


































Microsoft Word - 6MikeBouvetAn Exploratory Look at Solidarity and Support between Siblings in Young and Middle Adulthood.docx


CALIFORNIA SOCIOLOGY JOURNAL, 2010, VOL. 2 (ISSUE 1: 53-64) 

An Exploratory Look at Solidarity and Support between 

Siblings in Young and Middle Adulthood 
 

 

Michael Bouvet 

Department of Sociology 

California State University, Los Angeles 

 

 

This literature review explicitly centers on both solidarity 

and support of sibling relationships. Past research and 

analysis has clearly demonstrated that four variables—birth 

order of siblings, gender of siblings, family size and 

paternal framework—are vital and necessary to any 

research on siblings. However, there is no apparent 

research that has included a complete analysis of how these 

specific factors shape and mold the sibling relationships 

among young individuals emerging from adolescence into 

adulthood. Therefore, to complete the gap in literature, 

more analysis is necessary on the solidarity and support of 

young and middle aged adults. 

 

 

INTRODUCTION 

 
1
Siblings play very unique roles in one 

another’s lives in several distinct ways.  

Sibling relationships have the greatest 

potential for a lengthy existence and one 

that most individuals nurture and 

maintain throughout the entire life 

course (White 2001).  Siblings are also 

more likely than other familial pairs to 

share a common lineage and heritage, 

living environment, and passage through 

particular life events. Furthermore, 

siblings tend to be more egalitarian in 

                                            
1
 Michael Bouvet is a graduate student at the 

Department of Sociology. This literature review 

was originally submitted to SOC 595 

Critical Issues and the Problems in Sociology: 

The Aging Family, taught by Dr. Roseann 

Giarrusso in Fall 2009. 

their relationships, more so than with 

other family members and certainly 

more egalitarian in nature than the 

parent-child or grandparent-grandchild 

relationship (Gentry 2001).  Only ten to 

twenty percent of individuals grow up an 

only child, making sibling relationships 

highly prevalent (Cicirelli 1982).  

Previous studies indicate that siblings 

often have a profound and significant 

presence in the lives of individuals.  

They are integral and fundamental 

sources of affection, encouragement, 

support, comfort and friendship to one 

another (Cicirelli 1995).  Additionally, 

among older adults, a sibling is often the 

only person that has known an individual 

his or her entire life.  Therefore, it is not 

surprising that previous research has 

found that, along with parents, siblings 



SOLIDARITY AND SUPPORT BETWEEN SIBLINGS by Michael Bouvet           54 

 

CALIFORNIA SOCIOLOGY JOURNAL, 2010, VOL. 2 (ISSUE 1: 53-64) 

form critical reference points in the 

development of identity, attachment and 

support (White 2001). Sometimes, 

support from siblings appears to 

compensate for a lack of support from 

other members of the social network, 

such as parents and/or friends (Milevsky 

2004).  Eriksen and Gerstel (2002) found 

that a majority of adults give some form 

of help to at least one of their siblings 

within a year’s time, many on a monthly 

basis, suggesting that siblings often act 

as important social safety nets.  Because 

a sibling relationship can have such 

profound significance for an individual, 

it is one that is constantly analyzed.  

However, previous research either 

concentrates on the relationship in 

childhood years or in later life.  There is 

considerably less research conducted on 

sibling relationships specifically on 

solidarity and support in the early and 

middle years of adulthood.  This specific 

time within adulthood is significant 

because it is here that the bonds of 

strong future support are forged and 

solidified.  As people live longer, have 

fewer children, remain single, or choose 

not to have families, their social 

networks may decrease, and the sibling 

bond often emerges as a vital source of 

support (Volkom 2006). The assumption 

is that as medical research and 

technologies progress, individuals are 

living longer and more robust lives, 

potentially making strong sibling 

relationships critical because they 

provide necessary social safety nets in 

later life.  Therefore, as we continue to 

transition into the 21
st
 century, we can 

anticipate the need for stronger sibling 

relationships in young and middle 

adulthood.  As the baby boom cohort 

ages and the cost of health care 

premiums continue to increase, young 

and middle adult siblings will need to 

work cooperatively in order to take care 

of not only their elderly parents, but each 

other as they age.  Thus, we can better 

understand what the implications are for 

these relationships in the future by 

studying and understanding the sibling 

bonds present amongst young and 

middle adults in society today. 

