# Letting kids "work things out on their own"



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

Confession time, I hit my little brother *a lot* as a child and screamed at him even more. (I also played with him, loved him, and generally got along with him like 90% of the time, but that 10% was not good at all.)

This was not behavior modelled by our parents.

My parents did all the right GD things to help me find other solutions to frustration than hitting.

The one thing they didn't do is step in consistently *before* a situation enraged me to the point of hitting or screaming and model for me how to handle things. They didn't give me enough help to spot the coming feelings of irritation. They did it some times, "she asked you (him) to stop, can you stop or do you need to come over here with me" or "you (me) seem like you're getting bothered, would you like to go to your room for a bit?" But until I was 12 or so, I really could have used that every.single.time.

Because, quite frankly, the hitting and screaming was backed by anger and the "please stop" and moving away from my little brother and asking for help in using my words and all the other tools they tried to teach me were only backed by resentment. Guess which emotion helped create the stronger habit?

So whenever I see someone giving advice about letting kids "work things out on their own" I want to reply "what the







are you thinking?" Because with a child like I was, it's just asking for trouble. And it wasn't fair to me or my little brother.

This is the one thing about how I was raised that I plan to change when I have kids. If it seems like one of our kids is like me, I'm giving only a couple seconds before I step in and help.

(Note, as a Libra, I'm also abnormally sensitive to avoidable unfairness.)


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Admittedly I only have one, but we are pretty democratic in how he is raised, and anytime two people in our family are bickering, really bickering and not just having a lively discussion, the third person always steps in to mediate. Always, we've always done that and it's worked well for us. If we had another child I can't see why we'd suddenly start letting the children be hateful to each other. I can understand the "let them work it out" idea as a backlash against parents who are punitive and micromanage their kids, but assuming that's not the case, I really don't see the value in letting verbal or physical abuse go unchecked. Siblings are almost never the same age, and even if they are twins, there is always an imbalance of power just by way of being children with so many things not in their control. I know parents of more than one who do not go along with the "let them work it out" thinking and I like the way they parent--very present and involved when the kids start to fight, definitely making sure no one is allowed to be hurtful, but also respectful of the kids perspectives. It seems to take more work to be present and involved, but from what I have seen, the children are generally better, not worse, at getting along than children I've seen who are left to fight it out themselves.

But of course I might have two more closely spaced and eat my hat one day....


----------



## Ruthla (Jun 2, 2004)

I think it's about knowing your children, and about balance.

I step in when my children get violent with each other. I step in when they're screaming so loud that it hurts my ears. But I won't let myself get dragged into their petty (IMO) arguments.

If they're arguing over a toy, for example, I'll let them know that they need to work it out by themselves or I will take the toy away. Well, they argue over the TV or computer usage more than toys these days, but it's the same idea. I've found that when they argue about clothes it works best for me to simply say "OK, that item belongs to A, if B wants to borrow it you have to ask A's permission." That's one area they seem to need clear-cut guidelines. They still borrow each other's clothes, but now an argument (when they both want to wear the same thing on the same day) is quickly resolved with "Mom, who's shirt is this?".

It's a dance, a balancing act. I generally give them a few minutes to work things out independently before stepping in, and then follow it up by talking to each of them independently about their feelings and how to deal with similar situations in the future. I do NOT tolerate violence, and when I notice a child hitting and yelling, first I remove the child from the situation and after calming down we talk about preventing it from happening again.

I'm sorry your parents weren't able to step in and help you deal with your brother as often as you needed it. I suspect that, had they stepped in early enough, and followed up with anger-management techniques, it would have been quite safe for them to step back after a while and give the two of you time to work out "little things" on your own.


----------



## RedWine (Sep 26, 2003)

We have friends who let their daughters "work it out on their own." Their kids are 5 and 3. They almost never step in.

We used to have playdates with them, but I just informed my husband that I don't want to see them anymore. i am constantly mediating (which they look down upon). But sorry, I won't stand idly by and watch them hit or push my kids -- or even each other.

in my opinion, this strategy creates children who learn that the louder and stronger child gets the toy.


----------



## GuildJenn (Jan 10, 2007)

I think there's a difference between working it out for them "Susan you're older so give John the toy," and monitoring/modelling/working with them. around HOW it is getting worked out "I'm taking the toy until you both have a plan to use it that you both agree with," or even just, "no pushing and no yelling. I will be right here while you work it out."


----------



## angela&avery (May 30, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RedWine* 
We have friends who let their daughters "work it out on their own." Their kids are 5 and 3. They almost never step in.

We used to have playdates with them, but I just informed my husband that I don't want to see them anymore. i am constantly mediating (which they look down upon). But sorry, I won't stand idly by and watch them hit or push my kids -- or even each other.

in my opinion, this strategy creates children who learn that the louder and stronger child gets the toy.

I step in as little as possible. My children do not hit and push other children. They do hit each other and I step in then. I also step in when they are very very loud, or if someone is very very upset, but not to mediate. I leave the decision making up to them, I just step in to coach and mend hurt feelings. If I step in, it just makes things worse because then they start tattling all the time on each other and my dd will scream if ds brushes by her.

This approach has seriously stopped most of the fighting we were having. They play together so much better now.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Yeah, I think the "let them work it out by themselves" approach generally results in the bigger/stronger child taking on a role of aggressor and the smaller/weaker child gets to be the victim. Over and over again. Too Lord of the Flies for me.

Kids need skills and tools to work through conflict. It's my job to help them develop them. The source of their conflict doesn't really matter--the fact that they are perceiving a conflict and experiencing anger/frustration/jealousy does.

I've seen my BIL/SIL dismiss their kids' issues like this over and over b/c "it's not worth getting upset over." Well, yeah...that the PollyPocket's purse is gone might not be a big deal to the 35 yr. old in the house, but to the under 7 set, that's gonna be a problem!







And now those kids don't bother the parents about stuff like that anymore...but, the fallout? Holy hell! There is so much anger and resentment betw. those kids and seeking help from every other adult in the vicinity. They just seem so confused and adrift in terms of negotiating and mediating and working out any kind of issues. It's really sad.


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

I think that when siblings are having a disagreement, it's important for parents to remain neutral and avoid taking over the argument or solving it for the kids. When parent's try to solve the argument, it shifts the focus to getting parental approval and you get the "she started it!" ad infinitum.

I don't think that means no guidance. I let my kids know that I think they are kind and generous people, and I expect them to treat others with respect. And sometimes I just say "hey, quit it you two!" or turn it into a joke, a la Playful Parenting, if it seems like the atmosphere needs to be lightened up.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

I think parents should get involved whenever possible. I have only one child, but I apply this theory to friendship dynamics. "Work it out for themselves" oftentimes means the stronger or more dominant child wins. Which IMO is not okay.

I think parents have a very important role as guides for our children, including guiding interpersonal dynamics and relationships. My friend's son is at a Waldorf preschool right now and they are pulling him out because he is being ostracized and picked on by the other children. The teachers 'model' kind behaviour but do not step in and stop this group dynamic.

Which IMO is very, very wrong and an abdication of responsibility. Children can be little hellions when undirected. They *need* us.


----------



## RomanGoddess (Mar 16, 2006)

Younger sister here speaking and I can most definitely attest to the fact that parents who don't intervene at all create a dynamic where might is right.

And it doesn't matter that the kids are not actually violent with each other. All that needs to happen is that older and stronger brother takes a toy out of younger sister's hands. Period. No violence there. Was that good? Is it really fair to let them "work it out" in that situation? What, exactly, is the younger sister supposed to do in this situation besides protest vocally?

Is it even fair to tell them that they have to "discuss it" with each other and find a way to share when a stronger child just grabs a toy from a weaker child's hand? I mean, come on, guys. He took the toy out of her hands. The answer is plain and simple. He should give her the toy back. Period. I don't see how this situation is different from hitting. Both involve physical force and neither should be tolerated.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cmlp* 
Younger sister here speaking and I can most definitely attest to the fact that parents who don't intervene at all create a dynamic where might is right.

And it doesn't matter that the kids are not actually violent with each other. All that needs to happen is that older and stronger brother takes a toy out of younger sister's hands. Period. No violence there. Was that good? Is it really fair to let them "work it out" in that situation? What, exactly, is the younger sister supposed to do in this situation besides protest vocally?

Is it even fair to tell them that they have to "discuss it" with each other and find a way to share when a stronger child just grabs a toy from a weaker child's hand? I mean, come on, guys. He took the toy out of her hands. The answer is plain and simple. He should give her the toy back. Period. I don't see how this situation is different from hitting. Both involve physical force and neither should be tolerated.

Yep. I'm all about the, "Give back the toy! It's not allowed taking something from your sister/friend/etc. You need to ask if you want a turn, or think up a trade and see if she will agree to it."


----------



## mama2mygirl (Dec 14, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RedWine* 
We have friends who let their daughters "work it out on their own." Their kids are 5 and 3. They almost never step in.

We used to have playdates with them, but I just informed my husband that I don't want to see them anymore. i am constantly mediating (which they look down upon). But sorry, I won't stand idly by and watch them hit or push my kids -- or even each other.

in my opinion, this strategy creates children who learn that the louder and stronger child gets the toy.









