Three Types of Victims

Okay, parents. There are some things we survivors of sibling abuse need you to get straight.

In general, there are three types of victims in sibling abuse cases. Knowing these types will help you suss out what's really going on in your home.

The one who responds appropriately: It's not always the case that we're "equally contributing" to the caterwaul you hear going on daily. Yes, you like to dismiss the fights like that, but we need you to examine them a little closer. When we respond to uncalled-for attacks, we are exercising our basic human right to defend ourselves. We have a right to respect. And it is your job to recognize if a sibling is intentionally provoking us.

The one who does not respond: On the other side of the coin, if we don't defend ourselves, it doesn't mean we're weaklings who need to learn to fight our own battles. (Which is what some parenting books *cough* *cough* Siblings Without Rivalry would have you believe.) Sadly enough, a non-responsive victim is the case where parents recognize sibling abuse the most. So you can't blame us for not defending ourselves! It's one of the best ways to get you to realize what's going on. We might be --understandably-- afraid. We might feel helpless, and like any attempt to defend ourselves will be futile. We might have believed you when you said "it takes two to make a fight," and feel guilty if we defend ourselves. We might know we'll get in trouble if we respond, so we decide it's not worth the effort.

The one who responds inappropriately: In a case where a victim responds by bullying back, we still need you to get real about the root cause. Yes, it's not respectful to insult someone, even if they insulted you first, BUT it still stands in the way of accountability to just punish the victim without understanding he might have been goaded. We need you to listen to our grievances BEFORE you give out punishments. Stand back and observe a little. Does one kid always tend to be angry when they attack, but the other is always smiling, and generally looking gleeful? Does one kid seem more hurt than the other? Can you tell what the intentions are behind their words? Is it revenge or a power trip? And above all else, LISTEN TO US. Believe it or not, children could give you the answers you're seeking.

In these cases, you also have a tendency to correct the victim more than the aggressor. I don't know exactly why this is, but maybe it has to do with the fact that you yourself also feel intimidated by the bully. You know on a certain level that correcting the bully will lead to more resistance, while correcting us will not. You need to fully acknowledge the aggressor's part. Make yourself learn all the ways he or she taunts, teases, belittles, and embarrasses us. And hold them accountable. Acknowledging these parts will ultimately lead to a better correction plan--one that truly takes all aspects of the fighting into account.

Seek for understanding. It will help you find more--and better--solutions.

Another Way to Tell

So I recently had an insight...

Something one sibling abuse expert has said is that, when trying to determine if a sibling is being abusive, disregard the emotions. Separate the emotions from the behavior, and look at the behavior itself. 

That's sound advice.

But I think that where a lot of parents miss the signs of bullying is thinking that both kids are "equally contributing to it" because the victim child is fighting back. 

Something else parents should try is looking at the emotions. 

Often, in families where it looks like both kids are being mean to each other, you can still tell that one is the abuser and the other the abused. How? The abusive one is mainly doing what she's doing for fun. Is she smiling when she's insulting her brother? Is he laughing when he's teasing the other one? If you can see a smile on the child's face, then you've spotted the bully, whose motivation is power.

The abused, on the other hand, often does what she's doing out of anger. If there's a hurt tone of voice, if he doesn't look happy, then that's the victim. His motivation isn't power--it's revenge.  

Yes, disrespect should not be allowed. From either party. But I firmly believe we need to get real about the root cause. In many families, the disrespect can be traced back to one party in particular: the one who thinks it's fun to be mean. 

Don't just hold children equally accountable. Be honest about who's the main antagonist. Yes, victims should be taught to respond appropriately, but the burden does not fall on their shoulders. It is adult accountability that will really put an end to bullying (and consequently, the fighting), and this accountability needs to target the ones who are accountable. 

Firstborn Favoritism

There is a phenomenon I've witnessed in many families, and maybe you've seen it too. I call it Firstborn Favoritism.



One family I know of has three daughters, and the mother shows a lot of favoritism with her oldest. For parents' weekend the daughter's freshman year of college, the entire family went up to visit. Whenever her daughter went back to college after a break, the mother brought the entire family to the airport to wave good-bye. The mother constantly talks about her oldest, gushing the entire time, and practically ignores the other two daughters. She absolutely does not show the same amount of involvement or interest with the younger ones. She knows practically every detail about her oldest daughter's life, including her friends, her classes, her roommate troubles, her grades, everything. And she's no longer even living at home. The other two? The mother can barely name two friends of theirs. Her attention is completely sucked up by her oldest. So sucked up that she can't even tell that her oldest daughter mercilessly and relentlessly teases and belittles the youngest one.



Why do some parents show favoritism for their first child?



Ask any parent, and he or she will tell you about the indescribable love they felt when their first baby arrived. Their heart melted and the world stopped turning. Their baby smiled or gurgled, and that smile or gurgle was meant for them and them alone. They and their baby were one. And they had never ever loved any person as much as this little one before.



For many parents, these initial feelings never completely go away. Even after their second or third (or fourth...or.....you get it) child, the parent still feels a special bond to their first child. And some parents never completely lose their grip on this bond, which ends up manifesting itself as favoritism towards the firstborn child.


Now, many experts on sibling rivalry warn against playing favorites, but for different reasons. They believe favoritism ignites jealousy and competition in the non-favored children, who then tear down the favored child. I don't doubt this is true. But in my experience, favoritism can cause another effect: the favorite child bullies non-favored children.



Why does favoritism cause the favored child to bully? I have a few theories. First of all, a favored child is exposed to enormous amounts of praise, attention and affection from the parent. This parent-worship affects the child by reducing his or her sense of empathy. The extra attention can also increase a child's desire for power. With so much indulgence, the child comes to believe he or she should rule the world. This entitlement plays out in chasing after power in relationships with peers and siblings. Especially with siblings, because they will never desert a child like friends will. I also think favored children receive less discipline than non-favored ones. The apple of Mommy and Daddy's eye can do no wrong.


Some families I know of completely avoided firstborn favoritism. I have three theories for this. One is that some parents may have favoritism feelings for their first child, but are wise enough not to show them. Another is that some parents simply do not have a much stronger bond with their first child than with their second. And a third is that some parents have their own memories of growing up with a favored sibling--especially a firstborn favorite--and vowed to never do that to their own children. I know of three families in particular where I have a hunch that the mother (always the mother) purposely humbled the eldest child.


In each of these families, the humbling took place by withholding affection (but not to an abusive extent), teaching empathy, and generally reducing the sense of power and importance of Firstborn. And bullying does not take place in these families! Huzzah! Sibling abuse is cured!


Ha. Not really. But.....I think we've found a cure. Or a possible cure. Or at least a preventative measure. Don't show favoritism towards the firstborn child. Prevent bullying before it begins. Reduce the amount of power you give your oldest child, and he or she will not become a bully.


When you reduce the bullying, and by consequence the fighting, in the family, you--and your other children--will thank you.

It Can Happen to Anybody. . .

