[email protected]

In a message dated 6/2/02 6:22:08 AM Central Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:

<< P.S. You probably have already, but have you read the books written by
Adele Faber and Elaine Mazlish? They wrote How To Talk So Kids Will Listen
& Listen So Kids Will Talk, which I would recommend for folks who don't
have kids to read, and Siblings Without Rivalry, which I haven't read, but
I'll bet there's some good stuff in there, too.
>>

Well, she beat me to my suggestion!!
I think before you even consider sending your kids to school, it should be
required reading.
Assign yourself the Siblings without Rivalry for sure!!! And then make it a
point to find out what needs are not being met that is contributing to the
anger.
Just because you're a homebody, doesn't mean that they will be happiest that
way.
I don't know if you've tried to get to the root of this by finding out if
each of them is happy with the way things are set up, but I get the feeling
that getting away from the house more would be good for them.
You may have to call in assistance for this, since you need the at home time.
I've found that when my kids are getting really cranky with each other, they
just need a break or a change of pace.

Ren

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/2/02 8:46:16 PM Central Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:

<< An older child won't want to admit fear of a younger one. A boy won't
want
to admit fear of a girl. >>

You haven't met my five y.o. dd!! Both the boys admit being scared of her
sometimes...they even joke about being scared of a younger girl. But she can
be rather intense when she's pissed!!
Ren

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/2/02 8:46:16 PM Central Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:

<< One thing I have heard is that sibling rivalry is really a way that kids
compete for our attention. >>

Yes. Or for sibling attention.
My dd will do the most annoying things to the boys in order to get their
attention if they're ignoring her.

I think time alone with each child can help, away from the house. We do
special "date" nights with the kids.
If one of them is purposely annoying another one, that is a BIG signal to me
that they need some one on one.
"let's go bake some cookies" (or whatever makes that child happy) is usually
all it takes. A pillow fight ends as soon as anyone is getting stressed out.
Being involved in the pillow fight with them could help too.
I think we are responsible to pick up on the cues they give us. If we don't,
and it erupts into something unhappy, who is really to blame? The more
experienced, aware parent? Or the child that depends on us?
I think most of the time it's me that sets the tone or needs to pick up on
cues sooner.
Ren

Shannon Vale

Another idea to add to the pot...

I remember a friend who homeschooled, and was going through something of the
same experience with two boys constantly fighting both at home and out with
friends, deciding to take one year to do nothing else but unlearn their
current behavior. Everything else came second - from putting on their
clothes, to going grocery shopping, to hiking in the woods, to building a
fort, to sitting on the couch, to reading. Whatever they were doing,
wherever they were going, my friend's number one thought was "we're going to
do this co-operatively" and the moment an incident began to brew, she would
curtail whatever the activity was, and focus on the behavior and correct it
before it got out of hand. If she stuck with her plan I suspect it took a
lot less than a year for it to work, but unfortunately, we moved away, and I
don't know how it all worked out. But I thought it was a great idea to focus
on.

