Poll: Which is more important, nature or nurture?

BOTZ

Phil,

I'm an adoptee in my mid 30s. I have been in reunion with my natural family since 2004.

**side note** Is anyone else annoyed by the fact that "adoptee" is flagged by the spell-checker as a misspelling (it's a perfectly good word) and the first "suggestion" that comes up in the list is "adopter"? Ugh!

As to the question: I answered a question like this is the Psychology section not long ago. There's an answer here (I won't specify) that reminded me a little of one of the answers there. I think some people misunderstand the ageless question of nature v. nurture. The question is not "Does a person prefer things of their own 'nature' or things they have learned (nurture) to prefer?" -- as some have interpreted -- the question is "Does a person BECOME more like their own nature or what they have 'learned' to become?"

With that in mind, I believe that 'nature' (biology, genetics) has had about 80% influence on who I have become. 'Nurture' (my environment, upbringing, education) has had -- at best -- 20%. Let me explain why I think so.

Everything physical about me -- 100% -- is determined by my biology. Every bit. Yes, there are 'environmental' way to influence the expression of my physical characteristics but the genes themselves remain unchanged. Despite the extreme (abnormal, IMHO) thinness of my adoptive parents, the 'diet' I learned (nurture) as a child/adolescent brought about the not-so-thin figure I now enjoy due to my genetic makeup (nature). Until I met my mother, sister and aunts, and saw pictures of my already-deceased grandmother, I had no idea that my figure was "perfectly normal" and not due to the late-night, locked-door 'bingeing' my a-parents accused me of (which I never did). I can't explain the wave of 'sameness' (and the simultaneous wave of sadness) that washed over me when I read my sister's first email after I had sent her a more-than-just-face picture of myself. She said, "Oh, you have the 'D----' (our mother's maiden name) woman hips just like the rest of us." I laughed and sobbed for almost an hour. This fact, so absolutely ordinary and mundane to her, gave me one of my first glimpses of NOT being the freak I had always thought I was/felt like.

No amount of 'nurture' could overcome my 'nature' when it came to that.

When it comes to the non-physical expressions of who I am, my environment has done little to influence me into 'compliance'. I speak and inflect more like my natural family. I move -- walk, dance, gesture, etc. -- like my natural family. The speed, tone, volume and even subject of my speech is so like my natural sister that no one (in either family) can tell which of us is speaking unless they look at us. I laugh just like my natural brother.

My sense of humor is very similar to that of my adopted family. With one exception. No one, other than me, in my adopted family has the slightest understanding of (or tolerance for) satire. When I reunited with my natural family, I came to discover that my father is...wait for it...a satirist. True story. How could 'nurture' have had anything to do with that?

Here's a link to the question on the other board that I answered. I think it speaks to the point pretty well. In addition to my answer (and the one I 'corrected' at the end of my answer), there's another one in the list that cites a study of the criminal behaviors of adopted persons (adults) and the criminal behaviors of their natural and adoptive parents. Very interesting!

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AiOp7epNNBlMSKysonYH3o_ty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20080725232017AAtxw2b&show=7#profile-info-dJytgVEfaa

Please keep in mind that in this answer I am speaking to *my* opinion, based on *my* experience. Good luck!

ETA: After reading this question, and the other responses here, I went 'looking' for what research might exist "out there" on the subject. As we all must know, or intuit, there is TONS. But, here's a crazy-interesting article about how 'nurture' may play even less of a part than widely believed. Enjoy!

http://www.newsweek.com/id/151758

sunny

Nature is the hardware, 'nurture' is the software.

Possum

It depends on what a person sees as 'important' in their life.
(many that have both - sometimes can't understand what it feels like to have a loss in either area)

For me it's a huge mix. I am the outcome of both.

As an adoptee - what was extremely hard - was to not be allowed to know about ANY of my 'nature' - until I was 35 years of age.

Those that get to live with the people they are genetically linked to - get a 'road map' - an idea - a blue-print - of who they look like - what features they share with others - what talents they may be more swayed to - what traits they might share.

For me - I looked in the mirror - and saw a stranger staring back at me - every. single. day.

For the BEST emotional and psych health/well being for children - they need a damn good mix of both.
The 'nature' comes ingrained within them - but if they don't have information to those that share that 'nature' - it's hard to get a fix on - it's hard to know what feels right - what feels wrong.

All babies need to be loved and cared for - unconditionally.
They need good parents who will 'nurture their nature'.
Allow them to be who they will be - and love them for just being them.

Until I met my bio fam at age 35 - I had NO idea how amazing it is to know another that looks like me - talks like me - acts like me - has the same hands as me - reads the same books as me.

To now have that - I am more comfortable in my own skin.

LaurieDB

Current research widely states that we are born with a "core" of traits, including personality traits, that come in our DNA. As we interact with our environment and those in it, those core traits that we already have are affected and molded in various ways.

