What can a six-year-old, a broken cardboard car and a council rubbish collection teach us about fairness, accountability and double standards in separation and divorce?
Quite a lot, apparently!
Recently, my six-year-old challenged me with an interesting question.
Why is it that when children do something "bad", there are consequences, but when parents do something "bad", there aren't?
And, as much as I might have liked to disagree, he had a point.
We'd previously had conversations about fairness and consequences, including one occasion when he challenged whether a consequence I'd imposed was proportionate to his behaviour.
Upon reflection, I agreed that it wasn't.
So I adjusted it.
But this time, he was raising a broader question about fairness, accountability and the different standards we sometimes apply to ourselves and others.
And a recent council rubbish collection provided the perfect opportunity to put those principles to the test.
The Great Cardboard Car Incident
If you're a parent, you may be familiar with the delicate art of clearing out your child's accumulated creations, broken toys and miscellaneous treasures.
You know, those things that appear to have absolutely no practical value but which your child insists are precious?
Well, during our recent council collection, I attempted to discreetly dispose of a few such items.
Unfortunately, I got caught.
Because apparently, that broken cardboard creation with a stick and some bottle caps partially glued to it wasn't rubbish at all.
It was a car.
A car my son had spent "FOREVER" making.
And, according to him, it could absolutely be fixed.
Along with several other items whose significance I'd apparently failed to appreciate.
And whilst I might have had my doubts about the cardboard car's future potential, I had to acknowledge something rather important.
I hadn't asked him.
I'd made a unilateral decision about something that belonged to him, based entirely on my own assessment of its value.
And just because I didn't share his perspective didn't mean I was entitled to disregard it.
So I acknowledged my mistake.
And, so when the conversation about double standards came about the following morning, I invited him to consider what an appropriate consequence might be.
Well, didn't he get creative (sarcasm intended): No screen time. No phone. No laptop.
He was certainly chuff about playing uno reverse on tech bans.
But beneath the humour, isa lesson that extends well beyond parenting.
How Double Standards Show Up in Our Relationships
Most of us like to believe we're fair, reasonable and considerate people.
Yet it's surprisingly easy to apply different standards to our own behaviour and the behaviour of others. For example:
We expect others to listen to us, but don't always listen to them.
We want our boundaries respected, but sometimes struggle to respect theirs.
We expect our feelings and perspectives to be acknowledged, yet can dismiss someone else's when we disagree.
We want accountability, apologies and changed behaviour from others, whilst finding explanations and justifications for our own actions.
We criticise decisions made without our input, yet sometimes make similar decisions ourselves.
Often, these double standards aren't deliberate.
They can arise because we naturally experience situations through the lens of our own intentions, emotions, needs and circumstances.
We know why we behaved a certain way.
We understand the reasoning behind our own decisions.
But when someone else behaves similarly, we may not have access to their reasoning and instead interpret their actions through our own assumptions.
And during separation and divorce, these differences in perspective can become particularly pronounced.
Double Standards During Separation & Divorce
Separation can be an emotionally challenging experience.
Trust may be diminished, communication strained and both people may be navigating uncertainty, grief, frustration or a perceived loss of control.
In these circumstances, it can become particularly easy to justify our own behaviour whilst holding our former partner to a different standard.
Let’s consider some common examples.
Communication
We might criticise our former partner for sending reactive or accusatory messages, whilst justifying our own because we were hurt, frustrated or provoked.
Parenting decisions
We might object when the other parent makes arrangements affecting the children without consulting us, yet consider our own unilateral decisions reasonable because we believe they're in the children's best interests.
Flexibility
We might expect our former partner to accommodate changes to parenting arrangements when something important arises for us, yet feel inconvenienced or resentful when they request similar flexibility.
Property and finances
We might feel entitled to make decisions about belongings, expenses or shared resources based on our own understanding of what's fair, without appreciating that the other person may see things differently.
Accountability
We might expect our former partner to acknowledge the impact of their behaviour, whilst focusing primarily on the intentions behind our own.
