my family. However, I'd be doing a disservice to my child is I pretend there was not another family. another mother who impacted her.. another father (or two) who influenced who she is now

I honestly wasn't feeling defensive. Just a bit irritated. It sounded as if you were saying if someone claims that there is no difference between a full sibling and a half, they must be in denial or have their head in the sand about it. As if we really don't feel the way we say we do and are trying to deny the "real" truth about half siblings. If I didn't feel this way, I wouldn't have stated it. I have no reason to be in denial or have my head in the sand. That's all. I didn't say that ALL half sibs were close. What I said was that I believe relationships have a lot to do with each specific family. I don't think having some different relatives automatically means that I do not love or can't bond with my half siblings like I do my full siblings. I think it depends on personalities, age, distance, family type and so on. Are you saying that I won't notice that I love my half siblings less than my full ones until our parents die? You totally got me on this one. I truly don't understand what you are talking about. Are you thinking that because I love my half siblings as much as my full ones that I am denying my children their bio family? You will have to explain that one to me.

I only have adopted siblings. My bfather may have children but I don't know who he is. However, I would be really interested in meeting them if I ever found out I did have paternal half brothers/sisters. My older abrother and asister are twins. I have sometimes wondered whether they think of our younger brother and me just as much their siblings as each other. I get the impression with my sister that we are just as much as siblings as her twin. However, I am not so sure about my brother. In regards to bmother's twins who died at birth (or were stillborn - still aren't sure), I do think about them. I feel sometimes like I am the "keeper of their flame". When I went to look at the grave and just found a burial brick - no plaque or anything, it made me really sad. I do know my bmother thought about them through the years (friends told me she talked about them) but she was probably still in hospital when they were buried (born Fri/buried Mon) so her mother probably arranged it all (they were given names but I have a feeling that brandmother named them - their names are derivatives of bmother and grandmother's names - that may also be why there is no plaque - because the names probably weren't the names they would have been given if they lived). Anyway, the point of this ramble is that even though I never knew them and they never lived beyond a day, I still feel a connection to them because they are my sisters. They would be 39 if they had lived. Just out of interest, with those that have both paternal and maternal half sisters/brothers, do you feel closer to maternal than paternal or vice versa? BethanyB, I get the impression that WCurry means that even though her half siblings are as much family as full siblings, they do have different influences on what makes them them than Wcurry and her full siblings - just like adopted children also have influences from two different families. not just the one. Of course, I may be completely wrong.

I have four half brothers that lived with me, but still had a lot of exposure to their Dad (not my Dad), including all of them working for him and his company during their teens and into their 20s. I have two half sisters that lived with their Mom. They came for holidays, visits, etc. (We all lived in the same city).I have one full sister that I lived with for 25 years - and now we live about 7 blocks apart :)But if anyone asks me how many siblings I have, I'd just say 4 brothers and 3 sisters. We're all adults and I absolutely feel like they're all my siblings, no qualifiers needed. I am NOT as close with one of my sisters, but I don't necessarily see that it's because we're "only half." Out of eight kids, I just figure the odds are that I'm going to be closer to some than I am to others. Yes, they had different experiences growing up, different influences, etc. But at the end of the day, I just FEEL like they're all my siblings. And I must say, I have a GREAT sense or pride whenever one of my brothers corrects someone that calls me his "half-sister."

Cath, for many years I felt closer to my maternal half-brother, although he is almost nine years younger than me. We both lived in our mother's home, and I took the major role in raising him. Unfortunately, we had a complete meltdown several years ago, and I doubt that our relationship will ever recover...at least not in this lifetime.My father's kids...my sister is 12 years younger than me, and my youngest brother is almost 20 years younger. I lived with my sister for a year or so when she was a toddler, and I am still pretty close to her. My brother was born a year and a half after I relinquished my son. I think I subconsciously didn't allow myself to feel very connected to him...the pain was just too much at the time. He's 37 years old now, and we've been building our relationship pretty well the past few years. I see a lot of our father in him...I do have a selfish regret in not having any full-blooded sibs, mainly because I'd like to have someone who went through the same family crap I did. It was difficult to be the first-born child of my parents' first marriage and then have to deal with my mother's second marriage. It's like I felt all alone after my parents divorced. Other children from other marriages came along, but I still feel this disconnect at times...this feeling of aloneness.One of the things I hate about being the oldest is that in middle age, I'm getting all the "bad mommy" crap from some of my sibs. There are definite drawbacks to being the mother figure when you're still a child yourself. It just took years and years for it to rise to the surface.

I suppose I do feel closer to my maternal siblings, but I credit that solely to the fact that I lived with my brothers during my childhood and only visited with my (paternal) sisters/lived with them briefly. I don't think it has anything to do with the maternal vs. paternal aspect though. (At least for me :))

I think if you grow up in the same home, it's not a big deal. If you don't, half sort of defines the relationship. If you grow up with that person, they're just your sibling. As a mom, I will often say ONLINE that my sons are half-sibs ONLY because other foster parents really understand the compexities of having more bios in the picture, more relatives who might step in, etc. As a foster parent, it adds a lot of layers and complications.

I honestly don't feel closer to my full sub than my half. As I said, we grew up together in the same home and I agree that that makes a big difference. They did visit their father and have their father in their lives but that made no difference. I wonder if those who think that there is a difference between full and half sibs also think there is a difference in closeness and bonding between bio and adopted children? Do you think adoptees are not as close to their aparents as bio kids are?

OK, NOW I THINK I get where our miscommunication is comign from.. please let me know if I'm still off I was responding to how i read the OP. "Are there differences".. not "will you love them equally." My head in the sand was to that specific point -NOT whether you can love someone as much if they aren't blood Its the same with adoption. i could love my theorectical bio child no more, no deeper than I love my AD. However.. to say our relationship is no different than a BD would be putting MY head in the sand. is that any clearer??