This Mom Explains Why She Does Not Teach Her Kids To Share

"I think it does a child a great disservice to teach him that he can have something that someone else has, simply because he wants it.”

Teaching anyone that they should be able to have what someone else has simply because they want it isn’t a mentality I think should be spread around. But it begs the question: how then do we define what is truly sharing?

It's a long article but I've taken a snippet:

I talk all the time about the importance of sharing on this planet. Sharing space, resources, time, love, land, and so on. But if we were to remove the idea that someone should have it simply because they want it, what would that look like? Would we then create a world where no one would share anything because we’d always be thinking about whether or not they want it for the wrong reasons?

I think, as with many things, it comes down to each individual having an understanding within themselves about how to live harmoniously with one another. Understanding how to simply have or use goods, resources, etc. based on what we truly wish to experience or need in that moment, vs. needing to have things for the sake of having them, because we think it will fulfill us or, like in the case of many children, because someone else has it. In that sense I believe the place Beth is coming from when raising her child could make a lot of sense.

Here is Beth’s perspective on sharing so you can understand more about what I mean. Tell us what you think below!

—

There is a sharing policy at my son’s preschool. It’s a parent-run co-op, so we have to have policies like this so that we will all handle situations relatively the same way. The policy is that a child can keep a toy as long as they want to. If another child wants the toy, they have to wait until the first child is done with it. We’ll even “save” toys for the child if they have to go to the bathroom, go to the snack table, etc. so that it won’t get taken before they’re done. This applies to anything in the yard or school that can be played with, including swings and monkey bars.

At first, it didn’t really occur to me to wonder why this was the policy. I just went with it, because that’s the rule, and it didn’t seem like a big deal to me. The kids all know the rule, so outside of maybe their first two weeks at the school, they don’t throw a giant fit when you tell them, “You can have it when Sally Jo is done.” But lately I’ve been noticing a totally different attitude toward sharing in other places we go, and I’m starting to really know exactly why this is the school’s policy.

Two Questionable Sharing Practices

Here are a couple of examples of questionable sharing practices that I’ve seen recently. The first comes from a good friend of mine. (And I hope she doesn’t mind that I use her story as an example). She and her almost-2-year-old were at the park one day. He had brought a small car from home to play with. Another child, a little bit older, wanted to play with the car and was demanding that my friend’s son give him the car. A typical toddler scuffle ensued, and the other mother told her son, “I guess his mom didn’t teach him how to share.” Never mind the fact that the car belongs to him and that when someone asks you to share, “No” is a perfectly legitimate response.

My second story happened one morning at the local rec center. Friday mornings they fill the gym with tons of Little Tykes climbing structures and those plastic cars they can drive around, tricycles, big balls, even a bouncy castle. Basically a toddler’s dream play room. There’s this one red car in particular my son really likes playing with, and the last time we went, he drove it around the entire hour and a half we were there.

While most of the moms with smaller kids will shadow their kids as they play, my son is old enough now that I can sit on the sidelines and watch. From there I watched a mom whose son wanted to drive the car approach my son repeatedly, saying, “OK, now it’s time for you to give him a turn!” Of course he ignored her, and eventually she gave up. There were a million other little cars for her son to drive, including one that was almost identical. Or maybe I would have stepped in at some point.


Read more:  http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/04/22/this-mom-explains-why-she-does-not-teach-her-kids-to-share/

Sharing stuff when you are small is a big issue.
I hate the idea that someone can demand to be given a turn when a child is playing with a favourite toy......on the other hand I have seethed at parks when kids have hogged swings for hours (it seems) whilst mine are waiting patiently to have a go....in vain.

The best way imo is to leave kids to sort things out themselves when possible....life isn't always fair and you cant always have what you want when you want it ...its a good lesson to learn early on.

Syl wrote:Sharing stuff when you are small is a big issue.
I hate the idea that someone can demand to be given a turn when a child is playing with a favourite toy......on the other hand I have seethed at parks when kids have hogged swings for hours (it seems) whilst mine are waiting patiently to have a go....in vain.

