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.        

Dealing with Your Anger

For the past six years, I have been angry all the time. Every day, I've walked around with a black cloud over my head, my heart pounding, my teeth gritted and my hands clenched in fists. For those of you dealing with the aftermath of sibling abuse (or currently living through it), you are well acquainted with this sensation. Resentment is the shadow stubbornly stuck to the side of any sibling abuse survivor. And it feels like no matter what, you can't get rid of it. 

Even when life was going well, my anger was always bubbling underneath the surface. I was a volcano who was going to explode at any moment. In the company of great friends, I was angry. Seeing a long-awaited movie in the theaters, I was angry. Catching a glimpse of my crush across the hall, I was angry. Eating great food, finding the perfect shirt in the mall, watching the sunset on the beach, hearing my favorite song coming on the radio, during all of those events, I was angry. 

My resentment came from lots of things--being picked on by my siblings, not being protected by my parents, not being allowed to stand up for myself, and all of the other injustices, disappointments and heartbreaks that happened in my family. 

I found that even when I left the nest, my anger came with me. I couldn't let it go. At least when you're at home, your anger can serve a purpose. It is a natural reaction to those who abuse you, and can serve to protect you when the need arises. But when you've left those people behind, there's no longer a reason to be as angry as you were. But no matter how frequently I told myself that, my anger stayed with me. 

I'd consulted many sources of wisdom, from Buddha to Elizabeth Gilbert (the author of Eat,Pray, Love) on dealing with resentment. Each one of them said basically the same thing: holding on to anger was not healthy, and it was best to "just let it go." 

Okay, I'd think to myself whenever I read something about "letting anger go," but it's not that easy. How do I "let it go" without doing what I've been doing my entire life: repressing my feelings and making myself even angrier?

It turns out there's an exact art and science to it.

I've tried many different ways to let myself be happier and put my anger aside. Here's what has worked and what hasn't.

It's not about repressing your feelings. 
If you're doing it right, putting your anger aside shouldn't involve repression. The first time I tried to conquer my demons was a near catastrophe. It was a school field trip, and I was with my classmates, walking around a city, listening to a boring speaker drone on about historical facts I didn't care about. Demons are often triggered by frustrating events (at least I've noticed that for me), and what was frustrating me was the fact that we were standing in the freezing cold rain, bracing ourselves from the wind, and listening to a lady who just wouldn't shut up. It's like she didn't even notice the weather, because she happily stood there for about fifteen minutes yammering on about something I couldn't even hear over the noise of the wind and road. 

Resentment is when an emotion like anger is attached to an old memory. When something in your current life makes you feel frustrated, memories attached to frustration can surface, making you more frustrated. So that moment, when my emotions came bubbling up to the surface, I thought if I just told myself, "don't be angry," everything would be all right. Big mistake.

As had always happened in previous years whenever I tried to stuff my feelings down, I ended up getting angrier. For the rest of the tour, I was boiling inside, about to explode. "THIS 'LET IT GO' STUFF DOESN'T WORK!" I was screaming to myself in my head, "I think I'd rather be angry." Actually, typing this makes me angry. Phew, I need to calm down. Hold on a sec.

Ok, I'm back.

As I was saying, freeing yourself from your anger shouldn't involve repressing your feelings. It involves different formula.

It's about redirecting your thoughts.
When I observed my own thought processes, I began to notice that there were many triggers for my anger, not just frustration. Being the introvert that I am, I frequently get lost in my thoughts. When I'm just standing around, thinking, my thoughts turn to all my old memories of having been in situations where I was hurt and powerless. And then I get angry.

When I get lost in my thoughts, my mind begins churning up things my parents and siblings have done and said to me. It's like my brain thrives on anger, and will not work unless fury is churning around in it. 

What I decided to do instead of saying no to the angry feelings, was to say no to the images attached to the feelings. For example, instead of saying, "I will not be angry," to myself in the middle of a frustrating event, I would tell myself, "I will not think about the event that is making me angry." I would tell myself, "I will not think about the siblings who tortured me, the parents who didn't do their job, or the place where the event occurred." This new method helped a lot. 

Additionally, I would redirect my mind to think of positive things. I would think of things that had gone well recently, like a compliment I had received, or some good food I'd eaten, or a new friend I'd made. Focusing on the good events and throwing away the bad ones gave me a greater sense of control over my life. And a part of me really liked that. The fact that I could make myself happier while respecting my anger was the key.