:
My dd has always been small for her age and way too many parents of kids who towered over her would say, "Let them work it out. " And I really want to say, "Who do you think will win? My tiny daughter or your child who out weighs her by twenty pounds?"
My only regret is not stepping in earlier. DD has also always loved the train table and has been knocked down by way too many boys. And it is almost always boys. To the point where, at four, she really has to see that a boy is gentle before she'll play with him. She's afraid and says she doesn't like boys. (Yes, we talk about it. I don't leave it at that.) And I have to say, I see her point. If I had been knocked down again and again by boys, I'd feel a little weary too.


----------



## 2tadpoles (Aug 8, 2004)

I don't think that letting kids work things out for themselves is a positive or effective way if they've never been shown/taught HOW to do it. I don't care for the "sink or swim" approach.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mama2mygirl* 
My only regret is not stepping in earlier. DD has also always loved the train table and has been knocked down by way too many boys. And it is almost always boys. To the point where, at four, she really has to see that a boy is gentle before she'll play with him. She's afraid and says she doesn't like boys. (Yes, we talk about it. I don't leave it at that.) And I have to say, I see her point. If I had been knocked down again and again by boys, I'd feel a little weary too.

I've had this experience too, with boys and my daughter! And for awhile I did not step in strongly enough, especially with boys of friends of mine, due to the social awkwardness. I have seen little boys do intimidating behaviour with my daughter, and my daughter is obviously reacting in fear, and the mamas have acted like this is no big deal! What are we teaching our girls here? What are we teaching our boys?

I am always assertive with this stuff now. My daughter doesn't fear boys ,and I want it to stay that way.


----------



## Annikate (Aug 2, 2005)

Great thread! I've been wondering about this very thing lately. I feel like I should be a little *hands off* in letting dds work things out, but really, I do agree that this can teach them that the louder, more aggressive child *wins*.

It's a tough balance.


----------



## woo27ks (Jan 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *angela&avery* 
I step in as little as possible. My children do not hit and push other children. They do hit each other and I step in then. I also step in when they are very very loud, or if someone is very very upset, but not to mediate. I leave the decision making up to them, I just step in to coach and mend hurt feelings. If I step in, it just makes things worse because then they start tattling all the time on each other and my dd will scream if ds brushes by her.

This approach has seriously stopped most of the fighting we were having. They play together so much better now.

I could have written this post. They hardly ever tattle and figure it out on their own. My two get along great and have respect for the other's space and things.

Early on - I found playing referee was exhausting and if I would have just waited a few seconds longer - they would have worked it out themselves. Which to me is very valuable.

If the younger one comes to me and says that her brother did X - I respond with "what was your role in this?" - I find it's never one kids' fault.


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cmlp* 
Is it even fair to tell them that they have to "discuss it" with each other and find a way to share when a stronger child just grabs a toy from a weaker child's hand?

Funny thing is, I can't think of one instance where I took a toy away from my little brother when he was playing with it. We played together happily all the time. We were great at sharing, great at taking turns.

This macro-scale stuff my parents would step in consistently. It was the micro-scale stuff, the "He's breathing on me." "He's bugging me." stuff where I needed them to step in sooner and to step in without me having to ask for help. And when I did ask for help I needed a response other than to "ignore it", I'd been *trying* to ignore it for one thing.

On the plus side, it is going to be really easy to tell if I have a child like I was, even before there's a sibling. If I have to take socks and shoes on and off 20 times before there aren't any "bumpies" the kid has the same problems.


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2tadpoles* 
I don't think that letting kids work things out for themselves is a positive or effective way if they've never been shown/taught HOW to do it. I don't care for the "sink or swim" approach.

That's just it, I was shown/taught HOW to do it, I just couldn't implement the knowledge when I was worked up. There were lots of times where we did worth things out for ourselves, but I would much rather have had those times interferred with if it had meant that there was more interference during the times where I was overwhelmed.


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cmlp*
Is it even fair to tell them that they have to "discuss it" with each other and find a way to share when a stronger child just grabs a toy from a weaker child's hand? I mean, come on, guys. He took the toy out of her hands. The answer is plain and simple. He should give her the toy back. Period. I don't see how this situation is different from hitting. Both involve physical force and neither should be tolerated.

Kids do need guidance when it comes to learning how to work things out. It starts young. When the toddler grabs a toy away from a baby, a parent gives them the info: "Timmy was playing with that. If you want to play with it, you need to wait until he's done or find him something else he'd like and trade."

Kids need parents to help them learn how to resolve conflicts peacefully--but that doesn't mean they need all of their conflicts resolved for them. That can lead to resentment, rivalry, tattling and other annoying behaviors


----------



## woo27ks (Jan 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnysideup* 
Kids do need guidance when it comes to learning how to work things out. It starts young. When the toddler grabs a toy away from a baby, a parent gives them the info: "Timmy was playing with that. If you want to play with it, you need to wait until he's done or find him something else he'd like and trade."

Kids need parents to help them learn how to resolve conflicts peacefully--but that doesn't mean they need all of their conflicts resolved for them. That can lead to resentment, rivalry, tattling and other annoying behaviors

















:


----------



## katallen (Jan 4, 2005)

My brother and I worked things out between ourselves when my mother got tired of the constant emotional drain and it was liberating for all of us. He gave as well as he got and my mother was a much calmer and better mother so it benefitted all of us. When I was ten she told us we were to old to hit and needed to talk things out and that also worked for us.

I was also much better prepared for public school because I learned how to resolve things one way or another at home and that is pretty much what you have to do at school also. It didn't come as a huge shock when there was no one around to baby me through my emotions and the conflicts that came with sharing a playground and equipment with forty+ other children at recess.
Teachers generally frown on the children that come to them with all of their problems and can't resolve things on their own when you get into public school.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

I dunno....if my kids need my help solving conflicts or soothing big emotions, then I'm going to help fill that need. Viewing it as "tattling" or "babying" doesn't help me meet their needs. YMMV.

I'm not so much concerned with the needs of some public school teacher as I am with my children's needs.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

I think there is a huge difference between stepping in to take sides or "stop" an argument, and being present and supporting resolution while making sure everyone is treated respectfully.

I have really mixed feelings over the idea that it's bad for a child to "tattle" on a problem with a sibling. That is one of those area's where I think it's very easy to project motives on the child which reflect our own issues and limitations. "She's trying to get him in trouble" "She's a tattle tale and nobody likes them" etc. Maybe it's just a child who *needs* a lot of feedback and discussion to handle frustration? If so, telling the parent when they feel angry and frustrated seems pretty healthy.

I do, totally understand that no adult wants to be the sounding board for every.single.grievance.imaginable. But I would own it as my own limitation, and not project a label like "tattle tale" on a child who seems to crave a lot of discussion and interaction to handle minor frustrations.

But again, only having one, I'm prepared to be wrong on this one


----------



## LynnS6 (Mar 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sapphire_chan* 
This macro-scale stuff my parents would step in consistently. It was the micro-scale stuff, the "He's breathing on me." "He's bugging me." stuff where I needed them to step in sooner and to step in without me having to ask for help. And when I did ask for help I needed a response other than to "ignore it", I'd been *trying* to ignore it for one thing.

On the plus side, it is going to be really easy to tell if I have a child like I was, even before there's a sibling. If I have to take socks and shoes on and off 20 times before there aren't any "bumpies" the kid has the same problems.

OK so it sounds like you were a highly sensitive child (have you read the book, The Highly Sensitive Child? you should). I've got 2, so I know.

But, it sounds like your parents DIDN'T teach you how to deal with the micro stuff. "Ignore it" isn't teaching. What if they'd said to you instead:

"He's really bugging you, isn't he? Do you want to keep playing here or would you be more comfortable somewhere else? How do you think you can get him to stop?" Or something along those lines.

Our kids are nearly 3 and nearly 6, so right now, there's a definite power imbalance. And yet, I do let them work a lot of stuff out. "Both of you need to work this out or the toy is going away" DOES work - because if dd isn't agreeable to ds' solution, she will scream! That's not working it out, that's a power play. Ds then learns that if he doesn't accommodate dd, he too looses out. Dd learns that if her only solution is to scream at ds, she too looses out.

But, I only do that for things that I know they're capable of working out. Dd is a highly verbal nearly 3 year old. When she was 18 months, I stepped in and modeled turn taking or exchanging for another toy. Very often ds will try one of those solutions, if he's in a good mood. And dd is pretty good at suggesting them herself.

When my kids are well fed and well rested, they play very well together. I don't have any qualms about not jumping in for the 'he's bugging me stuff'.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *heartmama* 
I think there is a huge difference between stepping in to take sides or "stop" an argument, and being present and supporting resolution while making sure everyone is treated respectfully.

It's crucial, IMO, to NOT take sides. 90% of the time I don't know the 'back story'. I don't know what led up to this. I can model careful listening, provide empathy and suggest solutions. But I'm not going to take sides.

Quote:

I have really mixed feelings over the idea that it's bad for a child to "tattle" on a problem with a sibling. That is one of those aea's where I think it's very easy to project motives on the child which reflect our own issues and limitations. "She's trying to get him in trouble" "She's a tattle tale and nobody likes them" etc. Maybe it's just a child who *needs* a lot of feedback and discussion to handle frustration? If so, telling the parent when they feel angry and frustrated seems pretty healthy.
Well, what do you do with the tattling information? I don't tell my kids not to tattle, but unless I witness an event, there is no consequence for the person who was the 'offender'. So, if dd comes to me and says "T took my bus schedule" (don't ask, just know that this is a cool thing to have these days), or ds comes to me and says "M messed up my bus schedule pile" I will respond "Oh, and how do you feel about that? What do you think you can do?" What I absolutely will not do is say "T give her bus schedule back" or "M quit messing up T's bus schedule pile". Because often it turns out that T was taking back HIS bus schedule that M had suddenly 'decided' was hers, or that M was rummaging through his pile to find her schedule that T had decided to put with his.