I hate trite, overused sayings. But there's one phrase where I'll make an exception. "It can happen to anybody," applies perfectly to victims of sibling abuse. Often used after an unfortunate event befalls an otherwise capable person, the phrase "it can happen to anybody" means that bad stuff can happen to the best of us. Misfortune does not discriminate. Being smart or tough or brave or kind or rich or hard-working or quick or talented or anything else will not always protect you. Life is evil, and does not care how much you've paid your dues. When it decides to smite you, you don't stand a chance. So when bad things happen, you are not automatically to blame.

Many people think differently. After hearing about something horrible that happened to an acquaintance of theirs, these people will chalk it up to being the victim's fault. They want to distance themselves from the truth that something equally bad can happen to them. And in a weird mirroring of this belief, victims blame themselves, but for different reasons. We want to believe that as long as we are good and strong, we are invincible. Nothing bad can happen to us so long as we play our cards right. And if something terrible does happen, it must have been our fault. Because if it wasn't, and life really was just pure randomness, then it means we are powerless in the face of evil.

The sad truth is that, in many situations, we are powerless. This is especially true when we're children. When we're children, we are victims of circumstance. We are randomly assigned a family, and we are victims of our parents' action--or inaction. We are also victims of who our siblings turn out to be. In all my observations of families experiencing sibling abuse, something has become clear: anyone can be a victim, and anyone can be an aggressor.

One family I know of had interesting personality combinations with their children. Their older child was a quiet nerd. The younger child was a social butterfly. As they grew older, these differences became more pronounced. By middle school, the older daughter's nerdy tendencies had made her an outcast. The younger daughter quickly moved up the social hierarchy and became a cheerleader in high school.

As anyone familiar with high school stereotypes will tell you, traditionally the cheerleaders and jocks pick on the nerds. Cheerleaders are "winners" and nerds are "losers" in fantasy high school land. (In reality, I didn't find this to be the case, but it's a fitting metaphor, so I'm going to use it.) Exactly the opposite happened in this particular family.

The older daughter, the nerd, picked on the cheerleader.

As I've said before, there are a few common reasons why a sibling becomes a bully. In this family's case, the older child became a bully because of her insecurity. She was a loner at school who was picked on by other kids because of her poor social skills and weird habits. To rectify her insecurity, she abused her sister, giving herself a power trip and temporarily relieving herself of her own self-hatred.

This ironic situation is not an isolated incident. I have seen other families where an otherwise strong, assertive person found themselves a target of bullying. Like the family in A Case Study, the primary target was an assertive, independent, straightforward individual. One thing she never did in response to the bullying was ignore it. She always took a stand, always made sure to correct Allen when he was bothering her. This was done at the expense of the parents saying, "stop fighting!!!!!!," but she didn't back down. Her responses, however, were not successful.

Beating a bully has nothing to do with how "strong" the victim is. Even secure, confident people can be attacked. I've said this before and I'll say it again: To beat a sibling bully, parental action is crucial. Kids cannot do it on their own. A bully needs to be held accountable by an authority figure. He or she won't obey a peer.

And another, equally powerful message must also be conveyed: If you were a victim of sibling abuse, it wasn't your fault. Nobody asks to be bullied or "invites" bullying. Bullies will bully if they want to. It doesn't say anything about your character if you happened to be a target. Bullying, like any other trauma in the world, can happen to anybody.

Four Reasons to Stop Sibling Abuse

No matter how much explaining, cajoling, pleading, or proving you do, some people will never believe that sibling abuse is a serious issue. Even after providing example after example, countless studies and statistics, some people remain adamantly convinced that all sibling acts are normal and harmless. It utterly amazes (and repulses) me. Short of giving these people a nice, healthy dose of their own medicine (no one, I repeat, no one would hold that position after experiencing sibling bullying themselves), I've come up with four reasons why sibling abuse must be taken seriously, and soon thereafter, ended.

Parent, you should stop (what I have referred to as) sibling abuse....

For Yourself: Your kids are driving you nuts, aren't they? They're constantly at each other! No matter how many times you've told them to knock it off, they just won't STOP FIGHTING! It's constant back and forth and back and forth...How come they haven't learned how to resolve their problems yet? How come they can't work it out like adults? Here's the thing: If the fighting in your home is really intense; if they aren't fighting over objects and you can't pinpoint what exactly they're fighting about; if one kid is smiling while the other is really angry, you are very likely dealing with sibling abuse which is NOT normal, and NOT something children can work out themselves. This situation calls for adults to step in and hold the AGGRESSOR accountable. This is not a situation where the siblings are equally responsible. If you blame them both, you will get a more resentful victim, a more satisfied bully, and the warfare will not only continue, but intensify. It's very simple to me: Stop the bullying and you'll stop the warfare.

For The Victim: The victim needs to see that you have a vested interest in protecting him. She needs to know that her right to be respected will be enforced. He needs to be able to protect himself in the real world, and not being trampled on at home will do that. Being protected will diminish the feelings of resentment the victim will hold towards both the bully and the parent, and will be better, in the long run, for you.

For The Bully: If the victim needs to learn that he or she is worthy of respect, the bully needs to learn to be respectful. Often the bully learns how to play the game. She'll tease her brother for fun, but be the most empathetic and encouraging friend. She knows how it works. She knows she'll never get away with bullying her friends, but she can get away with bludgeoning her brother. But there's a glitch. Bullying habits can influence how the bully treats other significant, primary relationships. I've noticed that sibling bullies will tease and belittle their girlfriends or boyfriends similarly to how they teased and belittled their brothers and sisters. Same, or even worse, with spouses. There are other primary relationships that can be affected too. In one family I observed, the abuser's sister was getting married, and the bully began bullying his future brother-in-law just as he had bullied his sister. There is a ripple effect to the bullying behaviors. They can be carried outside of the family to affect other people. It's best if they're stopped before that happens.

For the Family: And maybe the most important reason of all: the family. I've already told you about how I cut off a relationship with one of my sisters. No parent wants that to happen. All parents dream of a happy, unified family. But that will not happen if one of the members feels disrespected or unsafe. No parent wants dissonance with one of their children, but that has happened in my family, and a few other families I know of where sibling abuse has occurred.

These are four very commonsense reasons why sibling abuse must be stopped. So stop it. Now.

Don't Forgive Yourself

In all the research I've done on forgiveness, I've noticed a recurring theme. I see it on blogs, on pithy Internet memes, in books, and in scholarly articles. It's the idea of forgiving oneself. Equally as important as forgiving the aggressor, they say, is forgiving yourself. For what you did or didn't do in the relationship. For what you said or failed to say. For the person you were. It doesn't matter anymore, they say. Forgive yourself.

When we're talking about abuse, though, forgiving ourselves isn't necessary. We didn't do anything wrong. 

I find it odd how frequently victim blaming gets pulled into conversations about sibling abuse. I was having a conversation with my cousin one day, and we were discussing my relationship with my abusive sibling. Or, rather, she was telling me how she saw our relationship. For your information, my cousin and I live approximately 350 miles apart. We see each other twice a year if we're lucky. We didn't grow up together, and our relationship is casual at best. We hardly know each other, and she certainly doesn't know anything about my family's intricate relationship dynamics. But during this conversation, as I'm explaining why I'm not attending my sibling's wedding, she says to me, "Well, she has things to apologize for, and you have things to apologize for."