The best way imo  is to leave kids to sort things out themselves when possible....life isn't always fair and you cant always have what you want when you want it ...its a good lesson to learn early on.

I think if all kids learned to share and give, the world might hold nicer adults.   There's enough selfishness in the world. I don't see anything wrong in learning to share just as you have to learn when to give and when to hold back.

I think that mum is quite right...
there are far too many self entitled snowflakes around as it is...
there is NO right of sharing something someone has (particularly where the item is personal)
sharing of "public" facilitis is another matter of course becasue in general we all "own" a share of those.
oyt side of those public facilities nope...your brat does not have any right to, and should NOT have any expectation of sharing something MY brat owns..ESPECIALLY if they are not already friends.

I wont share my tools....far too many went missing/got damaged over the years so now...you either get your own tools or hire me to do the job (if I can legally do it).

Siblings are told to 'share' things between themselves, that are family owed and intended for use for all of them...


All of them should get a 'fair share' of usage in this example.


If all the siblings had been given pocket money and one saved up to buy a bike, or had been given specific birthday presents for example, and others bought/got a skateboard and rollerskates... then the bike kid should have every right to use bike as much as they wanted and to refuse others to use it too...


This is the best way for lessons to be learned... ownership/control etc... making good choices in what things you want... then longer term it may be next year when bike kid chooses something shit and other 2 choose good things, and then when bike kid tries asking for use of the other twos things and is told to 'fuck off' cos he was such a little shit last year... then there are valuable lessons learned there too!!!


But having said all that... no 3rd party kid outside the family group has any right to demand any access to anything for reason of 'sharing'... unless they have something of equal value to offer as a tradeable 'share/swap'...!

It's all about balance. A child shouldn't have to share a special toy for instance, if a friend comes over to play.
I tell my daughter to put anything she doesn't want her friends to play with, on my bed. She can be a stubborn cow and ends up putting loads of stuff in my room so I tell her "may as well cancel your mate coming over then....they'll have nothing to play with".  So it then becomes her decision  to put some stuff back, usually grumpily in her case.

Children shouldn't hog a toy if there's only one though. They should definitely be encouraged to take turns then.

Interesting topic. If I had kids, I think I'd teach them that it's a must to share things that everyone gets to use, and that sharing things you own yourself is an act of kindness and friendship.

Very meaty topic!

Teaching tiny kids to share is teaching them vital social skills, nothing more. It's absolutely nothing to do with  promoting the communist indoctrination of sharing,  or promoting 'jealousy/envy/wanting other people's possessions'.


To put this in a completely different way - if small kids do not learn to share, then interaction with other kids would be zero (apart from the times they hit and scratch each other, as kids are naturally prone to do). They would learn no social skills. They'd all sit side by side in the nursery, each child in a world of his/her own.

Point blank refusal to share or interact - isn't that one of the signs of autism? No disrespect to autism btw, I know they are very bright kids. But I'm sure mums of autistic kids would tell other mums to count their blessings that they have a child who understands how to interact.


Most experienced mums know that when their tots learn the art of sharing  it makes mum's life a million times easier - as most fights among small kids are based on reluctance to share.

There's a lot more to sharing than just counting the marbles. One teaches a child to share because you want the child to grow up with people skills, and because life is not about me, my ass, and the line I can draw around it. Life is about interaction in a social setting.

As psychologist Matt Killingsworth said: "Nothing material is intrinsically valuable, except in whatever promise of happiness it carries." Life is a process, not a collection of stuff.

That mother is teaching her child covetousness and possessiveness, not happiness. This is how framing creates political values. If you think of the world of stuff, you will value a world of stuff.

Life is a process of living. As Karl Marx taught, politics should do the bare minimum about stuff: "To each according to need, from each according to ability." When Jefferson spoke of the "pursuit of happiness," he didn't mean stuff, but a process of genuine pleasantness. It involves consideration of others.

