Using 'I' sentences during disputes?

[Laura Corin]

I'm reading 'Peaceful Parents, Peaceful Kids' and am enjoying it overall. I'm having a hard time working out what I think about using 'I' statements to deal with disputes. For example, one is meant to say 'I get irritated when you forget to flush the toilet', rather than or 'Could you please work hard at remembering to flush the toilet?' or 'Could we all show respect for each other by remembering to flush the toilet please? Otherwise, it's a bit icky to come across.'

 

It's hard to put my finger on what concerns me about this. I can see that the 'I' statements often sound less accusatory and are less likely to cause a defensive reaction. However, to me, they make it sound as if all that matters is how someone else feels about actions, rather than there being some absolute standards of behaviour to which people (in this family, in this culture, in this society) need to adhere. If, for example, it didn't irritate me that (child) forgot to flush the toilet, would it therefore not matter, even though flushing is a cultural norm?

 

I recognise that this is a can of worms: could we keep discussion tied to issues of gentle family discipline please, rather than wider societal issues?

 

Thank you for any ideas,

 

Laura

[chaik76]

I'm right there with you for the same reasons you say.

[Mrs Mungo]

I statements are very important when you are speaking of feelings or topics that are subjective. I think this is especially true when it is between adults with differing opinions. I've seen/heard it used more in conflict resolution than in discipline. I guess I can see how it would be used in certain situations.

 

What I like better for the types of situations you describe are statements of fact. Instead of saying "shut the door" or "flush the toilet" you say "the door is open" or "the toilet is looking and smelling bad" and let the kids take the initiative.

[snickelfritz]

And using *I* statements was a main point.

 

But I'm not sure it's necessary if the situation isn't emotionally charged or likely to become that way?

 

I think of using it more when you are having a serious discussion to work through some things. But, if you have a child who is going through a sensitive stage and taking everything wrong it might be a tool to navigate the waters. Like a 6 year old who goes sobbing to her bed that everyone hates her and she's the worst sister in the world.:001_huh:

[Laura Corin]

And using *I* statements was a main point.

 

But I'm not sure it's necessary if the situation isn't emotionally charged or likely to become that way?

 

 

For example:

 

Child A cheated at Monopoly

Child B threw the die at child A

 

The ideal conversation goes something like:

 

Child B: 'I find it really irritating when you cheat at Monopoly, it makes me very frustrated.'

Child A: 'I hate it when you throw things at me like that.'

 

Again, it's all about feelings, rather than absolutes, but the situation is more highly charged. The 'I' statements are less confrontational, but do the rights and wrongs get lost?

 

Laura

[Lisa in Jax]

I see your point, but I think it isn't so much about being egocentric, but about avoiding accusing others with "you" statements.

 

Many people fight like this:

 

"YOU did this and YOU did that and you ALWAYS...."

 

There's no easy/gentle/peaceful way to respond to that.

 

If you say, "When you did this, I felt that," the person might be able to say, "Wow, I never knew it affected you that way."

 

In addition, it's intended to make the speaker take responsibility for her feelings and reactions. "I feel angry when you..." intead of "YOU make me so MAD!"

 

If taken to the extreme, it could result in a feeling that it's all about the speaker, but that's not the intention. As Mrs. Mungo said, "I statements" are meant to deal with feelings. They're to be used for times when other people's actions affect your feelings, and are used in lieu of accusatory "you" statements.

 

In cut-and-dried situations like toilet seat issues, it's not necessarily the ideal approach. Instead of "I statements," I'd say, "In our family, we ask that you put the seat down after you use the toilet. If you can't put it down, I'll have to do it for you. Unfortunately, if I have to spend my time checking your toilet, I might feel grumpy and not want to do <insert fun activity> here for you and your brother. So, it helps us both if you put the seat down after using the toilet."

 

Hope that makes sense...

 

Lisa

[justamouse]

For example:

 

Again, it's all about feelings, rather than absolutes, but the situation is more highly charged. The 'I' statements are less confrontational, but do the rights and wrongs get lost?

 

Laura

This.

 

And the feelings, which propel the actions are heard, which is so important. Anger and frustration comes from not being understood. And it also black/whites the situation-esp for a little boy who tends to retaliate with hands and feet. :glare: It helps him use his words to communicate his anger, instead of acting out and REALLY getting it wrong. (at least in my house!)