 

LITERATURE REVIEW 

 

Since this review explicitly centers on 

both solidarity and support, it is 

important to define the terms in regards 

to how previous studies have utilized 

them. Past studies have conceptualized 

solidarity as closeness, value consensus, 

contact, and exchanges (Bengtson and 

Roberts 1991).  Since the focus is on the 

degree to which family and siblings are 

integrated, solidarity is specifically 

based upon kinship.  Support can, to an 

extent, be considered an indicator of 

solidarity.  Support between siblings 

theoretically is influenced by family 

structure and solidarity.  An observation 

of heightened support reflects actual 

behavior, thereby making the content 

and benefits of sibling relationships 

tangible. Support is specifically defined 

as both emotional and instrumental 

support. Emotional support is 

exemplified by the actions that 

individuals do to make their sibling feel 

loved and cared for, or reinforce their 

sibling’s sense of self-worth and self-

esteem (e.g. providing encouragement, 

talking over a problem, giving positive 

feedback, or advice); such support is 

often embodied in non-tangible types of 

assistance.  By contrast, instrumental 

support pertains to the various types of 



SOLIDARITY AND SUPPORT BETWEEN SIBLINGS by Michael Bouvet           55 

 

CALIFORNIA SOCIOLOGY JOURNAL, 2010, VOL. 2 (ISSUE 1: 53-64) 

tangible assistance that siblings may 

provide (e.g., help with housekeeping or 

chores, childcare, provision of 

transportation or assistance with repairs) 

(Spitze and Trent 2006). 

 

Support Among Family Members 

 

There have been quite a few recent 

sociological studies that have focused on 

the relationships and bonds that exist 

between family members.  Most of these 

studies have corroborated theoretical 

notions that these important bonds do 

often exist between various members of 

a family, demonstrating the many ways 

modern families work to provide care 

and exchange economic resources. 

These studies have also identified that 

there is a cascading flow of support, aid 

and resource exchanges both up and 

down the generational line.  Parents 

provide support and care throughout 

their children’s early and later lives 

(Mandemakers and Dykstra 2008), and 

children reciprocate that support and 

care more and more as their parents age 

(Burr and Mutchler 1999).  A similar 

relationship can be found between 

grandparents and grandchildren.  There 

are plenty of incidences where a 

grandparent raises a grandchild (Minkler 

and Fuller-Thomson 2005), and often a 

grandchild will assist with support and 

care of an older grandparent in later life 

(Chan and Elder 2000).  Most of these 

studies, however, describe a vertical, 

exchange of resources between family 

members.  Absent from these particular 

studies and corresponding discussions is 

the identification and relevance of the 

horizontal exchange of resources, 

support and care that exists among 

siblings.  As vertical family relationships 

across several generations are becoming 

increasingly important in American 

society, it is imperative that horizontal 

relationships between siblings are also 

methodically analyzed to better under-

stand the dynamics that exist within 

these bonds. It is apparent that this belief 

is beginning to catch on in the 

sociological community as an increasing 

amount of research is being conducted 

on the solidarity and support between 

siblings.  However, these studies tend to 

focus on the relationship and exchange 

of support in either childhood or later 

life, presenting a gap in the literature on 

these interactions in early and middle 

adulthood specifically. 

 

Sibling Support in Adolescence 

 

Numerous studies have deter-mined the 

importance of siblings as a source of 

emotional support and instrumental aid 

in early and later life.  As adolescents, 

the support given between siblings is 

more emotional in nature.  Branje et al. 

(2004) found that because siblings are 

such an important source of support for 

each other during this period, they often 

affect both each other’s externalizing 

behavior as well as each other’s 

internalizing behavior.  In the process of 

gaining autonomy and defining their 

identity, adolescents may seek help from 

their siblings, and therefore become 

important role models for each other.  

Tucker, McHale, and Crouter (2001) 

found that both older and younger 

siblings are viewed as sources of support 

in familial issues, and older siblings are 

viewed as a source of support about non-

familial issues such as social and 

scholastic activities.  Feinberg and 

Hetherington (2000) identified that 



SOLIDARITY AND SUPPORT BETWEEN SIBLINGS by Michael Bouvet           56 

 

CALIFORNIA SOCIOLOGY JOURNAL, 2010, VOL. 2 (ISSUE 1: 53-64) 

siblings share a unique relationship, 

making them more likely to experience 

similar discrete family events, such as 

death, divorce, unemployment, a relo-

cation or parental discord.  A shared 

traumatic experience between siblings 

often strengthens the bond between them 

and initiates a lifelong exchange of 

emotional support.  Other research has 

indicated that the more an individual 

interacts with a feeling of love for 

his/her sibling, the less depressive 

symptoms for that adolescent become 

observable, indicating an effectiveness 

of a strong bond with a sibling on 

positive emotional and psychological 

growth (Vogt Yuan 2009).   

