by contributor Matt Winkler

Bad Cop:         “[Child], I thought we agreed that you would [perform an action].”

Child:               “Stop micromanaging me! I’m not perfect, OK?”

Good Cop:       “That’s OK this time. But you need to improve, understand?”

Child:               “Fine.” (Child exits, stage left)

Good Cop:       “[Bad Cop], you need to pick your battles. You’re pushing him/her away.”

Bad Cop:         “All three of us agreed that he/she would [perform an action]. Why am I the only one who expects accountability? How else is he/she going to learn responsibility?”

Good Cop:       “You have to be more flexible. It’s not easy being [a number] years old.”

Bad Cop:         “Easy isn’t the point. The child who is always carried never learns to walk. It’s not unreasonable to expect him/her to [perform an action] at this age.”

Good Cop:       “Just let it go.”

Reading the comments on earlier posts sparked a connection between Brian Hoover’s A-B-C chart and the Good Cop, Bad Cop paradigm. The scene above has played out many times during my marriage, invariably ending with me (Bad Cop) in the dog house. My wife and I agree on the laws of our household, but she tends toward selective enforcement, so I try to make my arrests when the good cop is not on duty. This treats the symptoms, but not the disease. How to remedy the performance gap between my wife’s noble legislation and her wimpy adjudication?

Let’s examine the dynamics at play in the scene above, according to the A-B-C formula, which “essentially allows a behavior analyst to identify the causes and outcomes of a given behavior.”

Child:

Antecedent – A three-way agreement that Child would [perform an action]

Behavior – Failed to clean her room, take out the garbage, do his homework, etc.

Consequence – Busted by Bad Cop, absolved by Good Cop

Bad Cop:

Antecedent – Child failed to [perform an action]

Behavior – Verbal confrontation with Child, to hold him/her accountable.

Consequence – Undermined by Good Cop.  Accountability compromised.

Good Cop:

Antecedent – Bad Cop confronting Child

Behavior – Intercede on behalf of Child

Consequence – long term Bad Cop / Child relationship rescued. Accountability incidentally compromised in the process.

Now, what is the function of these behaviors? Brian informs us “that the vast majority…of the behaviors we encounter fall into one of two categories: escape or attention-seeking.” Let’s assume a healthy family dynamic, and the child is simply trying to escape the obligation to [perform an action]. The best explanation for the Bad Cop behavior is child rearing (a combination of duty and altruism?). The Good Cop seeks immediate escape from conflict.

In our household of hair trigger, teenage dramatics, simply broaching a topic qualifies as conflict. My wife’s maternal instinct is to protect her child and restore harmony, so she rushes in to oppose me. In the past, I’ve either folded or held my ground, but I’ve discovered a new tactic that is far more productive. Instead of engaging my wife in a struggle over the issue at hand, I ask, “What would Supernanny say?” This converts the external conflict with me into an internal struggle with her parenting conscience, personified by Jo Frost.

I recommend this approach to other dads who find themselves accused of extremism when taking a centrist position. Rather than arguing your case, just summon an expert witness – one whom your spouse respects. Conjure this wise and imaginary arbiter, and allow your wife to play out the struggle mentally, potentially changing her own mind, and certainly sparing you another trip to the dog house.