I’ve noticed an ironic similarity between our country’s division and twin estrangement. The polarization of ideas and beliefs has contributed to tremendous difficulties with communication and empathy about our differences. In the same vein, when I listen to twins who have experienced painful ruptures with their same-age sibling, sometimes I see a pattern whereby their developmental dyadic connection left no space or need to work through conflict. This issue crops up more profoundly between male twins, as female pairs are likely to be more aware of and forthcoming with their emotions, which are aired and recognized although not always rectified.

Several of my male patients have told me that they never had any real conflicts with their twin. Any altercations would be small and short and would simply evaporate or disappear. Then the pair would resume their loyal, committed brotherhood without any hint of aggression or disdain. Yet this sense of unbridled, untested allegiance lends itself to creating “shoulds” that remain unchallenged until someone outside the twin bubble confronts the status quo.

For example, a romantic “third” may not be wholly on board with the dyadic devotion. Understandably, they come into the relationship with their own needs and feelings, which may not jibe with the existing situation. So the “intruder” appears to be the one to blame for new problems and dilemmas that had never arisen before. However, while the romantic partner plays a role in this schism, it must be noted that the twins’ inexperience negotiating conflict contributes mightily to the sad and angry dynamics that erupt. Since the siblings are not able to talk to each other about the impact of a partner on their circumstances, the partner is viewed as the instigator and ultimate dealbreaker of the twin relationship.

Idealizing the twin bond might seem natural. But in some cases, it opens the door to conflict and estrangement that can appear irreparable.

Photo by Alena Darmel, Pexels