Your anger will still be respected.
The reason why I had resisted "turning off" my anger for so long was because I felt like it would have been treating my anger disrespectfully. If you're like me, then you probably think as I do, that you have a right to be angry. And you do! Anger is a natural and healthy response to what has happened to you. It's not wrong. When someone has treated you badly, it would be foolish to not be angry. 

But when you're out and about, living your life, letting your anger consume you is also unwise. It is far, far better to tell your angry thoughts, "Okay, I hear you, I know how you feel, and right now I'm going to give you a break and focus on the good things in my life." Your anger is still there, and it still has its place, but that place is not interfering with the life you're currently living. 

And when it's time to use your anger, you can choose to let it out. Use your anger productively, and tell your parents and siblings about how they have hurt you. This will be another post entirely, but using anger in that fashion is also a good way to respect your feelings.

Finally, it is important to remember that deciding to be happy does not make you weak. In fact, releasing anger's grip on you is one of the strongest things you can do. Happiness is not for ninnies. Happiness is a goal for all of us who are striving to live well. And living well is the best revenge.   



      

"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.

Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas

The holidays are supposed to be one of the happiest times of the

year. 

But for those of us having family issues, they are perhaps one of the most difficult.

It is very stressful and upsetting to be around others who have done nothing but treat you badly all year long. When the family is sitting around the Christmas tree, exchanging gifts, exuding "Christmas cheer," it is very lonely to sit and dwell on your own troubles, particularly if they have been caused by your family. 

I recently ran across something on Facebook (of all places) that really caused me to think about today. One of my friends posted a status, part of which contained something that I wish to pass on to you. 

It said: 

No matter how much others intentionally try to hurt us, we can subsequently try to intentionally find happiness anyway.

So today I challenge you to try to find a piece of happiness, no matter how small. If you achieve that, know that you have gained a small victory in your own personal war against sibling abuse.  

Another Reason Why

I have a friend named David who has an older sister. David once told me about a story he heard from his mom about his early

relationship with his sister. David was a newborn, barely three months old when this incident occurred. David and his sister were in his mother's bedroom, with David lying peacefully in the middle of the bed. His three-year-old sister was there, watching over him. David's mom was temporarily out of the room, grabbing something from the walk-in closet. Her back was turned for maybe ten seconds when she heard a funny noise. It sounded like small cries that were being muffled by something. She turned around and saw David's sister try to smother her brother with a pillow.

These family stories might give you a chuckle, but this is a story that nicely illustrates another reason why sibling abuse can occur. That reason is the intense jealousy an older child may feel with the arrival of a new baby sibling. 

In the book Siblings Without Rivalry, (yes, I know I keep referencing this title, but bear with me) the authors present a great metaphor for explaining the jealousy a first-born child may feel upon the arrival of a new sibling. 

Imagine that your partner puts an arm around you and says, "Honey, I love you so much, and you're so wonderful that I've decided to have another wife (or husband or partner) just like you."  When the new wife (or husband or partner) finally arrives, you see that (s)he's very young and kind of cute. When the three of you are out together, people say hello to you politely, but exclaim ecstatically over the newcomer. "Isn't (s)he adorable! Hello sweetheart... You are precious!" Then they turn to you and ask, "How do you like the new wife (or husband or partner)?" 

The new wife (or husband or partner) needs clothing. Your partner goes into your closet, takes some of your sweaters and pants and gives them to the new wife (or husband or partner). When you protest, (s)he points out that since you've put on a little weight, your clothes are too tight on you and they'll fit the new partner perfectly. 

Is it a silly metaphor? Maybe. But it provides a great perspective for parents dealing with a very jealous first-born child. How did you feel while reading this? Didn't you feel so enraged you wanted to smash something? Didn't you want to lash out at the new spouse? To harm him or her, no matter the cost? This explains the intense cruelty behind many older children's actions when a new baby arrives.   

Not all first-born children will react like this. Both research and my own observations have shown me that a child's personality is the strongest indicator of how they react to a new sibling. More specifically, I have found that a child with an inflexible personality is more likely to react unfavorably.

Many families report that this cruelty doesn't stop when the child gets older. The "meanness" simply continues, evolving into different forms as the kid grows up. What's the reason behind this? Some might say that the old jealousy never dies, that the older sibling never "gets over" being displaced. 

I have a different theory. I think that the jealousy itself dies away, but the mean habits stick around. Because the older sibling gets used to torturing the little one, he or she continues this behavior because it's what he or she is accustomed to. Being mean out of jealousy evolves into being mean for fun. 