[MamaBearTeacher]

Thank you for bringing this up and questioning it. I have attended conflict resolution seminars that dealt with this and I was just thinking about it lately. I think it works really well to help focus people on taking conflict resolution seriously and it helps them to avoid using name calling in conflicts. The thing that bothers me is that maybe it gets too focused on the "I" and we live in a world where a lot of people are very focused on themselves anyways. Does encouraging people to use "I" statements encourage them to become more self-centered? Maybe this is related to the point you are making feelings versus absolutes.

[phathui5]

or 'Could you please work hard at remembering to flush the toilet?' or 'Could we all show respect for each other by remembering to flush the toilet please? Otherwise, it's a bit icky to come across.'

 

I think these are both fine ways to say it.

 

What the book probably wants you to avoid is going "You never flush the toilet! It's so gross! When will you learn?"

[Laura Corin]

I see your point, but I think it isn't so much about being egocentric, but about avoiding accusing others with "you" statements.

 

Many people fight like this:

 

"YOU did this and YOU did that and you ALWAYS...."

 

There's no easy/gentle/peaceful way to respond to that.

 

 

Leaving aside the toilet example, I'm thinking of situations where one person cares a lot about something and the other doesn't. Does the greater amount of feeling trump the lesser? Or is there a way of avoiding accusation whilst recognising that there are underlying absolute rights and wrongs?

 

Laura

[snickelfritz]

I see your point. You prefer that they not cheat because .....it's wrong.

 

But, I wonder if this method isn't a good one to teach them in dealing with each other, while YOUR job is still to instruct them on right and wrong?

 

While brother/sister or friend may not hold much weight in instructing on the morality of it, they can bring up the feelings part of it. And the practical repercussions. "I find it really irritating when you cheat at Monopoly, it makes me very frustrated."---Can transition into "I don't want to play anymore."

 

Now maybe that goes against the point...:D But, I have told my kids they can use that with a kid who is repeatedly doing something they don't like.

 

 

 

Child A cheated at Monopoly

Child B threw the die at child A

 

The ideal conversation goes something like:

 

Child B: 'I find it really irritating when you cheat at Monopoly, it makes me very frustrated.'

Child A: 'I hate it when you throw things at me like that.'

 

Again, it's all about feelings, rather than absolutes, but the situation is more highly charged. The 'I' statements are less confrontational, but do the rights and wrongs get lost?

 

Laura

[OHGrandma]

I think I understand your point. It's along the same line as when I see a parent in the store who is constantly saying, "Johnny, please don't climb on the shelves", "Johnny, please don't hit your sister".

There are rules we expect people to follow in society and in our family life. If Johnny responds, "But I like climbing shelves", then what??? He took ownership of his feelings, but that doesn't get his behavior in line with societal expectations. Or if his sister says, "Johnny, I hurt where you hit me", then Johnny may be pleased he accomplished his objective.

I think there are times when the person in authority states the rules, calmly; infractions are dealt with, calmly. I see no need to plead with a child to obey the rules.

The use of "I" statements can be useful for people who slip into accusatory statements towards people at the same level - "You always", "You never". Although I've heard it used in a whiney mode too, "I never get to do what I want".

[justamouse]

I don't think using "I" negates rules at all. Societal rules here and the I's don't come into it, the time out chair does.

 

But when a kid gets frustrated, and wants to pull hair or bite or slam doors, knowing how to say ie: "I hate it when you minimize my feelings about ____." reduces the tension in the situation.

[Dana]

I find the "I statements" most useful with my husband when we're having a charged discussion (or a fight). It's really funny when I'm trying to rephrase my statements and what I want to say is "I think you're being a jerk right now" and I have to recognize how that isn't a helpful thing to say. :D

 

Taking that time to rephrase and think about what is coming out of my mouth does seem to help my message be heard.

 

I think there are absolutes where you'd want to use the "you language" and I sure tell my son, "You need to go wash your hands." But I think the point is in your title "during disputes". Flushing the toilet isn't a dispute.

 

It's tough to be aware of what you're saying and to rephrase, but overall I think it does help. I haven't seen any signs of it leading to more egocentrism. We've also taught our son to use "I language" more when expressing things to us and I find I listen and hear his requests more clearly when he does. He comes across much less whiny and more reasonable.

[SquirrellyMama]

I have a hard time with "I" statements. I don't necessarily use "you" statements either. Instead of "I feel hurt when you do xyz" I usually say "It is hurtful when xyz happens". I'm afraid with the "I" statement my dh or others will think "It's all about her again".