 

Sibling Support in Later Life 

 

Several studies suggest that the sibling 

relationship changes over time.  As 

sisters and brothers get older, the 

relationship becomes less obligatory and 

more voluntary. Additionally, the 

support and care given and received by 

older siblings incorporates resource 

exchanges as well as emotional rein-

forcement (Martin, Anderson and Rocca 

2005).  Erikson and Gerstel’s (2002) 

research refutes the notion that siblings 

are largely symbolic ties in adult lives.  

They found that a majority of older 

adults give some form of help to at least 

one of their siblings within a year’s time, 

many on a monthly basis.  Volkom’s 

(2006) research characterizes the sibling 

relationship in later life as one of strong 

emotional ties, helping, and importance 

for the older adult’s well-being.  

Because a sibling can be a great helper, 

confidante, and friend in adulthood, 

contact with a sibling can also improve 

the physical health of an older adult.  

White and Riedmann’s (1992) analysis 

of data taken from a national survey of 

families and households is a clear 

illustration of how valued the sibling 

relationship is among adults.  Half of the 

adults surveyed indicated they had 

contact with a sibling at least monthly.  

Nearly two-thirds of these respondents 

considered at least one brother or sister 

to be among their closest friends.  About 

a third indicated they would call upon 

their sibling first when in need of 

emergency help. 

 

Conflicting Theories of Sibling 

Support in Early and Middle 

Adulthood 

 

Although these studies are high caliber 

investigations consisting of quality 

research and analysis, these studies fail 

to fully evaluate the relationship that 

exists between early and middle-aged 

adults. What is acknowledged is that 

during this time, the bond between 

siblings early and middle-aged is often 

transformed due to other significant 

concurrent life events, such as full-time 

employment, marriage, relocation, and 

birth of an offspring (Voorpostel and 

Blieszner 2008).  Another analysis by 

White and Riedmann (1992) yielded 

similar results.  They postulate that early 

and middle-aged young people start to 

move to separate residences, invest in 

economic or educational endeavors and 

establish intimate relationships with a 

romantic partner.  This is paralleled by 

decreased intensity of interactions with 

family members.  White expounds on 

this idea in later research. She explains 

that underlying most interpretations of 

sibling relationships is the assumption of 

a hierarchy of kinship relationships.  She 



SOLIDARITY AND SUPPORT BETWEEN SIBLINGS by Michael Bouvet           57 

 

CALIFORNIA SOCIOLOGY JOURNAL, 2010, VOL. 2 (ISSUE 1: 53-64) 

states that the in the standard kinship 

model, family bonds are conceptualized 

as a set of nested circles. During 

childhood, siblings typically are 

included within one’s inner circle or first 

tier of family social support.  As people 

mature into adulthood, often distancing 

themselves geographically for their 

siblings and forming their own families, 

sibling relationships are commonly 

relegated to outer circle of second-tier 

status.  The inner circle in adulthood is 

mainly reserved for parents, spouses and 

children (White 2001).  Bedford (1989) 

discovered an hourglass effect in sibling 

relationships, where sibling closeness 

and involvement are intense as adoles-

cents, gradually decrease in early 

adulthood, are relatively low in the 

middle adult years, and then rise again in 

later life.  Other research has postulated 

that a decrease in contact during early 

adulthood is the reason why young 

adults reported lower levels of conflict 

with their siblings than adolescents, 

engaged in less quarreling, less 

antagonism, less competition, and less 

conflict related to power (Scharf et al. 

2004).  Thus, some previous researchers 

have hypothesized that the more that 

siblings grow apart and become 

immersed in their own separate lives, 

they have less opportunity to spend 

together ultimately limiting all 

interactions, including conflict.   

However, that hypothesis has 

been contested by others.  Some research 

has indicated that a reduction in conflict 

may be attributable to emerging adult 

siblings’ greater ability to negotiate 

disagreements and their favoring 

negotiation over coercion (Laursen, 

Finkelstein, and Betts 2001).  Further 

research suggests that early adulthood 

fosters an addition of a new quality to 

the relationship between siblings.  They 

can become a source of potential 

support, or an important source of 

advice, that can be relied on, despite the 

lower incidence of daily interaction or 

involvement.  Once young adult siblings 

emerge from adolescence and leave 

home, the amount of support and 

assistance that they give each other is 

determined by the similarity of their 

roles and their feelings of closeness.  