And the difficulty is that both people may genuinely believe their own position is reasonable.
Yet what feels fair from one perspective may feel very different from the other.
Just Because You Think It's Reasonable Doesn't Mean It's Your Decision to Make
One of the most important lessons from my son's cardboard car incident was the distinction between believing a decision is reasonable and having the authority to make it.
From my perspective, the cardboard car was broken, taking up space and unlikely to be repaired.
From his perspective, it was something he'd invested time and effort into creating, something he valued and something he wanted to keep.
Neither perspective changed the fact that it belonged to him.
And whilst parenting obviously involves making many decisions on behalf of our children, this was an opportunity to recognise that his interests and perspective deserved consideration.
The same principle can be relevant during separation.
Whether we're talking about parenting arrangements, shared property, financial decisions or practical responsibilities, our belief that something is sensible, necessary or fair doesn't automatically mean we're entitled to decide it unilaterally.
Of course, not every decision requires agreement or consultation.
Some decisions are appropriately made independently, and legal responsibilities, existing agreements, safety considerations and the circumstances of each family matter.
But where a decision affects another person's interests, rights or responsibilities, it's worth considering whether consultation or agreement is appropriate before proceeding.
Because even a decision made with good intentions can create unnecessary conflict when another person feels excluded, disregarded or disrespected.
Fairness Doesn't Always Mean Treating Everyone the Same
There's another important distinction worth making.
Fairness and equality are not always the same thing.
Different people have different circumstances, responsibilities, capacities and needs.
What is reasonable for one person may not be reasonable for another.
Similarly, accountability doesn't necessarily mean imposing identical consequences for similar behaviour.
Context, intentions and impact all matter.
And particularly in separation, safety and power dynamics matter too.
There is also an important distinction between ordinary relationship conflict and patterns of abuse or coercive control. Expectations of mutual accountability should never be used to minimise abuse, excuse controlling behaviour or suggest that both parties are equally responsible for an unsafe dynamic.
But in relationships where both people can participate safely and meaningfully, fairness invites us to examine whether we're applying our expectations consistently.
One particularly useful question is:
Would I consider this behaviour reasonable, fair or acceptable if the roles were reversed?
Building Greater Awareness and Accountability During Separation
One of the foundations of a more conscious and collaborative separation is developing the capacity to reflect on our own behaviour, assumptions and communication patterns.
This might involve asking ourselves:
Am I holding myself to the same standards I'm expecting from my former partner?
Am I distinguishing between what I know and what I'm assuming about their intentions?
Have I genuinely considered their perspective, even if I don't agree with it?
Am I making a request, providing a notification or making a decision that requires their input?
Am I willing to acknowledge when my own behaviour has contributed to unnecessary conflict?
Would I feel differently about this situation if our roles were reversed?
These questions won't necessarily resolve every disagreement.
And being fair, accountable or collaborative doesn't guarantee that someone else will respond in the same way.
But they can help us make more conscious choices about our own behaviour and reduce the likelihood of unintentionally contributing to the conflict we're hoping to resolve.
Sometimes the Most Valuable Lessons Come From Unexpected Places
As for my son's proposed technology ban?
Well, I'm still not entirely convinced that losing access to my phone and laptop is a proportionate consequence for the great cardboard car incident.
But I am grateful that he felt comfortable enough to challenge me… And that I was willing to listen and engage collaboratively.
Because healthy collaborative relationships aren't built on never making mistakes.
They're built, in part, on our capacity to recognise those mistakes, consider different perspectives, take accountability and make adjustments.
And those are skills we can continue developing throughout our lives, including during separation and divorce.
Sometimes, all it takes is a little curiosity, a willingness to challenge our assumptions and the humility to recognise that someone else might have a point.
Even when that someone is six years old.
And apparently, quite the little collaborative negotiator.
PS: One final lesson
One final lesson for separating couples: If you're hoping for an amicable and collaborative separation, it's generally not wise to dispose of property, regardless whose name it bears, without mutual agreement.
Just ask my six-year-old. 😂
