One thing that should help is to teach him how to negotiate appropriately for things he feels are unfair or wrong. He needs to learn to express himself (again, appropriately) and HE also needs to learn when to not argue but just accept. Often once they know tat the door is open for them to discuss if they really feel strongly, they are more willing to let smaller issues go and accept.
What we found - we initially had to bend on everything, then work back to being rigid on things we feel MUST be done our way. But according to Explosive Child, the things we won't bend on, are Basket A. And the only things that should be Basket A are school attendance and immediate safety. So a kid running outside into the snow not wearing a coat - it's Basket B (unless temperatures are so dangerously low that a few seconds without a coat is lethal). Because the kid will himself realise that it is cold. Or instead of standing in the doorway blocking it and saying, "You MUST wear your coat!" you try, "Do you want your blue coat or your red one?"
Giving the child a choice is a good START with this. With choice, they have a responsibility to themselves and they have to step up and learn how to make choices. Part of being able to manage with a difficult boss in years yo come, will be already knowing how to negotiate and when not to waste your breath. This is taught often laboriously and at times painfully, but if they learn how to do it appropriately, they will be better equipped. I know - because we started "Explosive Child" techniques mostly on difficult child 3 but also on the older siblings, who at that time were in their late teens. Since then both our girls have had serious employer issues. easy child walked away (after having filed letters with her boss's superiors, letters which at the time were dismissed) and walked away with her reputation in tatters. She was later vindicated. easy child 2/difficult child 2 fought legally (having followed all the guidelines I set out for her) and eventually settled out of court with them. But the techniques she was taught by us helped her handle the workplace bullying situation the best way she could have.
We allowed out kids to argue with us, as long as they argued fairly and logically. Again, the older generation and even some of our friends thought we were nuts to allow it, but we have set our kids up to better manage their relationships in adult life, with partners, employers, colleagues and friends.
husband & I argue the same way. We do not fight. But we often discuss and we do disagree at times. But we generally agree to disagree - this is important to teach your kids. "Son, I know you want to go skating with your mates but at this point I have to step in and say no, you are not to go today. My reasons are - yo have an assignment due tomorrow and I don't think skating now, will leave you enough time to finish. If you get your work done now, you might be able to go later. You should be able to go tomorrow if you get your work done now." I will also add, "You can choose to go skating now, but if you do, I will not sit up late and help you type your assignment when your hands get tired. I am going to bed early tonight. So if you make the wrong choice now, you have to wear the consequences."
I rarely forbid anything, especially in the early stages. But I would make it clear that the wrong choice would bring natural consequences which could involve failing at school.
Sometimes what a kid wants, relies on a parent being cooperative. And you can always choose to not cooperate, as long as you obviously have other things to do. My parents did this to me, however, when they clearly did not have to. To me, even looking back now, I believe they were choosing to be obstructive. We were spending the day at my sister's and in the evening our church youth group were going on a bus trip to the beach. My parents didn't want me to go but had no logical reason (I realise now, they did not want me out with a group including boys after dark, even supervised by responsible adults as we would have been. I was 16 at the time.) My parents dealt with this by simply refusing to leave my sister's until it was too late for me to go. I knew they were stalling; we'd been at my sister's since mid-morning and I needed to be at the church hall for pick-up at 5 pm. But my parents were really, really over-protective to a ridiculous level. I say that now, looking back. My siblings say the same thing. They also say I had it a lot easier than they did (!!??!). I believe them.
There were other times when my parents were obstructive "for your own good" when I was not allowed to discuss at all (I had to learn to argue with husband after we married - I had no experience). One time which still burns me, I had been chosen (with another friend) to represent the school at public speaking. I had been telling my parents about this for several weeks, my friend's father was going to drive both of us girls to the school where we were to compete. I just had to get to their house. My father was late home from work that night and said he was too tired to drive me. My brother in law next door even offered to drive; my parents refused, said I had to be punished for failing to remind them of the event. I knew I had told them - my mother had been listening to me all week rehearsing my speech. They had not realised how important it was. Next day at school, my failure to even show up, despite my explanation, was seen as my having badly let down the school. It id a lot of damage to my reputation. I still feel that the main reason this happened, was because my parents had backed themselves into a corner and had resorted to "I said no, and I am the parent, my word is final!" purely to shut off debate.
It's a topic I am understandably very sensitive about, since the memory of the damage it did is still painful.
So yes, you are the parent and have final veto. But do not exercise it without really careful consideration. NEVER exercise that veto, especially with a very bright child who will KNOW, if you're simply fed up with debating the issue.
I still see tis happen with friends and their kids, when the friends say, "That's it! Stop nagging! I'm busy with the dog, I don't want to talk about it now, so you're not going."
What we do in such a situation - "I can't talk about it now, I'm concentrating on this task. I will be done in fifteen minutes, we will talk about it then."
We talk about it. If we have to write it all down to weigh up the pros and cons, we do so. But if a request cannot be granted until certain requirements have been met, then the child has a list of those requirements and the reasons. For example, "I can't take you because there is no fuel in the car. The spare drum of fuel is empty. I have no money to buy more fuel." If the child can make fuel materialise, or alternate transport, that objection is dealt with. If there are no other objections then the child should be allowed to go. But the other objections could be, "I know you say Johnno can give you a lift, but he has had his licence suspended. You are not going with an unlicensed driver." It is possible for a new objection to be raised, especially if it's an obvious breach of house rules.
So yes, you are the parent. You do have ultimate say. Just go gently with it. It actually is worth far more if you use it less.
Marg