During early and middle adulthood, they 

provide encouragement, companionship, 

assistance and occasionally financial 

support for one another.  They also are 

usually relied upon for help during 

various life dilemmas, and typically 

cooperate with one another when it 

comes to caring for elderly parents 

(Goetting 1986). Because marriage and 

parenthood create decidedly unique 

social worlds, similarities in marital and 

parental status may ensure help from 

particular siblings (Erikson and Gerstel 

2002).  Milevsky (2004) conjointly 

touched upon sibling relationships in 

early adulthood.   He also postulated that 

sibling support is related to an 

adjustment in emerging adulthood.  

However, he found that support from 

siblings appears to compensate for low 

support from other members of the 

social network such as parents and 

friends.  These separate findings are in 

complete contrast to other research 

hypothesizing that sibling relationships 

become diminished in early and middle 

adulthood, presenting a clear and present 

contradiction in the previous research on 

the subject.   

Furthermore, another analysis by 

White and Riedmann (1992) found that 

prevalence in contact and interactions 



SOLIDARITY AND SUPPORT BETWEEN SIBLINGS by Michael Bouvet           58 

 

CALIFORNIA SOCIOLOGY JOURNAL, 2010, VOL. 2 (ISSUE 1: 53-64) 

diminishes with age in late adolescence, 

equalizes during early and middle 

adulthood, and deteriorates sharply in 

later adulthood.  White and Riedmann’s 

(1992) nationwide study of 7,700 adults 

who had at least one biological sibling 

still living, indicated that approximately 

half reported some sort of interaction 

with their sibling (i.e. talking to or 

visiting) at least monthly.  Among 

sisters, the amount of contact and 

interaction was the greatest.  Conversely, 

it was the reported the least among 

brothers.  Sister-brother pairs landed 

between the other two groupings.  As 

anticipated, siblings who live in closer 

proximity to each other have more 

contact and interactions.  The most 

contact was seen in those that lived 

within two miles of one another.  The 

child that was the oldest, in addition to 

siblings with higher income and 

education, reported the most consistent 

contact.  Frequent contact was also 

reported with siblings that still lived at 

home with their parents.  White and 

Riedmann also found that biological 

siblings, living in integrated households 

with half-siblings and step-siblings, 

reported less close relationships.  

Interestingly, those same respondents 

viewed their biological siblings as a 

close companion through the life cycle.   

Thus, a potential source of the 

conflicting results of young and middle 

aged adults’ relationships may be due to 

dissimilarities in research measures and 

sampling methods as well as the 

utilization of cross-sectional data in the 

studies.  Although these separate studies 

provide some insight to the relationships 

that exist among early and middle aged 

siblings, they are few and far between, 

they are not consistent in their findings, 

and they lack the thorough and robust 

analysis seen in the research pertaining 

to adolescent and older sibling 

relationships. 

 

Four Significant Variables 

 

Because a connection in the literature is 

necessary, it is important to see how 

previous research has investigated the 

similar topics of solidarity and support 

among adolescent and older adult 

siblings.  These studies provide an ample 

starting point from which to address the 

similar relationships that exist among 

siblings in early and middle adulthood. 

When analyzed as a collective body, 

previous research provides several 

themes that are apparent in sibling 

relationships both in adolescence and 

later life.  Sibling research has identified 

four specific variables that must be 

considered when relationships between 

siblings are assessed: (1) the relative 

birth order, namely whether the sibling 

is younger or older, (2) the gender of the 

sibling, (3) the family size, specifically 

whether there are two or more siblings 

within the family, and (4) the paternal 

framework in which the siblings were 

raised, namely whether it was a single-

parent or dual-parent environment.   

Because research has indicated 

that children’s experiences with siblings 

differ greatly depending on whether they 

are older or younger, any research on 

siblings should include birth order as a 

variable.  Scharf et al. (2004) indicated 

that older siblings inherit some positions 

of authority and responsibility, and 

children were found to be satisfied more 

and to quarrel less with older siblings 

than with younger siblings.  Addition-

ally, older siblings were described as 



SOLIDARITY AND SUPPORT BETWEEN SIBLINGS by Michael Bouvet           59 

 

CALIFORNIA SOCIOLOGY JOURNAL, 2010, VOL. 2 (ISSUE 1: 53-64) 

being more a source of support and 

advice.  Other research suggests that 

because most siblings differ in age, older 

siblings are likely to acquire experience 

and familiarity with certain issues, such 

as social life, schoolwork, and risky 

behavior, before their younger siblings 

do.  In addition, parents may not be as 

knowledgeable as adolescents are about 

such non-familial experiences (Tucker, 

McHale and Crouter 2001).  For these 

reasons, older siblings may provide 

elemental advice for their less 

experienced younger siblings.  This idea 

could also apply to young and middle 

aged siblings.  An older sibling might 

undergo a major life transformation prior 

to a younger sibling (i.e. moving out, 

getting married, having a child), 

providing a unique and invaluable 

source of information and advice on that 

particular subject. 