So what's a parent to do? Parents need to validate these jealous feelings early on. In the story above, David's mother should have of course gone into the room and immediately pulled her daughter off of her son. (Which is what she did.) But then, she should have said,"People aren't for hurting! Show me how you feel with this pillow instead." 

She then should have handed her daughter a pillow to throttle. And then stood back and watched while her daughter pounded on it. She could have said something like, "You just want to send your brother back!" 

Such advice might shock parents, but research has shown that validation of feelings--not ignoring them--is what will drive vicious feelings away. Parents who end up with a jealous first-born child should not ignore the green-eyed monster, but welcome him in, listen to his feelings, and soothe the hurt away.           

"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. 

  

What is Sibling Rivalry?

In families with more than one child, sibling rivalry is to be expected. But what exactly is it? The one-word answer to that question is "fighting." Sibling rivalry is the competition, fighting, jealousy, and at times, hostility between siblings.

"Sibling rivalry" is the catch-all phrase that has been used in the past to describe any aggression whatsoever between siblings, including actions that have more recently been labeled as sibling abuse. This has misled many naive parents to believe that the sibling dynamics in their homes, whatever they may be, are inherently normal. Because sibling rivalry is normal, they think, if one sibling is teasing, belittling, or otherwise torturing the other, that is also normal. 

It's not, as this blog is here to tell you. 

But before I get into a deeper definition of sibling rivalry, let me tell you a little bit more about myself. When I was growing up, my older siblings constantly picked on me (for fun), and I saw the same thing happening in many of the families around me. To me, it always seemed so obvious: the reason siblings fought with each other was because the older one started it. In my mind "sibling rivalry" consisted of the older sibling being mean and the younger one fighting back. I never understood why parents didn't see this. 

It wasn't until I came across an article on the Internet that my rigidly-held belief started to crack. This piece, written for parents struggling with sibling issues, used the following question as one of its main headlines: "How can I tell the difference between sibling abuse and sibling rivalry?" 

What?

Huh?

You mean there's a difference between fighting and abuse? No way. I don't believe you. Older siblings always start the fights. Always. 

But as the very open-minded person I am, I started to question my thinking. I accepted the possibility that I could be wrong, and I began doing more research.  

Eventually, I came across a book entitled Siblings without Rivalry by Adele Faber and Elaine Mazlish. There is one passage in the first chapter that gives one of the best explanations I have ever seen about sibling rivalry: 

"The experts in the field seem to agree that at the root of sibling jealousy is each child's deep desire for the exclusive love of his parents. Why this craving to be the one and only? Because from Mother and Father, that wondrous source, flow all things the child needs to survive and thrive: food, shelter, warmth, caresses, a sense of identity, a sense of worth, of specialness. [. . .] Why wouldn't the presence of other siblings cast a shadow upon his life? [. . .] The mere existence of an additional child or children in the family could signify LESS. [. . .] And most frightening of all, the thought: 'if Mom and Dad are showing all that love and concern and enthusiasm for my brother and sister, maybe they're worth more than me. And if they are worth more, that must mean that I'm worth less. And if I am worth less , then I'm in serious trouble" (Faber and Mazlish, pp. xv-xvi). 

Eventually, it dawned on me that the fighting I had seen between siblings had not always been caused by an evil older sibling's desire for entertainment. In many families, the bickering between siblings was driven by their mutual resentment of one another--that the other always got the limelight, the attention, the affection, the recognition and praise. And it wasn't always the older one who started it.

Many parents are guilty of seeing "sibling abuse" actions as "sibling rivalry" actions. They think that if one kid is teasing, belittling, or name-calling the other, then this behavior is automatically normal and both siblings somehow contributed to it. Neither of these assumptions is correct, and these parents need to learn that. I, on the other hand, was guilty of seeing "sibling rivalry" as "sibling abuse." I used to think that any aggression between siblings was started by the older sibling, and was carried out with the sole intention of inflicting harm on the other child. It was almost a relief to figure out I was wrong.

However, in many families, the fighting between siblings really is caused by one sibling being mean and the other fighting back. In these cases, parents should not shy away from laying the blame where it is due, and holding the bully accountable. Sibling abuse can exacerbate the fighting between siblings. It's not always true that "it doesn't matter who started it." When parents know when a child has crossed the line, they can more effectively discipline their children and better promote peace in their home.

Understanding what sibling rivalry is and isn't will help parents do just that.