Excuse me? How can this person--who hardly knows anything about my relationship--automatically assume we're both equally guilty? It is not a universal truth that "it takes two to tango." That applies to many relationship problems, but in cases with abuse, assuming equal blame is wrong and harmful. The victim is never to blame for someone else's abusive actions. 

I've come to realize the saying, "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" rings especially true for sibling abuse. If you do stand up for yourself, you'll fight with your sibling, and you'll hear the often-proclaimed-but-hardly-ever-questioned "it takes two to tango" line. If you don't stand up for yourself, you get walked on and everyone from therapists to estranged family members will tell you later in life that you were "playing the victim" all along, and had you defended yourself, or communicated your expectations (ya know, to your eight-year-old sibling), or yelled louder or acted tougher, all of this wouldn't have happened. 

When I was growing up and getting picked on, I didn't stand up for myself all that much. Part of it was fear, but another part was knowing in the back of my mind that my efforts would be futile. I knew I would just hear the "Now, now, Sybil. It takes two to make a fight," line, and the grown-ups would send me on my merry way. And then I would feel even worse, because I would be angry and helpless.  

But it turns out that even when you don't fight back, you still hear the "it takes two to tango" line. From people who can't bear the uncomfortable truth that maybe, just maybe, there is a guilty party who deserves accountability. 

There's a very simple reason why victims don't need to forgive themselves. What happened to them was not their fault. From all of my observations, I have noticed one thing: if the parents aren't on board, nothing the victim can say or do will do anything to stop the abuse. Children don't have control here. In the family unit, parents are the authority figures, the children are submissive to the parents, and the siblings relate to each other as peers. When sibling abuse is happening, the parents have the primary responsibility of stopping it. 

I believe strongly that if anything is going to stop sibling abuse, it is education. Parents need to be educated on recognizing harassment, and knowing what to do if it happens. When abuse is going on, it is often because the parents don't recognize it. It is not because the victim is weak. It is not because the victim needs to be assertive. It is because the victim got unlucky, and must live at the mercy of his or her parents' decisions.

So don't forgive yourself. There's nothing to forgive. The type of person you were never mattered. It wasn't your fault.         

The Real World

When I talk about parents needing to intervene during bullying situations, an argument I get from time to time is that such action does children a disservice for life in The Real World. A child being bullied, they say, must learn to stand up for himself. As adults, victims won't have Mommy and Daddy coming in to rescue them, so they best learn to fend for themselves now.

I have several problems with this point of view, and I will happily dissect each one of them for you.  

The first problem, and most glaringly obvious one (at least to me) is that if parents truly believe this philosophy, then 90 percent of them are not following it. From what I've seen, victims do defend themselves--and Mommy and Daddy do nothing more than stand in the way. Nobody likes to hear fighting, and when parents hear bickering in the background--even when it's a victim asserting herself against a bully--parents immediately intervene to shut the fight down. Parents don't stay out of it--they step in to yell "STOP FIGHTING!" If you truly believe that a victim must defend herself, then let her do the work you believe she should do.

In addition to parents not putting two and two together, there's a second problem I believe must also be addressed. Does bullying happen in The Real World? Sadly, it does. I myself have been targeted numerous times by power-hungry individuals seeking to project their insecurities onto me. But there's a key difference between life at home and life in the adult world: control. When you're a kid, you're at the mercy of the home environment. When you're an adult, what you deal with is your choice. If I have a problem with somebody, I can stand up for myself. If and when that doesn't work, I can choose to leave the relationship. I can dump the jackass boyfriend, I can move away from crazy roommates, I can leave the job with the bullying coworker. In short, I can seek a better life elsewhere if defending myself doesn't work out. As an adult, I am much more able to protect myself.

Home life is very different. If defending yourself against your bully brother or sister doesn't work--time and time again--what do you do? You can't cut off a relationship with them until you turn eighteen. So you're stuck. You are stuck being abused and you live your life expecting to be mistreated. Which is a terrible, terrible lesson to teach a child. The reason children must be protected is because they have no control. When a person does have control, then it's appropriate to expect that person to fend for themselves. But not until then.  

And what about the bully? What is he learning about The Real World? Well, I'll tell you. He's learning: That it's O.K. to be mean. That it's just fine and dandy to get what you want by using force. That projecting your insecurities onto others is an acceptable means of handling your shortcomings. That getting a laugh out of humiliating others is a harmless form of entertainment. How will he fare in real life? How do you think he'll treat his spouse? His coworkers? His employees? The family he marries into? 

I've seen plenty of families where the victims stand up for themselves. And I've seen them do it calmly, firmly and consistently. Sometimes these interactions are successful, and many times they're not. Does this tell us that bullying is unbeatable? I don't think so. Recent bullying research shows us that the intervention of an authority figure is often the most effective way to beat bullying. And I strongly believe that when adults do their job--protect and discipline their children--positive results will follow. 

I don't see disciplining a bully as "rescuing" or otherwise stunting the development of the victim in any way. In fact, I believe that intervention is exactly what the victim needs to fully develop his or her best self. Parents may be wary that a child will see himself as helpless when an adult intervenes. The irony is that children who grow up in safe, nurturing environments where bullying is not allowed are more confident and more likely to defend themselves should the need arise. I can tell you from firsthand experience; a surefire way to ignite learned helplessness in a child is to feed him to the wolves over and over again with no protection.

When parents embrace the mentality of protecting and correcting, they not only carve out a better future life for their children. With their respectful former bully and confident former victim in hand, they create a better "Real World" for all of us. 

A Case Study

I've always wanted to be a fly on the wall in other people's families. Not because I'm creepy (although, with how much time I spend online, that's debatable), but because being able to research sibling abuse cases would be very beneficial to this project. Recently, I got exactly that opportunity, and I wasn't even expecting it. 

I just did a cultural exchange program, and part of this experience included a homestay with a family. They were a wonderful, I repeat, wonderful family. The parents, for the most part, were doing everything right. They were actively involved in the kids' lives, they ate home-cooked meals together every night, they tried to make each child (they had four) feel important and special, they were generous with affection, they respected each child's right to privacy and personal space (no bedroom-sharing! with four kids!), and in general they always went above and beyond the expected requirements of parents. They were doing exactly what all "good" parents should be doing. 

But there was one big problem. One of the siblings had taken it upon himself to pester, provoke and relentlessly annoy the others. 

Now. Before I go further, I need to address some issues. Many of you are the last-born children of your respective families, and greatly resent the "pesky younger sibling" stereotype. I respect your feelings. Youngest children are given all sorts of nasty labels, like "bratty," "spoiled," and "pesky," while eldest children are always portrayed as heavenly beings who can do no wrong. It has always been O.K. to say that a younger sibling is "pesky," but it has never been acceptable to say that an older sibling is mean. For if we do, the rebuttal will be that the mean-ness is in retaliation to the pestering. No matter what, the cultural belief is to flip the script around: the younger sibling is really the oppressor while the older sibling is the oppressed. I validate those feelings and understand why hearing one more time about those damn pesky younger siblings would be enough to make you want to throw your computer to the ground, thereby rendering future access to this blog, and the rest of this post, impossible. 

