Tweedle dee and Tweedle dum- the sibling strife item

Jan 5 02:29 UTC 1999

As most of Grex probably knows, I've got two small boys, currently aged 9 and
5 3/4.  I've recently realized just how close they are- they play together
constantly, by choice as well as by circumstance, and really support one
another's ideas.  Nor have they *seriously* attempted fratricide in years :)
Still, there is a pattern of escalation which happens nearly every day, in
one of a few forms; either Gareth, the younger, will niggle, pester and noodge
until Timothy retaliates with a pinch, punch or shove, then come crying to
us "he hit me".   I usually respond with, "why did he hit you?".  He'll often
say "Well, I hit him"  Right- issue over, they go back to playing.  Other
times, *nothing* the younger can do is right, his brother just says he's "very
annoying" and eventually hits him or pokes him or does something else nasty
(and potentially dangerous) with very little provocation.  We call Timothy
over (the older), ask him what he did, why he did it, whether it's *ever*
acceptable to hit/hurt his brother, what he should do instead, etc. and either
send him to be by himself a while or send him back to attempt to play.  There
are other variants, including mutual roughhousing which gets out of the
comfort zone, but in almost all cases we can hear the escalation and then the
younger one shows up in front of us crying or whining.  I give it short
shrift, not wanting to a)reinforce it as attention getting behavior b)make
them dependent on our intervention c)take sides inappropriately.  Michael
would like to see us handle *all* hitting/unkindness by giving them both a
time out long enough to hurt- 10 to 20 minutes at least- as many times per
day as needed.  Easy for him to say, he'll be at work more often than not.

So ok, folks who were siblings or who have raised them, what works?  Is this
an issue?  Does it go away on its own or should we intervene?  Help, please.

response 2 of 13:

Jan 11 00:46 UTC 1999

   hmmm.  i'm the youngest of five.  when my sibs and i got to
roughhousing, disputing, and whatnot, our parents generally allowed
us to settle it on our own unless we were in danger of causing serious
damage to ourselves or the furniture.  if we were having a particularly
bad day, my mother would generally exile each troublesome one to a
different part of the house or yard (one to his/her room, one to the
basement, one at the kitchen table with something to do, etc.) until
we found something that interested us more than irritating each other.
after that, if we *still* couldn't manage to be civil to each other,
corporal punishment was employed (up to the age of about nine -- not
that i'm suggesting parents who don't believe in corporal punishment
should use it).  we eventually grew out of most of our forms of sibling
rivalry.

response 4 of 13:

Jan 11 19:47 UTC 1999

With my youngest two, the "play by yourself until you can play nicely
together" rule had a _very_ disparate effect.  The youngest loved playing
by himself, and being sent to his room was hardly any punishment at all.
For the older, who was very sociable, not having anyone to talk to or play
with was very punitive.  So it was hard to come up with a solution that
had equal impact in terms of negativity. 

 In fact, the older one would often beg me not to punish the younger, just
so he wouldn't be left to play alone.  Whether or not he was being
punished himself, it _felt_ like punishment if his brother was not
available for play.  When I punished the younger, I let myself in for a
lot more socializing with the older, just so he wouldn't feel that way.  

response 6 of 13:

Jan 12 06:08 UTC 1999

My younger one is the gregarious one.  Occasionally the older one realizes
that he really does prefer to have his brother's company, but he seldom admits
it.
There is a *lot* about power going on- in some pretty abusive or insidious
ways- and I'm trying to a)let them sort it out b)let them know that abuse or
manipulation (hm, need a more specific word here- some "manipulation" is what
we *need* to learn  in order to work with others) is not acceptible c)help
them find- more importantly- want- healthy alternatives.  It's only
occasionally about reducing the noise level...

response 8 of 13:

Jan 13 16:45 UTC 1999

re #3 and #1: note that I did say "*more* at fault" (emphasis added just now).
If the instigator is at level #3, say, and the reaction is at level #10, then
the instigator gets more help from me while the reactor gets merely words of
correction.  If the instigator is at level #10 and the reactor is at level
#3, probably the other way around.  

Jonathan has always had fairly poor social skills, and sometimes actually
putting something into words seems to be help him understand people-to-people
things that are obvious to others.  So I *think* about intervening in some 
cases where other adults assume "they'll work it out", in case J. needs 
something explained again. Mostly they do pretty well (Jonathan is 11 going
on 12, and Paul is 8), not only when they're reading their separate books -- 
if they come in crying now, it's likely to be from cold toes, not "he hit me!"

response 10 of 13:

Jan 14 05:56 UTC 1999

Like Jonathan, Timothy sometimes has trouble interpretting social stuff.  We
talk about it, I give him suggestions for getting on with other kids, and
lately I'm trying to point out situations in which his way of expressing
himself is likely to seem overly critical or arrogant to other kids, and offer
alternatives.  Sometimes he gets it, but often just hasn't the control to
behave as we agree he ought to.  And brothers are better at pushing buttons
than anyone else...

response 12 of 13:

Dec 28 17:13 UTC 1999

Hey, wow!  We're on our bi-ennial trip out east, and our guys are actually
voluntering to play together.  I'm amazed and thrilled!  First time.  I mean,
they still kick and squawk when asked to share a bed, but that's normal.

Oh- and thanks, Valerie, for the birthda message on the mOTD.  Cool!