Should You Make Your Child "Finish What They Started"?

So your kid gets excited about starting a new hobby or sport and she begs you to sign her up for classes. Proper attire or equipment has been bought and lessons have been paid for. But a few sessions in, she tells you that she doesn't want to do it anymore.

You're now at a crossroad - do you "let" your child quit and lose out on the money, not to mention the apparent opportunity to teach them a lesson in making commitments? Or, do you accept the fact that she is no longer interested and don't want to force her into doing something unwillingly?

Your needs:

1. To teach your child the importance of commitments
2. To not lose out on money that has already been spent and could have possibly been used for something else 

Here's where most parents would tell their kids something along the lines of:

"I already paid for it and I don't want my money going down the drain. You've got to finish what you started!"

The question is, how do you deal with this situation to get yours and your child's needs met?

A Quick Lesson in Discipline:

When motivation in doing something comes in an external form (like the parent forcing a child to do something), they usually will simply do the bare minimum to finish the job at hand. When problems are resolved this way, parents often have to nag, remind and constantly check in on their child. One of the most important factors in place here is that children do not learn discipline and the consequences of real-life decisions in external forms. You might be able to "make" your child eat broccoli, but that doesn't mean that you are making them actually enjoy it. You might scare your child into not giving up on something that they started, but what you're really doing is just making the child scared of you -- not scare them about how the real-life consequences on giving-up may affect them. Your forcing her won't make her interested. Almost always, when the parents needs "win" over the child, the child will bear hate and resentment.

Three "Gordon Model" Methods To Use:

Preventive I-Message - Tell your child ahead of time that the money spent on their activities is something that you cannot get back whether they decide to continue or not and how losing that money could affect you. Explain to your children (as an informant, not a disciplinarian) the importance of making commitments and how they affect other people that are involved in the commitment.

Modify The Environment - Here's an easy one! Don't sign your child up for classes that are non-refundable. Wait to purchase necessary materials and see if you can have your child sit in and participate in a few classes before they make the commitment. Or find a place where you can pay per session, instead of for a whole month, for example.

Method III - In this situation, we are in the area of both people owning a problem (you and your child). Go through the six-step process and begin by finding out what your child's needs are in this situation and what the underlying reason is behind his or her feelings. Maybe she isn't comfortable taking karate in the same class as boys or maybe her skill level is more advanced than the rest of the kids, leaving her un-stimulated.


Before jumping to the first conclusion you can think of in these types of situations, consider the option that both you and your child can get your needs met and resolve conflicts in a respectful and effective way.

A Survey: What Makes For Good and Bad Relationships?

What Makes For Good and Bad Relationships?

A few years ago Rob Koegel, a professor at the State University of New York at Farmingdale, asked students to respond to a questionnaire about their best and worst relationships. Some of the questions were about relationships between the students and people of more or less equal status such as friends, partners, siblings and the like. Others were about themselves and people with greater status like bosses, teachers, professors, parents, etc. The students were asked to describe what these relationships were like and the results were illuminating. They named respect, caring, trust, honesty, support and good communication as characteristics of their best relationships and went on to say these relationships cultivated empathy, compassion, understanding and respect for differences. They said when others exhibited these characteristics relationships with them were good regardless of status differences

Dr. Koegel said students told him their best relationships were fulfilling and uplifting, made them happier, stronger and more complete. He summed up; “Our best relationships make us feel appreciated, valued and worthy. They also make us feel more connected to and trusting of others. Unlike most other relationships, this reciprocal connection nourishes, supports and empowers both parties”.

On the other hand, relationships students labeled “worst” were described as manipulative, dominating, unjust, and unequal. They said the manipulative; dominating people viewed differences in an either/or fashion, good or bad, right or wrong, better or worse with their positions put forth as the correct ones. The self-righteous attitude of the dominators resulted in the survey respondents tending to feel incompetent and inadequate. Those who used their status to win, to get what they wanted at others’ expense, generated feelings of insecurity and shame in the losers who became distrusting of themselves and others. The students used terms like “one-sided”, “taken advantage of”, “dominated” to describe how they felt about these damaging relationships.

Respondents agreed that these unequal relationships are always unfair. They characterized their dynamics as win-lose and said dominators win by using their personal and institutional power as parents, teachers, bosses and the like to coerce and abuse. Those on the losing end are forced to accept one-sided relationships like these because they have less status, are overpowered, dependent and needy.