I agree with many of the points already mentioned.
If a child has saved up for something and his sibling or friend has not, why should the child who has sacrificed other things in order to buy what he wants be expected to share?

Its nice if they do, and all kids should be encouraged to share, but I don't think they should ever be forced or have things taken off them.

If its a public amenity, as in a play group or a play park, kids should take turns.

A child who refuses to share anything will often be treated with disdain by other kids...that's why I think often its best to let them sort it out between themselves, amazing how sociable kids can be with each when they are left to their own devices without a grown up forever intervening..

At the same time, kids also need to be taught the differences between private property, communal property and "public" property (i.e.  those resources that belong to every living creature on the planet ==   e.g.  air, sunlight, fresh water, basic  food sources..).

Just have a look at how many corporations believe that they have the self-declared "rights" to buy up anything that they want, and can afford --  
A few months ago,  the chairman of AGL said at their annual meeting that he didn't believe that anyone has an inherent right to fresh air or fresh water -- that everything should be up for grabs;
Many of those corporate bosses currently in the Dumpster's executive team, also have that same "robber baron" mindset --  believing that they should have the right to take anything they want, purely for their company's profit;
The same mindset that Germany and Japan displayed in the 1930s, and Russia in the 1950s..

At the same time as kids may be taught to share some toys and food with others, they should also be taught the importance of respecting other peoples property, personal space, feelings and rights..

Then maybe we would have less of those destructive "beggar thy neighbour",  "greed is good" and 'laissez faire' attitudes  ?          

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

At the same time, kids also need to be taught the differences between private property, communal property and "public" property (i.e.  those resources that belong to every living creature on the planet ==   e.g.  air, sunlight, fresh water, basic  food sources..).

Just have a look at how many corporations believe that they have the self-declared "rights" to buy up anything that they want, and can afford --  
A few months ago,  the chairman of AGL said at their annual meeting that he didn't believe that anyone has an inherent right to fresh air or fresh water -- that everything should be up for grabs;
Many of those corporate bosses currently in the Dumpster's executive team, also have that same "robber baron" mindset --  believing that they should have the right to take anything they want, purely for their company's profit;
The same mindset that Germany and Japan displayed in the 1930s, and Russia in the 1950s..

At the same time as kids may be taught to share some toys and food with others, they should also be taught the importance of respecting other peoples property, personal space, feelings and rights..

Then maybe we would have less of those destructive "beggar thy neighbour",  "greed is good" and 'laissez faire' attitudes  ?          

That is the very philosophy that is created by teaching a child selfishness.  One can teach sharing positively.  If taught negatively, it is inevitably a negative statement.  Consider the following:

Syl wrote:If a child has saved up for something and his sibling or friend has not, why should the child who has sacrificed other things in order to buy what he wants be expected to share?

One does not even have to go there, unless one looks at all others a negative.  I think that sort of teaching is where you get things like death panels (Paul Ryan) and tolls for breathing.

Quill...its called teaching children self discipline and fairness...a good lesson to be taught early on in life.

Syl wrote:Quill...its called teaching children self discipline and fairness...a good lesson to be taught early on in life.

I'm sorry.  I think it's teaching children selfishness and covetousness.  Both self-discipline and fairness relate to a given framework of what is fair, and how to be disciplined.  The framework that teaching a child to covet things and teaching him that he "earned" it, is teaching a system of 'keeping it away' from others.  The core value of that system is selfishness.

An alternative is to teach a child that things are not intrinsically valuable in and of themselves, but  that they are valuable as a medium for interaction with others.  I also have a framework of self-discipline and fairness, based upon interaction and sharing.  It does not emphasize selfishness, but loving thy neighbor.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:Quill...its called teaching children self discipline and fairness...a good lesson to be taught early on in life.

