Have You Checked the Results?

Step 6: CHECKING THE RESULTS

There are Six Steps of the "No-Lose Method". After going through the first five steps, Step 6: Checking The Results is important to make certain everyone's needs have been met and the solutions from Method III conflict resolution turns out to be the best.

It's not always the case that all solutions from Method III conflict resolution turn out that way. Sometimes you or the other will discover weaknesses in the solution that will require modification or rejection for a better solution.

It is important to seek out the other's feelings about the solutions as well as to keep in touch with your feelings about the conflict resolution results.

Both of you should have an understanding that decisions are always open for mutually acceptable revisions.

Sometimes those new to Method III will discover that they have overcommitted themselves--in their enthusiasm they agreed to do too much or the impossible. Be sure to keep the door open for revision if this happens.

Remember:

Your best tools for effective No-Lose Conflict Resolution will always be:

• Active Listening
• Clear and Honest Sending of Your Needs with Non-Blameful I-Messages
• Trust and Respect for the Needs of the Other
• Openness to Changing Facts and Feelings
• An Unwillingness to Let Method III Fail
• Entering Method III Without Fixed Solutions
• Refusal to Revert to Method I or II*

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's F.E.T. Adult Resource Book

Winning vs Losing

Winning vs Losing

How we solve conflicts and problems is not a reflection on our being "good" or "bad" parents. Our approach comes from what we have learned from interactions with our own parents, teachers, friends, bosses, coworkers and others in our work and life. We are doing our best with the tools we have been given. For many parents, there is a fear of losing control and becoming victims of their children's demands. For other parents, it is a fear of becoming too dictatorial and controlling. both fears come from the win-lose way of thinking that is ingrained in today's world, work and life.

As a result of this thinking, the two most common ways to solve problems are Parent Wins and Child Loses - Method I in P.E.T. language, and Parent Loses and Child Wins - Method II. P.E.T. offers an alternative to these win-lose methods. The core idea in P.E.T. is: Parents have the right to get their needs met and, equally, so do children. Both must win; neither must lose. And the way to insure that this happens is deceptively simple and straight forward: Parent and child must commit themselves to search together until a solution is found that will meet their equally important needs, resolve the conflict, and preserve the relationship.

Learning to resolve conflicts effectively, in ways that enhance the parent-child relationship, can actually transform most conflict into positive events in a family--an opportunity for parents and children to learn about each other and the process of solving problems effectively.*

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's P.E.T. Participant Workbook

Method III Develops Children's Thinking Skills

Method III encourages--actually requires--children to think. The parent is signaling the child: "We have a conflict, let's put our heads together and think--let's figure out a good solution." Method III is an intellectual exercise in reasoning for both parent and child. It is almost like a challenging puzzle and requires the same kind of "thinking through" or "figuring out." I would not be surprised if future research demonstrates that children in homes using Method III develop mental capacities superior to children in homes using Method I or Method II.*

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's P.E.T. Book

Do You Compromise?

A Special Note About Compromise

Many parents, who are uncomfortable with the results of either Method I or Method II, turn to an additional option, compromise. While neither parent nor child loses, they don't really win either - both try to win as much as possible and lose as little as possible. This approach is often confused with the P.E.T. alternative, "No Lose Problem Solving - Method III".

In a compromise, both parent and child can feel dissatisfied and the solution may become a wall between the two. A compromise solution is actually made up of trade offs and promises (individual parent and child solutions) and each watches very carefully to be sure that the other does not disregard her pieces of this solution. Usually it involves "buying and selling" solutions and needs are often not even identified. Win-lose concerns and feelings often remain.

In Method III, the first big difference is attitude - there is a genuine desire for a win-win solution which both will be happy with. The second important difference is that needs come before solutions. The needs of both the parent and the child are identified and clarified before solutions are even considered.

Method III means negotiating until a solution meets the parent's needs as well as the child's.*

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's Parent Effectiveness Training, P.E.T. Participant Workbook

Why Is Method II Ineffective?

Why Method II Is Ineffective

What does it do to children to grow up in a home where they usually win and their parents lose? What are the effects on children of their generally getting their way? Obviously these children will be different from those in homes where Method I is the principal method of conflict resolution. Children who are allowed to get their way will not be as rebellious, hostile, dependent, aggressive, submissive, conforming, withdrawing, and so on. They have not had to develop ways to cope with parental power. Method II encourages the child to use his power over his parents to win at their expense.

These children learn how to throw temper tantrums to control the parent; how to make the parent feel guilty; how to say nasty, deprecating things of their parents. Such children are often wild, uncontrolled, unmanageable, impulsive. They have learned that their needs are more important than anyone else's. They, too, often lack inner controls on their behavior and become very self-centered, selfish, demanding.

These children often do not respect other people's property or feelings. Life to them is get, get, get--take, take,take. "I" comes first. Such children are seldom cooperative or helpful around the house.

These children often have serious difficulties in their peer relationships. Other children dislike "spoiled kids"--they find them unpleasant to be around. Children from homes where Method II predominates are so accustomed to getting their way with their parents that they want to get their way with other children, too.

These children also frequently have difficulty adjusting to school, an institution whose philosophy is predominantly Method I. Children accustomed to Method II are in for a rude shock when they enter the world of school and discover that most teachers and principals are trained to resolve conflicts by Method I, backed up with authority and power.

Probably the most serious effect of Method II is that children often develop deep feelings of insecurity about their parents' love. It is easy to understand this reaction when one considers how difficult it is for parents to feel loving and accepting toward a child who usually wins at the expense of the parent. In Method I homes resentment radiates from child to parent; in Method II homes from parent to child. The child of Method II senses that his parents are frequently resentful, irritated, and angry at him. When he later gets similar messages from his peers and probably other adults, it is no wonder he begins to feel unloved--because, of course, so often he is unloved by others.

