Is it selfish to pick your game over your 6 year olds?

[Mallory]

This weekend my 3 boys (and I) have soccer games.

 

The older two have games in one town. Ds11's team plays at 12:45 and 2. Ds13's team plays at 9 and 11:30 (and ds11 can play in these too) and there is a game at 12:45 that I can play in (and probably ds13). I really love playing and don't want to miss it.

 

But my ds6 has games in another town at 11 and 12:30. We don't really know anyone on his team well enough I feel comfortable letting him go with them. The bigger boys could ride with someone else.

 

So either ds6 doesn't get to play or I don't. I really just want to leave him at my dad's and go with the older boys, but I am feeling that is a very selfish choice.

 

What do I do?

[West Coast Mom]

Go play your game. The six year old has lots of games ahead of him. He probably won't even miss it. Can your dad take him since you may drop him there anyway?

[Thea]

In your situation, I would bring the 6 year old to his game. Sorry.

[Thea]

Go play your game. The six year old has lots of games ahead of him. He probably won't even miss it. Can your dad take him since you may drop him there anyway?

 

 

My ds would've known at 6 that he missed a game and he would've been very, very upset.

[CountitallJoy]

In your situation, I would bring the 6 year old to his game. Sorry.

 

:iagree:

[TammyS]

I would sort of weigh what this particular game means to you vs what you it means to the child. Are either of them "important" in some way? Is this conflict going to be ongoing? If either game is important, then I think that game wins. If not, I say you get your game. The 6 year has siblings and gets to play daily. Mom, not so much. He won't die if he misses 1 game. And he needs to learn that others needs (for social time, for exercise) are important, too.

[Tasia]

Is your team counting on you? Is his counting on him?

 

Unless your father can take him to his game, I would take him. My kids would be very upset and angry if I caused them to miss a game.

[WishboneDawn]

So either ds6 doesn't get to play or I don't. I really just want to leave him at my dad's and go with the older boys, but I am feeling that is a very selfish choice.

 

Sure, it's selfish to a degree but aren't we allowed to make those choices sometimes. And in the end isn't a happy, satisfied mom a tremendous gift to give to a 6 year old?

 

Go play!

[ChristineW]

My six year old would be devastated if he missed a game. I'd take the boy to his game especially since his older brothers are getting to attend theirs. If I really wanted to go to my game, I'd call the coach and see if he/she could drive my kid.

 

Christine

[bettyandbob]

So, I'm the youngest of 3. My mom swears she did everything with me that she did with my siblings (read stories, go to sports events etc). She did not. She just stopped going to much at all. I would say you don't have to go to everything, but if you've never made the olders skip a game for your activity I wouldn't make the 6 yo do it either. My parents did EVERYTHING for my older brother and sister who are 4 and 5 years older than me. I know because I went to every bit of it too. Then, there was a clear message that my stuff wasn't important.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

I think you should take your ds to his game. If it helps, think of all the reasons you signed him up in the first place. You must have thought it would be good for him to play.

 

Especially when it sounds as if you would be joining a pickup-style game but your child is a member of a team.

[Upward Journey]

Go, play & have fun!!!! The 6yo has many more games ahead of him.

[QueenCat]

If it were me, and no one else were available to take my 6 year old, then I would take him. I do believe in "mom" time but that is built around the kid time at this age, in my home.

[*Michelle*]

Your son may have many games ahead, but how many games have you played? Did you already play as a child/teen?

 

I think I would take him.

[Tammi K]

When I first read your post, I interpreted it to mean that you could be part of a 'pick up' game, not that you are actually part of a team with a scheduled game. If that's the case, I would say your son's team trumps. It's part of what you agree to when you join a team. It's not fair to the other team member....and all of that.

 

If you are also on a team that has a scheduled game that day, that's different. Which team needs the player more? Who will suffer most if one of you doesn't play. (Who needs to learn the life lesson about commitment and doing what you sign up to do?)

 

I think I'm leaning toward your son playing. He/you made a commitment to be part of a team. Sorry it puts you in a hard place.

[catz]

If he's on a regular league where his teammates and coach would expect him, then I would find a way for him to play (although I might start making calls to get him a ride).