Keep in mind that personality is not the same thing as certain learned values. Two people with very similar personalities can still make very different "moral" choices. Genes don't "make" a person behave a certain way -- they provide the core personality traits. Studies of twins separated and raised separately show strikingly similar personality traits, despite different environments.

Personality wise, my aparents would be the first ones to tell you that I did not match the rest of the family. That doesn't mean they didn't love me, they just recognized the obvious difference. When I met my first family, everyone was quite taken with the similarities. My grandfather on my first mother's side says that talking to me on the phone is like talking to her in terms of phraseology, inflection and such. On my father's side, people are quick to note our matching sense of humor, interests, abilities, likes, dislikes, ways of approaching similar situations. I'm quite a bit like him, and I have to say I enjoy seeing that genetic mirroring that most folks grew up hearing about, seeing and recognizing.

beautifulwingedone

From my experience growing up in a closed adoption and contacting my birth-family after 16 years I would say they are both pretty much equal.

spydermomma

Both of them are important and so integrated that you can't really separate them out that much. I do like Sunny's analogy. You can run all kinds of different software and do lots of different things, but the basics are set up by the hardware and software cannot change that.

And I really do believe that a lot of our basic personality and aptitudes are there when we are born. The identical twins I know (only 4 sets, but still) are a lot more alike in personality than even the fraternal twins. But it isn't as if the genetics of personality are at all simple -- I'm sure we all know siblings that are nothing alike.

And then nurture is also crucial, you can't really nurture something that truly isn't there (you can't make a musician out of someone born tone-deaf), but you can nurture something lovingly, or stifle it. You can allow a spirit to develop, or crush it. The spirit is there from the beginning, but nurture can change the expression of it.

Melissa G. Um, which studies are those? How about some links?

Man J. Hmm, you sure picked a bad example. Just last month a study was published that showed that almost all black Africans and most African Americans have a gene that may make them 40% more likely to contract HIV when exposed:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/jul/17/hiv.aids

Torrejon

I don't think either is more important than the other. I think HOW THEY COMBINE is what determines who someone becomes.

I'm an adoptee.

Independ"ant"

Both?
As much as I believe nurturing is "extremely" important to any human being as well as many parents wanting credit for it, nothing can change a persons nature(it can only distort it). Evilness and goodness comes from nature and nurturing either of them has an effect.
Look at Jeffrey Dahmer....he had June Cleaver parents but he liked to murder, eat and store people in his freezer.
Look a Bill Clinton....redneck family, a mother that was a bit of a drunk but he became a Rhodes scholar and the most powerful person in the world.

Was once thinking about adoption but decided to assist the families instead(sickened by the ruthlessness of IA), have a sister who placed her son, 1 friend who placed, 1 friend that lost full custody over who could afford the best attorney's during her divorce and wife number 2 forced her pretty much out of her sons life, 1 friend almost placed as a teen, several friends who are adoptees, work 6 months out of the year in country that has been allowing kidnappings to fill the supply needed by the paps.

Freckle Face

Nature with a splash of nurture.

adoptive mom

Morgaine

No real connection to adoption right now.

I am a psychology student though.

I say both.

We are genetically predisposed to a lot of traits (Nature). But we are also a product of our environment (Nurture).

If a person's genetic makeup has a predisposition to alcoholism but they are never are really exposed to alcohol (due to religious beliefs or personal beliefs of their parents), they will probably not become an alcoholic.

There is also an element of luck involved and our own personal choices. We can choose to act differently than what we are genetically predisposed to do, but we can also choose to act on that which we are predisposed.

School Nurse

Nature....NO, it's nurture......no wait, Nature......

I think Nature wins in determining who a person IS.
You can't really change Nature.

I think Nurture is Most Important from a parenting point of view, though.
I think Nurture (or the lack of it) can make or break who a person is capable of becoming.

No wait...it Nurture.....Oh, I don't know.

gemini

Good question! I think 65% nurture and 30% nature oh and 5% is just luck...

monkeykitty83

I think it completely depends on the person. Sorry not to be more definite, but I've seen some people for whom it seems like total nature, others total nurture, and most people fall somewhere in between. I can't say there's one percentage I think holds true for everyone.

Mei-Ling

Tough question...

Seeing as I don't really know the nature side of my story, I can't claim something that may or may not be true.

So I'll say both. Without nature, you wouldn't need the nurture aspect to build it up. Without nurture, the nature aspect will never reach its full potential.

mommy2squee

Neither: they are equal.

I see in myself and my son behavior traits that came from both families, genetic,and adoptive.

Adult adoptee, and adoptive mom.

picky

Good question, there is no answer. Both are essential to development. For instance no matter how much you nurture a child to become a professional basket ball player if he ends up growing (nature part) only 5 foot tall he won't make the team. If you have a child with the highest IQ in the world and you raise that child in a remote African village away from civilization he won't be able to reach his/her full potential - you have a great nature part but nurture is not sufficient.