While some studies have shown that children from Method II homes are likely to be more creative than children from Method I homes, parents pay a dear price for having creative children; they frequently cannot stand them.

Parents suffer greatly in the Method II home. These are the homes in which I have frequently heard parents say:

"He gets his own way most of the time, and you just can't control him."

"I'll be glad when the children are all in school so I can have some peace."

"Parenthood is such a burden--I spend all my time doing things for them."

"I must say, sometimes I just can't stand them--I just have to get away."

"They seldom seem to realize that I've got a life, too."

"Sometimes--and I feel guilty saying this-I wish I could ship them off to someone else."

"I'm so ashamed to take them anywhere or even have friends come to our home and see those children."

Parenthood for Method II parents is seldom a joy--how unfortunate and sad it is to raise children you cannot love, or hate to associate with.*

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's P.E.T. book

Can One Parent Use Method III and the Other Not?

One Parent Using Method III, the Other Not

We are often asked in P.E.T. whether it is possible for one parent to resolve conflicts by the no-lose Method III approach while the other does not. The question comes up because not all parents take the course with their spouses even though we strongly urge that when there are two parents both participate.

In some cases where only one parent is committed to change to the no-lose method, perhaps a mother, she simply starts resolving all her conflicts with the kids by using the no-lose method and the father continues using Method I in his conflicts. This may not cause too many problems, except that the children, fully aware of the difference, often complain to the father that they no longer like his approach and wish he would solve problems the way their mother does. Some fathers respond to these complaints by enrolling in a subsequent P.E.T. class. Typical of such fathers is the one who showed up at the first session of a P.E.T. class and admitted:

"I'm here tonight in self-defense, I guess, because I began to see what good results my wife was getting with her new methods. Her relationship with the kids has improved and mine has not. They talk to her but they wont talk to me."

Another father, at the first session of the class in which he enrolled after his wife had been in a previous class, made this comment:

"I want to tell you women who are taking this course without your husbands what you might expect from him. As you start using the new methods of listening and confronting and problem-solving with the children, he is going to feel hurt, left out. He will feel his role as a father is being taken away from him. You will be getting results, but he can't. I lashed out at my wife and said, 'What do you expect of me--I'm not taking the damn course.' Do you understand why I say now that I can't afford not to take the course?"

Some fathers who do not learn the new skills and remain content with their Method I approach are often given a bad time by their wives. One wife told us that she began to build up resentments and ended up being quite hostile toward her husband because she could not stand watching him resolve conflicts with power. "I see now just how much harm to the children Method I produces, and I just cannot sit by and watch him hurt the kids this way," she told the class. Another said, "I can see he is ruining his relationship with the kids and that makes me feel disappointed and sad. They need their relationship with him, but it is going down the drain rapidly."

Some mothers enlist the help of class members in P.E.T. to generate the courage to confront their husbands openly and honestly. I recall one young mother who in class was helped to see how much she herself actually feared her husband and therefore had avoided confronting him with her feelings about using Method I. Somehow, by discussing this in P.E.T., she gained enough courage to go home and tell him the feelings and had identified in class:

"I love my kids too much to stand by and see them hurt by you I know what I have learned in P.E.T. is better for the kids and I want you to learn these methods, too. I've always been afraid of you and I can see you're doing the same to the kids."

The effects of her confrontation astonished this mother. For the first time in their relationship, he heard her out. He told her he hadn't realized how much he had dominated both her and the children, and subsequently agreed to enroll in the next P.E.T. class in their community.

It does not always work out as favorably as in this family, when one parent continues to use Method I. I am certain that in some families this problem never does get resolved. While we seldom hear about it, it is likely that some husbands and wives never do come together in their methods of resolving conflicts, or in some cases a parent who has been trained in P.E.T. methods may even return to her old ways under pressure of a spouse who refuses to give up using power to resolve conflicts.*

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's P.E.T. book

"Can We Use All Three Methods?"

We occasionally encounter a parent who accepts the validity and believes in the effectiveness of the no-lose approach, yet is not willing to give up the two win-lose approaches.

"Won't a good parent use a judicious mixture of all three methods, depending on the nature of the problem? asked a father in one of my classes.

While understandable in view of some parents' fear of giving up all of their power over their children, this point of view is not tenable. As it is not possible "to be a little bit pregnant," it is not possible to be a little bit democratic in parent-child conflicts. In the first place, most parents who want to use a combination of all three methods really mean that they want to reserve the right to use Method I for the truly critical conflicts. Translated into simple language their attitude is: "On matters that are not too important to the children I will let them have a voice in the decision, but I will reserve the right to decide my way on issues that are very critical."

Our experiences seeing parents try this mixed approach is that it simply does not work. Children, once given a taste of how good it feels to resolve conflicts without losing, resent it when parents reverts back to Method I. Or they may lose all interest in entering into Method III on unimportant problems because they feel so resentful of losing on the more important problems.

A further outcome of the "judicious mixture" approach is that kids acquire a distrust of their parent when Method III is tried, because they have learned that when the chips are down and the parents has strong feeling on a problem he will end up winning anyway. So, why should they enter into problem-solving? Anytime it gets to be a real conflict, they know Dad is going to use his power to win anyway.

Some parents muddle through by occasionally using Method I for problems where the kids do not have strong feelings--the less critical problems--but Method III should always be used when a conflict is critical, involving strong feelings and convictions on the parent of the kids. Perhaps it is a principle in all human relationships that when one doesn't care much about the outcome of a conflict, one may be wiling to give in to another's power; but when one has a real stake in the outcome one wants to make sure to have a voice in the decision-making.

*Excerpt from Dr. Gordon's P.E.T. book