Gender plays a substantial role in 

sibling relationships.  This is evident in 

both research of adolescent siblings and 

older adult siblings. Previous researchers 

have concluded that sister-sister pairs 

had more contact and were emotionally 

closer than others (Spitze and Trent 

2006).  Cicirelli (1989) found that the 

perception of a tight bond with sisters by 

either males or females was directly 

correlated to psychological well-being, 

illustrated by fewer symptoms of 

depression, while a tight bond to 

brothers seemed to have little effect on 

well-being.  White (2001) found that 

both being female and having sisters 

were associated with contact, exchange 

of support, and having a sibling as a 

close friend. Tests for statistical 

interaction suggested that women with 

sisters had the closest relations to 

siblings, whereas men with sisters fared 

better than men or women without 

sisters (White and Riedmann 1992).  

White (2001) also reported that women, 

relative to men, increased levels of 

contact and help exchange with siblings 

over time.  Previous research has also 

found that women were perceived to be 

more involved in their close re-

lationships than men, and the sister-sister 

relationship was described as the most 

intensive bond among siblings.  Among 

early adolescence, female siblings were 

most likely perceived to generate 

emotionally supportive outcomes (Howe 

et al. 2001). In contrast, participants in 

boy-boy sibling dyads reported less 

caring, less intimate exchange, and less 

coping resolution than participants in 

girl-girl dyads (Cole and Kerns 2001).  

This is highly relevant to the solidarity 

and support among young adult siblings, 

especially relation-ships involving 

sisters.  It could be hypothesized that 

certain significant life events, such as the 

birth of a child or a marriage could 

actually bring sisters, or a sister and 

brother, closer together by creating a 

scenario in which gender specific advice 

and/or support is relevant.  Additionally, 

Spitze and Trent (2006) found that 

women reported giving and receiving 

more child care and chore support (i.e. 

cooking, cleaning), consistent with 

gendered patterns of household labor.  

More specifically, men with a sister are 

about a third as likely than women with 

a sister to provide child care or advice, 

and women with a brother are about a 

fifth as likely than those from sister pairs 

to help with chores, and about half as 

likely to give advice.  Thus, a woman 

with a sister will, in all likelihood, 

maintain a closer relationship with their 

sibling in early adulthood as opposed to 



SOLIDARITY AND SUPPORT BETWEEN SIBLINGS by Michael Bouvet           60 

 

CALIFORNIA SOCIOLOGY JOURNAL, 2010, VOL. 2 (ISSUE 1: 53-64) 

a sister-brother or brother-brother sibling 

configuration. 

Another prominent factor indent-

ified by previous research is the size of 

the family.  Researchers have proposed 

that adults from larger families exhibit 

greater affection and have more contact 

with all their siblings than those in 

smaller families.  Based on this premise, 

researchers have found that older adults 

from larger families tend to have at least 

one sibling to whom they feel close than 

do those from smaller families (Connidis 

and Campbell 1995). Studies also 

suggest that adults with a greater number 

of siblings perceive more support will be 

forthcoming and actually receive more 

help than those with fewer siblings 

(White and Riedmann 1992), which is a 

pattern for receipt of help similarly noted 

among older adults.  Eriksen and Gerstel 

(2002) found that those who have more 

siblings give significantly less total help 

to particular siblings, suggesting that 

having more siblings forces adults to act 

judiciously about what they give.  

Conversely, other researchers have 

found that siblings from smaller families 

may depend on each other more, relative 

to those from larger families who have 

more sisters or brothers to turn to in 

times of need (Tucker and Crouter 

2001).  Thus, research on young and 

middle aged adults should include 

analysis of the family size and 

composition to observe whether or not 

having more siblings will affect 

solidarity and support amongst them.   