Koegel’s survey pointed out what I think everyone knows from experience: the most critical barriers to a healthy, happy relationships are power differentials between partners or groups. If one person (or group) can force another to do something she, he or the group doesn’t want to do the relationship is in trouble. Its unfair relationships like those that Dr. Koegel’s subjects labeled as win-lose and agreed that losing left them feeling powerless, taken advantage of and dominated.*

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon writings

Why Is Conflict a Good Thing?

Why Conflict is a Good Thing

By Linda Adams, President of GTI

Conflicts between people are a normal, natural and inevitable part of life--at work, at home and in all our relationships with others. Unfortunately, most of us don't really accept this fact and we still get surprised and distressed when it's clear that a conflict has emerged.

As long as everything is going along smoothly, it's easy to be considerate and respectful of another person's needs. They are in no way interfering with our own. But the emergence of a conflict can change all that--now we can feel threatened, anxious and angry. The same person whom we enjoyed working with yesterday now seems like an adversary. That's because of our vast, past experience with conflict, most of which was negative.

We have a negative attitude toward conflict primarily because we haven't learned constructive ways to deal with it--in fact, the converse is true: we have learned destructive ways of handling conflict. As children, as students and as employees (and too often as spouses) we have experienced losing in a conflict because parents, teachers and bosses use/d their power to win at our expense. Even though we know the feelings of resentment, anger, dislike, even hostility that we experience as a result of losing, the win-lose posture is deeply ingrained and when we get in positions where we have power over people, we often choose to win at their expense.

A great deal of research shows the damaging effects that win-lose conflict resolution has on interpersonal relationships. It creates distance, separation, dislike, even hatred. It's the main reason people leave their jobs for new ones and marriages break up.

Viewing Conflict as Constructive

How conflicts get resolved is the critical factor in any relationship. In fact, it is the most critical factor in determining whether a relationship will be healthy or unhealthy, mutually satisfying or unsatisfying, friendly or unfriendly, deep or shallow, intimate or cold.

As most of us are aware, there is an alternative to the win-lose posture. It's often been called "win-win" or "no-lose" because the goal is to find a solution to the conflict that meets the needs of both people. Resolving conflicts this way requires three important attitudes and behaviors: 1) the attitude that conflict in general presents the opportunity for constructive change; 2) the willingness to engage in the process of mutually searching for a solution that meets the needs of both people; 3) the communication and problem solving skills that it takes to make this win-win method work. Too often, people want to resolve conflicts this way, but either are not truly willing in their heart of hearts to work for a mutually-acceptable solution or do not have the skills required to work together to find one. When this occurs, the win-win method is doomed to failure.

"Let's Keep Talking"

When you're in conflict with another person, you both are usually aware of it at some level. There's a sense of disruption, unease, something is not right. The communication between you might change, perhaps becoming superficial or terse. Or there's silence.

Once you're aware that you're in conflict, what you do next really matters. Acknowledge that a conflict exists. Very often, we decide not to acknowledge this hoping that the conflict will somehow go away or resolve itself. That rarely happens. Only when conflicts are brought out into the open, do they have the chance of being dealt with effectively.

And as I just mentioned, dealing with conflict effectively requires skills--skills that are proven to work, sometimes like magic. When you have these skills, the idea of facing conflicts with others is not nearly so daunting, and in fact can be stimulating and energizing. (There are very few intractable problems to which there are no mutually-acceptable solutions.)

Dialogue is the key element in constructive conflict resolution. Dialogue is made up of two very different communication skills, both of which are essential--listening with empathy and non-blameful self-disclosure. As Reuel Howe states in his book, The Miracle of Dialogue: "...it must be mutual and proceed from both sides, and the parties to it must persist relentlessly...when two persons undertake it and accept their fear of doing so, the miracle-working power of dialogue may be released."

The importance of listening with empathy to the other person's needs, feelings and beliefs cannot be overstated. This means experiencing what it feels like to be in the other person's shoes at that moment and then reflecting what you hear back to them to check whether you understood correctly. This can be very difficult to do especially when you have strong opposing viewpoints or feelings, but it's possible when you're truly intent on understanding. Something amazing happens when people feel understood and accepted at a deep level. Their need to hold onto their preconceived solution to the conflict often dissipates. And often their strong emotional feelings subside.

The other essential part of dialogue is non-blameful self-disclosure. Now it's your turn to talk about your needs and disclose your feelings without blaming the other person. Ideally, they will be committed to listening empathically to you, to put themselves in your shoes, to experience your reality. When that happens, you too can feel catharsis, and be more open to finding a mutually-satisfying solution. Once the basic needs of each person are clearly defined and understood, moving through the other steps needed to find a solution can be done in a climate of mutual consideration and respect.

Having positive conflict resolution experiences like these are both rewarding and reinforcing. And that's a great thing.

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