[lionfamily1999]

*I* have been struggling with this ever since I read and article on "fighting fair."

 

The biggest problem arises when the other person doesn't know why you avoid saying I. It ends up sounding like an imperial order, rather than a personal issue, if you know what I mean.

[Jean in Wisc]

So what do you do if the other person does not care how you feel?

 

Or even more--what if they find satisfaction in making you frustrated and angry?

 

Ugh.

 

I'm living in another reality these days.

 

Jean

[elfgivas]

You're reading one of my all time favourite books :001_smile: it transformed our house, or rather, it helped us transform ourselves.

 

i think there is another section where she deals with enforcing house rules, that among other things includes calmly repeating one phrase to avoid descending into a debate on rules. in this case, that might be something like "the toilet needs to get flushed every time it is used". (no "I", no "you", just a simple statement of fact).

 

maybe the toilet incident could be dealt with at a family meeting?

 

i'm imagining something like:

 

"i've noticed that the toilet isn't getting flushed regularly. it smells and is harder to clean when that happens. how could we deal with this? is there a way to help everyone remember to flush?"

 

and then there are the logical consequences, where the forgetful flusher gets to become the toilet cleaner. methinks that should do it.

 

enjoy!

ann

[Karen in CO]

...I'm having a hard time working out what I think about using 'I' statements to deal with disputes. For example, one is meant to say 'I get irritated when you forget to flush the toilet', rather than or 'Could you please work hard at remembering to flush the toilet?' or 'Could we all show respect for each other by remembering to flush the toilet please? Otherwise, it's a bit icky to come across.'

 

It's hard to put my finger on what concerns me about this. I can see that the 'I' statements often sound less accusatory and are less likely to cause a defensive reaction. ....

 

One of the things that I noticed when my ds was a teen was that anytime my dh tried to correct his behavior, it seemed to erupt into an emotional issue even if it started with something trivial like toilet flushing. I think that using the I statements in a household with emotional teens would be a great tool for circumventing some of this. No matter what we thought of general rules or norms, my ds as an emerging adult responded better when I talked to him as an equal. "I would like you to .... because ....." "I want you to be home by a x o'clock because ...." "I don't like it when you ...."

 

There isn't any phrasing that is going to turn a teen into a well-behaved puppy, but I think that taking the time to phrase things into I statements at least with teens could really help. I'm going to look into that book, I wonder if it has any great suggestions for overly-dramatic little girls.

[mirth]

So what do you do if the other person does not care how you feel?

 

Or even more--what if they find satisfaction in making you frustrated and angry?

 

 

Changing your tactic would be advised for this type of person. I can, however, see how beginning early sentences with "I" can deflate most arguments.

 

One place I think it's good to use "I" is when taking ownership of a fault where kids are involved. If you are the mom, then saying "I was wrong to yell at you. I shouldn't have done that,and I hope you can forgive me." is preferred to "Mommy was wrong to yell at you. Mommy shouldn't do that. Mommy is sorry." Mommy is right there afterall (She is the one speaking. Little kids understand what "I" is. And I think they know when parents (adults, others, etc) are trying to deflect or transfer self-admission of fault)

[nmoira]

If, for example, it didn't irritate me that (child) forgot to flush the toilet, would it therefore not matter, even though flushing is a cultural norm?

I haven't read Peaceful Parents, Peaceful Kids, but Parent Effectiveness Training discusses "I" statements in great depth. P.E.T. in a nutshell: The vast majority of our interactions with our children should be just normal conversation, unless there's a problem. If the problem is the parent's (e.g. child screaming in the parent's ear), then "I" statements are the way to go. If the problem is the child's, then the parent can employ active listening (in some form appropriate for the child) to give them a chance to solve their own problem. Children occasionally need help thinking things through (we still use a version of "I Can Problem Solve" from Thinking Parent, Thinking Child.).

 

So for the toilet. If its a matter of merely teaching manners, then you don't have a problem and don't need to use "I" statements. If you think it's important enough to deal with, merely citing social convention, etc. may be sufficient. :) If you gag every time you enter the bathroom, you have a problem and an "I" statement is warranted. One thing that's key in PET, is that you must have the "I" statement in your mind before you start to speak. "I" statements should not be used for everyday disciplinary issues, but should be authentic. P.E.T. also reverses the "I" statement, with the "you" coming first. This better models the action and consequence.