Finally, the paternal framework 

present in a family has been shown to 

affect the relationship siblings have with 

each other.  For example, growing up 

with both parents predicted more 

interactions among adult siblings, 

whereas those raised in single parent 

families had significantly more 

diminished contact in later life (White 

and Riedmann 1992).  Poortman and 

Voorpostel’s (2009) research results 

show that siblings from divorced 

families more often have conflict-laden 

relationships in adulthood than do 

siblings from intact families.  There 

were, however, no differences between 

siblings from divorced and intact 

families regarding the more positive 

aspects of their relationships (i.e. 

relationship quality and contact 

frequency).  It can then be hypothesized 

that a positive family atmosphere is 

likely to be related to warm sibling 

relationships, whereas a distressed 

atmosphere will probably be related to 

negative sibling relationships. In 

addition, Furman and Giberson (1995) 

suggested that conflicts with parents 

could increase the likelihood that 

children will be irritated and discharge 

their anger onto their siblings.  Parents 

may influence their children’s inter-

personal relationships directly by giving 

advice and intervening in their 

interactions and disputes (McHale et al. 

2000), or indirectly by modeling social 

behavior or regulating their children’s 

emotions and behaviors (Parke and 

O’Neil 1999).  Previous research showed 

that children, whose relationships with 

parents were characterized by warmth, 

reported exhibiting less hostility and 

rivalry and more affection toward their 

siblings (Stocker and McHale 1992).  In 

contrast, parental assertion of power was 

related to a higher frequency of conflict 

between siblings (Furman and Giberson 

1995). Thus, contemporary demographic 

trends such as the rise in single-parent 

families and decrease in family size 



SOLIDARITY AND SUPPORT BETWEEN SIBLINGS by Michael Bouvet           61 

 

CALIFORNIA SOCIOLOGY JOURNAL, 2010, VOL. 2 (ISSUE 1: 53-64) 

could be relevant to the solidarity and 

support of young and middle aged adults 

and should therefore be considered as 

contextually relevant to the study. 

 

Implications for Research 

 

Past research and analysis has clearly 

demonstrated that these four variables 

are vital and necessary to any research 

on siblings.  However, no one previous 

investigation, to my know-ledge, has 

included a complete analysis of how 

these specific factors shape and mold the 

sibling relationships among young 

individuals emerging from adolescence 

into adulthood.  Additionally, variability 

in the extent of sibling support has 

typically been explored by studying 

sibling dyads from different families.  

However, comparisons of the 

experiences of two or more siblings from 

the same family are extremely rare.  

Therefore, information from a series of 

siblings, ranging in age and gender, 

across different families is extremely 

important to the analysis of solidarity 

and support of siblings.  The addition of 

the relationship of half and step siblings 

would also be invaluable.  Finally, 

nearly all of the previous research on 

siblings was obtained through cross-

sectional studies, drawing the entirety of 

data from one point in time.  Since it is 

important to see how the sibling 

relationship undergoes a metamorphosis 

as siblings advance through the young 

and middle adult years into later life, a 

longitudinal study might be more 

effective for discovering trends in data. 

 

 

 

 

Implications for Practice 

 

As previously mentioned, we are very 

much influenced by the relation-ships 

that we have with our parents and our 

siblings in early life.  As we grow into 

adulthood, these complex influences 

continue to play a role in all our 

relationships, regardless of whether we 

are geographically or emotionally close, 

distant or detached from our family of 

origin. As siblings age, their relation-

ships are influenced and altered by many 

actual or perceived events that may or 

may not be directly related to each other.  

It is postulated that as siblings grow into 

adulthood, their focus may move away 

from each other to their own children, 

and to their aging parents, which could 

negatively affect their solidarity and 

support for each other in later life. 

 Over time, some sibling issues 

will obviously remain the same.  On the 

other hand, may social factors emerge 

that are bound to have an ever-increasing 

influence on the way siblings deal with 

their own inevitable aging.  The biggest 

factor, arguably, is the ever-increasing 

number of older men and women in our 

society. Current trends and future 

projections include: (1) a population of 

aging siblings that is not only growing, 

but is changing in terms of longevity, 

health status, and needs, (2) a baby-

boom generation that is already arriving 

at the threshold of retirement  (pro-

jections suggest that 25% of the 

population will be over sixty-five early 

in the 21
st
 century), (3) an expanding 

geographical dispersion among family 

members, (4) a projected increase in 

programs and legislation that expand 

services to meet the needs of aging 

siblings (these are projected to offer 



SOLIDARITY AND SUPPORT BETWEEN SIBLINGS by Michael Bouvet           62 

 

CALIFORNIA SOCIOLOGY JOURNAL, 2010, VOL. 2 (ISSUE 1: 53-64) 

more options than in the past, which may 

affect the quality of life for the elderly 

and their aging siblings), (5) families of 

aging siblings will have many more 

opportunities and options in their care-

giving and support roles, (6) and finally, 

the prevalence of divorce and remarriage 

has produced a proliferation of step 

relationships, including sisters and 

brothers.  As aging individuals face 

illness, retirement, a death of a spouse 

and other enormous life changes, their 

siblings also face questions of how 

involved they will become in their lives.  