Rainia W

Hmmm, I would say the majority of your traits are from nature. What you do with them is depending on how you are nurtured. I have multiple relatives who are adopted, and I am an adult adoptee myself. Everyone I have met that has come in contact with the bio-family (in most instances, I have met the bio-family as well) it explains a lot of why that person is so laid-back, or why that one is a workaholic, or why that one has anger management problems, or lacks ambition, when these traits aren't apparent in the adoptive family.

I am only basing this on 4 adoptees who have met their adopted parents or siblings or both, and then of a couple who aren't anything like their adopted family but sounds a lot like how their bio-parents were described in paper.

Nurture is still important though. If one is abused, that is definitely going to change some traits. Or you could have a trait of "stubbornness" but in one family it will appear to be that you are stubborn as a mule, but another family it will have been nurtured so that you are more a determined person rather than stubborn per se. Traits often have positives/negatives, and I think thats where the nurturing comes in.

Finally, to answer your question: Nurture is more important because it is what can bring about the positive side of the traits, or severely traumatize people depending on their experience. Still, Nature is often much too overlooked when it can give great insight into why people are the way they are.

Bouvier

Good question, and difficult to calculate the percentage! I believe that everyone is born with a natural genetic connection to their biological parents, physically, psychologically, personality, etc., I also believe that an adopted child can absorb certain personality traits from their adoptive parents, as well as any other outside influences, ie; friends, etc.,

My belief however, is that unless you have the nurturing, life may be more challenging for someone. Everyone deserves tender loving care.

Zuko

My specific opinion... I think they're equally important in forming who we are... from my viewpoint, I can't see one as more important than the other.

I'm an adoptee, but you already know that!

wholelottacats

I'm a 50/50 person. I think we're all born with a lot of who we will be, and the rest we pick up from our family/surroundings. I don't think you can discount or ignore either one.

I'm a PAP.

Wundt

There is no answer to this question, the truth is that who you are an interaction of nature and nurture, and neither is 'more important'. Consider, which is more important in your house? The foundation or the walls? Without the foundation, the walls will not be strong, but without the walls, you don't have a house.

Nature is that foundation. It sets the shape, dimensions, and limitations of your life. Nurture is like the walls, they build on that foundation to make a complete picture.

So, what does this mean for adoption? It means that many aspects of a child's personality are defined by their biological foundation, but adoptive parents can build on that foundation and make something wonderful.

smurf_lou

Nurture definitely.....nature controls some of your personality traits, some of the things you may have an interest in, sport, music, that sort of thing, but Nurture determines your morals and the personality you develop and how you develop. The support you are given through life is a big part of your self esteem, the way you develop relationships depends on what you have seen and the way you have been treated.

Sophie

I believe it may be 50/50... but often think it could be more nurture 75%; nature 25%.

(Mom through an international adoption from Guatemala)

birdy

Nurture is more important but not the only factor in deciding ones behavior. They are both major in the sculpting of ones personality.

As far as adoption, I can only tell what I have seen from my students and friends.

depending on when they were adopted. If right at birth, or a very young age, they are obviously more likely to pick up the habits of the adopters, but they still tend to carry the same innate behaviors as their birth family. Sometimes no matter what kind of influence the adoptive family has, the genetic traits will overcome their influence. that can work both ways, the adopter may have poor traits but the adopted child has good traits and visa versa.

That is my personal experience of observation. I have worked with emotionally disturbed kids for 10+ years and see many that are adopted or in foster care.

sizesmith

My adopted son is almost 11 months old, and his bio parents have moved in temporarily so I can help her with this pregnancy (so she can keep the baby). He will go to her faster than other friends of the family, or basic strangers, however, those of us who have been around since his birth are the ones he prefers. When he's tired, or if he falls (he's trying to walk), or he's hungry, it's my arms that he wants. She's tried to comfort him, but it just doesn't work.

I do believe however, that honesty, love, and openess are part of the nurtering. I don't think you can raise a child, cuddle it, act like you're loving it, and then at 15 tell it that they're adopted, and expect to be trusted. Part of love is trust, therefore, being honest about everything from day 1 is very important from both sides of the adoption. My hope is that maybe she'll get her act together for this child. Yes, I'd love to adopt it, but I won't ask her. The dad has asked, and I said yes, but she's reluctant, so I'm getting everything she'll need to help her, I'll babysit, and then she can get a job and get on her own 2 feet. If she chooses to remain a party person, and wants me to raise the baby, I'd love to adopt it (only legally). The sad part is, her 6 year old cuddles with me, and says he loves me, even though he's only known me for a few months when my adopted son was born, and now for a few weeks again, and he comes to me more than her,.

stellar

I believe it is nurture. Of course nature plays its role too, as genes always account for something, but it is the care a child receive that truly shapes who they become.

ladyjane7777@yahoo.com

I would say nurture since i help nurture preschool children.

Melissa G

Nurture.
This is actually close to being proven through a variety of studies.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: