Negotiations
In general, when the boys are watching TV, T. lets them alternate choosing what to watch (from the menu of shows that we approve and have TiVo’d). I sometimes follow that pattern, sometimes tell them that if they can’t agree on something, there won’t be any TV watching.
Lately, D has figured out that he can improve his bargaining position by offering side deals, or bribes. So, tonight he offered N one of his water bottles for choosing Tom & Jerry over Max and Ruby. N happily accepted. Yesterday the price was a nickel.
I’m not sure why this bothers me. Both boys were happy with the deal, and neither one gave up something irreplaceable. (D has other water bottles; N will get another chance to pick a show in a day or so.) And they’re learning how to negotiate without our intervention, as suggested in Siblings without Rivalry. But I still feel like something’s wrong with this picture.
August 9th, 2007 at 10:16 pm
I think it’s ’cause you suspect that D is taking advantage of N’s developmental stage. N is too young to understand the loss of “choice” (a nebulous good) compared to a immediate reward of a physical good (coin/water bottle).
My kids are age matched to yours, I think, and my older does this to my younger too. I mostly don’t interfere, unless I think she’s manipulating her brother into doing something he really doesn’t want to do, or if it’s happening too frequently. N’s OK if he misses a few choices of movies, but if his choice can be bought for a nickel indefinitely, he never gets a choice, and I step in when it seems like their negotiations are reaching that level.
bj
August 9th, 2007 at 10:38 pm
We’re in the opposite boat – the younger one usually gets his way on the TV shows. I’m not exactly sure how he gets his older sister to compromise, but he does. Although, now that he’s decided that he loves “Hannah Montana,” it has been a lot easier…
August 10th, 2007 at 9:20 am
I usually try to stay out of it, but it’s not infrequent that my older son (4 year difference) will take advantage of my younger one, along the lines of “I’ll let you pick the show if you give me $20.” At that point I’ll intervene, typically to howls from both of them.
August 10th, 2007 at 11:39 am
Your post brings back memories. Growing up my younger sister would pay me $5 (it was alot in those days) to make her bed. I don’t think my mother ever knew until we were older. In the long term I don’t think it hurt us, but I probably would not allow my kids to pay each other for chores or leisure. Whenever money comes into the equation I am not sure what it is teaching children. If you Tivo shows why not let each child have his specified half-hour of TV since there is an age and interest difference.
August 10th, 2007 at 1:17 pm
Maybe what bothers you is also what bothers me: that family relationships should not be conducted on a free-market-value basis. Teaching your kids about generosity and taking turns is important, and that’s what you are trying to do; that they try to get around your intent this way shows the importance of teaching them in the first place (i.e., that their self-interest is strong but their family feeling not yet developed).
August 10th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
I’d like to introduce a somewhat different take on the situation — as both a parent (of a 6-year old girl and 3-year old boy) and faculty member who teaches negotiation.
I’ve come across two media pieces recently that have made me even more thoughtful than I already had been (“ponderous” is probably the better word) about the significance of negotiation skills. In sum, they report research showing that (a) women appear to negotiate far less often, and far less effectively, than their male counterparts; and (b) women face social repercussions in their efforts to negotiate (which no doubt feeds back into the frequency and effectiveness issues).
So obviously those findings, and the first kid scenario described above, don’t raise much concern for boys’/mens’ proclivity or ability to negotiate, but I think we need to be pretty thoughtful in both private and public spheres about suggesting negotiating is a bad thing. As long as all parties are able to participate in a way that advances their interests in the short or long term — have and understand their rights, the resources to be exchanged, and the consequences of exchange — I think kids’ engaging in such exchanges constitutes wonderful, important skill-building. It’s those various conditions that are the catch, of course. The younger child above (but also the older one) needs help learning about bargaining positions and zones, and about effectively and fairly making concessions. About negotiating to preserve and advance relationships along with individual interest.
Better boy/male negotiators help support the making of better (and more frequent) girl/female negotiators, I would like to think. And make, more plainly, better boys/men. So as dorky as I sound admitting this, I work with my children all the time around negotiating, with me and each other. And sadly enough, with my girl it’s already about pushing her to engage the process more; with my boy, about engaging the process fairly (reports the radical feminist).
Links to articles:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/29/AR2007072900827.html?referrer=emailarticle
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12529237
August 11th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
We’ve got a similar situation (and a 4 year age difference) going on here. More often than not, I stay out of it, largely because I think it helps my daughter to be more direct in asking for things, which is something that she struggles with. I agree with bj, though, too–I’ll intervene if I think the trade is verging on manipulation.
August 12th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
Let’s say your kids are playing with Legos and start to fight. One wants to build a tower, one wants to build an airplane. You tell them that if they don’t figure it out, you’ll take the Legos away. So they figure it out. They divide the Legos so that each can build what he wants; or they build a tower, break it apart, then build an airplane; or they build a tower that has wings and flies. They find a way that each gets what he wants, right there and then — it’s a win/win for each.
TV watching, even if you alternate, is win/lose. One kid gets to watch what he wants and one doesn’t. And your older son has figured out how he can always win…
I think that for small children, negotiating over physical objects like Legos is easier than something like TV. To get his way, your youngest has to think of something he has that his brother might want, and what could that be? The only thing that comes to mind is parental attention. That’s why little kids learn early to scream and say, He hit me!
(You’d also probably be happier if your older son offered to, say, read a book to his brother in exchange for TV priviledges! Maybe you can suggest things that they can swap.)
August 12th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
Actually I think that the negotiating isn’t so bad
My children each have their own t.v. to avoid fighting but they have become
very selfish by actually having their “own” things such as a t.v.
The way they act if you come in “their” room and try to change the channel on “their” t.v. even if they’re not even in the room at the time
Maybe I’ll take the tv’s out all together and make them watch the one downstairs