My kids went through a battling each other stage, long enough for me to
recall thinking life would never change. After far too long a time of me
listening to them yelling and fighting and explanations of he hit me first,
she threw that, he did this, she did that and driving me up the wall, and me
trying many of the suggestions mentioned here on the list already, I tried
something different. I told them that whenever I heard what I thought was a
fight brewing, I would intervene and they would have to stop whatever it is
they were doing and would have to come and sit down with me and either 1)
re-enact the preceding scene frame by frame for me so I could get a clear
picture of what the problem was and how to resolve it, or 2) each in turn
would tell me his/her side of the story and I would sit as judge after
listening to both sides. I described to them that this was similar to what
happens when adults have fights they can't or won't fix on their own - they
go to court and someone sits in judgement; the judge might get it right, but
he might get it wrong. In both scenarios I would get the kids to pinpoint
exactly when things started to go wrong, what they could have done to make
it head in a better direction, what we could do to ensure it wouldn't go
wrong another time under the same circumstances, and I set it up for them to
watch for key triggers in the future, asking them that when either of them
noticed one of these triggers in the future, to come tell me. As time went
on, my daughter was better able to see the triggers as they were happening,
while my son generally didn't twig to them until after the fact with me
having to draw it out of him - but the point was, allowing them to take on
the responsibility for their personal well-being was a great experience for
all of us - taking this tack eliminated the me against them/them against
each other scenario. And one of the best things I thought, was that the
consequence of their actions was no longer anger, but talk, and I always
left it to them to settle the dispute and figure out how justice could best
be served. It dawns on me now that if it was attention from me they were
seeking, then they got their reward, because they got oodles of attention
from me as I listened to their stories of the battle just fought and I can
outtalk anyone any day of the week - something they learned from those
experiences. I'm sure one of the greatest lessons they learned from all that
is that being subjected to another session with their long-winded mother was
simply not worth the battle - it was easier to stop fighting.

shannon

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

Shelly G

--- Shannon Vale <shannonvale@...> wrote:
I told them that whenever I
> heard what I thought was a
> fight brewing, I would intervene and they would have
> to stop whatever it is
> they were doing and would have to come and sit down
> with me and either 1)
> re-enact the preceding scene frame by frame for me
> so I could get a clear
> picture of what the problem was and how to resolve
> it, or 2) each in turn
> would tell me his/her side of the story and I would
> sit as judge after
> listening to both sides.

Shannon, I think this is an excellent way to handle
this problem! My kids are 11 years apart, so I think
it probably won't apply much in our family, but I
think it's a thoughtful way to approach this subject.

Shelly

=====
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever does." -- Margaret Mead

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

[email protected]

This was a great post Shannon, THanks, I'm going to offer this to my two
oldest kids. They sometimes need alot of help.
BTW< There is a neighborhood near where we are moving called Shannon Dale!
~Elissa Cleaveland
"It is nothing short of a miracle that the modern methods of instruction
have
not yet entirely strangled the holy curiosity of inquiry." A. Einstein

tamlvee

--- In Unschooling-dotcom@y..., "Shannon Vale" <shannonvale@h...>
wrote:
I'm sure one of the greatest lessons they learned from all that
> is that being subjected to another session with their long-winded
mother was
> simply not worth the battle - it was easier to stop fighting.
>
> shannon
>

This is a great technique. I will start using it today. I was
wondering how old your children are/were when you started this. Do
they still have "eruptions" now and then? I can handle an eruption
now and then, it's the day to day, seemingly continuous bickering
that wears me down. This is going to help me. Thank you for posting
this idea.

Tammy

[email protected]

When my boys have lost it with one another (which happens less and less as
they get older, and partly because of what follows), I speak with them
separately. I'll let Marty, the younger one, tell his whole story, and vent
about his brother, and tell me that Kirby is ALWAYS that way, and Marty's
adrenaline starts to dissipate, and Kirby can't interrupt. I'll try to find
something actually needed and useful and soothing for Marty to do (even if
it's just watch TV with Holly or to go play with the dog, and if he's willing
then I know where he is and that he has something better to think about than
what just happened). Then I go to Kirby and I summarize, calmly, what Marty
said. I get Kirby's response, I read his eyes and body language, I argue
Marty's argument so that Kirby will see Marty's point of view without having
to interact with Marty while he's still angry. I soothe Kirby and remind him
that it's hard for Marty to be so close in age, or whatever's appropriate for
the situation. Maybe it's "It's hard for Marty since you had company all
weekend and he didn't have anyone special to hang out with, and now he wants
to hang out with you. I KNOW you're tired, but think of it from his point of
view." Whatever it might be.

Then I go back to Marty and tell him Kirby's side, and how Kirby seems to
feel about it, and could he just wait until afternoon maybe, until Kirby's
had some time alone.