These events and issues often bring 

siblings together on new terrain and 

highlight the strength and stressors of 

their relationships that have occurred in 

the most previous periods of their lives.  

How siblings come together and 

negotiate this new terrain is affected by 

many of the latent themes of the early 

and middle adult eras of their lives: a 

complex mixture of friendship and 

collaboration, support and solidarity, and 

sometimes rivalry around common 

sibling issues.  Therefore, what older 

adults do for their aging siblings and 

how they negotiate their own behavior 

with siblings are salient personal issues 

for many people.  These relationships 

ultimately concern almost all individuals 

for whom an aging sibling is, has, or will 

be part of their life. It ultimately 

concerns all of us who have siblings and 

hope to live long, fruitful lives, making 

it all the more important to investigate, 

learn and understand the relationship 

that exists between siblings in not only 

childhood and old age, but across the 

whole life span.  Therefore, to complete 

the gap in literature, more analysis is 

necessary on the solidarity and support 

of young and middle aged adults. 

 

REFERENCES 

 

Bedford, V. 1989. “Sibling Research in 

Historical Perspective: The Discovery 

of a Forgotten Relationship.”  

American Behavioral Scientist Vol. 

33. 6-18. 
 

Bengtson, V. L., and Roberts, R. E. L. 

1991, “Intergenerational solidarity in 

aging families: An example of formal 

theory construction.” Journal of 

Marriage and the Family. Vol. 53. 

856 - 870. 
 

Branje., S., Lieshout, C., Aken, M. and 

Haselager, G. 2004. “Perceived 

support in sibling relationships and 

adolescent adjustment.” Journal of 

Child Psychology and Psychiatry 

45:8.1385–1396. 
 

Burr, J. and Mutchler, M. 1999. “Race 

and Ethnic Variation in Norms of 

Filial Responsibility among Older 

Persons.” Journal of Marriage and 

Family Vol. 61. No. 3. 674-687. 
 

Chan, C. and Elder, G. 2000. 

“Matrilineal Advantage in 

Grandchild-Grandparent Relations.” 

The Gerontologist Vol 4(2). 179-190. 
 

Cicirelli, V. 1982. “Sibling influence 

throughout the life span.” In M. E. 

Lamb and B. Sutton-Smith (Eds.), 

Sibling relationships: Their nature 

and significance across the life span 

(pp. 267-284). Hillsdale, NJ: 

Lawrence Erlbaum. 
 

Cicirelli, V. 1989. “Feelings of 

attachment to siblings and well-being 

later in life.” Psychology of Aging 

Vol. 4. 211-216. 



SOLIDARITY AND SUPPORT BETWEEN SIBLINGS by Michael Bouvet           63 

 

CALIFORNIA SOCIOLOGY JOURNAL, 2010, VOL. 2 (ISSUE 1: 53-64) 

 

Cicirelli, V. 1995. Sibling relationships 

across the life span. New York: 

Plenum Press. 

 

Cole, A. and Kerns, K. 2001. 

“Perceptions of Sibling Qualities and 

Activities of Early Adolescents.” The 

Journal of Early Adolescence Vol. 21. 

204-227. 
 

Connidis, I. and Campbell, L. 1995.  

“Closeness, confiding, and contact 

among siblings in middle and late 

adulthood.”  Journal of Family Issues 

Vol. 16(6). 722-745. 
 

Eriksen, S. and Gerstel, N. 2002. “A 

Labor of Love or Labor Itself: Care 

Work among Adult Brothers and 

Sisters.” Journal of Family Issues 23; 

836. 
 

Feinberg, M., and Hetherington, E. 

2000. “Sibling differentiation in 

adolescence: Implications for 

behavioral genetic theory.” Child 

Development 71. 1512–1524. 
 

Furman,W.,and Giberson, R. S. 1995. 

“Identifying the links between parents 

and their children 's sibling 

relationships.” In S. Shulman (Ed.), 

Close relationships and 

socioemotional development (Vol. 7, 

95-108). Stamford, CT: Ablex. 
 

Gentry, D.R. 2001. “Resolving middle-

age sibling conflict regarding parent 

care.” Conflict Resolution Quarterly 

19(1). 31-47. 
 