I'm sorry.  I think it's teaching kids selfishness and covetousness.  Both self-discipline and fairness relate to a given framework of what is fair, and how to be disciplined.  The framework that teaching a child to covet things and teaching him that he "earned" it, is teaching a system of 'keeping it away' from others.  The core value of that system is selfishness.

An alternative is to teach a child that things are not intrinsically valuable in and of themselves, but  that they are valuable as a medium for interaction with others.  I also have a framework of self-discipline and fairness, based upon interaction and sharing.  It does not emphasize selfishness, but loving th neighbor.

I think it can also be useful to teach a child that their friend who wants to play with the toy they saved their allowance to buy might not even get an allowance. What seems like self-discipline to one person often looks more like privilege to others.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:Quill...its called teaching children self discipline and fairness...a good lesson to be taught early on in life.

I'm sorry.  I think it's teaching children selfishness and covetousness.  Both self-discipline and fairness relate to a given framework of what is fair, and how to be disciplined.  The framework that teaching a child to covet things and teaching him that he "earned" it, is teaching a system of 'keeping it away' from others.  The core value of that system is selfishness.

An alternative is to teach a child that things are not intrinsically valuable in and of themselves, but  that they are valuable as a medium for interaction with others.  I also have a framework of self-discipline and fairness, based upon interaction and sharing.  It does not emphasize selfishness, but loving thy neighbor.

Look at it from the view of the child who has not saved or worked hard for the toy his friend owns.
He has gotten something with no effort required, what is that teaching him?

Are your own prized possessions shared out and  given freely to anyone who wants them?...mine are not.

I said its nice to share, but I don't believe children have a right to take just because they want something, its up to the owner (even if the owner is a child) to allow.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I'm sorry.  I think it's teaching kids selfishness and covetousness.  Both self-discipline and fairness relate to a given framework of what is fair, and how to be disciplined.  The framework that teaching a child to covet things and teaching him that he "earned" it, is teaching a system of 'keeping it away' from others.  The core value of that system is selfishness.

An alternative is to teach a child that things are not intrinsically valuable in and of themselves, but  that they are valuable as a medium for interaction with others.  I also have a framework of self-discipline and fairness, based upon interaction and sharing.  It does not emphasize selfishness, but loving th neighbor.

I think it can also be useful to teach a child that their friend who wants to play with the toy they saved their allowance to buy might not even get an allowance. What seems like self-discipline to one person often looks more like privilege to others.

Thats a good point.

When I was little I lived next door to a girl whos parents obviously had more spare cash than mine.
Every Friday her mum took her to the shop and they would fill up a box with chocolate bars and sweets that would last Jean for the week.
She would sit on her step sorting them out, I would sit with her helping her sort them ...she never offered any to me and I never expected her to.
My mum would be a lot more upset than I was....she thought Jeans mum should have either kept her inside to sort her treats out by herself or tell her to share some of them.

Even though I loved chocolate and would have happily accepted some, I never asked for any and it made me really appreciate any chocolate when I did get it.

Sharing is all age-relative too. There's simply no point in trying to teach a one year old to share, for example, as they have no concept of 'mine and yours'.

I think it's fair to say that from about three till about five, is the premium age that sharing really is a problem.  Humans at this age are entirely selfish by nature and have little real concept of empathy - they care more about their own feelings than the feelings of others.

I do think it's okay to allow them not to share their special toy (or if they do happen to share their favourite toy then it's okay to then let them ask for it back).

Children should learn to share absolutely, but they also need to know that it's okay to be a person that says no occasionally.  Kids are very molded nowadays to become "perfect" and to fit into what we all think the "perfect person" is....well there's no "perfect person" so whilst you can guide them, you ultimately have to allow them to be themselves and for them and you, to be okay with who they are.

I don't make my daughter necessarily play with a girl she doesn't like. If she says she doesn't like someone I respect her decision not to like that someone.

eddie wrote:Sharing is all age-relative too. There's simply no point in trying to teach a one year old to share, for example, as they have no concept of 'mine and yours'.

