You can't make POJA work if your husband won't agree on the principle of POJA in the first place.

You do not think your son should go to the event. Your husband thinks he should go. The default in POJA is that you do nothing while you come to an enthusiastic agreement on the consequence. Your son does not go to the event unless you both enthusiastically agree that he should go.

Will your husband abide by that?

SC if you're talking about the event earlier in the week, no, he did not follow the POJA. I sent him the article on using the POJA in parenting decisions this morning and this afternoon we had another incident w son. I contacted him at work and he agreed to come up w a consequence together for our son, and he agreed he will be the one to deliver this afternoon.

Since we already had plans and agreement for son to go to practice this evening doing nothing means he'd still go in this case, right? What do I do if husband didn't agree son should have a consequence? He did in this case, but initially he wanted to just have a talk w son.

I'm confused on how to handle discipline for son when we don't agree and I don't know how to get husband to see necessity of consistent boundaries without making demands.

No, Kat, I'm talking about the post you just made an hour ago.

The prior agreement has broken down. You want your son to stay away as a punishment, but your H thinks he should go. The POJA default is "do nothing". That does not mean leave the previous agreement in place - that agreement broke down. "Do nothing" means your son must not go while and until you negotiate a new agreement.

Will you husband do that?

NO.

Do nothing literally means DO NOTHING. It means neither one of you leaves to take your son to practice tonight. It means neither one of you calls anybody to pick him up. You do nothing until you are in agreement on what to do.

You will not be able to address this until your husband agrees to live by the POJA, which includes literally doing nothing when you do not agree with what he wants to do.

However, this is an assumption - a DJ on your part. Don't make assumptions.

IF your H does not agree, the default would be "do nothing" - your son stays home - and you negotiate a consequence. If you can be persuaded that a different consequence (or punishment) is equally as, or more effective than, the ban you wanted to impose, then you can agree to it, and your son can go to the event. However, if, despite brainstorming, the two of you cannot reach enthusiastic agreement, then your son does not go; "do nothing".

Got it, thanks SC and Prisca. I asked husband for ideas and he came up w a consequence I agreed to. He will be the one to tell son since I'm now out of the home with our other child. And, I want it to come from husband.

SC, he understands the POJA but it is very new for us. I need to keep on him about it. If I told him that son will not go to practice until we agree on a consequence, he will do it but he absolutely will see that as a demand.

Any suggestions for making it less of a demand? His way of handling our child is to talk with him.

It is not a demand to say "I am not willing to do that." or "I am not enthusiastic about ..."

In order for it to be a demand, you must be forcing your spouse to DO something (for example, our son is going to practice tonight even if you are unhappy about it).

He would not see it as a demand if he understood it and agreed to work with it. he would know from the word go that the minute you said you wanted your son to stay home as a punishment, and he said that he disagreed, he thought x should happen, and you didn't agree with that...

...the minute it became clear that you did not agree with each other, everything would be put on hold until you could find a solution that you both enthusiastically agreed with. He would know that the disagreement meant that son didn't go unless and until you (Kat) enthusiastically agreed that he should go.

You wouldn't be demanding that your son didn't go. Nobody would be demanding anything. Rather, it would be understood by your husband that you "do nothing" while you resolve the disagreement.

I hope you did not make a reluctant agreement in order to keep the peace. Were you enthusiastic about the solution, really?

Ok so in this case I'd say "I'm not ok with son going to his evening activities w the way he behaved this afternoon."

And leave it at that, right? And if husband takes him, I need to plan B. But if husband says "I think he should go to practice so he doesn't let his team down, but here's another option. We can give him this consequence instead."

That's acceptable, right? I'm trying to get this right and I appreciate the help. These situations are highly emotional for me and I feel resentment when husband comes home and cheerfully talks w son after son has been mistreating me and our other child.

Just saw this and honestly, I'd have preferred he stay home as punishment as I see that as sending the clearest message and it's very difficult to ground him otherwise since he's always at practice. Husband came up w next best thing though and son feels it as much when we take his iPhone away.

