Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
SHARING IS CARING, but sometimes sharing is boring, or annoying or a total pain, right? Especially if you’re an older sibling with a particularly grabby younger brother or sister in your shadow.
This week, one dad is wondering if three years old is too young to start teaching his daughter some tricky life lessons – not just about sharing with others, but about being kind to younger family members who may be too little to understand the implications of their actions.
Each week in our series, Am I Being A Bad Parent?, we hear from a reader who can’t figure out if they’re on the right track with a parenting decision, or if they’ve gotten something 100% wrong. To get a balanced view of the situation, we put the dilemma to a group of Irish parents, keeping things anonymous to encourage honest answers.
My three-year-old is a good sharer when it comes to kids her age at playgroup and preschool, but she usually refuses to share with her new baby brother. Even her discarded breakfast bowl was off limits recently. He is at the stage of wanting to grab and explore everything, and it’s not nice to see it sparking such negative sibling interaction. We know she’ll probably grow out of it… so am I being unreasonable to tell her to share when they’re both still so young?
No, of course you’re not being unreasonable. Kids can be naturally pretty selfish. But you say your daughter is good at sharing with other kids, and it’s the annoying little brother she has the problem with. At three she’s old enough to understand that babies grab things and she needs to try be patient with her little brother. The sibling stuff can be complicated so I would always let them know it’s ok to feel like the baby/toddler is annoying, but that it’s not ok to be mean.
Yes, you’re being a bit unreasonable. I think every child should be allowed some stuff that’s theirs not to share, kept by the child somewhere safe and played with when other younger kids are not around. The three year old is possibly feeling vulnerable with the arrival of her new brother. One solution is to try to spend some time alone with the three year old and make her feel special. Then explain how much her little brother loves her and how playing with him and showing him how to use toys is fun for both of them.
You’re not being unreasonable, but it’s a lesson that’ll take work. Sharing with a young sibling not like sharing in playgroup, which is basically taking turns. This is just handing something over to be chewed or bashed, which is understandably a little frustrating for a big sister. It’s not an exchange in the same way, it’s just “your responsibility as an older sibling”. I suspect that the solution is more about persevering with a consistent message about family members being nice to each other.
So what’s the final tally? Is our reader being unreasonable?
No – 2
Yes – 1
Tell us your thoughts in the comments!
Want to win a brilliant day of book-filled family fun at Dubray StoryFest? Get your hands on one of two family passes here – and sign up for our Family Newsletter below!
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Good man Hugh. Can I suggest that you circulate this to some of your younger colleagues who have posted articles over the past few days which have suggested that the fans were responsible for this tragedy.
Hi Eamonn, can you give me any specific examples here?
@ Hugh. Sure, check out an article posted 22 hours ago in the Score section. The original wording was amended after I pointed out the facts of the Taylor Report but in the discussion below the article the writer repeats the assertion that " fan irresponsibility" was the cause of the tragedy. This is totally untrue. The Taylor Report clearly states poor crowd management and Stadium design as the key factors. Thanks Hugh.
@Eamonn: I understand this is a highly emotive subject, and I accept your point re:the ambiguity of the original wording, but your claim that I blamed the actions of fans for the tragedy is grossly inaccurate. I think if you re-read my comment, you’ll see that’s the case.
The significance of the Commons debate lay in its attempt to dispel the myth of fan irresponsibility once and for all, bringing the official, government narrative in line with the experience of supporters and victims. The PM is contemplating a public apology because that never really happened, even in the wake of the Taylor Report.
@ Conor. My concern is that comments like “The question of official blame, however, has historically been reduced to one of fan irresponsibility” is just simply untrue and unfortunately, only helps perpetuate the myth. I’m not sure how else I’m supposed to read this. This is totally at odds with the only official inquiry into the events leading up to the tragedy. That’s my point, nothing personal. Over and out. Thanks Conor.
Another of Thatcher’s legacies.
have your say