I think it's fair to say that from about three till about five, is the premium age that sharing really is a problem.  Humans at this age are entirely selfish by nature and have little real concept of empathy - they care more about their own feelings than the feelings of others.

I do think it's okay to allow them not to share their special toy (or if they do happen to share their favourite toy then it's okay to then let them ask for it back).

Children should learn to share absolutely, but they also need to know that it's okay to be a person that says no occasionally.  Kids are very molded nowadays to become "perfect" and to fit into what we all think the "perfect person" is....well there's no "perfect person" so whilst you can guide them, you ultimately have to allow them to be themselves and for them and you, to be okay with who they are.

I don't make my daughter necessarily play with a girl she doesn't like. If she says she doesn't like someone I respect her decision not to like that someone.

I think you are raising your daughter wisely. Children should be allowed to avoid people they dislike, or are otherwise negative in their minds.

But on the premise that the family is the incubator of politics, as George Lakoff alleges, I think teaching selfishness is coaching precursors to social ambivalence, greed and, indeed, up to actual conflict and war.

eddie wrote:Sharing is all age-relative too. There's simply no point in trying to teach a one year old to share, for example, as they have no concept of 'mine and yours'.

I think it's fair to say that from about three till about five, is the premium age that sharing really is a problem.  Humans at this age are entirely selfish by nature and have little real concept of empathy - they care more about their own feelings than the feelings of others.

I do think it's okay to allow them not to share their special toy (or if they do happen to share their favourite toy then it's okay to then let them ask for it back).

Children should learn to share absolutely, but they also need to know that it's okay to be a person that says no occasionally.  Kids are very molded nowadays to become "perfect" and to fit into what we all think the "perfect person" is....well there's no "perfect person" so whilst you can guide them, you ultimately have to allow them to be themselves and for them and you, to be okay with who they are.

I don't make my daughter necessarily play with a girl she doesn't like. If she says she doesn't like someone I respect her decision not to like that someone.

Yes that's probably too young. But at the other extreme, some people on here are talking about kids saving up their pocket money to buy their own toys. The age group I had in mind when I made my own posts is certainly a lot younger than the 'pocket money age group' .... long before they have any concept of money, let alone saving up.

Tommy Monk wrote:Siblings are told to 'share' things between themselves, that are family owed and intended for use for all of them...


All of them should get a 'fair share' of usage in this example.


If all the siblings had been given pocket money and one saved up to buy a bike, or had been given specific birthday presents for example, and others bought/got a skateboard and rollerskates... then the bike kid should have every right to use bike as much as they wanted and to refuse others to use it too...


This is the best way for lessons to be learned... ownership/control etc... making good choices in what things you want... then longer term it may be next year when bike kid chooses something shit and other 2 choose good things, and then when bike kid tries asking for use of the other twos things and is told to 'fuck off' cos he was such a little shit last year... then there are valuable lessons learned there too!!!


But having said all that... no 3rd party kid outside the family group has any right to demand any access to anything for reason of 'sharing'... unless they have something of equal value to offer as a tradeable 'share/swap'...!

I love the way you make it clear that sharing is fine within the family but not necessarily with outsiders. Spoken like a true Thatcher's child, take a bow.



Anyway, carrying on ... Perhaps one can think of sharing toys in a kindergarten ... as the art of taking turns. Once learned this will be a springboard to learning how to take turns for other things. And recognising that he is not the centre of the universe.

In an average kindergarten the carer/child ratio is not one to one so there will be many times when the child will need to wait his turn if he needs attention. This will not be too traumatic for him if he has already learned a bit of patience and tolerance through being taught the art of sharing. And ideally the time a child starts mixing with a roomful of other nursery children for the very first time, is the time to start learning to be sociable.

One thing about this particular case that's nagging me ..... if there are numerous toy cars at a playground yet the kid is fixated on just ONE car and plays with it for up to 90 minutes, not letting any other kid near it ....... I'd be concerned. My antennae would be stirring. Shades of OCD ....??