So, I don't tell my kids not to tattle. I help them process the information. But no way, no how am I going to get drawn into their battles based solely on one piece of information from a 'tattler'.

Ditto with the micro stuff. If one of my kids is having trouble, I'll help them process and look for solutions if they come to me. But I won't step in unless there's real verbal or physical abuse going on. There IS value in learning how to do things with siblings.


----------



## Mpenny1001 (May 21, 2005)

I can't speak as a parent since I only have one kiddo, but I can speak as a sister who had an older brother. Our parents would not allow us to physically "work things out" and would gently guide us in verbally working things out (e.g. "You've had the toy for 10 minutes and your sister woud like it. Do you think it would be nice if you let her have it for a while?").

Of course, when our parents weren't looking, we beat up on each other regularly. Oftentimes, there wasn't even any underlying issue...it was almost like wrestling for sport.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

It's crucial, IMO, to NOT take sides. 90% of the time I don't know the 'back story'. I don't know what led up to this. I can model careful listening, provide empathy and suggest solutions. But I'm not going to take sides.
Oh dear, I didn't type it out right--I was saying this too--that there is a difference between stepping in to take sides (not a good idea) and stepping in to make sure everyone is treated with respect and to support resolution (good idea to me).

Hope that makes my words clearer!

Quote:

Well, what do you do with the tattling information? I don't tell my kids not to tattle, but unless I witness an event, there is no consequence for the person who was the 'offender'. So, if dd comes to me and says "T took my bus schedule" (don't ask, just know that this is a cool thing to have these days), or ds comes to me and says "M messed up my bus schedule pile" I will respond "Oh, and how do you feel about that? What do you think you can do?" What I absolutely will not do is say "T give her bus schedule back" or "M quit messing up T's bus schedule pile". Because often it turns out that T was taking back HIS bus schedule that M had suddenly 'decided' was hers, or that M was rummaging through his pile to find her schedule that T had decided to put with his.

So, I don't tell my kids not to tattle. I help them process the information. But no way, no how am I going to get drawn into their battles based solely on one piece of information from a 'tattler'.
I agree with what you are basically saying here--and I know that in our small family of 3, it's never a good idea for the third person to "take sides" in a disagreement. Instead if two are bickering, the third will supportively offer help.

Perhaps the only difference would be that for me, I wouldn't be okay viewing the situation as being "drawn into a battle"...even if in that instant one child was feeling really angry and "against" their sibling, I would be coaching myself (in my head) to find a positive framework for the problem. I know siblings fight (I was a middle child!) but I also know from my experience that it doesn't feel good to be screaming and furious with someone, and that children are people, and people generally do want to get along, not be hateful. They may not know how to get along right then, but I wouldn't ascribe a term like "battle" or "war" to them, kwim? It automatically reinforces the idea that we are not a team, and there are sides to take, which I am not going to support *even if the moment one person is acting that way*. I'm going to stand for the fact that we are a family team, and help the person who is struggling. I think the implication in the "stay out of their battles" view actually reinforces the mentality that the kids are at war and the parent is playing the role of neutral third country. I don't think global war policy will work for me on the family resolution level. I don't think it's working on a global level either, but now I'm digressing


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
I dunno....if my kids need my help solving conflicts or soothing big emotions, then I'm going to help fill that need. Viewing it as "tattling" or "babying" doesn't help me meet their needs.

Of course, I'm always there to help my children solve their conflicts if they need me, give them guidance or a shoulder to lean on if they need it. To me, "tattling" is when a child is in the habit of running to adults for every infraction of another child, even when it didn't have anything to do with them, "mom, Billy picked his nose!" etc.

I admit that I have never actually had this problem with my own children, and that it is a trait I find annoying in my children's friends. I guess I can't help but wonder why these kids need to come to me for every.little.thing.


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

I think the question and the answers lay on a spectrum for this issue. My parents prevented me and my brother from arguing and when we asked them what to do, they accused us of tattling and told us to forget or ignore or go to our rooms, separate, etc... To this day, my brother and I, though we love each other, suffer from a disconnect in our relationship that neither one of us knows how to address with each other because we've never worked through anything together. In our childhood, there was a right and wrong one, and no guidance, but plenty of emotional abuse, so my experience with this question has been tainted, I think.

With our children, whether and how much I intervene and guide thier interaction depends completely upon how well they're handling the issue. Sometimes I don'thave to say or do anything, and others, when they want to hit, I do. Sometimes I physically guide them to do the proper thing; one takes a toy from the other and I tell him that the other was playing with it and was not finished. "listen to his words; he is telling you how he feels about what you did. Would you like to give the toy back all by yourself, or would you like me to help you?" Then I sometimes have to gently guide him with his hand outstretched with the toy in hand, at which point, he will hand it back- so far none have protested this... so far. Other times, a toy has become such a fuel for fighting that I will remove it for a while and when I bring it back, explain what our expectations are of each other- respect, gentleness, sharing, etc...

As others have expressed, it is a balancing act that requires being/acting in each moment as though for the first time while considering each child's tendencies and being sensitive to them- guiding where they typically need, backing off where they've gained skill, etc...

I feel overflowing with joy when I see them come into conflict and resolve it entirely on their own with respect and compassion; it's completely awesome! And it does happen, sometimes.


----------



## broodymama (May 3, 2004)

This thread has been really helpful to me! My DD is still young (almost 9 months) but as her interaction with her brother increases I'm starting to see some of the typical sharing/"that's mine!" issues. Thanks for all the good ideas, mamas!


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

I admit that I have never actually had this problem with my own children, and that it is a trait I find annoying in my children's friends. I guess I can't help but wonder why these kids need to come to me for every.little.thing.
Honestly, if ds was reporting every moment to me of another person, I would just ask him (in an honest and curious way, not dismissive) "Ds, why are you telling me that?" or "Ds, what did you hope I would say to that?" and find out why he's doing it.

I do think there are MANY parents who reinforce tattling by giving tacit approval to the tattler--children crave approval, and if they "tell" what another is doing wrong, they get roundabout approval for themselves. But that isn't the child's fault. It's completely up to the parent how to respond to "Mommy, brother is picking his nose".

Personally, I'd be inclined to help my children do what I'd do--if my child was picking his nose, I'd offer a tissue. That's it. Hopefully my child would learn to simply offer a nose picker a tissue, because that's all that happens to nose pickers here







At most I'd say to that information "Yes, we all pick our noses, because stuff gets in there. I offer a tissue if I think a person needs one, because it's what I'd want if it were my nose". And that's it. The implication being that I assume they want to help their sibling with a problem. And even if their motives were less than ideal, that won't change my reaction, kwim? I'm not going to say "Johnny, that's dirty, thank heaven's your sister at least always uses a tissue for her nose!". I cannot imagine reacting like that


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnysideup* 
I admit that I have never actually had this problem with my own children, and that it is a trait I find annoying in my children's friends. I guess I can't help but wonder why these kids need to come to me for every.little.thing.

Oh I know how you feel. I've worked w/ kids for most of my life and in my experience, it's the kids who are used to the "top down" set-up where the parent considers the events/sides, and hands down some sort of ruling about who did what and what the solution will be. And it seems like there is a thread of lingering injustice that runs through the kids' life, and an inability to sort through the problem without those sorts of "rulings."

The type of intervention that I practice is to help flush out what the conflict is and help the parties involved find a solution that is agreeable to both.

When my nieces come to me with, "Billy picked his nose!" type reports, I usually respond with, "Okaaaay...is there something I can help you with? Is it grossing you out and you'd like him stop?" And move from there to brainstorming ideas on how to make all parties comfortable or whatever.


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *heartmama* 
Honestly, if ds was reporting every moment to me of another person, I would just ask him (in an honest and curious way, not dismissive) "Ds, why are you telling me that?" or "Ds, what did you hope I would say to that?" and find out why he's doing it.

I do think there are MANY parents who reinforce tattling by giving tacit approval to the tattler--children crave approval, and if they "tell" what another is doing wrong, they get roundabout approval for themselves. But that isn't the child's fault. It's completely up to the parent what significance they give to information that a child is picking his nose or whatever....

ITA


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sapphire_chan* 
(Note, as a Libra, I'm also abnormally sensitive to avoidable unfairness.)

I'm a pisces and sensitive period!







And I'm living with 2 (about to be 3 scorpios - possibly a Libra) and a leo!!

I tend to agree with you. I don't think you can step in all the time, but there were times I felt I could have been protected a little better. I was the oldest, so I guess I was supposed to fend for myself. My sister and I were pretty physical - if I couldn't fly away from irritation, I fought. And as an adult I struggle now with wanting to fly or fight with my kids when they don't cooperate with simple requests.


----------



## RedWine (Sep 26, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *angela&avery* 
I step in as little as possible. My children do not hit and push other children. They do hit each other and I step in then. I also step in when they are very very loud, or if someone is very very upset, but not to mediate. I leave the decision making up to them, I just step in to coach and mend hurt feelings. If I step in, it just makes things worse because then they start tattling all the time on each other and my dd will scream if ds brushes by her.

This approach has seriously stopped most of the fighting we were having. They play together so much better now.

That sounds great. In my opinion, you ARE stepping in. The parents I am referring to don't do anything whatsoever.