However, I have a few more things to say that might make this post easier to swallow. Yes, the instigator in this case study was the youngest child. But that's the only time I'll say that for the rest of this article. To me, his position doesn't matter: what mattered was that he was treating his siblings disrespectfully. I will make sure to stress his behavior rather than his birth order. Secondly, the primary victim in this situation was not the eldest child. She had actually moved out of the house. The other two remaining siblings were the victims, and the instigator seemed to provoke them about equally. However, the next oldest child was working a lot, and was hardly ever home. That left the third-born, the youngest daughter, to be the primary victim. So, if it helps, think of this not as an older sibling being victimized by a younger one, but as the youngest daughter being traumatized by, well, another youngest child.

Now that I've got that settled, I'll continue. The little instigator, whom I'll call Allen, did all sorts of things to pester his siblings. And at least half of his antics went on right under the parents' noses. During dinner, in the car, and whenever the family was gathered together, he would poke and prod at his sisters and generally annoy them. I could tell his behavior was really irritating the sisters, but the parents didn't seem to notice it at all. One time, we were in the car and Allen decided to start something up again with the sibling sitting right next to him. She, of course, protested. Allen only upped the ante. The sister appealed to the mother for help. She only said, "both of you, stop fighting!" She called to her mom again, but this time Allen started mimicking her. Like name-calling, mimicking is a big "no-no," and absolutely requires parental correction. The mother didn't say anything about it.

The tensions between Allen and his siblings continued to escalate. One night, there was a big fight between Allen and one of his sisters, and I couldn't help but overhear it. I wasn't there to observe what exactly led to the fight, but I'll bet you my next paycheck that I know why it happened. I'll bet you that Allen had been pestering his sister, she had already had it up to here with all of his antics, and kaboom! a big, explosive reaction ensued. I don't blame her. 

That night, what was probably most painful for her, even more than her brother's pestering, was her mom's reaction to it all. In the midst of the already extremely emotional situation, her mother made one of the most common mistakes parents make: lecturing rather than listening. "If there's a problem between you two," I could hear her yelling from downstairs, "I expect you to work it out like two adults!!!" 

That's not what's going on here, I thought to myself. This is not a conflict between them. This is a child being disrespectful who needs to be held accountable by an adult. The next morning, I went upstairs to grab something before I headed out for the day, and I ran into the mother. I could tell she was thinking about the previous night. "Good morning, Sybil," she said with a smile that did not meet her eyes, "Did you sleep well?" I answered her back kindly, but what I really wanted to do was answer her unspoken statements. I could tell that she thought of the previous night as a horrible experience of dealing with her terrible, misbehaving children while she, the long-suffering mother had to once again set them straight. 

I felt like telling her that's not what had happened the previous night. What happened was that she was the problem. She was dealing with a misbehaving son who saw it as his right to terrorize others purely for the pleasure of it. And she needed to discipline him. 

Let me make it clear once more that this woman was not a "bad mom." She was very kind and empathetic and really did care about her kids' feelings. A few days later, I overheard her asking Allen if he had made sure to do something, (like make sure something was picked up, I couldn't quite hear her) for the sake of the other sibling. It's not that she flat-out didn't care about the fighting, she just thought it was caused by something else. She thought they were fighting over things. 

Part of the problem was that the parents didn't grasp that the pestering was a big deal. They saw it, but the emotion it caused in the sisters didn't register with them. They weren't so much turning a blind eye as just being blind to the seriousness of the issue. However, I think that paying more attention to what the sisters were saying should have enlightened them. Very often, I heard one of them say, "You aren't respecting me!" right after Allen tried to irritate her. That key word, "respect," should have signaled to them to pay closer attention. 

Living with this family enlightened me more to the problem with parents. It's not that parents dealing with sibling abuse are bad parents (although some of them are). This family taught me that even the best parents can make some awful mistakes. All parents, even the best ones, need to consistently evaluate the job they're doing and ask if they need to change something. They need to be willing to ask and admit if they are the problem behind a major issue. I believe that if they do that, even if it bruises their ego, they can start to make major changes that will benefit both themselves and their families. 

  

    

Parental Inaction, Deconstructed

One of the most painful parts of experiencing sibling abuse is the sense of helplessness that follows almost every encounter you have with your abusive sibling. I know that I never felt like I was successful if I tried to

stand up for myself. No matter what I did, it felt like my siblings simply continued to harass, embarrass, and abuse me. Parents can be a big part of this helplessness, because they often don't do anything to stop the bullying. Now, before all you parent-lurkers flock to the comments section, let me explain.

I'm sure you can find a parent feeling equally helpless about the bullying in their home. I'll bet you these parents say similar things to the victims in the situation: "Man, I've tried EVERYTHING to get Billy to stop being mean to Joey, but NOTHING WORKS!" 

But I haven't met one yet.

It astonishes and infuriates me whenever I see a parent handling--or, really, not handling--sibling abuse in their families. I have witnessed teasing, belittling, provoking, name-calling, insulting, and even hitting. I'm talking about cases where it has been very, very clear to me that one was the instigator and the other was the victim. What gets to me more than the meanness itself is the parents' response to it. Because in each occasion I've witnessed, the parents have not uttered a.single.word. about it. Or if they do, it's to tell the kids (or really, the victim), "STOP FIGHTING!!!" 

I always wonder why they don't do anything. What is the reasoning behind their inaction? If I were to ask them about it, or peer into their brains, what would I find? I haven't yet mustered the courage to confront these parents, and I don't have the ability to read minds, but if I did, I think I would find one of the following responses:

"Billy and Joey are always at each other! It's driving me up the wall! Why can't they just learn to get along and leave their poor mother in peace?" 

Or

"*chuckle* Oh, siblings. They're always so mean to each other. Oh well, that's normal!" 

Or

"It bothers me when I hear them fighting. But I stay out of it. They need to work it out themselves."

Or

"At this point, I don't care who started it. I just want it ended!"

Or

"You know, I do think Billy teases Joey a little. But I think it's not that big of a deal." 

Or

"I don't think we need to play the blame game. It takes two to tango, and we need to hold them both accountable." 

Or

"I just don't care. As long as there's no blood, it's not my problem."

Or

"If Joey has a problem with Billy, then he can handle it himself. I'm not fighting his battles for him." 

These misguided thoughts are the result of a society that has hammered into parents' brains that "sibling rivalry is normal," and that fights between siblings require no further analysis than automatically assuming both parties are guilty. This blanket assumption is a dangerous guiding mindset and needs to be thoughtfully and carefully re-examined. The truth is that sibling relationships are complicated. There is no one message guiding sibling struggles that equally applies to all families, and if that became the cultural Zeitgeist, I would be a happy camper. Sometimes I think that parents would be best suited if they simply trusted their own common sense. Throw out the parenting books, deafen your ears to your in-laws' advice, don't believe what your friends say, and form your own conclusions about what you think is happening in your family. 

In addition to the confusion with children's contributions to fights, there is another, equally concerning confusion about responsibility, and that is the parents' responsibility in the whole affair. There are some parents out there who flat-out believe that they do not have responsibility when it comes to sibling abuse. I don't understand that. I have never understood that. Parents are there to protect their children, including protecting one of their children from the other. When one of your children endangers the safety or self-esteem of the other, it is your responsibility to step in and discipline that child. 

So what exactly is the parents' responsibility? Like I said before, there is no one-size-fits-all message, but I think there are a few keys parents should keep in mind: 

-Get familiar with the dynamics going on in your specific family. Each family is different, and carries different sibling dynamics. Don't assume that what's going on is "just normal."

-Sibling squabbles usually take the form of one of three things: conflicts, rivalries, or bullying. Keep an eye on fights, and try to label them. Are your kids fighting over things? Are they competing with each other? Is one being mean to the other?

-It's not always the children's sole responsibility to "work it out themselves." That applies to their conflicts. Dealing with bullying is YOUR responsibility.

-While the victim in the situation can certainly build his or her assertiveness muscles by standing up and saying no, that's usually not the problem. Most victims do stand up for themselves, and they need to be able to rely on you to back them up (and not stand in their way by saying, "DON'T FIGHT!!!"). The bully needs you too. Remember, he or she is also learning a lesson --that put-downs are not acceptable.

-Pay attention to what the children are saying. "Leave me alone!," "Stop being mean to me!," or, plain and simple, "Stop it!" are all possible signs that bullying is occurring. Look out for insulting and teasing as well.  

-Attacking a sibling with no provocation is not normal. Being mean for fun is not normal. Correct children when they do these things.

-Sibling abuse is not rare. It's actually more common than society has made it out to be. It is a possibility that there's a bully in your home, provoking the fights.

-It's not a big deal until it happens to you. Even a seemingly harmless comment is enough to do a lot of damage. Don't immediately dismiss a child as being oversensitive or too dramatic.

-If there is a bully in your house, you'll see a pattern. He or she will often use the same tactics, and you'll notice just how often he or she provokes others.

-Trust your common sense. If any piece of wisdom goes against what you think is best, trust your own beliefs first. 

-Keep your kids' happiness as your main goal, and when you use that to guide you, you'll stumble upon better answers. 

Often I find myself thinking that if an antagonizer (bully) is present in a family, it's because the parents haven't done anything stop him or her. Because I look around me, and I think that out of every ten families dealing with sibling abuse, ONE is doing something about it. The rest are either in denial, misinformed and confused, bystanders at a loss of what to do, or completely apathetic. I wonder if bullying is most certainly preventable, and the families not experiencing it nipped it in the bud from early on. 

Most parents of two or more children experience some level of bickering between the children. And most parents complain about it. I have always been a believer in looking for solutions to problems rather than complaining about them. Parents of a bullying child especially need to look around for answers, yet most of them are looking in the wrong place. Rather than throwing their hands in the air and screaming, "WHY CAN'T MY KIDS GET ALONG?!" they should instead look at themselves. Because in many sibling abuse situations, they are the problem. And they need to take action. 

My Reply to a Misguided Mom

Here is a note I found on this website titled "When Should I Intervene During Teasing?"

My 13-year-old son is constantly teasing his younger brother, who is 10. I never know when to intervene. On the one hand, I want to let them work it out themselves. On the other, I worry that my older son is going to think it's OK to be mean and my younger son is going to have some lasting emotional scars. What do I do?
- Janet

And here is my response:

Dear Janet,

You're a good mom. It sounds like you're involved in your kids' lives, and want the best for them. You want to do what's right and you follow the advice from experts, parenting books, and most likely the people in your life: children should be left alone to "work it out themselves."

But here's the thing: "Working it out themselves" is something that applies to your kids' conflicts with each other. If your sons are fighting about what to watch on T.V, or who stole whose skates and broke them, or which video game they want to play together, then they can be left alone to work it out themselves.

During a teasing situation, children should not be left alone to handle it. While conflicts can be dealt with by compromising, teasing is very different. In this situation, there's nothing to really "work out." We're dealing with misbehavior here. And when a child misbehaves, it is a parent's duty to step in.

Telling a teaser and a victim to "work it out themselves" is like telling a child running around a restaurant screaming his head off to "work it out himself." The restaurant-screaming child is not going to stop until an adult steps in and punishes him for misbehaving. The same goes for the teasing child.

You are absolutely right that your older son is learning that it's OK to be mean. The fact that you are worried and the fact that you wrote this letter both tell me that your intuition has given you the answer here. You know already that it's time for you to intervene.

And when do you intervene during teasing? If the teasing is constant, if it's meant to embarrass or dominate the victim, if one child is always teasing and the other always being teased, then you must step in and hold the aggressor accountable. You're worried that there's some sort of acceptable limit for teasing, and you shouldn't intervene until the teasing has surpassed that limit. What all parents should know is that the threshold is a lot closer than they think. If you can say "teasing is present in my house," then chances are the limit has already been reached.

Try your best to stamp out the teasing and let your older son know his power to be compassionate. Then it will no longer be necessary to intervene

Sincerely,

Spunky Sybil



 

"But That's Normal"

I don't talk about my experience with sibling abuse that often to people I know in real life. I have only found a few trustworthy people regarding this issue. But whenever I do open up about my past, the response I get is usually the same. A little chuckle, a flicker of the hand as if swatting away a fly, and then the phrase, "Oh, but that's normal." 

These people don't mean to belittle my feelings. Far from it, actually. They, too, see the mean things siblings say and do to each other, and a little part of them is appalled at the behavior. But they have adopted the usual response regarding sibling issues: the belief that what they're seeing is normal. Why do people think this? 

Part of the problem is that we have not yet distinguished between the many different parts that comprise sibling rivalry. Another part is that "sibling rivalry" is too broad of a category. When we say "sibling rivalry," what exactly do we mean? 

In the past, "sibling rivalry" has been a broad category for everything siblings do to "make each other miserable" (you hear that one a lot, too). "Sibling rivalry" is the phrase we use for the expected bickering over property, but it's also what we use when we talk about jealousy between siblings. It's about the competition between siblings; both to be "better" than the other and to compete for the parents' love and attention. It's the phrase we use when we talk about younger siblings being pests and older siblings being mean (wait a minute...are we allowed to say that older siblings are mean? Is that a thing yet? Or are they still perfect little angels who can do no wrong?) And all of these actions have been labeled "sibling rivalry," which in turn has been labeled "normal." 

"Sibling rivalry is normal" is part of a larger syllogism guiding the current thoughts about fighting between siblings: 

 Things that are acceptable are things that are normal.

Sibling rivalry is normal.

Therefore, sibling rivalry is acceptable. 

