Twins may share a birthday, but that doesn’t mean they always want to share their belongings. Giving siblings joint presents can encourage cooperation, yet it can also create arguments when one child decides an item belongs exclusively to them.
For relatives buying gifts, the situation becomes particularly frustrating when the original intention was clearly explained. Should the person who bought the present be responsible for resolving a disagreement that happens months afterward?
For one Redditor, the trouble began with two carefully selected robot sets purchased for their twin nephews. Rather than buying identical presents as usual, the OP and their partner chose activities the boys could enjoy together.
Unfortunately, one nephew claimed ownership of the combat robot set and refused to let his brother participate, despite repeated explanations that both gifts were shared.
The boys’ mother eventually demanded a replacement, and their grandmother supported her position. Read on to find out why the OP questioned whether refusing to buy another set made them the unreasonable one.
An aunt faces family pressure to buy another birthday gift after her twin nephews refuse to share
Few things hurt more than watching a thoughtful gesture turn into a family argument, especially when the intention was simply to make two children happy. Gift-giving should create excitement and connection, not leave someone feeling guilty for failing to solve a problem they never intended to cause.
For this aunt or uncle, buying birthday presents for 11-year-old twin nephews seemed straightforward. Both boys enjoyed building and playing with robots, so two shared sets appeared to offer twice the entertainment.
Unfortunately, one twin, Ed, claimed exclusive ownership of the combat robots and refused to let his brother Ton touch them. Instead of enforcing the original sharing arrangement, the boys’ mother asked the gift-giver to purchase another set.
The emotional conflict goes deeper than money. Ton felt excluded from something meant for both brothers, while the OP felt unfairly blamed for Ed’s refusal to share. Their mother and grandmother focused on repairing Ton’s disappointment, but overlooked the behavior that created it.
However, there’s another perspective worth considering. Twins frequently share birthdays, experiences, and social identities. Receiving communal presents, even thoughtful ones, can sometimes reinforce the feeling that they’re being treated as a pair rather than two separate individuals.
Ed’s possessiveness may partly reflect a desire for independence rather than simple selfishness. Because he physically unwrapped the combat set, he might have interpreted it as his personal possession despite being told otherwise.
Still, that doesn’t justify excluding his brother, particularly when he willingly shares the robots with other children.
Pediatrician Dr. Shelly Vaziri Flais, writing for the American Academy of Pediatrics, emphasizes that twins need opportunities to develop separate identities. She recommends giving each child distinctive birthday presents rather than assuming siblings should share everything.
At the same time, she encourages parents to establish fair systems for shared toys, including timed turns that help children understand equal access. Her guidance recognizes that respecting individuality and teaching cooperation are complementary responsibilities, not opposing choices.
This advice highlights where both sides could have handled things differently. The OP could have chosen individual presents, but the parents also needed to reinforce the agreement that both sets belonged to both boys.
Buying another combat set solved Ton’s immediate disappointment, yet it avoided addressing Ed’s refusal to respect shared ownership. The more valuable lesson would have involved establishing clear rules, ensuring equal access, and helping both children understand the difference between personal belongings and communal property.
For future birthdays, separate gifts reflecting each child’s interests would probably prevent similar misunderstandings. However, relatives shouldn’t be expected to repeatedly spend money correcting conflicts that parents are responsible for managing.
Ultimately, protecting a child’s feelings shouldn’t mean eliminating every disappointment. Sometimes, fairness is learned through boundaries rather than additional presents.
Here’s what the community had to contribute:
These Redditors blamed the sister’s parenting and said she should enforce sharing herself
These users said twins are individuals and usually deserve separate gifts
This commenter also criticized the sister for asking OP to spend more money
Should the aunt have purchased another robot set, or should the boys’ parents have enforced the original sharing arrangement? And are shared birthday gifts ever a good idea for twins?