----------



## 2tadpoles (Aug 8, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *katallen* 
My brother and I worked things out between ourselves when my mother got tired of the constant emotional drain and it was liberating for all of us. He gave as well as he got and my mother was a much calmer and better mother so it benefitted all of us. When I was ten she told us we were to old to hit and needed to talk things out and that also worked for us.

The way I see it is that if you're emotionally present with your children, things wouldn't get so incredibly out of control to begin with. Ten is too old to hit? Hitting is not acceptable at any age, IMO.

Quote:

I was also much better prepared for public school because I learned how to resolve things one way or another at home and that is pretty much what you have to do at school also.
So, until you were ten, did you resolve things at school by hitting?

Quote:

It didn't come as a huge shock when there was no one around to baby me through my emotions and the conflicts that came with sharing a playground and equipment with forty+ other children at recess.
Teaching and guiding your children is not babying them. It's called parenting.

Quote:

Teachers generally frown on the children that come to them with all of their problems and can't resolve things on their own when you get into public school.
Yep. One more reason to homeschool. Kids are individuals. Nobody can meet the daily emotional needs of 25 kids.


----------



## RedWine (Sep 26, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cmlp* 
And it doesn't matter that the kids are not actually violent with each other. All that needs to happen is that older and stronger brother takes a toy out of younger sister's hands. Period. No violence there. Was that good? Is it really fair to let them "work it out" in that situation? What, exactly, is the younger sister supposed to do in this situation besides protest vocally?



OMG, yes. These kids are always taking stuff out of my kids' hands, and I am always stepping in and nicely (but firmly) telling them to give it back. Thier parents do NOTHING. About anything. Ever.

Forget it, we're not hanging out with them anymore.


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

I havr to step in with my kids. I send therm to different rooms (or one can shoose to go outside). I tired that whole "let them work it out" thing for awhile, but then DS1 sent DS2 to the ER.


----------



## oliversmum2000 (Oct 10, 2003)

:

any ideas i can get to help my children get along is always appreciated


----------



## GuildJenn (Jan 10, 2007)

Barbara Coloroso's quick marker for the difference between "tattling" and "telling" is "will it get the person into trouble? (tattling) or out of trouble? (telling)." I find that helpful.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GuildJenn* 
Barbara Coloroso's quick marker for the difference between "tattling" and "telling" is "will it get the person into trouble? (tattling) or out of trouble? (telling)." I find that helpful.









Yeah, but if you're not punishing or causing "trouble" for people, then it's a moot point. Tattling can't really exist, I think.

I think so many kids (I know I did) would never go to adults for help, when it was *definitely* needed, for fear of reprisal. If we label them coming to us with information about another person needing help, or getting themselves into a dangerous situation, or having had something bad happen to them, as "tattling" (with all it's negative connotations), then how likely are they going to be to come to us with this information?

It's this kind of set up that predators and molestor use ALL the time to keep kids quiet--"Don't tell or you will get into trouble." I don't want my kids to have any hesitation to come to me if one of their friends is using drugs and in trouble, if someone has tried to take advantage of them, if they've done somthing to get themselves in a bind, etc, etc. So, I think the lines of communication have to be open and nonpunitive for a really long time to get to that place of trust, where it's just a GIVEN that they would come to me in any of those situations.

Anyway, hope some of that made sense...not enough coffee yet...Interesting conversation!


----------



## oliversmum2000 (Oct 10, 2003)

monkeys mom - i think you make a very good point, encourage them to come to you and tell you anything and everything, it is down to us how we respond to the information, we do not need to respond by telling another child off, and if the person 'telling' knows that no one will get into trouable as a result hopefully it will remove the antagonistic angle from telling you things and leave you with a child who has no fear of sharing things with you, which is very important.

i think that is a great idea, something i think i will definitely try t remember to put in to action.


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
Yeah, but if you're not punishing or causing "trouble" for people, then it's a moot point. Tattling can't really exist, I think.

My point in mentioning it was that it might be a clue that the parent is overly involved in the children conflicts or interactions to the point where a child *cannot* solve a disagreement on his own. A child should always know they _can_ go to the parent for help if they need it, but they should not feel they have to.

Quote:

I think so many kids (I know I did) would never go to adults for help, when it was *definitely* needed, for fear of reprisal.
This is one reason I think punishment is wrong. A child should never be afraid of his/her own parent. Getting into "trouble" is not something a child should ever have to worry about, imnsho.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnysideup* 
This is one reason I think punishment is wrong. A child should never be afraid of his/her own parent. Getting into "trouble" is not something a child should ever have to worry about, imnsho.

Yes! I think it's also interesting how many kids who do get into "trouble" and get punished, then seek to pass that along to *other* kids via "tattling." That's not a healthy dynamic, in my opinion--to want to see other kids get punished. And it must feel very conflicting to the child, you know?


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

I don't think it is that kids want to pass it along and see other kids get punished. I think it is that many kids have a healthy sense of justice. That is something I *want* my kids to have.


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
I don't think it is that kids want to pass it along and see other kids get punished.

I've known kids that most definitely did want to see other kids get punished.








Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
I think it is that many kids have a healthy sense of justice.

What does "justice" mean in this situation? 'Cause I think it often means when someone does something wrong they should be punished.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
That is something I *want* my kids to have.

I hope my kids know that everyone makes mistakes, and that generally, when someone does something "wrong" they just need guidance and help or more information to do better next time.


----------



## numericmama (Apr 27, 2005)

This is a very timely conversation for me right now. This weekend we were spending time with family.

Their discipline style is punitive, so when the kids tattle I think they are trying to get the other in trouble. Or at least it looked and felt like it to me. When both kids were doing something they would be punished for, it was like a race to tell on the other before being caught by the parents. And, they would try to cover up that they were participating. The parents response was, "I don't want to hear about it."







: Their point is to correct the behavior (or teach a better choice), but then, when they would find out about a problem, they say that they don't want to know about it.

I have noticed some new "tattleing" behaviors when my son and his BF play together. But, since they don't get punished or in trouble, I was taking a different view of it. When she would tell me what was going on, I'd say "Thank you" and go help. I really feel like it is coming from a place of concern within her. This felt like a really natural response to me, but after this weekend I was second guessing myself. Reading this thread, helps me feel more confident in my instinctive response though.

When the other two (punished) kids are together, I have no idea what to say or do when they tattle. Even if I am gentle and help them work it out, they have been punished so much that I think even my hearing the tattling will bring stress and fear to them. Then no matter what I do, it will feel like a punishment.


----------



## 4evermom (Feb 3, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
I don't think it is that kids want to pass it along and see other kids get punished. I think it is that many kids have a healthy sense of justice. That is something I *want* my kids to have.

We seem to have kids in this family with that kind of "eye for an eye" sense of justice. These aren't kids who are treated punitively, yet they do the tattling behavior. I'm trying to introduce the concept of karma since ds and his cousin seems to naturally gravitate towards revenge which invariably escalates (One person laughs at the other so the other retaliates by hitting).


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnysideup* 
What does "justice" mean in this situation?

I think it means that kids want to see that everyone gets treated equally, and that others aren't allowed to hurt others and disregard rules. It can be very frustrating for a child with a strong sense of justice see other kids do something immoral or against the rules, and the parents and adults don't see it or respond to it. Some kids are very sneaky and get away with alot, and for a child with a strong moral sense and a sense of justice, that can be very hard to watch.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnysideup* 
I hope my kids know that everyone makes mistakes, and that generally, when someone does something "wrong" they just need guidance and help or more information to do better next time.

This would be a philosophical difference, because I don't believe that generally people who do wrong are lacking in guidance, help or information. I think some people are, and I think some people choose their own selfish impulse over doing right. I think if we are honest with ourselves, each of us can identify instances in our lives where we knew what was right, we had help, guidance and information avaliable, and we simply chose to do what we wanted to do.


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
This would be a philosophical difference, because I don't believe that generally people who do wrong are lacking in guidance, help or information. I think some people are, and I think some people choose their own selfish impulse over doing right.

I think that's contrary to GD principles--(from the forum guidelines)"_It is based on the belief that children are born innately good and that our role as parents is to nurture their spirits as they learn about limits and boundaries, rather than to curb their tendencies toward wrongdoing..._" It changes the dynamic of teaching discipline if you believe your children might just "choose their own selfish impulse over doing right."


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
I think it means that kids want to see that everyone gets treated equally, and that others aren't allowed to hurt others and disregard rules. It can be very frustrating for a child with a strong sense of justice see other kids do something immoral or against the rules, and the parents and adults don't see it or respond to it. Some kids are very sneaky and get away with alot, and for a child with a strong moral sense and a sense of justice, that can be very hard to watch.

Absolutely--I have a "just" kid! He's all about the fairness. But, my overriding experience with kids in these situations is that they are not satisfied with everyone behaving equally, they are looking to make the "wrong-doer" pay. "Aren't you going to punish him/her?!" And if "fairness" means they get less, they're not so into the fairness anymore, you know?









Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
This would be a philosophical difference, because I don't believe that generally people who do wrong are lacking in guidance, help or information. I think some people are, and I think some people choose their own selfish impulse over doing right. I think if we are honest with ourselves, each of us can identify instances in our lives where we knew what was right, we had help, guidance and information avaliable, and we simply chose to do what we wanted to do.

But, we're talking about *kids* here. In many cases (with younger children) it's not even a matter of *choosing* the impulse, it's a developmental inablity to recognize it or combat it. I think most kids are trying to do the right thing and follow social norms...they just lack experience or tools.