The benefits are that they get to argue with someone who loves them instead
of someone they've just been furious with. They still get to say their piece
and run it through their mental process, and each hears the other's point of
view, but filtered through a long-time witness, not directly and hurtfully.
And my benefit is I know where their understandings are, what compassion
they're developing, what their patience level is becoming, etc.

Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/3/02 10:13:44 AM Central Daylight Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:


> The benefits are that they get to argue with someone who loves them instead
> of someone they've just been furious with. They still get to say their
> piece
> and run it through their mental process, and each hears the other's point
> of
> view, but filtered through a long-time witness, not directly and hurtfully.
>
> And my benefit is I know where their understandings are, what compassion
> they're developing, what their patience level is becoming, etc.
>
> Sandra

Thanks Sandra! I am going to start trying this. We have always used the *come
here and sit down and both of you will get a chance to tell Mom/Dad what the
problem is* way to solve the really big knock down drag out fights (and the
little ones too) but in the past year this way hasn't worked as well as it
used to. Mainly because it just ends in a screaming match to see who goes
first to tell us the *REAL* story! (I almost want to run away laughing
because 6 and 8 year olds can come up with some very persuasive arguments as
to why it should be him/her who goes first!) Any way, separating the kids and
allowing them each time to tell their side, cool off and have Mom and Dad do
the argument for them sounds very positive.
Has there ever been a time when this didn't work? And is this the most
drastic measure you have ever taken?
~Nancy


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/3/02 9:40:39 AM, Dnowens@... writes:

<< Has there ever been a time when this didn't work? >>

There have been times when one of them stayed angry for a few hours, but that
was the worst.

<<And is this the most drastic measure you have ever taken? >>

Well I've used yelling and shaming, directed toward Kirby. Not more
effective, by any means. More a release of my OWN frustration and
adrenaline, and it didn't set a very good example at all. It let him know I
was really frustrated, but it wasn't positive.

There were times when they were younger that I would keep them apart for
hours, and finally they'd need the partner or opponent for a game or
something and THEY would say that's long enough, we're fine now, can we play
together?

Something I've tried throughout to keep aware of is to watch when they're
good to another sibling and comment on it in private. Like...
"Marty, thanks for helping Holly with that puppet. She was getting really
frustrated." (She's making marionettes out of cardboard tubes and stuff)
"Kirby, thanks for letting Marty go with you guys to play D&D. I hope he
didn't bug you too much," and Kirby got to say, "No, it was fine. He was
cool."

Stuff like that. Again, it's not just feedback and positive reinforcement
for them, but it's information gathering for me.

Sandra

Julie Stauffer

<<Has anyone else gone through this with close in age boys?>>

My brother and I were just like your sons. We were 2 years apart in age and
basically despised each other, and we went to school :)

We had lots of fistfights, scratches, very ugly arguments. After I grew up,
my Mom told me that there were days when she fantasized about not coming
home from work, just driving straight out of town so she wouldn't have to
put up with the fighting.

What I remember as having an effect was she simply kicked us out into the
yard and locked the door. She said she couldn't control us, couldn't stop
it, but it made her crazy and she didn't feel like she should have to be
crazy because we wanted to pick at each other.

It did calm us down. Before I think we would get out of hand because we
knew my mom would step in and save us from serious injury. We could be
jerks because mom wouldn't let anything bad happen. Steve and I still don't
like each other much but I haven't stuck my tongue out at him in years
<grin>.

Julie

Julie Stauffer

As I have been reading along with all the posts, I wonder if Patti can put
the ball in the kids' court? Can you call a family forum and state simply
that you understand the older kids have trouble getting along but that you
and the toddler are being negatively impacted and something has to give?

If the scenario were different and the two older ones were playing music so
loud that the little guy couldn't sleep, how would you handle it?

If the older guys were having fun with the burn pile but leaving matches
laying around that could damage the little guys, how would you handle it?

