MovieChat Forums > Party of Five (1994) Discussion > Although I know that all families are di...

Although I know that all families are different....


am I the only one who thought the spread of the ages from Charlie to Owen was slightly unbelieveable? Now, "accidents" like Owen happen all of the time, but it's more the other 4 that seem a bit "off" if your know what i mean. OK, so accordinging to the parents death, on their tombstones they had him at 20-22 (which is a bit odd, considering later that they mentioned that Diana was an alumna of Standford or whateverr. But since this is TV, you have to overlook such details sometimes. However, when the parents died, Charlie was 24, Bailey 16, Julia, 15 Claudia, 11 and Owen, ~ 1. So they waited almost a DECADE after Charlie was born to have Bailey?!? Come on! Unless it was some sort of medical problem, that's kind of hard to believe.

Again, I'm willing to "go with with it" (the writing), because a) it's tv and b) they needed a sib old enough to become the guardian, but the if it were the "real world," Bailey, Julia and Claudia would probably the most realistic sibs, without their extreme age differences...

reply

I don't see a problem with the age gap I'm sure there are hundreds of families with age gaps like that. One of my mom's friends has a 30 year old son, a 26 year old daughter, and an 11 year old son.

---------
You're pretty sick, Chubbs.

reply

I didn't mean to imply that it was a "problem," just a bit unusual. If it were me. personally, I don't think that after 24 (+) years of raising kids, I'd want a little downtime for me (as CUTE as Owen is:-)

reply

I agree - it's definitely possible but very unusual. I have personally never met full siblings with a 23 year age difference. Also, having a baby by accident is not too common for a woman in her forties I would guess. I think Diana was supposed to be 44 when she died (?) so Owen came along accidentally when she was 43. Again, definitely possible but not common.

But I love the show so i'm willing to suspend disbelief a bit and just go along with some unusual things.

reply

I agree it's a bit weird that there would be such a big gap between Charlie and Bailey and also a gap between Julia and Claudia. It's like they had Charlie, had career or fertility issues so it took them a while to have Bailey, they were on a roll so had Julia and then you would think that would be it because they've got more kids and both sexes (which is what most people want) but then they randomly had Claudia four years later. lol.

Also weird is that Matthew Fox does not look eight years older than Scott Wolf! wtf kind of casting was that.

reply

Yeah, it's rare to have 3 major age gaps between the kids (8 years, 4 years, and 10 years). Charlie could have easily have been 21; he’d still be of legal age to be a guardian, but the gap wouldn’t be so large.

reply

Well, if Diana had had Charlie at 20, and still did Stanford and stuff, he was clearly a surprise baby. So maybe that's why there is such a gap between Charlie and Bailey? And they did say Owen had been an accident in the first season and Charlie had made a comment about them starting all over with another baby when he was old enoug to have been Owen's father. And some people just have gaps between their kids. Like my brother is 23, I'm 21, my litte sister is 15, and my little brother is 10. So there is 13 years between the oldest and youngest.



All time is all time. It does not change...It simply is.

reply

Your theory of two unplanned pregnancies around three planned pregnancies sounds plausible to me. It's an unusual family, but I never found it's so unlikely that it took me out of the show.

The gaps in my family are like the four oldest Salinger siblings in reverse. My older brother is 3 and a half years older. Then, I have a twin (instead of a one year gap). Then, my younger sister is 8 and a half years younger.

reply

One of my best friends parents had a baby a little over a year ago. She has four older siblings, ages 19, 22, 25, and 29 (if I remember correctly; I'm friends with the two younger ones). The youngest baby was a complete "oops".

I always thought that the Salinger's thing was a little far fetched until I seen it in real life with my friends family. I guess it could happen to anyone.

reply

When my mother's youngest sibling was born, their oldest brother was over 30. It happens more frequently than you'd think.

"The world is a mess, and I just... need to rule it..."

reply

Charlie was probably an accident but Diana could have still gone through college with him. and the father had drinking problems when Charlie was just a kid so their marriage was on the rocks for a while. that probably eliminated any thoughts of another child until he had recovered

I'm gonna die of long hair!

reply

I love 10th Kingdom! Sorry off topic, it's just rare for me to run into a 10k quote I guess :)

As for Party of Five, I'm not sure if I ever noticed how odd the age spread was. I was 13 when it came out so I don't think I noticed. Just got season 3 on dvd and now I'm watching everything over.

reply

My parents had three kids. My older sister was born in 1973 and I was born in 1981, and my younger sister was '84. The difference between me and my older sister was 8 years, the exact same age difference as Charlie and Bailey, so it isn't farfetched at all.

reply

yeah the age gaps were ludicrous. but so was almost every major plot on the show. i mean the show started off with a family of orphans. lol who just happened to be the most photogenic bunch of orphans in america!

reply

sure the age gaps are unusual, but they make sense and work for the show
just look at packed to the rafters!

people have just come so accustomed to having careers and then rushing having kids in a small amount of time so they can do other things so 8 years seems a bit unusual by todays standards

charlie was probably a surprise baby, then bailey, julia and claudia were planned, and with owen, diana would having been approaching menopause which makes a female extremely fertile therefore resulting in a broken condom or a missed pill and 9 months later, owen!

but really, i know a few people whom have 5+ years in between each baby (eldest then 5 years later another, 6 years later another, 4 years later another and 8 years later the youngest)just because they wanted it that way so its not all that strange...

reply

My theory is that maybe ALL of the kids were accidents. Nick and Diana would have been pretty young when Charlie was born. If I'm not mistaken, there was an episode where Charlie was talking about how surprised he was to get his baby brother Bailey after being an only child for so long, so I'm thinking Bailey was also unplanned. Julia MAY have been planned, but I'd say it's iffy because there's only a year between Bailey and Julia. Granted, there are people who do plan pregnancies immediately after the birth of the previous child, so it's possible, but I think more women than not would prefer to wait until the previous child was about a year old before trying to have the next. It's VERY exhausting to deal with being pregnant while having to care for a baby that's not even a year old yet. Claudia could have been planned or not. It would seem like the Salingers would have thought they were done having kids, since Julia would have been four by the time Claudia came along, but it could be either way. Maybe they did want another child and thought this time they'd wait until the youngest was a little older. As for Owen, it's all but said in the series that he was definitely an unexpected surprise. Ordinarily, I'd say you don't have five "accidents" when it comes to kids, as you generally learn your lesson with the first accident and do more in the future to prevent the next, but you never know. Nick and Diana might have been the kind of people who just didn't favor birth control. Maybe they didn't plan or try specifically for a big family but certainly weren't opposed to the idea and just wanted to let nature do what it was going to do when it was going to do it. Someone mentioned maybe they had infertility issues that they eventually overcame, but it could very well be just the opposite. There may have been wide age gaps between the kids because their parents may have tried for years to avoid getting pregnant, but nature just always had a better idea. Some people are seemingly just immune to certain types of birth control, something will work really well for awhile but then fail, while something else won't work well at all. Some people are just meant to be more fertile than others despite efforts to be otherwise. I even knew a woman who got pregnant twice on the Depo Provera shot and once on the pill. it does happen. In any event, the Salingers were obviously good parents who loved all of their kids and wanted to make sure they were taken care of and their big family turned out to be a blessing for them, as did the kids' age differences. It could be it was just all part of God's plan to ensure those kids would always have each other once their parents were gone.

reply