----------



## marybethorama (Jun 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GuildJenn* 
I think there's a difference between working it out for them "Susan you're older so give John the toy," and monitoring/modelling/working with them. around HOW it is getting worked out "I'm taking the toy until you both have a plan to use it that you both agree with," or even just, "no pushing and no yelling. I will be right here while you work it out."

I agree


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

I would agree with the idea that *children* do wrong most often from lack of information and guidance - or simply immaturity. I only disagree with teaching the idea to my children that all wrong in the world is from lack of information, help or guidance.

When I talk about kids with a sense of justice, I'm talking more from my own experience as such a child - not from experience with many children. I was not a major tattler, but I did struggle with seeing others do wrong and parents and adults turning a blind eye. It wasn't that I wanted others punished. In fact, it would have embarrassed me to be perceived as the cause of someone elses "getting in trouble". But I hated and still hate to see children (people) be mean and not be called on it.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Furthermore









Being born good and staying good are two very different things. I don't at all see a conflict between acknowledging that as people grow they develop a sense of self with wants and desires as well as needs, and nuturing their spirits as they learn how that self fits in the world.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

LOL - the irony of this just caught me. Do you realize that the one who made the statement that people can do things for selfish reasons is also the one who tried to assign a positive "good" motive to the child who tattles? While the one who inisted that children are innately good was the one to assign a "wrong" motive to that child? Very funny!


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
LOL - the irony of this just caught me. Do you realize that the one who made the statement that people can do things for selfish reasons is also the one who tried to assign a positive "good" motive to the child who tattles? While the one who inisted that children are innately good was the one to assign a "wrong" motive to that child? Very funny!

Ha!









I think it really speaks to the damage that a punitive environment has on kids, though.

And I understood your point above about being a kid who didn't want to get another kid in trouble, rather just wanted to make sure that things were fair and kind. I've found that those kids are less likely to come to an adult in a "tattling" way--b/c they do know that in most worlds, the kid they are "reporting" *will* get in trouble. They tend to suffer quietly, in my experience.

And reason #459 why punishment ain't the way to go!


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

I'm not anti-punishment. However, I do think when imposed consequences are unjustly harsh that people are less likely to get help when they need it. There is a difficulty created when we are forced to go to judges for guidance. Would you go to the police department and report that you drove drunk last night and need some help?!


----------



## hottmama (Dec 27, 2004)

Well, my oldest is a tattler-- he even tattles on himself.







So if I NEED to know what happens, I can ask and find out, but if I don't need to know, I tell him.
I step in when necessary but that isn't often. My boys are both biggish (41 lb. 4 yr. old and a 23 lb. 16 mo. old). They take toys from each other, push each other, etc. but they don't generally hit or kick. If they need me they will scream or come get me. Parents who hover over their kids freak me out. Both of my boys are healthy, happy, and love each other to death.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hottmama* 
I step in when necessary but that isn't often. My boys are both biggish (41 lb. 4 yr. old and a 23 lb. 16 mo. old). They take toys from each other, push each other, etc. but they don't generally hit or kick. If they need me they will scream or come get me. Parents who hover over their kids freak me out. Both of my boys are healthy, happy, and love each other to death.

It doesn't concern you that they are internalizing taking and pushing as satisfactory problem solving skills? And just b/c they are both big doesn't mean that other kids they interact with are.


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
While the one who inisted that children are innately good was the one to assign a "wrong" motive to that child?

Well, just because children are innately good, does not mean they always do everything "right" or always behave in a way everyone likes. Maybe the child needs more guidance, help, or information.

More importantly, it's not so much that this a _wrong behavior_ that needs to be stopped, or that the motive is even important at all, but that it can be a clue into whether or not a parent or caregiver is overly involved in solving a child's conflicts.

Now, obviously, a child should come to his/her parent for help when they need it, and children do go through phases where they are concerned about rules, right and wrong, etc (I am really thankful that my kids always come to me whenever anyone is doing something unsafe, for instance)... so, I am not talking about the normal stuff... it's kids that cannot solve issues on their own, and run to an adult for _every little thing_, even when it doesn't necessarily involve them--might be a red flag to a parent to examine how they (the parents) are handling things. Maybe the child needs a little encouragement, help, or guidance to be more independent with conflict resolution. Maybe they enjoy the attention. I am still sure they are good kids though









Like heartmama said some posts back:_"I do think there are MANY parents who reinforce tattling by giving tacit approval to the tattler--children crave approval, and if they "tell" what another is doing wrong, they get roundabout approval for themselves. But that isn't the child's fault. It's completely up to the parent what significance they give to information that a child is picking his nose or whatever...."_


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
I would agree with the idea that *children* do wrong most often from lack of information and guidance - or simply immaturity. I only disagree with teaching the idea to my children that all wrong in the world is from lack of information, help or guidance.

I teach my children that when people do wrong things (immoral, not just unpreferable), it is because of a misunderstanding of their personal value/worth and that of others. I believe that- I don't think that there are people who fully understand their worth, that of others, and then choose to act in a way that can only be interpretted as utterly evil, without a gracious outlook. I am not sure if there are people who are utterly evil, but I'm not willing to make that judgement upon an individual and I don't want my children to do so either.

It's also much easier to live with people if we don't label the person, but rather the behaviour. This keeps my children from thinking the neighbour's children are evil or 'bad'. This does come up a lot over here because we love fairytales and the distinctions between the motivations of the 'good' and 'bad', respectively, characters are often clear, but in real life, that is rarely the case.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnysideup* 
Well, just because children are innately good, does not mean they always do everything "right" or always behave in a way everyone likes. Maybe the child needs more guidance, help, or information.

The point I was trying to make was that it is sometimes implied that if you believe your child capable of selfish behavior you must be a less compassionate, harsher parent - and as implied by the quote from the forum rules, must be focused on "curbing tendencies toward wrong doing". In fact just the opposite may occur depending on the parent. When I believe kids are capable of just plain choosing wrong just the same as I am, then I may be more forgiving and let things slide that others see as evidence of need for more guidance.

I don't believe a child who chooses wrong always needs more guidance, help or informaiton. Sometimes a child needs to learn by experience. S/he may "know" intellectually that X is wrong, but may not be able to truly grasp the implications until she has done it and is reaping the consequences. This is true of adults and children. Sometimes we know lot's of reasons not to do something, but it isn't until we feel the pain that we really get it.

I believe tattling is generally one of those issues. Other kids will teach you what happens if you tattle if parents aren't overly involved. However, children *must* feel safe coming to their parents, and they must be protected.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
I don't think that there are people who fully understand their worth, that of others, and then choose to act in a way that can only be interpretted as utterly evil, without a gracious outlook.

I'm not thinking so big - not so much thinking about evil. I'm thinking about little things. The fact that we all choose sometimes to do things just because we want to - in the face of good evidence to the contrary. It is not because we are evil. It is because we are human, and we love ourselves very much, and we want to do the things that make us happy. I think humans learn experientially - and sometimes we do what we know we shouldn't because we don't believe the evidence until it hits home.

(As an aside, I think that is why God told the Jews to do so many things without reasons attached - because the learning is in the *doing*.)


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
I don't believe a child who chooses wrong always needs more guidance, help or informaiton. Sometimes a child needs to learn by experience.

I agree that sometimes a person needs to learn by experience--The information a person needs might be first hand experience.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
S/he may "know" intellectually that X is wrong, but may not be able to truly grasp the implications until she has done it and is reaping the consequences. This is true of adults and children. Sometimes we know lot's of reasons not to do something, but it isn't until we feel the pain that we really get it.

I think people do this because they don't really believe the theory that X *is* wrong, and they are testing what is true for them--e.g. it might be illegal to drive over 55mph, you know that but you do not believe it is dangerous or wrong to go 65, so you do. You disagree with the theory that driving over 55 is wrong.

Maybe it's just a disagreement of semantics


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Yep, you disagree with the theory, until you rack up a few tickets, and have a frightening incident where you almost hit a deer with your babies in the back of the minivan. Then you start to think, hmmm, maybe they whole speed limit thing is a good idea. The idea with the imposed consequence is that the tickets will be enough incentive that you won't need to have a near fatal accident (or worse) - but some people don't get it.

I agree - there are very few - people who would get behind the wheel of a car and drive in a way they knew could hurt someone. And those that do generally are in need of help, guidance and information.

So, yep, sounds like a semantics thing - I love semantics!


----------



## LynnS6 (Mar 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
I think it means that kids want to see that everyone gets treated equally, and that others aren't allowed to hurt others and disregard rules. It can be very frustrating for a child with a strong sense of justice see other kids do something immoral or against the rules, and the parents and adults don't see it or respond to it. Some kids are very sneaky and get away with alot, and for a child with a strong moral sense and a sense of justice, that can be very hard to watch.

Don't forget too that a sense of justice and following the rules is also developmental as well as temperamental. I've got one who, temperamentally, is a rule follower. If he wants something sweet to eat, he'll ask me. As a toddler, he went around the neighborhood setting the recycling bins upright again because the helter-skelter way the recycling crew threw them down bothered him. He's got a very strong sense of justice and order.

And right now, he's developmentally in a stage (5 going on 6) where rules are VERY important to him. So, it's important that I acknowledge it when the rules get broken. But, I don't necessarily DO anything about it. I just listen most of the time.

