The first time it happened, I knew it had to be an intentional parenting strategy simply because it lacked any semblance of common sense. I’m referring to when an otherwise friendly, intelligent-seeming parent enunciated as clearly as possible, “SON, ARE YOU READY TO SHARE? NO?” And then he turned to my daughter, who was asking after the boy’s plastic dump truck (which he was not using), and said, “I’m so sorry, my son is not ready to share with you.”
If this were a rare occurrence, I would not be writing about it. (Parents do weird shit all the time, myself included.) My family recently moved from the Midwest to the East Coast, and this bizarre parenting policy showed up there, and it shows up here, at parks, playdates, and birthday parties. And it is always ensued by a kind of perplexed silence where I can sense, for a rare moment, that my and my child’s thoughts are in sync: WTF?
Of course, parents understand that certain teachable moments should not be governed by social norms. The problem with no-share parenting is not that it makes everyone feel weird.
The problem is that children do not need to be coached to be more possessive. They come into the world with more than enough greed. In shaping the doctrine of Original Sin, Augustine famously claimed that even infants are “far from innocent,” crying greedily for breastmilk from their first moments; young children throw tantrums when adults don’t comply with their demands.
Whatever you make of Augustine’s assessment, surely we can all see that, today, having equals status for adults as much as for children. Whether we’re talking houses or plastic dump trucks, what you can lay claim to reinforces your identity. The psychologist Bruce Hood put a finer point on this in his 2019 book, Possessed:
When the toddler enters the nursery, they embark on a campaign to take control over all the objects that they can possess. Some of the earliest observational studies revealed that three-quarters of quarrels between eighteen- to thirty-month-olds in a nursery were disputes over possession of toys. When there are only two toddlers present, then these disputes rise to around 90 percent.
That is (A) really funny. It also means (B) that children are plenty capable of expressing “Mine!” (verbally or nonverbally) without their parents walking them through it. Hood continues, “‘Mine’ may be a very small word that children first learn to use, but it remains one of the most powerful in a world dominated by ownership.”
It is so natural to want to possess, and so excruciatingly difficult to give — even if, technically, we know “it is more blessed to give than to receive.” As adults, we find every reason not to give: “It encourages beggars to beg.” “My gift could be misused.” “I’ve given enough already.” “Other people could give more.” “The economy! Inflation!” But to what extent are these just reasonable-sounding emotional justifications for what is most innate in us? You have to wonder.
When it comes to our children, especially when we over-identify with them, it can be hard to see them give up something they’re possessive over. “It’s disenfranchising to ask your child to give up a toy.” “It takes power away from them.” “They need to choose generosity for themselves.” “Other kids shouldn’t be so entitled.” In practice, though, such rationales seem to be more about the parents’ insecurities than the child’s.
Now, I will concede the danger of adults constantly intervening to shout “Share! Share! Share!” That is not beneficial to the child, and it is annoying to the rest of us. I’m not saying we can’t handle this calmly or even, God forbid, gently.
As much as possible, this is a situation in which under-parenting should be considered. Are the kids of an age where they can figure this out on their own? Is there a possibility that a child will refuse to share and then discover that she’s lonely in her material success? Not a bad lesson to learn early.
If no-share parenting was, in practice, more about passively allowing a child to hoard objects and deal with the consequences, I wouldn’t very much mind. But just the opposite tends to happen. Many no-share parents see it as their duty to intervene to explain to all involved parties to whom the toy belongs.
Some “experts” worry that sharing falls a little too closely to giving everything away: getting pushed around, bullied, abused. Of course, no one is better positioned to evaluate such risks than a parent. But I will also say that my child is a fast but not-very-big girl, and the number of sizable boy toddlers whose mothers affirm their possessive instincts has been hard for me to accept.
As for the Bible, when it comes to possessions, Jesus never equivocated. He never said, Well, in this situation … He praised the poor woman who gave despite her lack. He told his disciples: “Freely give.” And most notoriously, he instructed the Rich Young Ruler, “Go, sell what you own, and give the money to the poor.” Believers grasp for every reason to think Jesus didn’t mean what he said. “He meant it metaphorically.” “He was just trying to make a point.” There’s always a lot of concern about the “sell what you own” part, but so little about the “give the money to the poor” part. Jesus is not saying throw everything away. He’s saying give. Someone else needs what you have. Of course he meant what he said. There are hungry people around here. He wanted his disciples to know a straightforward truth, that it was better to give than to receive.
Any conflict on the playground immediately raises a host of complex questions. Is your child a pushover? Is the other child a bully? Which child is bigger, older, faster, smarter? Who are you? Where are you? What message are you sending? What tone are you using? What behavior are you reinforcing?
Then again, maybe this is all very simple.
