Following the Reaction to Its Roots

Ground Notes, Part Two

One child was riding a bicycle in the garden when another moved towards him with the forceful determination to have it. Before there was time for explanation, negotiation or fairness, there was a body in motion, another body at risk and an adult deciding how to intervene.

Moments like this arrive quickly in the crèche. We respond before we have fully understood what has stirred inside us.

Nonviolent Communication offers one way of slowing the moment down. We are invited to notice what happened, name how we feel and recognise what we need. But the more revealing part often comes after because.

I feel frightened because I need to know that nobody will be hurt.

I become stricter because I feel I am losing control.

I rush to decide who is right because both children are looking to me for protection.

I tell them to solve it themselves because I am afraid of favouring one child’s version of events.

The honest because may reveal exhaustion, uncertainty, fear, a need for order or an earlier experience of conflict that still influences how we respond.

A woman once told me that, as a child, she had asked her mother to protect her while she was playing with her older brother. Her mother did not respond in the way she needed, and the experience remained with her as a memory of being left alone.

Years later, a conflict between children may awaken more than concern about what is happening in front of us. It may also touch the child who was not protected, the sibling who was blamed, the adult who fears losing control or the caregiver who cannot bear to choose incorrectly.

That does not make the need shameful. It makes the reasoning beneath the reaction visible.

For adults who are uncomfortable with emotional language, this need not become a demand for personal disclosure. It can begin as reflective practice:

What happened that a camera could have recorded?

What interpretation have I added?

What am I noticing in my body?

What am I afraid might happen?

What am I trying to protect: safety, fairness, order, quiet, authority or connection?

Is one child currently less safe or less powerful?

What boundary is needed before discussion or negotiation can begin?

And perhaps most importantly:

Is this a need the children should be expected to meet, or something I need adult support to manage?

In the bicycle incident, the immediate task was to interrupt the physical action and keep both children safe. Understanding could come afterwards. The child reaching for the bicycle did not need to be shamed for the intensity of his desire, and the child already riding it did not need to surrender his safety or his turn in order to restore calm.

Naming what has been awakened in the adult does not mean we automatically act from it. It gives us more choice about what happens next.

Children do not encounter only our words during conflict. They encounter our pace, tension, history and capacity to remain present. Following the because helps us distinguish what belongs to the children’s disagreement from what their disagreement has brought to the surface in us.