Do I think that fighting between siblings is normal? Absolutely. Do I think that some of it is acceptable? Again, absolutely. Actually, I wish my parents had thought that fighting between siblings was acceptable, because whenever my siblings and I fought, their most helpful reaction was to tell us to stop fighting. Which was not helpful at all. 

When parents embrace some amount of arguing as normal, their children benefit. We all need to build conflict-resolution skills in life, and these don't come from parents shutting their kids' fights down. 

But the problem is that not all of what we've so far called "sibling rivalry" is normal. Antagonizing a sibling for the fun of it is not normal. Attacking a sibling with no provocation is not normal. Violence and name-calling are not normal. Living in fear of a sibling is not normal. Teasing intended to embarrass or belittle is not normal. Among the standard quibbling between siblings is a sneaky little monster who thinks he can get away with his doings if he disguises himself as "sibling rivalry." It is our responsibility as a society to strip this beast of his disguise and call him out on his actions. And doing this will also help reduce the conflicts between siblings, as parents will rid themselves of the bullies in their families who so often provoke the fights. 

And how do we do that? By doing away with this generic prescription that we have foisted on all sibling doings. I suggest a new mantra, just a little bit different from the first, to enter into the Sibling Squabbles Zeitgeist for today. It's pretty simple. Ready for it? Here it is: "Not All of 'Sibling Rivalry' is Normal." That's it. Plain and simple. And when we embrace this mindset, parents are left to use their own common sense to figure out whether what's going on in their families is normal or not.   

Learning to Be Helpless

One of the long-lasting effects of sibling abuse is something psychologists call "learned helplessness:" a mental state in which a person feels powerless to avoid or escape an averse situation because he or she believes that his or her efforts will not be successful. The reason why it's called learned helplessness is because individuals who experience this have been conditioned by life circumstances to think they are powerless. When it comes to sibling abuse, "life circumstances" come in the form of abusive siblings and also the parents who do numerous things to contribute to the problem. 

We're often told that being a kid is great. When you're a kid, you don't have to pay the bills, deal with the DMV, cook dinner, save for retirement, keep your health insurance, get out of debt, or any of those stressful responsibilities adults face every day. Children are pretty much free to do whatever they want. Heck, you can't even go to jail when you're a kid! Children certainly have it good living a life free of responsibilities. 

But there's a catch. Children may not have responsibilities, but in exchange for that, they also don't have any freedom. When Mom and Dad are in charge, the kids don't have a say. Children are too young to manage money or make their own meals, and so we expect their parents to handle that for them. Actually, there are many responsibilities--like family discipline--that children can't and shouldn't handle. Hopefully, the parents are responsible adults who make good decisions. But what happens when the parents don't do that? All of a sudden, "lucky" children aren't so lucky anymore. Because when you're a kid, and your parents mess up, you pay the price. 

In my family, sibling abuse was happening right underneath my parents' noses, and they didn't mutter a word about it. In fact, they even encouraged it! One time, my mother, sister and I were at a church potluck, filling our plates from the buffet table. My sister had just gotten to the bowl of re-fried beans, when she turned around to me and said, in a loud voice, "Sybil, don't take any beans. They always make you fart." My mom was standing immediately across from her and heard every word. I will always remember her reaction. Rather than disciplining my sister, my mom laughed and then said, "Oh, guess who shares a room! Ha ha ha!" Even back then, I remember thinking that my mom should have done something to stop her, and feeling hurt, humiliated and disappointed that she hadn't protected me. 

What was possibly even worse was that my parents took away my power to protect myself. My dad was the worst offender. If he heard bickering in the background, he didn't care at all for the cause of the fight, he just wanted it ended. One time, we were in the car, and the same sister mentioned above began picking a fight with another one of my siblings. Getting angrier and angrier, I rushed to my other sibling's defense. My sister in turn screamed at me, enough to make me want to cry. I was just about to defend myself, when my dad yelled back, "Thank you, thank you," his words for "stop fighting right now!!!" And when we got home, I did cry. For about two hours. 

When the car incident happened, I was in a period of my life where I had decided that enough was enough: I wasn't going to take any more crap from my siblings. I was finally going to stand up for myself and force my sisters to treat me right. "Devastated" is not a strong enough word to convey how I felt when my efforts didn't work. What disappointed me even more was my father not only not supporting me, but doing the opposite. He didn't care that my feelings were hurt, that my sister had just attacked me, and I needed to defend myself. He only cared about his own irritation towards the bickering (something he signed himself up for when he decided to have more than one child, I might add), and casually brushed my feelings aside. 

The helplessness I felt as a result of my parents' actions was something I carried with me outside of the home. I struggled a lot to stand up for myself in the real world, afraid that fighting back would only bring me more pain. It was only years later that I began feeling a sense of control over my life again. In my twenties, I began noticing that I could stand up for myself when there wasn't another person yelling at me for doing so. I felt so much freer when I gained that little bit of control.

It is important for parents to realize their role in shaping the outcome of sibling abuse. We're taught that parents do nothing but positive things for their children: they feed, clothe, nurture, and protect their children. They put their children on the right path. When parents do do their jobs right, they really reap the benefits in how their children behave. But parents can also do many negative things--things that harm the family. Parents can make their children powerless, fail to correct children who misbehave, damage their children and render them less capable in the real world. 

Taking a stand against sibling abuse means not only taking a stand against abusive children, but also against ineffective parenting methods. Parents, take a closer look at how you work with your children, and honestly evaluate if you need to change your ways. It is only when you do that when your children will change theirs as well.        

"Stay Out of It"

Parents have been exposed to many pieces of advice about dealing with sibling squabbles. One bit of wisdom is "stay out of it." Don't intervene. Let the children work out their problems themselves. For if you intervene, one of a number of bad things will occur: You'll pick sides. Or you'll shut down their fight and not give them a chance to express their frustrations. Or you'll settle things for them and they'll never learn to settle things themselves.  

But just like with "it doesn't matter who started it," there are certain situations where "don't intervene" doesn't apply. 

If there's a recurring conflict that the children have not been able to resolve themselves, parents must get involved. If the children skip compromising and move right to a screaming match, parents must get involved. If the children are very young and have no idea how compromise works, parents must get involved. If a child begins abusing another, or the fight is escalating towards abuse, a parent must ABSOLUTELY get involved. All that's basic common sense, right? You'd be surprised by how many parents and child-rearing experts think otherwise. 

I once read online somewhere that parents should only intervene if someone is about to get hurt. No way. If there is even a chance that a fight will get physical, the children have skipped two or three important conflict-resolution steps. Steps where a parent should have said, "okay, it's time to intervene." If someone's about to get hurt, you've waited way too long.

Here's the thing about intervening: It's not all that important when you get involved, but why and how you go about doing it. The goal of intervening should never be to pick sides, shut down a fight, or resolve the kids' problems for them. The goal should always be to help the children communicate better so the problem can be resolved. As long as you have the right goal in mind, you don't need to worry about whether or not to intervene. 

Here's something more about intervening: It's not only "okay" to do so in certain situations, but absolutely crucial that a parent do so. I'm talking about families where one sibling experiences emotional, physical or sexual abuse at the hands of another. 