He's not tattling to get dd into trouble, he's 'tattling' because it's driving him nuts that she's not following the rules. We had the same problem when they were playing hide-n-seek and dd kept wanting to tell ds where she was going to hide. It drove him NUTS. Those aren't the rules. Dd, meanwhile, is in a developmental stage where she's oblivious to the rules (2 going on 3). And temperamentally, she's much more laissez faire about them. When she wants something sweet to eat will take the whole bag of jelly beans and sit down with it - no asking involved!

We have neighbors, though, who clearly tattle. I know because they're often in the yard with our kids in the summers. And there is a malicious intent behind it. They're angry and want the other kid to get into trouble. I don't know if that's the result of the parenting they get or because they're a bit older. Either way, my response is either "Oh, OK." or "Hmm.. why are you telling me this?" After 2-3 incidents like this, they quit 'tattling' to me.


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
I'm not thinking so big - not so much thinking about evil. I'm thinking about little things. The fact that we all choose sometimes to do things just because we want to - in the face of good evidence to the contrary. It is not because we are evil. It is because we are human, and we love ourselves very much, and we want to do the things that make us happy. I think humans learn experientially - and sometimes we do what we know we shouldn't because we don't believe the evidence until it hits home.

(As an aside, I think that is why God told the Jews to do so many things without reasons attached - because the learning is in the *doing*.)


I agree, which is what I meant by us looking at people with a gracious outlook, otherwise everyone would look like the face of evil. I think that your example of needing to learn from experience fits into the lack of information/guidance spectrum. I don't believe that people purposefully choose to do what is harmful/wrong (which would make them utterly evil); I do think they make mistakes because of a lack of information and guidance of _some sort_. That's not to say that they haven't been _given_ help and guidance, and even lots of it, just that what they needed to make the _right_ choice was not included in that guidance (inadvertently). They may not even know what they were lacking, but I do think that all wrong-doing comes from a lack of understanding of some sort- I gave self-worth and that of others as the bottom line for when everything else has been accounted for.

I, too, love semantics!


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
Yep, you disagree with the theory, until you rack up a few tickets, and have a frightening incident where you almost hit a deer with your babies in the back of the minivan. Then you start to think, hmmm, maybe they whole speed limit thing is a good idea. The idea with the imposed consequence is that the tickets will be enough incentive that you won't need to have a near fatal accident (or worse) - but some people don't get it.

Or, maybe you were right and driving 65 works for you.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnysideup* 
Or, maybe you were right and driving 65 works for you.









Nope, it doesn't, because the law is 55 (actual 60 here in Texas). If I felt that passionately that the law was unjust, then I would lobby to change it. I would not simply disregard a law because I didn't like it or felt it was too restrictive and unneccesary. My sense of justice is too strong for that - I could not abide by being punished or even possibly punished for something I felt was right. If it's not a matter of "rightness", just a matter of preference, then I respect the laws of my community and expect others to do the same. It might not be "wrong" as in unsafe to drive 65, but it is "wrong" to subvert the law - if you accept the benefits of living in a community, then you need to accept the laws of that community.

I am not a moral relativist - I do believe that there is a standard of right and wrong outside of each of our individual minds, and I do believe that civic duty is part of rightness. If I'm not willing to participate in the community, then I should not live in the community. I am, however, conservative, meaning that I believe in minimalist gov't - less regulation, less taxation, less public assistance, less foreign meddling, less, less, less. But this is going on a huge rabbit trail and far from the topic, but it is interesting to see how our individual idiologies affect our view of discipline and parenting.









If the rule is no ice cream before bedtime, but dd decides that she thinks there is nothing wrong with eating ice cream before betime, and disregards the rule. Then you can bet as her parent I will impose my will upon her, so that she understands that subverting parental authority is wrong regardless of how she feels about the rules. If she has a problem with the rule, then she can come lobby the law maker (me) to change it, but she does not have the right to decide for herself that the law doesn't exist or doesn't apply to her.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
just that what they needed to make the _right_ choice was not included in that guidance (inadvertently).

Or maybe they just plain didn't "get" it - or maybe their need is so great that other humans cannot fill it - and they need divine assistance? Who's to say on those really big ones - grace and humility is the perfect attitude to have.


----------



## mamaduck (Mar 6, 2002)

IMO, the constant sibling bickering is the single most exhausting aspect of parenting. It trumps consant breastfeeding, 90 minute nighttime sleep cycles, teething, and three-year old tantrum phases. If you had asked me about this issue 8-10 years ago, I'd have given you a very different response than I will now. (I also think that bullying between unrelated children is a *very* different story all together, and I handle that differently.) And I have learned to tread very carefully when thinking about the way that other parent's deal with it, because its a big hard issue. I imagine that many parents feel at a loss much of the time. I know that I have felt at a loss plenty of times.

My kids get separated when they pass the point of reason. They get to a certain volume, or they get phsycial -- and then they are required to separate for awhile. I don't care where or how. I don't really want to hear details of the problem either, at least not in the heat of the moment -- though I will listen later if someone feels the need to vent some feelings.

I'm done intervening, negotiating, facilatating disscussion, etc. etc. etc. They can work it out without violence or shouting, or they can play separately. I don't want to know details. The general tenor around her escalates *very* obviously when I slip into the habit of mediating. The arguments and the fights increase dramatically when they feel they are able to put me in the middle of it.

But my kids are 6 and 10, and past the point of hairpulling and eye poking. It was different when they were smaller and one was more obviously at a disadvantage than the other.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaduck* 
I don't care where or how. I don't really want to hear details of the problem either, at least not in the heat of the moment -- though I will listen later if someone feels the need to vent some feelings.

I'm done intervening, negotiating, facilatating disscussion, etc. etc. etc. They can work it out without violence or shouting, or they can play separately. I don't want to know details.

Oooo, I *hated* it when my parents got like that! I can remember being 10 with that annoying bratty 6 year old sister like it was yesterday. I wanted them to *fix* her - she was such a pitb!







It'll be fun to see how I feel one of these days when it's my kids.


----------



## katallen (Jan 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
I dunno....if my kids need my help solving conflicts or soothing big emotions, then I'm going to help fill that need. Viewing it as "tattling" or "babying" doesn't help me meet their needs. YMMV.

I'm not so much concerned with the needs of some public school teacher as I am with my children's needs.

There won't be any public school teacher out there solving your child's needs. I am not saying that you should parent to please your child's teacher, I am saying you should prepare your child for what is to come in school (or rather what is not going to be there in school) which is a lack of supervision and an expectation that they will be working things out on their own. It is a huge shock to go from a situation where you are babied and your mother intervenes whenever your brother breathes near you or copies you to a situation where you are told not to tattle after someone hits you and are labeled and called a tattler or a crybaby by the teacher if you keep bringing things to them.

Obviously you should still help your children and respond to their needs and help them through their emotions when they need you. And I think that it is necessary to listen to them when they spill out their frustration and to empathize with them even if you don't go over and solve things for them. There are some things though that they really can work out on their own like being copied, breathed on, or having to wait a long time for a turn.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Wow.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

:

Didn't know I wasn't working... why do I feel like I need a vacation?














:


----------



## mamaduck (Mar 6, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
Oooo, I *hated* it when my parents got like that! I can remember being 10 with that annoying bratty 6 year old sister like it was yesterday. I wanted them to *fix* her - she was such a pitb!







It'll be fun to see how I feel one of these days when it's my kids.









Okay, but the thing is -- the 6 yo. does not need to be fixed. He is just being 6. He is being the same exact way the 10 yo. was when he was 6. So, yeah -- a 6 yo. can be annoying -- but if big bro. can't take it in stride, then he needs to walk away. I know my post sounded hard nosed, and to be honest, I do sympathize with him about having a younger sib -- since _I am the oldest of 4_ and I know full well what it feels like. BUT -- it just plain does not help to step in and mediate. It *always* makes matters worse. Every. Single. Time. To the point that it would be illogical to continue banging my head on the wall.

I think what it boils down to is a boundary issue. The fact is -- its NOT MY JOB to work out every little squirmish between them. Its not my job to keep them from annoying each other. They will be annoyed in life, and they can and should problem solve when that happens. Its not doing them any favors to let them expect that I will do it for them. They CAN work stuff out, or the CAN walk away. But if I get involved, then they WON'T. They will put it on me.

When they were little and it was about toy grabbing, then I did step in and say, "_Sorry dude, your brother was still playing with that."_ But that phase was over so fast.

I think my posts on this thread sound harsh, and a big part of that is probably due to the fact that I'm burned out when it comes to sibling bickering. Things are going SO MUCH better with me just STAYING on the outside of things. I'm coming to the conclusion that I was doing them a disservice when I used to get overly-involved. I should have been giving them more credit -- they can cope. I taught them the skills they need when they were toddlers.


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaduck* 
They CAN work stuff out, or the CAN walk away. But if I get involved, then they WON'T. They will put it on me.









:


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Oh, mamaduck, I wasn't criticizing, just remembering - I don't think you sound harsh. I think you sound normal


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
Oooo, I *hated* it when my parents got like that! I can remember being 10 with that annoying bratty 6 year old sister like it was yesterday. I wanted them to *fix* her - she was such a pitb!







It'll be fun to see how I feel one of these days when it's my kids.









Of course! All kids hate it when their parents refuse to do what they REALLY (on some level) want and say: "Oh poor darling, your sister is so annoying and you are totally not at fault and your sister will be in big trouble and we really love you better anyway."









When I say I "stay out of it" I mean I NEVER EVER EVER EVER blame one child unless TRUE physical harm is at issue.