 

I avoid using words like "irritate" in "I" statements. We are occasionally irritated by those living in close proximity and that's often more about us than them.

[Penelope]

I'm not familiar with that book but it sounds like Parent Effectiveness Training. I have read the bookb Non-Violent Communication and it is similar, but it goes one step further. You would make the I statement, but then make a request of the other person.

 

"When I see you using my things without asking, I feel angry. Would you be willing to ask permission/not use that next time?"

 

I have found it helpful in disagreements with DH because phrasing it this way shows I am owning my own feelings; he has a tendency to take some comments or requests as criticism and this has helped us. However, in some cases I think this kind of language 1)feels stilted 2)fails to set firm boundaries when needed and 3) I think with younger children it can be manipulative to phrase things in terms of feelings no matter if it is an I statement or not. I agree that it is better to say "I expect you will do ____" in the case of absolutes, than to talk about feelings, which makes things more about ME than about them and what they did wrong.

[KidsHappen]

While I do use "I" statements when talking to adults, I do not when talking to children. Because the truth of the matter is that I don't really care how they feel about what they have to do, I only care that they do it. So in my house, my "I" statements are more of the:

 

"I am the mom and I make the rules." variaties.

 

I do say "We are going to do it this way."

 

But when I get the "I don't want to"s and the "it's not fair"s my answers are

 

"I don't care and I never said it was."

 

When I get the, "You're so mean"s my answers is

 

"Good, that means I am doing my job."

 

As my children get older we transition more towards adult/adult type conversations although I do still have a tendency to be bossy. It appears to be an X linked gene though as all of my girls have picked it up. :tongue_smilie:

[Impish]

I don't find 'I' messages ego centric at all. I use them when talking to Wolf, especially if its a serious/emotional issue. Using an 'I' message has him listening to me. A 'You' message has him automatically on the defensive, and the fight is on.

 

Give you an example.

 

"I worry when you're home late from work, and don't call. I start thinking there's been an accident or something."

 

vs

 

"You need to call home from work! Do you have any idea what I go through when you're late and I don't get a call?"

 

or

"I would really appreciate it if you would put your dirty laundry in the basket. I find it demeaning to pick up dirty socks and underwear off the floor when there's a basket just a foot or two away. I feel uncared for, even disrespected when the laundry is on the floor instead of the hamper."

 

vs

 

"You need to put your dirty laundry in the hamper. Its only a few feet away. You don't care about me or respect me enough to put your laundry in the hamper."

[Year Round Mom]

This doesn't answer your question directly, but I think the heart of the question is how much weight should we give emotion in tense situations?

 

I want to teach my kids to look out for the feelings of others. So, if DD1 takes a toy from DD2, I will ask DD1 how she thinks that makes DD2 feel. How would you feel if DD2 took a toy from you? Etc.

 

But we would come back to the absolutes: We share our toys, period.

 

So, I think it's more important to teach a child to be trained to identify the emotions of others rather than her own.

 

That's not to say that I don't help her identify her own, though. I might say, "You must feel frustrated that DD2 has played with that toy all morning, huh?" But I turn it around after DD1 IDs her frustration. "Do you think DD2 might be frustrated that you took the toy away from her?" Then, "we don't steal in our family. We share." or something like that.

 

Emotions is a good place to start. But the establishing of family values/morals is the way to finish.

[buddhabelly]

Impish beat me to it. I was going to say that "I" statements are perhaps more useful when there is no "right and wrong." For example, coming directly home after work is not necessarily morally right or morally wrong. Neither is leaving the toilet seat up (or down). I find that "I" statements are most useful in these situations, exactly for the reasons Impish gave. "You don't love me!" or more commonly, the silent treatment, is not as helpful as, "I really need your help in the late afternoons, and when you stop by to see your friends after work I feel like you don't consider your family to be a priority." Or whatever.

 

Julie

[cin]

While I do use "I" statements when talking to adults, I do not when talking to children. Because the truth of the matter is that I don't really care how they feel about what they have to do, I only care that they do it. So in my house, my "I" statements are more of the:

 

"I am the mom and I make the rules." variaties.

 

I do say "We are going to do it this way."

 

But when I get the "I don't want to"s and the "it's not fair"s my answers are

 

"I don't care and I never said it was."

 

When I get the, "You're so mean"s my answers is

 

"Good, that means I am doing my job."