I think Patti is probably right that the kids get a kick out of the
bickering but she and the little guy have the right to not have their home
turned into a war zone day in and day out.

Julie

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/3/02 11:14:10 AM Central Daylight Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:


> <<And is this the most drastic measure you have ever taken? >>
>
> Well I've used yelling and shaming, directed toward Kirby. Not more
> effective, by any means. More a release of my OWN frustration and
> adrenaline, and it didn't set a very good example at all. It let him know
> I
> was really frustrated, but it wasn't positive.
>
> There were times when they were younger that I would keep them apart for
> hours, and finally they'd need the partner or opponent for a game or
> something and THEY would say that's long enough, we're fine now, can we
> play
> together?

That's what I was wondering about, keeping them apart for a good length of
time. That and grounding. Have you ever used that?
I don't mean to sound so nosy, I just like to pick brains. In our house I am
the laid back parent, but the *heavy* when it comes to punishments (if that's
a good word for it) and Darin is the more reserved parent but a pushover when
it comes down to making the kids see their fighting (or what ever) is wrong.
For example, I am the only mom on the block who will let my kids ride their
bikes all over. Everyone else keeps their kids restricted to this street.
Darin is the same way, he hates to have the kids out of eye sight. OTOH, the
kids know they have to give me a general idea of where they are going to be,
just in case I need to find them. (nine times out of ten, they do) Should
they just hop on their bikes, ride three blocks over to a friends house, go
inside to play and I have no idea where they are, then they would get into
trouble. (this would result in no bikes for a week, they would have to walk
if they wanted to go somewhere) Darin and one of my friends from down the
street say that *IF* I kept the kids restricted to our block then I wouldn't
have that problem. I say it doesn't happen enough for me to put a stop to it.
Besides, if I didn't let them go, then Moly wouldn't have found a new friend
with a Mulberry tree and blackberry bramble in her back yard, and I wouldn't
have been able to make a great cobbler!
So I wonder which is better? I let the kids go all over, riding their bikes,
unless someone forgets to give me a heads up. Then I take away the favorite
mode of transportation. I don't take their ability to go and have fun, just
the ride. Darin OTOH would rather keep them restricted to the block and then
they wouldn't have to bother with telling me where they are going, (risking
forgetting and loosing the bikes) because I would be able to look out and see
where they are.
~Nancy


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/3/02 12:46:27 PM, Dnowens@... writes:

<< That and grounding. Have you ever used that?
I don't mean to sound so nosy, I just like to pick brains. >>

I don't mind.

We've never grounded our kids or even put them in timeout. Instead of "Go to
your room and stay there" (or anywhere "and stay there") we have said "Could
you take the laundry to the back while I talk to Kirby" or something which
wasn't punishment, it was designed to get the physically moving and
elsewhere. Once the laundry was put wherever they were free to move about.

<<Should
they just hop on their bikes, ride three blocks over to a friends house, go
inside to play and I have no idea where they are, then they would get into
trouble. (this would result in no bikes for a week, they would have to walk
if they wanted to go somewhere) >>

My kids tell me where they're going. In the rare instances in which they
failed to do so, I didn't punish them, but was honest with them about why I
wanted to know, and how scary it is for the mom, and asked WHY they didn't
let me know. In each case they felt immediately sorry, and I'm only thinking
to two Marty-instances and two Kirby-times. Grounding them or taking
privileges away might make ME feel better (or like a better parent) but I
don't want them to learn to earn privileges, or to learn to behave to avoid
"being arrested" or whatever. I want them to actually understand and accept
the reasoning. If you withhold bicycles, when they're older that won't
transfer to telling their girlfriends where they're going. If we use reasons
and purposes and feelings to persuade them, that will automatically transfer
to other situations. They know that whoever is responsible for o good.

<So I wonder which is better? I let the kids go all over, riding their bikes,
unless someone forgets to give me a heads up. Then I take away the favorite
mode of transportation.>>

Those aren't the only two choices, though, to restrict movement or to
threaten with bike-removal.

Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/3/02 1:57:52 PM Central Daylight Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:


> Those aren't the only two choices, though, to restrict movement or to
> threaten with bike-removal.
>
> Sandra
>

Good point! Thanks!
~Nancy


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Shelly G

--- SandraDodd@... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 6/3/02 12:46:27 PM,
> Dnowens@... writes:
>> <So I wonder which is better? I let the kids go all
> over, riding their bikes,
> unless someone forgets to give me a heads up. Then I
> take away the favorite
> mode of transportation.>>

I'm a big worrier, but I don't want Andrew to be
penalized because of my (probably irrational) worries.
So, we compromise. When he's going to be a ways away
for quite a while, he takes one of those pocket-size
Motorola 2 way radios with him, and I keep the other
one.

I can't remember ever calling Andrew on it, but he
likes it, because if something comes up and he wants
to stay later than the agreed-on time, he doesn't have
to come all the way home, he can just call and let me
know.

Actually, he gets a kick out of calling home and
making fun of me worrying about him ... "I'm here Mom,
nothing to worry about. I haven't forgotten where we
live, or ran away with a rock band ...."

Shelly

=====
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever does." -- Margaret Mead

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/3/02 12:57:08 PM Central Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:

<< as
to why it should be him/her who goes first!) Any way, separating the kids
and
allowing them each time to tell their side, cool off and have Mom and Dad do
the argument for them sounds very positive.
Has there ever been a time when this didn't work? And is this the most
drastic measure you have ever taken?
~Nancy >>

The way Sandra described is very similar to how I handle things now.
Although, most of the time I just don't have to separate them to achieve
peace.....mainly because the two usually in question are 8.5 and 12. With the
5 and 8.5 y.o. it's different, there's always a separation involved before I
can hear both sides.
Something else I do, after they are a bit more calm, is ask how they
themselves contributed to the problem. They are usually able to figure out
how it could have been handled differently on their own. Sometimes I have to
point out how it felt to the other person, but after practicing having them
self analyze, they are pretty good at it now.

Ren

Shannon Vale

Tammy wrote...
I was
>wondering how old your children are/were when you started this. Do
>they still have "eruptions" now and then? I can handle an eruption
>now and then, it's the day to day, seemingly continuous bickering
>that wears me down.

Hazy memory here, Tammy, but I think my children were 6 and 8 when I
cottoned on to the idea of working through their fighting like this. It's
seven years later now and the fighting is now history, but it did continue
on for a few years, but becoming more and more sporadic once we "got with
the program." I think the evolution into less fighting was helped along by
their growing maturity and their ability to spend more time on their own and
less with each other; as well, as they grew older their vocabulary grew
larger and I suspect they found they could communicate more with words and
less with hands and feet.

Someone mentioned the difficulty of who would get to go first when both
children need to tell their own side of the story immediately. What I did,
was tell them both that there was a certain advantage to going second,
because that child could hear the other one's case before presenting their
own. It seemed to work and avoided the me first me first need for the most
part.

shannon

_________________________________________________________________
Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

joanna514

--- In Unschooling-dotcom@y..., "Julie Stauffer" <jnjstau@g...> wrote:
> <<Has anyone else gone through this with close in age boys?>>
>
> What I remember as having an effect was she simply kicked us out
into the
> yard and locked the door. She said she couldn't control us,
couldn't stop
> it, but it made her crazy and she didn't feel like she should have
to be
> crazy because we wanted to pick at each other.
>
> It did calm us down. Before I think we would get out of hand
because we
> knew my mom would step in and save us from serious injury. We
could be
> jerks because mom wouldn't let anything bad happen.