So if one child is just hitting another I might say "You two cut it out right now. No hitting allowed' and if the hitting did not stop I would seperate them. But I would not blame one.

I would only single one out in this scenario: "Ellie you can NOT push your sister near the stairs. She could fall and really get hurt"

I do not get involved in "she was mean to me" etc.... I WILL listen privately to those concerns but I make very few suggestions, just listen and empathize "It's hard to be the littlest, Huh?"


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya44* 
Of course! All kids hate it when their parents refuse to do what they REALLY (on some level) want and say: "Oh poor darling, your sister is so annoying and you are totally not at fault and your sister will be in big trouble and we really love you better anyway."









Exactly!


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
Or maybe they just plain didn't "get" it - or maybe their need is so great that other humans cannot fill it - and they need divine assistance? Who's to say on those really big ones - grace and humility is the perfect attitude to have.

Absolutely! Heehee, I just thought I'd leave that up to others to conclude (since I'm still pretty new here), although I, too, believe that to be the case. This why sometimes, when our eldest doesn't seem concerned about his behaviour toward his brothers, despite our explanations, we offer him a little bit of such guidance (the divine sort), from the perspective of grace, to which he is unusually receptive (he's a precocious child who's been asking serious questions regarding God since he was 16 months old).

I agree that it is very interesting to see how we view our children and discipline them according to our underlying ideologies. This thread is quite interesting!


----------



## monkeys4mama (Apr 25, 2006)

I haven't read every post in this thread but have been following some of it and have been thinking about it for a couple of days. I have very strong personal feelings about this subject b/c of my own experiences growing up.

I was a second child, about 2 yrs younger than my brother who had a pretty severe case of ADHD which was not treated in those days. Well, some people did treat it, but our ped didn't believe in stimulants and my parents didn't want to use them. My dad was drinking at the time (he's since sobered up but at the time he was pretty remote and unavailable due to alcohol use) and my mom was pretty overwhelmed and stressed out. Brother was constantly on the move, constantly challenging everyone, constantly getting into my stuff, pushing me around, bullying me, etc.

I know my parents tried to do what was right, but at the time, my mom said that all the popular child psychology promoted "letting kids work things out on their own" and only intervening in extreme cases. They also promoted punishing both kids equally for fights, etc. This was supposed to help kids learn to negotiate their own problems and was supposed to prevent sibling rivalry. I am sure my parents meant well, but I had a pretty miserable time growing up and learned to be a victim and to tolerate being taken advantage of and not having my boundaries respected.

I can remember that my brother used to tease me mercilessly, calling me names, taunting me about my poor athletic skills, about being fat (I prolly ate a lot as a result of many mixed-up emotions), about my name (nothing really wrong w/ it, but he'd find whatever he could to tease me). And he'd take my stuff and often break it or mess it up or lose it or just beat it up in the process of using it. Sometimes that was intentional and willfull, sometimes it was just a result of his inattentiveness and impulsivity and recklessness. He would steal and eat my Halloween candy, he'd take my money, he'd cut my dolls' hair off, he even swung my pet gerbil around in circles by the tail until the tip of her tail broke off! When I saved up my money from chores and allowances to buy a brand new ten-speed bike, he took it and rode out down to the river fishing and scratched it all up and tore the grip-wrap stuff off the handlebars. He never hit me or beat me up, but sometimes he would hold me down and tickle me mercilessly until I was screaming and begging him to stop, but he wouldn't. And he was too strong for me to overcome.

There was just nothing in my life that felt safe from him. And I felt like my parents didn't help me. They tried sometimes, but it was ineffectual and usually too late. I think they found him exhausting too. And they saw interventions as being against the popular parenting advice. I remember feeling grateful when we got sent to our rooms b/c it meant he couldn't pick no me anymore. Even though it really wasn't fair many times that I was being punished when I was just fighting back. If there was ever any punishment, it was almost always both of us getting the same punishment. Sometimes I felt like my brother would bait me to get in fights and get us grounded b/c he wanted me to miss out on something I wanted to do, etc. I seriously question how a policy like this was supposed to prevent sibling rivalry. It only made me resent him and my parents. And the lack of guidance and supervision in resolving conflicts left me at the mercy of my older, stronger and more sophisticated brother.

All that really did serious damage to my self-esteem and created a lot of problems in me that I am still working through today. I look at myself now, as a 40 yr old adult and realize that my childhood experiences had a lot to do with a lot of the poor decisions and relationship choices I made in my life. I'm sure it has something to do with why I married someone who doesn't respect my boundaries and with whom I constantly feel undervalued and like my feelings don't matter.







I had a long string of relationships in my life that were pretty much like that. I didn't learn to be assertive, to seek out people who treated me well, to expect to be treated with respect and fairness, to demand justice, etc, etc, etc. I could go on. But you get the picture.

For years, I was not really conscious of how this upbringing had affected me. I love my parents and I think they did the best they could. And I even love my brother and forgive him for much of that. His ADHD was a big factor beyond his control. But nonetheless, it resulted in my child self growing up in an environment where I felt alone, unprotected and victimized. I learned a sense of helplessness and powerlessness. It didn't teach me to resolve conflicts on my own. It taught me that my place was subservient to whomever had greater strength and power than me.









I encourage parents to help their kids learn the skills to resolve conflicts on independently. But not to just leave them alone to do it. Observe them and offere guidance where it would be helpful. And by all means, step in and intervene and take control of the situation when necessary. I'm trying to do that with my kids and I think it's working reasonably well. I have to laugh sometimes b/c my older kids sometimes get in fights and are not doing well at working things out, so I go and ask them if they need my help to resolve the problem. Usually they prefer to work it out on their own and will tell me so. But the mere act of my suggesting intervention is usually enough to get them back on track towards a more fair and just resolution. I'm hoping that means I taught them the right skills when I did intervene. And sometimes I still do intervene. But it's nice when I don't have to. So I think the kids do learn the skills w/ help from grown-ups. Prolly better than w/o grown-up intervention.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

I think that is a good point Ellen. As someone else put it - I was the type to "suffer in silence". How is suffering in silence learning to solve problems?

I was physically abused on the bus by a boy (who ended up being an arsenist and torched the school) and never said a word. My little sister told my parents, and they went to the school about it. It was hugely embarrassing to me. I have just never liked conflict and confrontation. I think parents have to be aware that these kind of kids are out there and make sure they are safe and learning to stand up for themselves. Being stood up for by my parents taught me that I was worthwhile and to stand up for myself - I still hate conflict, but I do better than I used to.


----------



## mamaduck (Mar 6, 2002)

I think there is a difference between "leaving them to work it out," and ignoring blatant misbehavior and rule breaking. When personal property is being destroyed, a child is hitting/hurting others, using bad language, and name calling -- these things are much bigger than just a "sibling issue." In our house these behaviors break the fundemental family rule that we treat each other with respect. In the situations you describe, Ellen, the behaviors needed to be addressed. But it would not be about negotiating differences between two kids -- it would be about addressing the fact that basic rules are being broken.


----------



## monkeys4mama (Apr 25, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaduck* 
I think there is a difference between "leaving them to work it out," and ignoring blatant misbehavior and rule breaking. When personal property is being destroyed, a child is hitting/hurting others, using bad language, and name calling -- these things are much bigger than just a "sibling issue." In our house these behaviors break the fundemental family rule that we treat each other with respect. In the situations you describe, Ellen, the behaviors needed to be addressed. But it would not be about negotiating differences between two kids -- it would be about addressing the fact that basic rules are being broken.

Yeah, I really wish that my parents had gotten that message. Sometimes I think people read parenting books or study various parenting theories and take the conclusions too far. They mean well, but all "rules" about parenting must be applied with common sense and flexibility to adapt to each individual situation. Sometimes when I read things on the parenting and discipline boards I shake my head and wonder if such extreme and "to-the-letter" applications of various parenting philosophies are a good or healthy idea. Ykwim? There are very good ideas going around. But just remember to keep paying attention to the situation and evaluating whether the approach is working and whether it's truly appropriate to the circumstance. Had my older brother not had severe ADHD w/ all the accompanying impulse control, hyperactivity, aggressiveness, inability to attend to and therefore perceive and empathize with my feelings, etc, then my parents could have prolly allowed us to work things out on our own a lot more. But as it was, the situation was just not conducive to that sort of parenting approach. I know my mom was exhausted herself and maybe she didn't have it in her to spend more time referreeing and all that. I dunno. I just like to encourage all parents at all times to be flexible with their philosophical ideals about parenting, and to be observant about how they're working out and what's happening, so that when a different approach is needed, they'll be able to recognize it and implement it.


----------



## gaialice (Jan 4, 2005)

I am stepping in very late in this thread to say that "not taking sides" (what I do) is one thing, and "do nothing" (like what monkeys4mama's parents where doing) is another. What you went through, monkeys4mama, is very very sad, and it is great that you turned into such a compassionate mom for your kids.

Yet, as for adults intervention, it is nice that it works in your family, monkeys4mama, but in mine, it really did not work at all, not least because I find it hard (in fact impossible) to remain calm in the face of bickering over petty things several times in close succession (I mean, I saw them bickering over a wooden stick in the middle of a park, full of sticks of course!!!!).