Just a thought!

I agree with quills position, the OP is teaching selfishness and self absorption
You can't not teach a child a 'value/ethic' in a vacuum, you simple teach them the opposite value/ethic instead.

I have 2 younger brothers we are all 2 years apart and we shared everything. I think the 'only child' have more troubles socially later in life due to not learning to share and taking turns etc.

I think the Idea that people 'demand' you share is odd....
ones that haven't been taught to share probably Demand others share, it seems very selfish and not really understanding the concept of sharing.

Also it seems the OP treats sharing and taking turns as the same thing..

It's all about balance. You must make a child aware that sharing is a good thing to do and that material objects aren't important.
But.
You must be careful not to take away their confidence to say no occasionally, like when a certain teddy or doll is special. When you allow them some control over their possessions it shows you're listening and accepting their personal feelings and opinions.  It's really about striking the right balance with the emphasis being on sharing - that sharing is just the best option because fuck it, you mustn't get attached to possessions or outcomes in life...or you're seriously fucked.

Jules wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Siblings are told to 'share' things between themselves, that are family owed and intended for use for all of them...


All of them should get a 'fair share' of usage in this example.


If all the siblings had been given pocket money and one saved up to buy a bike, or had been given specific birthday presents for example, and others bought/got a skateboard and rollerskates... then the bike kid should have every right to use bike as much as they wanted and to refuse others to use it too...


This is the best way for lessons to be learned... ownership/control etc... making good choices in what things you want... then longer term it may be next year when bike kid chooses something shit and other 2 choose good things, and then when bike kid tries asking for use of the other twos things and is told to 'fuck off' cos he was such a little shit last year... then there are valuable lessons learned there too!!!


But having said all that... no 3rd party kid outside the family group has any right to demand any access to anything for reason of 'sharing'... unless they have something of equal value to offer as a tradeable 'share/swap'...!

I love the way you make it clear that sharing is fine within the family but not necessarily with outsiders. Spoken like a true Thatcher's child, take a bow.
 


Anyway, carrying on ...  Perhaps one can think of sharing toys in a kindergarten ... as the art of  taking turns. Once learned this will be a springboard to learning how to take turns for other things. And recognising that he is not the centre of the universe.  

In an average  kindergarten the carer/child ratio is not one to one so there will be many times when the child will need to wait his turn if he needs attention. This will not be too traumatic for him if he has already learned a bit of patience and tolerance through being taught the art of sharing.  And ideally the time a child starts mixing with a roomful of other nursery children for the very first time, is the time to start learning  to be sociable.

No... That's not exactly what I said... I said things that were bought for all should be shared equally but things that each individual sibling owns themselves are theirs to decide whether they want to play on it or not and their decision whether to allow other siblings access to them or not.

eddie wrote:It's all about balance. You must make a child aware that sharing is a good thing to do and that material objects aren't important.
But.
You must be careful not to take away their confidence to say no occasionally, like when a certain teddy or doll is special. When you allow them some control over their possessions it shows you're listening and accepting their personal feelings and opinions.  It's really about striking the right balance with the emphasis being on sharing - that sharing is just the best option because fuck it, you mustn't get attached to possessions or outcomes in life...or you're seriously fucked.

Reading through this thread it got very tetchy in parts.

I agree with a lot of the points made, and I think it definitely depends on the childs age, what 'possessions' we are talking about, and how the child views the possession he is being asked to share.
Like everything connected with bringing kids up, compromise is usually the best option.

veya_victaous wrote:I think the Idea that people 'demand' you share is odd....
ones that haven't been taught to share probably Demand others share, it seems very selfish and not really understanding the concept of sharing.

Also it seems the OP treats sharing and taking turns as the same thing..

Spot on, veya.  The taker who hasn't been taught the spirit of sharing, is demanding precisely because he, like the non-sharing possessor, is steeped in possessiveness of material objects.  Possessor or taker, they are both into corporeality, missing the experience of interaction with others.