Orange County Register

(Today’s guest blogger is Elizabeth Esther.)

“Mommy, Jewel isn’t sharing her marrrrrrkerrrrrrs!” James wailed, running into the room. “Yeah, because he’ll ruin them!”

Jewel protested, running in right behind him.Ah, yes, the ubiquitous Sharing Dilemma. Back when I had only two children, I spent (OK, wasted) all kinds of time trying to get my kids to share.

Then I got smart.

I don’t make my kids share anymore. We learned the hard way that enforced sharing isn’t kindness; it’s tyranny. And I don’t have time to be a tyrant. There’s just too much laundry to do.

Don’t get me wrong. If by sharing we mean teaching our kids to be fair, kind and generous, I’m all for it. But I’ve learned that true kindness is voluntary. I want to encourage cheerful generosity rather than begrudging compliance. The only way to accomplish this is by protecting their right to share or not share their prized possessions. If nothing else, it has dramatically decreased the number of inter-sibling arguments over damaged toys.

Back when I tried to enforce the You Will Share Rule, chaos and injustice reigned supreme. The children operated under the assumption that their siblings must share and so there was zero incentive for treating property respectfully. Indeed, in the case of the special-markers, my sons figured they had just as much a right to their sister’s property as she did—minus the obligation of having to replace the marker if it was ruined. Of course, enforced sharing didn’t make anyone more willing to share; it just stoked the flames of outrage whenever a special toy was broken.

When a toy was broken, both parties appealed to good ol’ Mom: my daughter seeking justice for her ruined goods and my sons seeking a marker bailout. And after all, the boys argued, why should they have to replace the markers when my daughter was required to share them in the first place?

As a mother trying to raise responsible citizens, I am concerned that my children treat each other fairly and kindly. But I no longer believe that enforced sharing is either kind or fair. Thus, the new standing rule in our home is that each child is entitled to his or her own personal property and that they decide when, where and how to share their things. Remarkably, the problem of sharing has simply disappeared.

We’ve discovered that the children are more apt to share because they know that if their property is damaged, the offending party must replace it. If their special things are being misused, they have the power to revoke the sharing privilege. This breeds far more spontaneous generosity—and inter-sibling trust–than any amount of parental coercion. Most importantly, they’ve discovered that one simple act of voluntary sharing demonstrates true kindness more than ten acts of sharing under duress.

Sure, I could continue to enforce mandatory sharing upon my children. And sometimes I do. But for the most part, I don’t want to rob them of the opportunity to experience the joy of spontaneous, voluntary generosity. To give is an honorable sacrifice. But only when individuals are free can they experience the reward that comes from voluntarily sharing their special markers. Only then will they understand that it’s better to give than to receive.

❃❃❃❃❃

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.