Goetting, A. (1986). “The develop-

mental tasks of siblingship over the 

life cycle.” Journal of Marriage and 

the Family 48. 703-714. 
 

Howe, N., Aquan-Assee, J., Bukowski, 

W., Lehoux, P. and Ranaldi, C. 2001. 

“Siblings as Confidents: Emotional 

Understanding, Relationship, 

Warmth, and Sibling Self-

Disclosure.” Social Development Vol. 

10(4). 439-454. 

 

Laursen, B., Finkelstein, B.  D., and 

Betts, N.  T. 2001.  “A developmental 

meta-analysis of peer conflict 

resolution.”  Developmental Review 

21. 423-449. 
 

Laursen, B., Finkelstein, B., and Betts N. 

2001. “A developmental meta-

analysis of peer conflict resolution.” 

Developmental Review Vol. 21. 423-

449. 
 

Mandemakers, J., Dykstra, P. 2008. 

“Discrepancies in Parent’s and Adult 

Child’s Reports of Support and 

Contact.” Journal of Marriage and 

Family Vol. 70. 495–506. 
 

Martin, M., Anderson, C., and Rocca, K. 

2005. “Perceptions of the Adult 

Sibling Relationship.” North 

American Journal of Psychology Vol. 

7. No. 1. 107-116. 
 

McHale, S., Updegraff, K., Tucker, C. 

and Crouter, A. 2000. “Step in or Stay 

out? Parents' roles in adolescent 

siblings' relationships.” Journal of 

Marriage and the Family Vol. 62. 

746-760. 
 

Milevsky, A. 2004. “Compensatory 

patterns of sibling support in 

emerging adulthood: Variations in 

loneliness, self-esteem, depression 

and life satisfaction.” Journal of 

Social and Personal Relationships 

Vol. 22(6). 743–755. 



SOLIDARITY AND SUPPORT BETWEEN SIBLINGS by Michael Bouvet           64 

 

CALIFORNIA SOCIOLOGY JOURNAL, 2010, VOL. 2 (ISSUE 1: 53-64) 

 

Minkler, M. and Fuller-Thomson, E. 

2005. “African American Grand-

parents Raising Grandchildren: A 

National Study Using the Census 

2000 American Community Survey.” 

The Journals of Gerontology 60B(2). 

S82-S91. 
 

Parke, R., and O’Neil, R. 1999. “Social 

relationships across contexts: Family-

peer linkages.”  In W. A. Collins, and 

B. Laursen (Eds.), Relationships as 

developmental contexts (211-240). 

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum 

Associates, Inc. 
 

Poortman, A. and Voorpostel, M. 2009. 

“Parental Divorce and Sibling 

Relationships: A Research Note.” 

Journal of Family Issues Vol. 30. 74-

91. 
 

Scharf, M., Mayseless, O. and Kivenson-

Baron, I. 2004. “Adolescents' 

attachment representations and 

developmental tasks in emerging 

adulthood.” Developmental 

Psychology 40. 430-444. 
 

Spitze, G. and Trent, K. 2006. “Gender 

Differences in Adult Sibling 

Relations in Two-Child Families.” 

Journal of Marriage and Family Vol. 

68. 977–992. 
 

Stocker, C., and McHale, S. 1992. “The 

nature and family correlates of 

preadolescents’ perceptions of their 

sibling relationships.” Journal of 

Social and Personal Relationships 

Vol. 9. 179-195. 
 

Tucker, C., McHale, S. and Crouter, A. 

2001. “Conditions of Sibling Support 

in Adolescence.” Journal of Family 

Psychology Vol. 15. No. 2. 254-271. 
 

Vogt Yuan, A. 2009. “Sibling Rela-

tionships and Adolescents' Mental 

Health: The Interrelationship of 

Structure and Quality.” Journal of 

Family Issues Vol. 30. 1221-1244. 
 

Volkom, M. 2006. “Sibling 

Relationships in Middle and Older 

Adulthood.” Marriage and Family 

Review Vol. 40(2/3). 151-170. 
 

Voorpostel, M. and Blieszner, R. 2008. 

“Intergenerational Solidarity and 

Support Between Adult Siblings.” 

Journal of Marriage and Family Vol. 

70. 157–167. 
 

White, L. and Riedmann, A. 1992. “Ties 

Among Adult Siblings.” Social 

Forces Vol. 71(1). 85-102. 
 

White, L. 2001. “Sibling Relationships 

over the Life Course: A Panel 

Analysis.” Journal of Marriage and 

Family Vol. 63. No. 2. 555-568.  

 