When I was going to therapy, my therapist had an interesting approach to getting me out of depression: he'd tell me my problems were all my fault. The reason my older siblings picked on me, he'd say, was because my personality invited it. (His exact words.) Because I was so passive, so compliant, my siblings saw this weakness in me and took advantage of it. My therapist was so convinced that I was the root cause of my family problems that he told me, "I think that no matter who your siblings were, no matter their personalities, this [the abuse] would have been the outcome." So it didn't matter that one of my good friends, who was just as unassertive as I, had an older sibling who treated her just fine. It didn't matter that my parents never did anything to correct the abuse when they saw it happen. It didn't matter that I saw plenty of families where the abused sibling did fight back, to no avail. It didn't matter that I fought back now and again, to no avail. According to my therapist, I was the only one to blame in my problems with my siblings.

Unfortunately, I have seen this attitude expressed in many different sources. Even in Siblings without Rivalry, the book I have given nothing but glowing reviews about until now, heavily implies in some parts that a child's personality influences whether he or she will be victimized. 

I disagree.

I have seen families where a passive, gentle child is pushed around by a domineering, insensitive one. But I have seen just as many where the victim is not at all passive. I've seen families where sibling abuse has greatly exacerbated the fighting between siblings. Usually, the sibling in the "victim role" is unsuccessful in stopping the attacks. 

I've observed families that have stopped sibling abuse, and from these observations, I believe that the key is not in the victim's response. It's in the parents' actions. Families that have successfully ended sibling abuse are usually headed by assertive parents who have clear expectations for behavior. And then hold children accountable for breaking the rules. That type of intervention is crucial. In fact, I believe that ending sibling abuse is impossible without the parents' intervention.

This shouldn't come as a surprise. Parents have a job. Their job is to protect, and that means deciding when it's time to intervene.

"It Takes Two to Tango"

"It doesn't matter 'who started it'" advises the University of Michigan in their YourChild topic on sibling rivalry, "because it takes two to make a quarrel. Hold children equally accountable when ground rules get broken."

I'm sure you've heard a similar statement before. It is the mantra among parents, teachers and other adults when dealing with conflicts between kids. If you've ever been on the receiving end of a bully's insulting words, you know that this statement can be just as infuriating as the bully himself. What do you mean 'it doesn't matter who started it?'" You probably thought to yourself when an adult punished the two of you for fighting. OF COURSE it matters who started it! He attacked me and I stood up for myself. Shouldn't he get at least a little bit of a worse punishment than me?"

I've been critical of the "It doesn't matter who started it" line my whole life. To me, there are some cases where the culprit is clear, and any adult who claims that it took two to start the fight is either insane or being lazy. What is so aggravating for a child dealing with sibling abuse is the double bind this statement presents to them. If a sibling attacks them, and they do fight back, then a parent will claim that they were both equally responsible for fighting. If a sibling attacks them and they don't fight back, they're letting themselves get walked on. Either way, the victim sibling loses.

I decided to dissect this mantra some more.      

Certainly, there are many circumstances where "who started it" doesn't matter--perhaps because there really wasn't an instigator. This happens most often when the children are fighting over things. In that instance, you aren't dealing with a victim and an aggressor, you're dealing with two people with conflicting wants. During these fights, the children most need an adult to guide them in the process of compromising, not someone who will arbitrarily pick a child to sit in a corner for five minutes. Punishing one of them for "starting it" would be unfair and unproductive. 

That makes sense to me.

What doesn't make sense is essentially turning a blind eye in conflicts involving a bully and a victim. In these circumstances, I believe, who started it DOES matter. When a parent punishes an aggressor for what he did, that parent is not "playing the blame game" but is holding that child accountable for his actions. In fact, in a victim-aggressor situation, not blaming is unfair and unproductive. When a child teases another just for fun, it is expected that the victim will respond. Punishing them equally only further infuriates the victim and satisfies the aggressor. It is only when the aggressor is punished for his transgressions that the root cause of the fight is adequately addressed.      

I searched the Web for some insights from parents on this subject. Here are some posts from this board I found. 

Parents: does it matter which kid started the fight?

I have a brother, and as all kids do we fought now and then. As long as there was no blood or other obvious injury, we both got in trouble when we fought.

Oh, we'd try to explain that the other started the fight, but it was inevitably met with "It doesn't matter who started it - it takes two people to have a fight. You stand in this corner, you stand in that corner, and don't sit down." 

For the 15-30 minutes I faced the wall each time, I remember being rather indignant that we never were allowed to reason with them, because to me it was important how the fight started. Not only that, it seemed terribly unfair that we (okay, I. I didn't really get his side) wasn't supposed to respond to being pestered...

Now I'm not so sure that how the fight started makes any difference if you're not in the room to see it. I don't have kids, though, so I ask you folks with real, non-hypothetical, parenting experience

Do you:

A. punish them both/all for arguing and hitting if you didn't see what happened, regardless of their reporting of the situation? What if there are three or more kids and everyone else fingers one as the cultprit?

B. play detective to figure out who was at fault, and only punish the instigator if you're reasonably certain that you worked out what had happened?

C. try to find out who was at fault to make that child's punishment worse, but not spare the victim(s) because they shouldn't have responded to escalate the problem?

__________________

I only had one child.

However, I think that it IS important to know which one started the fight, and why. Frequently all parties are at least a little bit guilty in a fight, but sometimes the provocation is just about irresistible. And sometimes the reaction is way over the top.

I think that NEVER investigating the cause of fights is just taking the easy way out, it's a sign of a lazy parent, or a lazy school system. If one kid is in the habit of just throwing punches at another kid(s), then the instigator needs to be stopped somehow. I know that there were a few kids of my acquaintance who DID just pick fights for the fun of it.

_______________________________________

 

When my boys fight, I do care who started it, but both of them get "in trouble" because if someone is starting a fight with you, the best response is not to engage in a physical fight. We do try to determine who started it and we talk about what each person should have done differently, but if you only ever punish the instigator, you're going to have a lot of pointing fingers and lying, plus, you're missing out on the lesson that everyone has control over his reactions - you can choose to talk it out, you can choose to get help from an authority, you can choose to walk away, or you can choose violence. If you choose violence, you'll face the consequences, just like in "real life."

_____________________________

If I've got the time, I'll do some digging and try and determine who was the instigator, who escalated from verbal to physical, etc. Whoever got physical first usually gets the worst punishment.

If I'm cooking dinner, or doing some other job that doesn't allow for an easy break, or I'm watching something on TV I really want to see, then everyone gets punished.

____________________________________________

Yeah, from what I've seen, punishing both means the bigger/older one always gets to beat up the little one and pick on him and be cruel to him, and the parents never see he is only responding.

I am not a fan of this as you can see.

___________________________________

Maybe, but only punishing one oftentimes allows the younger / smaller kid to figuratively and literally poke sharp sticks at the older.

__________________________________

I've found that they know how to push each others buttons so well, it's hard to say who really started the ball rolling. I tended to come down harder on the one with the extreme (loud) reaction but usually encouraged them to work out their differences without appealing to parental authority. If I wouldn't intercede, they, in theory, would have less incentive to escalate.

____________________________________

Yeah, this. Was it the kid who made the first physical move? Was it the kid who made the first verbal taunt? Was it the kid who tried to cheat to show up the sibling who had been winning? Was it the kid who suggested the game in the first place, knowing that the only way the sibling would win was by cheating?

You -- over there! You, over there! I don't care what he/she/they/you did. Stay there until dinner.

________________________________________

Sometimes you get one purposefully building things up to a physical confrontation in order to get the other in trouble. I've caught students doing this to slower students especially. Verbally picking at them over knowing they'll get a physical response which is much more likely to be noticed by the teacher. I tend to punish the verbal aggressor worse in those cases and try to teach the other student better ways to handle the situation.

______________________________

Rule #1 -no bothering each other just for the fun of it.

Rule #2 -zero tolerance for violence.

Rule #3 -nobody likes a narc.

I didn't want them tattling on each other so I didn't get into the whole who started it thing, but our house isn't that big so I usually knew anyway.

____________________________________

I don't always try to figure it out, but I do fairly often. It generally turns out that they're about equally guilty. The little one likes to push buttons, the older one likes to tease, and they both want to be the boss. So I point out where each went wrong and they have to apologize to each other.

The other day, my older kid came running in, screeching "Mooooom! She licked my tongue! Ew ew ew! It was groooooss!" All I could think to reply was "What on earth was your tongue doing out where she could lick it?"

 _____________________________________

With two boys 10 and 14, I am now so tired of the whole thing that a) they get punished for the NOISE more than anything else, and b) if there's no blood, I don't want to know.

I am exhausted!

Not to mention if I do try to intervene they just then both gang up on me!

_____________________________

Which teaches children that justice isn't important, the only thing that's important is not being noticed.

_________________________

I don't care. My words of advice to them: "I'm not fighting your battles for you. You work it out yourselves."

_____________________________________ 

When my stepkids were growing up, I sometimes watched my cousin's three kids on the weekends. There was about five years from the youngest to the oldest of the combined five kids. 

D's kids were used to doing the the pick-pick-pick-smack-tattle bit with their folks. I wasn't buying that. They quickly learned that I would begin by asking them a series of questions, starting with Is it on fire? If they couldn't answer yes to at least one of the questions, everybody involved got a time out. 

It wasn't long before they actually made attempts to settle things among themselves before trying to be the first to rat out a sib. 

___________________________

Not a parent, but as a child the few adults who would satisfy my sense of justice were those who punished us both but after investigating, so when I'm taking care of kids I try to follow their methods.

So I got punished for hitting my friend LA (which I shouldn't have) but he got punished for hitting me first and for cheating (he hit me when I pointed out that he was "miscounting" on purpose; as you can see, I still remember the specific incident very clearly 33 years later). The punishment was the same, we got sent to separate rooms to have timeout until dinner time (we both had reading materials and loved to read), but it wasn't because "I don't give a shit who hit who or why" or because "I'm the adult and you're both grounded". His mom did give a shit and she gave individual warnings on specific behaviours; the part she couldn't be bothered with unless something became a repeating problem was setting individual and specific punishments.

__________________

My parents punished me every time my brother got in trouble, just on principle. Apparently as his older sister his every move was my responsibility.

It's not healthy. Even at this age I have a Cain-and-Abel complex.

_______________________________

It is true though that I hate watching kids who are used to their parents intervening and negotiating through every childish spat. Kids of elementary age and up should be able to solve most of their disputes by themselves. 

When my kids have a geniune problem I don't mind working it out with them but I will NOT be involved with the "pick, pick, pick, THUMP, wail" type thing. The younger one to be honest is horrible to his older brother and dreadfully disrespectful. Therefore if he involves me with the "He thumped meeeee" wail, yes, I will punish the thumper but the taunter will also be punished.

_________________________________

Whether it matters depends on the siblings.

With my two boys? They don't really fight, but one of them will start picking at the other, and he'll answer back in kind, so the first one ups the stakes, and it just goes from there. It's all fun and games, unless and until it gets out of hand. Most of the time they're good at stopping when one of them is close to the tipping point, but when they don't, it doesn't really matter who started it, in my opinion - the best thing I can do is put a stop to it, NOW. Once they've both cooled down, they've forgotten what started the argument in the first place, and it's all good again.

I've seen plenty of other sibling pairs and groups, though, where one sibling intentionally picks fights and doesn't mind getting punished as long as the victim gets it, too. In that sort of situation, it's vital to get to the bottom of the situation and let the young instigator know that a) a parent knows what's going on and b) no matter how much trouble Chosen Victim gets into for hitting, Instigator will be in deeper trouble for provoking the fight. Otherwise Instigator will continue to think the fun is worth it as long as Chosen Victim gets punished the same way, as my mother used to say, "so I'm sure I get the guilty party" 

__________________

In the moment, it doesn't matter. Later, it might.

That is, if you're fuming and screaming and indignant, you're not responding rationally, and you need to go cool down, whether you started it or not. Once you're calm, we can have a discussion about what happened, where you were provoked and how you might handle it better (non-violently, quieter, whatever that means) next time. And I'll have this discussion, probably separately, with the other guy as well. But while you're still fuming is not the time for this discussion.

I don't dole out "punishments". Punishments are authoritarian bullshit that don't teach kids how to control themselves when there is no authority around. But I'm happy to talk to you, help you find your triggers in a non-triggering manner and discuss strategies for how you might handle difficult situations. Which of these strategies you choose next time is up to you, and you'll quickly find out whether they work any better than the strategy you chose this time.

A time out in our house isn't punishment, it's a cooling off period. And I've sent myself to time out to cool off when I need it!

________________________________________________

'Fights' in our house usually consist of one child hitting the other, the other hitting back and the first telling on the second. 

I almost always get to the bottom of it (they get time outs until they are ready to tell the truth and then they both have to agree what happened). Consequences usually involve apologizing and play acting what they could have done instead.

My kids so hate this process that the act of hitting each other seems to have lost its appeal. (Though I nearly died of laughter when my youngest said to the oldest who had called him a name, 'thanks' and just walked away like we play acted. The oldest nearly burst from being so annoyed.)

_________________________

I'd go with the quick investigation approach as there is rarely a case where one kid has up and attacked the other for no good reason. And with kids you know, you learn their patterns pretty quickly, so there is usually evidence of what happened either because you hear voices getting elevated in the other room before the punch or something (like a toy) is in the hand of the kid who shouldn't have the toy. In those circumstances, the instigator gets it worse than the person who threw the punch, but both get punished. If there is no prior evidence, everyone gets punished equally. If there is no evidence, but several kids all have the same story where one party is clearly guilty, that kid gets punished and the others are told not to play with him/her for a period of time. The "everyone gets punished equally all the time" thing doesn't work for me because one kid will often be a jerk to the other kid on purpose knowing that the 'equal punishment' hurts the victim far more than the attacker, particularly when the victim is younger where a time out is that much more harsh for them.