Husband coaches the team so keeping son home would have been punishing him too. But it would have sent a very clear message to son.

It's acceptable for him to SAY that, but it is NOT acceptable for him to go ahead and DO that, if you disagree with the proposal.

What he says is a proposal - part of the negotiation.

You can accept or reject his proposal, or try to modify it. You can make an entirely different proposal.

He can accept or reject your modification or new proposal, and he can make yet another proposal - and so on. But nobody does anything until there is an enthusiastic agreement between the two of you.

So you were not in enthusiastic agreement, and you capitulated. It was a mistake for you to have done so. This was not POJA at all.

Ok I thought the point of the POJA was to come up w a solution we both like? I could have suggested that son not go tonight, and husband would not have wanted that. Instead, I asked him first and he came up w something I did like, though not as much.

You guys are really making me see just how weak I've been in my marriage and parenting. Thank you!!! After years of being told I'm too demanding, too controlling, too restrictive, too reactive, etc. I'm finally starting to see that this is NOT true.

How I should have handled today:
Me: "Honey, son was disrespectful, and violated house rule this afternoon. I'd like us to come up with a consequence for him."
Husband: "Oh no. I'll talk to him. He's likely stressed about x and not handling well."
Me: "No excuses for his behavior. I'm not ok with just a talk. I'd like us to give him a consequence for yelling at other child and me and disobeying me."
Husband: "Agreed."
Me: "I'm not ok with him going to practice this evening after his behavior."
Husband: "He has a commitment to the team. What if we ground him from his devices instead?"
Me: "I'm not ok with that. I'd like to send a very clear message that we will not support him if he continues to treat his family this way."
Husband: "I disagree."
Me: "Until we find an agreeable solution, son will remain in his room."

Through your comments here, it seems like you are pre-assuming that your H will not agree for your son to miss the practice without giving H the opportunity to comment on that suggestion himself.

As for this:


...for perspective, the kid is 12 and he'd be missing a practice. He's not missing an NBA practice right before the championship game. And even if it was that practice, the marriage still comes first.

Another way to see this might be that your son lets the team down when he yells or swears at you because that causes him to miss practice.

Since you haven't talked to H about this yet, I would not assume that option is off the table in your negotiations. It is an excellent suggestion to start with.

You may want to suggest giving DS12 an alternate activity that he can occupy himself with during the missed practice time slot, such as raking, weeding or scrubbing the garage floor.

Your H is a coach and is used to persuading a child's fuller potential out of themselves. Don't sell him short, before he has a chance, on holding high expectations from your DS12.

Your goal is to negotiate a deterrent (more so than a punishment, right??) to the behavior that your H is also enthusiastic about.

If you are not enthusiastic about an agreement, you always have the prerogative to come back to it to say you are no longer enthusiastic about it, and then brainstorm together for a different solution.

The solution is only mutually enthusiastic while both parties are enthusiastic; otherwise the solution is failing the test.

Did H say this?

If he did not, do you see that this is a DJ on your part to presume your H's feeling of punishment as his reason for avoiding solutions to a problem, before approaching him with the negotiation?

It seems like you needlessly and presumptively restricting your brainstorming together.

Thanks, Sunny. You're right- husband is skilled at encouraging a child's fuller potential. He uses positivity to motivate, which I love. But in the past, husband has made it clear that while he will not challenge me in keeping son home from a practice/game for poor behavior, he does not agree with me. I haven't done it for this reason in 2 years. It makes it hard when he's always got a practice or tournament or local game. I don't support those activities after son has thrown tantrums, violated house rules, etc.

Last year son would yell at me and other child in car while giving him rides to practices. I had to tell both son and husband that I would no longer be giving son rides until that behavior stopped. Husband would then leave work to take son himself and go back to work.

Sometimes you have to use consequences to motivate/deter. Positivity is great as long as it works. It's not working.


That was then. Now it is two years later and that option has not worked out well for you. It is fair to re-open the idea to explore how he might be enthusiastic now.


How has that worked out for him? It is fair to re-open the discussion since the behavior wasn't resolved with that method so you are no longer enthusiastic about that solution.