 

When my son was this age, they had a program where the kids would do soccer drills for 1/2 hour with high school kids and then play a scrimmage game for a 1/2 hour with mixed kids (different kids every weeks, friends that wanted to be together could hold hands when they were choosing teams). In that case, it was not a big deal at all if they missed a game.

[Catwoman]

In your situation, I would bring the 6 year old to his game. Sorry.

 

My ds would've known at 6 that he missed a game and he would've been very, very upset.

 

If it were me, and no one else were available to take my 6 year old, then I would take him. I do believe in "mom" time but that is built around the kid time at this age, in my home.

 

:iagree: :iagree: :iagree:

 

I'm sorry to say this, but yes, you are being selfish if you go to your game. Be the adult and give up your pleasure for your little one.

 

In your shoes, I wouldn't enjoy my own game anyway, if I thought my ds was sad about missing out on his own game.

[edelweiss]

:iagree: :iagree: :iagree:

 

I'm sorry to say this, but yes, you are being selfish if you go to your game. Be the adult and give up your pleasure for your little one.

 

In your shoes, I wouldn't enjoy my own game anyway, if I thought my ds was sad about missing out on his own game.

 

This sums it up for me as well.

[TammyS]

So, I'm the youngest of 3. My mom swears she did everything with me that she did with my siblings (read stories, go to sports events etc). She did not. She just stopped going to much at all. I would say you don't have to go to everything, but if you've never made the olders skip a game for your activity I wouldn't make the 6 yo do it either. My parents did EVERYTHING for my older brother and sister who are 4 and 5 years older than me. I know because I went to every bit of it too. Then, there was a clear message that my stuff wasn't important.

 

As a mother with a 14 year old and 2 year old, I can tell you that there is a couple of things going on with that. One, is that after a while, you realize that those things were simply never as important you thought they were when you were first a mother. The other, is that you just get tired. You don't want to go hither and yon to kids stuff after a while. I know it's not a fair thing to say, but it is true (maybe I'm just tired of dealing with a teen but I am dreading my 2 year old getting to school age).

[justkeepswimming]

.

Edited October 26, 2012 by justkeepswimming

[bettyandbob]

As a mother with a 14 year old and 2 year old, I can tell you that there is a couple of things going on with that. One, is that after a while, you realize that those things were simply never as important you thought they were when you were first a mother. The other, is that you just get tired. You don't want to go hither and yon to kids stuff after a while. I know it's not a fair thing to say, but it is true (maybe I'm just tired of dealing with a teen but I am dreading my 2 year old getting to school age).

 

First, your dc are far enough apart that they may not be able to compare. I was closer in age and did go to everything and then saw my stuff wasn't valued as much as my siblings.

 

My point was show that actions may send messages she does not want sent.

[Soror]

Depends to me. Does he really care about the game, is it a big deal to him? I don't think mine would care very much and love to visit grandparents just as much, especially being that young.

[katilac]

Is his dad not available to help?

 

Do you have any idea if he would prefer to play his game or visit grandpa?

[Elizabeth in MN]

Children come first, always.

[Joshin]

Depends on the variables. If his team needs him, then he gets to go. If they can survive without him and he isn't that keen on it, then he can hang with grandpa. It sounds like your game is a parent-child scrimmage thing? If so, that's valuable bonding time with a preteen, and that can really pay dividends as you enter the rocky teen years so it's not a fully selfish choice.

 

Personally, I would talk it over with him then come to a decision. In my family, children do not come first, we are all equals and we all come first. We decide together what will work best for the family. Both children and adults make sacrifices for each other, and that strengthens our family bond.

 

We would discuss it, both rank how important we each felt our respective games were, and discuss options. Perhaps he'd be thrilled to have some one-on-one practice time with just you at the park later in the week, or maybe another special activity. On the other hand, maybe he ranks his game a 10 on the want-to-do scale, so this time you must sacrifice your want.

 

Families are give and take, even though it may not always feel fair.

[TammyS]

In my family, children do not come first, we are all equals and we all come first. We decide together what will work best for the family. Both children and adults make sacrifices for each other, and that strengthens our family bond.

 

 

 

:iagree::hurray:

 

Agree completely.

 

ETA: My children joined my life, not the other way around.

Edited October 26, 2012 by TammyS

[Mallory]

So while most of you would take the kid, it does seem to matter what he would prefer. I think as cold as it is going to be on Sat. he'd probably rather stay with grandpa, and if I could arrange for a certain friend I am sure he'd rather stay there. The older boys (and I) love soccer. Really I think he just wants to play because we all do, not because he enjoys it or even ever wants to go.

 

I do play on a league, but for Sat. I would be filling in on the U18/16 team, who will be short enough they will be playing with U14 players and old women like me ;). I also help coach the U14s and U12s (okay and the U8s when we show up, but he really doesn't care most of the time).

 

The U8s will have plenty of players whether ds6 shows up or not.

[TammyS]

So while most of you would take the kid, it does seem to matter what he would prefer. I think as cold as it is going to be on Sat. he'd probably rather stay with grandpa, and if I could arrange for a certain friend I am sure he'd rather stay there. The older boys (and I) love soccer. Really I think he just wants to play because we all do, not because he enjoys it or even ever wants to go.

 

I do play on a league, but for Sat. I would be filling in on the U18/16 team, who will be short enough they will be playing with U14 players and old women like me ;). I also help coach the U14s and U12s (okay and the U8s when we show up, but he really doesn't care most of the time).

 

The U8s will have plenty of players whether ds6 shows up or not.

 

Honestly, if it's not putting his team out and he doesn't mind, I don't think I would drive a 6 year old to another town for a soccer game even if I had nothing to do that day. Too much bother with too little payback.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Honestly, if it's not putting his team out and he doesn't mind, I don't think I would drive a 6 year old to another town for a soccer game even if I had nothing to do that day. Too much bother with too little payback.

 

Presumably you wouldn't have signed him up for the team, then.

[TammyS]

Presumably you wouldn't have signed him up for the team, then.

 

True. I would not sign up a 6 year old for games out of town regularly. I assumed that most games are played in-town. Do people regularly drive 6 year olds to out of town games?

[LucyStoner]

I would see if Grandpa could take him. If not, I'd skip my game and take him.

[CountitallJoy]

:iagree::hurray:

 

Agree completely.

 

ETA: My children joined my life, not the other way around.

 

:001_huh: Wow...just...Wow. :(

[Farrar]

In my family, children do not come first, we are all equals and we all come first. We decide together what will work best for the family. Both children and adults make sacrifices for each other, and that strengthens our family bond.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

 

Exactly. So, in other words, it depends on many factors, most of which have already been mentioned by various PP's. Neither the kid or the adult should "win" automatically.

[Farrar]

:001_huh: Wow...just...Wow. :(

 

Understand that for some of us the idea that the child should automatically win and the mother should automatically subsume her desires in this situation makes us feel just as :001_huh: :(

[CountitallJoy]

Understand that for some of us the idea that the child should automatically win and the mother should automatically subsume her desires in this situation makes us feel just as :001_huh: :(

 

I don't see it as a matter of who "wins", I mean, seriously? Why the heck even sign the poor child up to play if her "desires" were clearly more important than his? :confused:

 

I stand by my reaction. Wow.

[Mommy22alyns]

I would also take the 6yo to his game.

[Farrar]

I don't see it as a matter of who "wins", I mean, seriously? Why the heck even sign the poor child up to play if her "desires" were clearly more important than his? :confused:

 

I stand by my reaction. Wow.

 

I don't think any one side should win either. The post that you were reacting to was in support of a household where everyone is an individual whose needs are considered and honored. When there's a conflict between the parent's needs/desires and the child's needs/desires, both should be honored and considered and hopefully discussed together. I'm sorry anyone should find that shocking, but to me the posts that said the mother should *clearly* take the child and the posts that said the parent should *clearly* go herself were both too black and white.

 

I don't understand why a household where everyone's desires get considered should be so shocking.

[Ipsey]

Lots of variables. You're not bad for going to your game. You're not a saint for getting your son to his.

You're a family :) Make it work.

 

In my family, we give and take. It wouldn't faze my 9-year-old at all to miss a game. If it would be a blow to his psyche forever, I'd take him to his game--and get him some therapy :)

[Dustybug]

In your situation, I would bring the 6 year old to his game. Sorry.

 

:iagree:

[Ipsey]

Children come first, always.

 

It really depends.

 

In your family, fine.

 

Not in mine.

[catz]

Just to be different, I wouldn't chose the child's game just because he's the child and his needs should always be first. I would chose the child's game because I feel when you sign up a child for a committed activity like a team sport, you are committing yourself to be there for YOUR child, but also for the other children there. It's one thing if your kid is sick or has to attend a funeral. I think it's another thing completely when you'd just rather be doing something else. I'd be totally fine with finding a ride for kid, but I would find a way. I don't think other people think this way, but it does hurt a team or class dynamic when kids are missing. I've volunteered to coach and teach in different situations. The other kids get a bad message too with regular missed games ("Jimmy doesn't think our team or class is important").

 

If you were both committed to teams, I'm not sure what I'd do. Before I commit my child to an activity, I make sure it works for anything on my plate. Before I commit to something new, I make sure it works for what we already have on our schedule including the kid's current set of activities. It is a balancing act.

 

I think there is an important lesson in showing kids that we honor commitments to the end of them.

[Joker]

I think there is an important lesson in showing kids that we honor commitments to the end of them.

 

:iagree:This is where I stand. I don't think it sends a good message about commitments and follow through. Maybe the 6 yr old would enjoy and look forward to his own games more if others did as well.

[thebacabunch]

Go cheer on your boy.

[Catwoman]

So while most of you would take the kid, it does seem to matter what he would prefer. I think as cold as it is going to be on Sat. he'd probably rather stay with grandpa, and if I could arrange for a certain friend I am sure he'd rather stay there. The older boys (and I) love soccer. Really I think he just wants to play because we all do, not because he enjoys it or even ever wants to go.

 

If that's the case, then I'm not sure why you asked the question at all. :confused:

 

It seems like you are revising history here, because you originally posted:

 

So either ds6 doesn't get to play or I don't. I really just want to leave him at my dad's and go with the older boys, but I am feeling that is a very selfish choice.

 

 

If your ds6 didn't care about playing and would have preferred to stay with Grandpa anyway, you wouldn't have needed to ask the question at all. My take on your OP was that he wanted to go to his games and you wanted to go to your own game, and there was a conflict over who would "get to play." I'm sorry, but that sounded to me like you were trying to decide whose happiness was at stake. And you said you "really just want to leave him" with your father, not that your ds loves to go there and would prefer it. You made it sound like you were feeling selfish about dropping him off at your dad's house while you went to your own game, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who assumed the kid was going to be upset about it.

 

I guess I'm just wondering if you're changing your story a bit because some people have said you would be selfish for going to your own game, because this just doesn't make sense to me now. Why not just ask the little guy if he would rather spend the time with Grandpa or go to the soccer games? If you're pretty sure he would choose to be with your dad, it's a win-win situation for all of you.

 

I don't mean to pick on you, but your latest post doesn't seem to mesh with your OP, and if your ds6 doesn't even particularly like soccer and would prefer to be with your dad anyway, why was there all the concern about whether or not you were being selfish? The way things sound at this point, you'd be doing your ds a favor by letting him stay with your father.

 

I'm confused. :confused: I feel like I'm missing something here, and that I completely misread one or the other of your posts. Again, I'm not picking on you; I'm just trying to figure this out.

 

EDITED TO ADD: I just re-read my post and I know it sounds snarky, but I don't know how else to phrase it. I hope you're not offended!

Edited October 26, 2012 by Catwoman

[LucyStoner]

Cat, I think you are overthinking it a bit. I don't know many mother's who don't sometimes worry about being selfish even when it really doesn't matter to the child and there is really no reason to worry. It seems perfectly normal to me that the OP might think twice even if her son doesn't mind or would even prefer not to play. I would lean to taking him or making sure he got there with a family member but I would assume that the OP is not even considering not going if she had any reason to think it would tear her kid up.

[Soror]

Depends on the variables. If his team needs him, then he gets to go. If they can survive without him and he isn't that keen on it, then he can hang with grandpa. It sounds like your game is a parent-child scrimmage thing? If so, that's valuable bonding time with a preteen, and that can really pay dividends as you enter the rocky teen years so it's not a fully selfish choice.

 

Personally, I would talk it over with him then come to a decision. In my family, children do not come first, we are all equals and we all come first. We decide together what will work best for the family. Both children and adults make sacrifices for each other, and that strengthens our family bond.

 

We would discuss it, both rank how important we each felt our respective games were, and discuss options. Perhaps he'd be thrilled to have some one-on-one practice time with just you at the park later in the week, or maybe another special activity. On the other hand, maybe he ranks his game a 10 on the want-to-do scale, so this time you must sacrifice your want.

 

Families are give and take, even though it may not always feel fair.

 

:iagree: I know some parents take things too far in both extremes- ie being a slave to their child or always putting themselves first. However, for us there is not a single pat answer. Quite often dh and I sacrifice for the kids, sometimes they might not get to do something they want due to our needs and desires. Neither is a given.

[Trish]

they grow up so fast.

 

Yeah, he might not remember this game. Will YOU remember your game?

 

Of course you have the right to skip his game. I wouldn't.

[mlktwins]

Just to be different, I wouldn't chose the child's game just because he's the child and his needs should always be first. I would chose the child's game because I feel when you sign up a child for a committed activity like a team sport, you are committing yourself to be there for YOUR child, but also for the other children there. It's one thing if your kid is sick or has to attend a funeral. I think it's another thing completely when you'd just rather be doing something else. I'd be totally fine with finding a ride for kid, but I would find a way. I don't think other people think this way, but it does hurt a team or class dynamic when kids are missing. I've volunteered to coach and teach in different situations. The other kids get a bad message too with regular missed games ("Jimmy doesn't think our team or class is important").

 

If you were both committed to teams, I'm not sure what I'd do. Before I commit my child to an activity, I make sure it works for anything on my plate. Before I commit to something new, I make sure it works for what we already have on our schedule including the kid's current set of activities. It is a balancing act.

 

I think there is an important lesson in showing kids that we honor commitments to the end of them.

 

:iagree: :iagree::iagree:This exactly! This is how we think and what we do. I would take DS6 to his game. We just had team pictures last week. Everyone showed up but one kid for pictures. At the game later thath day, the mom said they weren't buying any pictures so why bother. We didn't buy the pictures either, but we committed to be on the team and we made sure they were there for the team pictures.

 

ETA: I will say that, while the boys want to play soccer next season (would be their 8th season), DH and I decided we are taking a season off because mom and dad need a break from running them around everything (soccer, robotics, swimming). So, we do put ourselves first sometimes because we need some time to get things done and not run around all week. We will do soccer again next fall if they want to -- we just need a break. We also know that the boys want to be on our neighborhood competitive swim team this summer. That will be a 2 month committment (5 days a week of practice and a meet on Sat) and the last soccer game (maybe 2 games) will overlap with swim. I don't think it's fair to commit to soccer and not be at the last 2 games.

Edited October 26, 2012 by mlktwins

[2squared]

I also help coach the U14s and U12s (okay and the U8s when we show up, but he really doesn't care most of the time).

 

:confused: Am I reading this right - that you don't make the 6yo's game a priority normally? Does the "when we show up" comment mean that other activities or wants often supercede the 6yo's games? If so, that just doesn't seem right, and I think you are probably sending a message to your 6yo that you don't want him to receive.

 

I have a 6yo and four other kids. I am very careful with all of our commitments. If I couldn't commit to my 6yo's activity, then I wouldn't commit at all. If we start something that just isn't the right fit, then we stop. We aren't kinda in and kinda out. KWIM? Either the 6yo's soccer is important to the family or the 6yo shouldn't be in soccer.

 

I, also, wouldn't sign up a 6yo for out-of-town games. Or....if I didn't want to travel, the team was big enough, and this traveling team was the only option....I would clearly commit to only the in-town games.

 

Something is out of balance here. This doesn't sound like a one game decision. This sounds like an overall priorities and commitment decision.

[Candid]

Let me give you a practical reason to go to the 6 yo's game: to get to know the other families so the next time you have this conflict you'll have someone you'll trust to take your child.

 

It might be easy to think, "Well, it's only this one time," but if you don't start building those relationships now, this will come up again and again.

 

I'd also say that this is a great time to start taking with the 6 yo about responsibility to a team. I would absolutely not allow him to think he is not going because of the cold and his dislike of it. If you do decide to have him skip, lay the blame on your own responsibility, not the cold or your desire to play.