That's what seems to happen with my two. However they do mostly like
each other and get along(though they wouldn't admit to that).
I have two different kinds of situations here in my family. One
are "real" fights that need to be discussed and resolved the other is
when they get "crazed" and seem to thrive on antagonizing and being
overly silly and eventually too physical with each other and it gets
out of control. They do it right in front of me and it is definitely
something they enjoy. When I say, I step out of the game, I mean, we
all know where it leads when they start to get like that and if they
choose to take it that far they know the outcome. When they know
I "won't play" they choose not to let it get that far. I can hear
one or both of them pulling in the reigns and ending it before an
eruption happens. Or when I hear one trying to stop and the other
not responding I usually try to use distraction to help the other
stop.
They have hit each other or pulled hair or pinched, but they have
never duked it out. Maybe because they are a boy and girl or maybe
because that is something that would seem really wrong to them. If
one starts crying, it all end. Game over.
They even admit to it being a game of sorts.
Joanna

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/3/02 3:13:24 PM, shannonvale@... writes:

<< Someone mentioned the difficulty of who would get to go first when both
children need to tell their own side of the story immediately. What I did,
was tell them both that there was a certain advantage to going second,
because that child could hear the other one's case before presenting their
own. It seemed to work and avoided the me first me first need for the most
part. >>

I go with the one who's likely do the most damage (physical or psychic) in
the waiting period, if one of them is REALLY furious. That sometimes means
"grab the loser," which is a trick older teachers taught me when I was
teaching and I broke up some fights between boys. Two of the male teachers
older than I was (everyone was older than I was, I started at 21), said if
you grab the guy who's winning, he might try to hurt you to get back to the
fight. If you grab the loser, he wants to be rescued, he saves face (didn't
stay to truly lose) and the winner saves face (he was winning).

So in the case of my boys, that near-loser is usually Marty.

Sandra

Luz Shosie and Ned Vare

>
Group,

I'm a first time poster.
Considering the problem of arguments/fights between kids...

Luz and I recently heard a good idea. If it is possible for both combatants
to (stop for a moment and) tell their own sides of the argument, the idea is
that both parties should then be able to state the opponent's point of view,
with a parent present. Thus, each will at least listen to and understand,
and then reiterate the other's position.

It is the function of a good interviewer (such as on "60 Minutes") or a
reporter or judge to get the story straight. We think it might be helpful
for kids in their disagreements to understand each other and be able to say
in their own words what the other is saying, and pinpoint the problem,
because so often, arguments are the result of misunderstandings.

Ned Vare

[email protected]

First I apologize for the late post--the subject's seemed to have died down.
I've been out of town or a week. I'm just catching up.

>>>however now that we are all adults (well in age at least <g>) we are all
very close - and those who have the closest relationships are those who were
the ones who are closest in age who fought the most in the childhood/teenage
years. Maybe along the line somewhere amongst all that fighting and arguing
we came to understand the other (all good and not so good qualities) more
and therefore worked out better ways to deal with each other providing a
stronger foundation of relationship handling between each other!!!<<<

I guess I wanted to share the other side: my brother (I'm fifteen months
older) fought like crazy. As far as I can tell, it wasn't for attention (of a
parent or each other), for fun, out of boredom, or for anything other than we
just couldn't stand each other.

It seems that a lot of people say they are closer to that "other" sibling now
that they are grown--I hear that all the time. Johnny and I STILL avoid each
other. We don't actively seek one another's company and actually try to be in
different rooms, if possible, when we are "together"--although there's no
outright physical danger any more! <g>

He threw a phone at my head one time---one of those OLD phones---you know,
the dial kind? Blood everywhere. Our fighting was wicked. I can't remember
many times when we actually "got along", although there MUST have been a few
peaceful hours in those many years.

My parents tried everything. Mostly we got "the belt" or "switched". So you
can imagine my feelings about corporal punishment! And I blamed it all on
John. I didn't ask for him to be a part of my life. But as a sibling, there
was nothing I could do about it--and my mother was no help--mostly whining
about how "lucky" I was to have a brother (or Johnny, a sister) and could we
pleeeeease stop---Go figure!

Some personalities just don't FIT, and we have always been polar opposites. I
think many parents cheer/fool themselves by thinking that these "wars" will
result in close adult relationships, but it doesn't always work out that way.

Things got "better" when we were in high school---different ones---and had
completely separate lives. I "get" to see him once or twice every other year.
Often enough.

I think that, as a parent, the more pleasant you can make sibling life, the
better. They didn't ask to be thrown into this life-long situation, and
there's really no way out.

I wish I had a solution---just my story. But I think it's wise to know that
sometimes all you can do is make each as happy as you can---and keep them
separated.

Kelly

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/9/02 8:41:55 AM, kbcdlovejo@... writes:

<< I think that, as a parent, the more pleasant you can make sibling life,
the
better. They didn't ask to be thrown into this life-long situation, and
there's really no way out. >>

I agree with this.

I started to write that I'm lucky that my kids get along as well as they do,
but it's not all luck. Yet still, if one of them REALLY didn't like one of
the others longterm, I would do whatever it took to allow them to be separate
and still get to be with parents and the sibling they did like.

Some parents see their job as the parent of a group, but I think each
individual child should be parented as well as the parents can. Each should
be looked at as he might have been an only child, and not deprived entirely
of attention to him as an individual.

The new age belief that each person chooses his situation for purposes of
soul-growth (kind of an American reincarnation theory) will likely be thrown
into this by someone in the readership. Personally, I don't believe it and I
don't like it as a defense or a justification for human behavior. Even if
reincarnation is the deal and we all get unlimited lifetimes to "get it
right," the rightness comes from doing the best we can, and any parent who is
allowing a child to be abused or tormented isn't doing his or her best job as
a parent or as a compassionate human.

Sandra

Tia Leschke

>
>The new age belief that each person chooses his situation for purposes of
>soul-growth (kind of an American reincarnation theory) will likely be thrown
>into this by someone in the readership. Personally, I don't believe it and I
>don't like it as a defense or a justification for human behavior.

I *do* believe it, or at least see it as the most likely explanation for a
lot of things. But I *don't* accept it as a defense or justification for
any kind of behavior. I think people using it that way don't really
understand it.

>Even if
>reincarnation is the deal and we all get unlimited lifetimes to "get it
>right," the rightness comes from doing the best we can, and any parent who is
>allowing a child to be abused or tormented isn't doing his or her best job as
>a parent or as a compassionate human.

Exactly. If those kids did "choose" the sibling relationship, for whatever
soul purpose, then they need all the help they can get from their parents
in learning how to deal with it. That doesn't mean allowing them to be
abused or tormented. It means helping them learn the skills they need to
get along as well as they can, and giving them as much time apart as they
need and can be managed.
Tia

What you think of me is none of my business.
*********************************************************
Tia Leschke leschke@...
On Vancouver Island

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/9/02 11:00:08 AM, averyp@... writes:

<< > I started to write that I'm lucky that my kids get along as well as
> they do,
> but it's not all luck.

What is it if not luck? Stellar parenting? Or what? >>

There's no way to know fully without several exact clones of each child
raised in different circumstances.

I know I could have made things worse.
I know I could have failed to help them find peaceful solutions
I know I could have failed to be close enough to catch things when they
started.

I don't know how much worse it would have been without my input and advice
and supervision, and nobody else could do better than guess, either. But I
see other families that practically encourage sibling disagreement by making
fun of it, characterizing their kids as the other's fan or enemy or other
kinds of irritating descriptions. I don't know how much better it could be
if I had done more and better sooner with encouraging good relationships
between them.

I think there is a big element of luck in any personality matters. Any peek
at DNA and inheritance of traits shows the gigantic gamble that "nature" is.
And THEN comes the attention and tools and messages and modeling and all the
half-invisible and subconscious stuff that happens as "nurture."

Sandra

Amy Thomlinson

I have 2 boys 7 and 3. There is alot of sibling
rivalry between them. My youngest was just over 24
hours old when I stepped out of the room and my then
not quite 4 year old tried to kill him. It has been
a relationship where my oldest hates his brother and
my youngest worships the older one. Lately I
realised part of it was timing. I had a new baby
about the time my first born was doing the "i want to
marry mommy" thing and although I tried my best to
spend time just with him and keep things as normal as
possible It wasn't entirely possible for him to stay
in the limelight. So I am certain part of it was
bad timing (not my choice of times) I also think that
the personalities play a big part. With my younger
sons personality I think it would have been fine he
is very laid back and takes things as they come
whereas my first is a everything has to be perfect for
him personality. As for parenting I have made some
mistakes but i try very hard to keep my boys as
separate people and very rarely do I force them to do
things together other than family outings because I
know that 7 and 3 are very different ages and enjoy
different things. Above all I know I have to
intervene everytime there is a fight because my kids
probably would do serious harm to each other if i left
them to "work it out"

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

Cheryl Duke

I just wanted to jump in and say what a help this thread has been to me. I
am an only child and now I have 2 children. They are 9 and 3 and although
they get along pretty well, there have been times I have been stumped when
it comes to dealing with their bickering. I have no personal experience
with a sibling of my own - obviously. All of the advice has been great.

Thanks,
Cheryl

Patti

SandraDodd@... wrote:

> I started to write that I'm lucky that my kids get along as well as
> they do,
> but it's not all luck.

What is it if not luck? Stellar parenting? Or what? I'm not being
sarcastic, I'm really curious what you've done or not done to have kids
that get along so well if you believe there's more to it than luck. I'm
quite sure I've tried everything except shipping them off to boarding
school in different states. :-)

> Yet still, if one of them REALLY didn't like one of
> the others longterm, I would do whatever it took to allow them to be
> separate
> and still get to be with parents and the sibling they did like.

For us it's not a matter of the kids not liking each other. They do
*not* want to be separated- they seek each other out continually. For
some reason they can't get enough of it. It usually starts out silly
and giggly and ends up with tears and anger.
I think my situation is different from kids who just plain don't like
each other and prefer to be apart. In some ways that would be a whole
lot easier to manage.

Plus my kids at times *do* get along, and when they do everything's
great. (I think I mentioned it's about 50/50). So I imagine they will
grow up to be good friends- I just need to figure out how to live with
the bickering 50 percent for now.

Patti


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sue

> The benefits are that they get to argue with someone who loves them
instead
> of someone they've just been furious with. They still get to say their
piece
> and run it through their mental process, and each hears the other's point
of
> view, but filtered through a long-time witness, not directly and
hurtfully.
> And my benefit is I know where their understandings are, what compassion
> they're developing, what their patience level is becoming, etc.
>
> Sandra

I really like that idea - especially the part knowing where their
understandings are, what compassion they're developing, what their patience
level is becoming, etc.

Sue
>
> ~~~ Don't forget! If you change the topic, change the subject line! ~~~
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> Visit the Unschooling website:
> http://www.unschooling.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Sue

> <<Has anyone else gone through this with close in age boys?>>

Actually, I have six brothers and three sisters and oh lordy the fights that
we would have - I found in our family that those closest in age would have
the most fights and also the most intensive fights - girls included -
however now that we are all adults (well in age at least <g>) we are all
very close - and those who have the closest relationships are those who were
the ones who are closest in age who fought the most in the childhood/teenage
years. Maybe along the line somewhere amongst all that fighting and arguing
we came to understand the other (all good and not so good qualities) more
and therefore worked out better ways to deal with each other providing a
stronger foundation of relationship handling between each other!!!

Sue
>
>>
>
> ~~~ Don't forget! If you change the topic, change the subject line! ~~~
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> Visit the Unschooling website:
> http://www.unschooling.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>