Tyrone Schiff 1Unnaturally NurturedThe formation of a twin is a fascinating and unexplainable occurrence in nature. It occursrandomly and without planning. Generally, twins find that they are able to confide in their respective twin more so than any other person in their lives. Twins possess a bond that extendsfar deeper than just their physically similar attributes. Twins share something that is said to beinherently unique to us all: their DNA and genetics. Monozygotic twins have the exact samegenetic makeup in every single cell that composes them. Cognizant of the similarities inherent toa twin’s genetics, an interesting question is generated. In various psychological fields, theargument rages on whether our lives are molded by our environments or by our genetics. Thisconflict of opinions is commonly referred to as nature versus nurture. In the case of twins, they provide psychologists with a rare opportunity to study the roles of these two factors on theindividual. It ought to be noted that psychologists are often limited by the uncontrollableinfluences that occur in any given twin experiment. At the same time, however, these limitationsare accompanied by many beneficial insights. Thus, being able to compare twins is a strong benefit and ally of nature; however, certain environmental factors proposed by psychologists play a key role in defending the theory of nurture.This paper will attempt to look at two different situations in which twins were studied.First, the David Reimer case will be presented and then the example of the twins being separatedat birth depicted in the film shown in class. In the case of David Reimer, a genetically normalmale was attempted to be converted in to a female. This was recommended by the psychologistJohn Money who asserted that “newborns are psychosexually neutral,” meaning thatenvironmental cues would be the only determinant needed when trying to figure out sexualidentity (Colapinto, 1997, p.64). The true benefit in this case for Money was being able to

Tyrone Schiff 2compare David’s progression as a female against his twin brother’s progression as a male.Money is clearly a staunch activist for the role of nurture. In contrast to Money, another psychologist named Milton Diamond argued in favor of our genetic make-up and therefore therole of nature in one’s development. Diamond had gathered evidence in his lab that “suggested alink between hormones that bathe a developing fetus’s brain and nervous system and its later sexual function” (Colapinto, 1997, p.64). Diamond is essentially making the argument for naturein this case that during development a certain sexual orientation is coded into the individual. If one recalls, David Reimer ultimately switched from being a female, the stimulus his environmenthad forced upon him, and chose to live his life as a male, the initial genetic coding he hadreceived. This argues heavily in favor of nature, but there are certain limitations to twin researchthat could possibly explain these findings.In response to the catastrophe that was the experiment of David Reimer, John Money justified the failure by asserting that it was due to David’s environmental factors that ultimatelyled to the failure. Money believed that due to the fact that David had a twin brother, someonewith whom David could compare himself, this made David’s unnatural progression into becoming a female that much harder. David recalls that he “kept thinking of the fun stuff my brother was doing […]” (Colapinto, 1997, p.67). Clearly, having this twin brother around wasnot a good environmental factor for his progress. Furthermore, Money also attributed the failureto the environmental factor that David received in regards to his rearing. Money put extreme pressure on the parents to not have any “second thoughts” for it would “weaken the child’sidentification as a girl or woman” (Colapinto, 1997, p.66). With this in mind, the parentswouldn’t allow David to take part in perfectly normal activities that any young girl may havewanted to do. David recalls wanting to shave with his father, but was immediately reprimanded

Tyrone Schiff 3and told to go with his mother. One could argue that had David’s parents been a little morelenient, and perhaps allow for David to grow into a tom-girl the experiment would have been far more successful. However, this is just one incident of twin research.In a film shown in class, there was an interesting case of twins that had been separated at birth and reunited later on in their lives. Clearly, these twins had been raised in quite differentenvironments and had gone through different experiences. Yet, it is relevant to note that both of them had chosen to become firefighters as their professions. The twins also noticed that they helda beer glass very similarly. This particular twin research argues very heavily in favor of nature, based on the fact that their environments were different but ultimately the twins followed asimilar path. However, one should also consider that these twins may have had variousexperiences in their own lives that led to their identical professions. As is the case in this study,the greatest limitation in any twin research experiment is the lack of control over the subjects(ABC News, 1999).So, what can one gather about the research done on twins and their contribution to theongoing debate of nature versus nurture? In some ways, there a many benefits, yet at the sametime there are a number of limiting factors. Benefits include the fact that genetically their make-up is identical which allows for a superb comparison. On the other hand, all twin studies arelimited by the fact that they can’t be controlled by psychologists, and there are factors that cannot be anticipated. Ultimately, twin research provides a number of answers to the debate on natureversus nurture, but at the same time propose new questions that lie ready for investigation.