I do intervene in my kids bickering, I surely do. When they fight over a toy, I take the toy and take it with me in the kitchen or wherever I was initially and then I say that the girls need to work things out on their own. More often than not at this point, I'm at a point where - if I said anything - it would not be GD and it would likely be something I will later regret, because as a pp mentioned seeing your kids fight is so nerves wrecking. So I try to be myself for a little while - concentrate on any task will help me calm down, like preparing dinner, putting stuff away.... Honestly, more than 9 times out of ten, by the time I have regained my calm I can hear that the two have found an agreement and they come and ask to have their toy back and I always give it back ASAP. Noone gets punished for bickering, but bickering and attacking your sibling is not OK in our family (it does happen, of course, but no, it is not OK)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkeys4mama* 
If there was ever any punishment, it was almost always both of us getting the same punishment. Sometimes I felt like my brother would bait me to get in fights and get us grounded b/c he wanted me to miss out on something I wanted to do, etc. I seriously question how a policy like this was supposed to prevent sibling rivalry. It only made me resent him and my parents.

Punishments suck. The only effect of punishment is always and consistently to provoke resentment... Yet, punishment is one thing, doing nothing, is another. When a kid is swinging a

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkeys4mama* 
pet gerbil around in circles by the tail until the tip of her tail broke off!

is not GD, it is neglect, of the child (and the pet, if I may add). Doing nothing, in any realm of parenting including of course sibling disputes is not GD.


----------



## CJNeeley (Jun 8, 2005)

Well I do a bit of 'stepping in' and a bit of letting them 'work it out themselves'
They are young, 3 and 4, so working it out themselves tends to be small and limited. But they do sort of tend towards what would probably be perceived as "tattling" and it's for these issues I generally urge them to handle themselves. For example, 4 yo will come in and say his brother is calling him a cookiehead (yes, in their world this is a horrible offense)... so I will tell him things like "Tell him you don't like that. Tell him what you'd like him to call you instead." And if that doesn't work and he comes back with the persistent complant I'll say something like "Well since it clearly bothers you, tell him you don't want to play with him if he's going to call you that and if he won't stop then go play by yourself for awhile." So if they 'tattle' I basically give them ways of handling it, and if they frequently come with the same old complaint I'll ask them what they think they should do about it and/or what they have tried so far that is not working etc... because really I think most kids 'tattle' because they feel unable to handle the situation themselves. (Although, I have seen some of the ones pps are talking about who are seeking trouble/punishment to fall on the other party and some will even go so far as to tell you what they think that trouble/punishment should be. I don't think this is the intent of every child or even every child raised with a punishment mindset. And even when a child _wants_ you to do something about it, they are still seeking you out because it's bigger then they can handle and they need help...you just sometimes have to choose your own method of helping)

They go to sunday school and I think it's important they learn how to handle smaller things on their own or seperate themselves from the offender, so they are not running to the teacher for everything and being dismissed. Because that way when they really need the teacher's help/intervention it is more likely they will hear them out... I have worked with children in the past and seen teachers who will interrupt children/cut them off with "Stop whining and go play" without even knowing yet if there is a problem. (And had them tell me "If you listen to them you will only make it worse.") One of them actually got suspended when she dismissed a child without listening saying "You are fine, go play." when they came up to her crying because later after a trip to the infirmary the child was sent to the hospital for symptoms of a concussion and turned out to have actually cracked her skull falling from the swing. Now I'm not sure it made a difference in the teacher and I honestly think she consistently did the same thing before and after, and know for a fact from hearing out of her own mouth that she saw the suspension as a fluke, felt she had done nothing wrong, and felt it was just a legal tactic by the school because they were afraid of being sued and wanted to be able to tell the parents they had done something about the situation. (The handling of whole thing actually scared me away from deciding to go into childcare/teaching profession...which is really another story but it was just to cold-hearted and hands off for me.)

And I really feel that in a way the hand off dealing with the teachers and only intervening when it turns serious/severe is sort of the same idea as what you were talking about with not intevening on the little things and feeling like you weren't equipped to deal with them. But I also feel there is a difference in letting kids work things out and letting them fend for themselves... When a child is unequipped and left to fend for himself he doesn't know what to do and he has no one to turn to for advice when he feels stuck/out of ideas...he often ends up with more remorse because he wasn't ever really comfortable with how he dealt with the situation--even as he was doing it--but he felt he didn't have a better option and was chosing what he most could live with. But when are more involved and you give that child more guidance and advice he has more tools to draw from when he's in those tough situations. But they still need to learn to face things themselves, so it a matter of helping them deal with things rather than dealing with it for them. And with a lot of kids you're going to have to do the balancing act until they are preteens and with some until they are much older...but it's a progressive thing you transition from giving them ideas to asking them questions to help them brainstorm their own ideas as they are ready. In the end, it's nice to be hands-off and it's good development for the kid the get his own hands around the problem, but to get there successfully it starts out with being pretty hands-on. One of those seeming paradoxes...much like responding to your babies needs makes them more capable of being independent rather than making them more clingy. Ignoring things doesn't make them better, whether you are a parent or a child...


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *gaialice* 
(I mean, I saw them bickering over a wooden stick in the middle of a park, full of sticks of course!!!!).

.

Glad my kids aren't the only ones!


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *katallen* 
I was also much better prepared for public school because I learned how to resolve things one way or another at home and that is pretty much what you have to do at school also. It didn't come as a huge shock when there was no one around to baby me through my emotions and the conflicts that came with sharing a playground and equipment with forty+ other children at recess.
Teachers generally frown on the children that come to them with all of their problems and can't resolve things on their own when you get into public school.

Your teachers let you guys get into fights? In elementary school? Lousy playground supervision then.


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LynnS6* 
OK so it sounds like you were a highly sensitive child (have you read the book, The Highly Sensitive Child? you should). I've got 2, so I know.

But, it sounds like your parents DIDN'T teach you how to deal with the micro stuff. "Ignore it" isn't teaching. What if they'd said to you instead:

"He's really bugging you, isn't he? Do you want to keep playing here or would you be more comfortable somewhere else? How do you think you can get him to stop?" Or something along those lines.

YES!!! Exactly!!! That is *EXACTLY* the kind of thing I wish they'd done and *exactly* what I'm hoping to goodness I manage to pull off with my own kids.

Now, things weren't quite as bad as my first post probably made them out to be. For one thing, we were 5 years apart in age so by the time I was 10 and he was 5, I'd mostly just carry him around upside down (which he *loved*) if he bugged me.


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
Yeah, but if you're not punishing or causing "trouble" for people, then it's a moot point. Tattling can't really exist, I think.

Oh there was a little girl in my neighborhood growing up who was definitely a tattler. But she stopped tattling to my mom who would just look her right in the eye and ask "why are you telling me this? I *know* it's not to get Soandso in trouble because you know I don't work that way." She'd still come to my mom and chat about everything else under the sun, but she stopped tattling.


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *katallen* 
to a situation where you are told not to tattle after someone hits you and are labeled and called a tattler or a crybaby by the teacher if you keep bringing things to them.









: You seriously think this is okay? OMG if that had happened to me in school I would've been pulled out as soon as I got home and the teacher would have been fired for incompetency. Although, just to reiterate, if kids are getting hit the supervision's insufficient anyway.


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

I should clarify, I wasn't coming to my parents with "he's breathing on me" "he's bugging me" I was telling him to "stop it!". If they'd realized that me saying "stop it!" was a prelude to becoming angry and had stepped in as.I.started.to.feel.overwhelmed then maybe I would've been able to learn to cope faster. And the only problem was my little brother because he was the one I was around for long periods in smaller spaces. Kids at school A. mostly didn't get into those situations with me, and B. when they did they actually stoped when I said to stop (mainly because it didn't happen as often).

As it is, I still want to rip my own ears out in many cases, and I've had to go for walks or put on headphones and hum to keep from yelling at people. (Seriously folks, just blow.your.nose if you sniff, it's going to come back and then you'll make that revolting fingernails on the chalkboard noise again.)


----------



## Ex Libris (Jan 31, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mama2mygirl* 







:
My dd has always been small for her age and way too many parents of kids who towered over her would say, "Let them work it out. " And I really want to say, "Who do you think will win? My tiny daughter or your child who out weighs her by twenty pounds?"
My only regret is not stepping in earlier. DD has also always loved the train table and has been knocked down by way too many boys. And it is almost always boys. To the point where, at four, she really has to see that a boy is gentle before she'll play with him. She's afraid and says she doesn't like boys. (Yes, we talk about it. I don't leave it at that.) And I have to say, I see her point. If I had been knocked down again and again by boys, I'd feel a little weary too.

My ds is very gentle, and he's been scared by other boys, too. He usually only wants to play with girls now.


----------



## monkeys4mama (Apr 25, 2006)

As far as "tattling" goes, I have followed an example made at the kids school which I think can be helpful. They teach the kids that there is a difference between "tattling" and "reporting". Tattling is when you go tell on someone in order to get that person in trouble. Reporting is when you tell on someone b/c the behavior violates the "bottom line" rules (no violence, threatening, teasing, etc) AND you have been unable to get the person to stop by other means.

You can still pick that theory apart and find problems with that approach, as with virtually anything, but I do think it's a useful paradigm. There are cases where behavior is quite obviously tattling to get someone in trouble and that's really easy to identify by these guidelines. And there are plenty of cases where the kids have not tried to work it out first and so I give suggestions and send them back. And the kids seem to understand the distinctions most of the time, so it's helpful to all of us. And it's important to me that serious behaviors DO get reported (read my post about how I feel that too little intervention can lead to victimization). Usually this approach works pretty good at getting me there to help when they are truly significant conflicts that should be "reported".


----------