 

As my children get older we transition more towards adult/adult type conversations although I do still have a tendency to be bossy. It appears to be an X linked gene though as all of my girls have picked it up. :tongue_smilie:

 

:iagree:

[kalanamak]

I statements are very important when you are speaking of feelings or topics that are subjective. I think this is especially true when it is between adults with differing opinions. I've seen/heard it used more in conflict resolution than in discipline. I guess I can see how it would be used in certain situations.

 

:iagree:

 

"I feel rushed and hurried when you don't do the dishes. It puts me behind." is so much better than "Why can't you do the dishes? It is one little thing and you never do it."

 

For a quick read on why I worked hard on learning the "I" statements, try this simple, wonderful book:

http://www.amazon.com/Why-Marriages-Succeed-Fail-Yours/dp/0684802414

 

or google John Gottman.

 

I, too, had your objections, but I am a convert. I use his principles to get on with people at work who are *very* different from me. However, I don't use it so much on my child, although I will more and more as he gets older. Currently, I use it mostly on issues that haven't "gone away" with a few prompts, and that really do cause troubles in such a way I can make honest, convincing "I" statements. I never lie to my son with them.

[Peela]

I dont think "I" statements are meant to be used in that particular context- that doesn't feel appropriate to me. Too contrived and ineffective.

 

I think the best use of them is when there is intense conflict and both parties, or even one, are in an accusatory state of mind. Bringing it back to "I feel" or "I think" helps diffuse the conflict a little, because you cant fight with someone's opinion or feeling- they are just stating a fact or an opinion- but if you are being accused and blamed, as in, "you always embarrass me in public" you are being attacked and there is little space for effective resolution. If my dh tells me "I often feel embarrassed when you put me down in public" I am more likely to have a good look at my behaviour, and avoid a direct conflict, than if he attacks me and accuses me about it.

 

It has it's place, but I wouldnt use it to get my kids to flush the toilet, although there may be a point in actually telling them how it makes you feel at some stage (not as a martyr guilt trip thing though- Just something like, gosh, I am so frustrated that no one flushes the toilet. It makes me feel like I live in a men's urinal. The smell just really bugs me. Can you guys make a better effort please? ). There are many ways to deal with such issues...family discussion, gentle reminders, consequences, punishment, fines, sense of humour.

[Orthodox6]

Not familiar with this book. . .

 

"I" statements have their place; however, other kinds of statements sometimes are more appropriate (imo). If my guidance (reprimand, teaching, reminder, whatever) always is geared around how "I" feel, my messages accumulate as wholly self-centered.

 

Very true that not everything relates to "feelings". Does the referenced book promote one of those "overly emotional, everybody's precious ego must remain unbruised at all costs" philosophies?

 

A third-person, neutral statement often fits the situation very well. example: "People remember to flush toilets after going to the bathroom because the next person won't want to see used poop or used pee in the bowl. It's considered gross [yucky, disgusting, stinky, whatever. . .]."

 

References not tied to "I" often are far less inflammatory.

 

Interpersonal problems lend themselves better to "I", or "feeling", statements. Example: "When you hurl your bowl of zucchini on the floor and demand Twinkies instead, I feel hurt that my efforts to give you a good dinner are not recognized." . . . OR . . . "Slicing off 1/2 of your sister's hair makes her feel too humiliated to go out in public."

 

Don't know if I'm on the right track for you, or not, Laura. . .

 

I'm reading 'Peaceful Parents, Peaceful Kids' and am enjoying it overall. I'm having a hard time working out what I think about using 'I' statements to deal with disputes. For example, one is meant to say 'I get irritated when you forget to flush the toilet', rather than or 'Could you please work hard at remembering to flush the toilet?' or 'Could we all show respect for each other by remembering to flush the toilet please? Otherwise, it's a bit icky to come across.'

 

It's hard to put my finger on what concerns me about this. I can see that the 'I' statements often sound less accusatory and are less likely to cause a defensive reaction. However, to me, they make it sound as if all that matters is how someone else feels about actions, rather than there being some absolute standards of behaviour to which people (in this family, in this culture, in this society) need to adhere. If, for example, it didn't irritate me that (child) forgot to flush the toilet, would it therefore not matter, even though flushing is a cultural norm?

 

I recognise that this is a can of worms: could we keep discussion tied to issues of gentle family discipline please, rather than wider societal issues?

 

Thank you for any ideas,

 

Laura

[KidsHappen]

because you cant fight with someone's opinion or feeling- they are just stating a fact or an opinion.

 

 

I have actually had people tell me otherwise. :confused: