Working with Conflict Post-Separation: When Fairness Becomes Scorekeeping (aka “Tit for Tat”)

‍Did you know the expression “tit for tat” has a history going back to at least the mid-1500s? It originally carried the idea of “blow for blow.”

‍It’s been coming up for me as I continue to specialize in high-conflict parenting and parenting coordination.

I find myself listening to statements, arguments, positions and even interests that somehow lead back to some version of:

‍ ‍“She started it.”

‍ ‍“He got away with it.”

‍ ‍“She wouldn’t do that for me.”

‍ ‍“Why should he get this?”

Tit for tat.

Now, don’t get me wrong. No one wants to think of themselves as doing this. We can usually see it much more easily in the other person. Sometimes we call it “spite.” Often it only becomes visible when we start asking curious questions.

A parent rejects a proposal for a vacation. ‍“Can you help me understand what the obstacles are to saying yes to this?”

‍What follows may be a hodgepodge of reasons and concerns. But as we explore them, sometimes they lead back to something unreasonable the other parent did months or even years ago—something technically unrelated to the decision being made today.

‍When people have been entangled in conflict for a long time, that can be very hard to see. A skilled mediator can help.

The Invisible Account

‍After conflict has continued for a long time, people can begin keeping an invisible—and sometimes not so invisible—account of what has happened between them.

‍ ‍Who sacrificed more?

‍ ‍Who caused more hurt?

‍ ‍Who compromised more?

‍ ‍Who has already “gotten their way”?

‍ ‍Who has been treated unfairly?

‍These questions are understandable. But they can make future decisions extremely difficult. A proposal that might otherwise be workable can begin to feel unacceptable simply because the other person would benefit from it.

‍Instead of asking:

“Would this arrangement work?”

We find ourselves asking:

“Why should they get that after everything that has happened?

That is an important distinction.

Sometimes a proposal genuinely does interfere with something important to you or to your children. If so, there is a real problem for us to work on and we can do that. But sometimes the problem is not really the proposal. It is what the proposal has come to represent.

‍ ‍An extra parenting day may carry years of feeling taken for granted.

‍ ‍A request for information may trigger years of feeling controlled.

‍ ‍A financial proposal may become connected to sacrifices made during the relationship.

‍ ‍A disagreement about a holiday may carry a much bigger fear about your importance as a parent.

The present issue begins carrying the weight of the entire past.

And that is when fairness can turn into scorekeeping.

The Past Still Matters

Mediation cannot make the history of a relationship come out even. No parenting schedule, financial settlement, vacation arrangement or holiday schedule can compensate someone for everything they believe happened during the relationship or since separation. But that does not mean the past is irrelevant.

‍Quite the opposite.

The past can teach us something.

It may teach us that predictability is especially important.

It may tell us that clearer boundaries are needed.

It may show us why financial transparency matters.

It may explain why meaningful involvement with the children is so important.

‍ It may teach us that certain ways of communicating simply don’t work anymore.

‍ So perhaps there is another way to approach the history:

We cannot change the past. We don’t need to pretend it didn’t happen. But we can learn from it and decide how much power we want it to have over the future.

‍The question becomes less:

‍“What should I get because of what happened?”

‍ and more:

‍ ‍“What have I learned from what happened that could help us make a better decision now?”

‍That doesn’t require forgiveness. It doesn’t require trust where trust has not been rebuilt. It doesn’t require either person to agree with the other’s version of the relationship. And agreeing to something now does not mean that what happened before was okay.

‍It simply means that history doesn’t have to make every future decision.

‍A Question Worth Asking

‍Sometimes one of the most important questions I ask in mediation is:

“If the other person gets something that matters to them, does that actually take something important away from you?”

Sometimes the answer is yes. Great. Now we know what the real problem is and we can work on it. But sometimes the answer is no. ‍And that may tell us that it is the history of the conflict—not the issue in front of us—that is making the decision.

‍So what do I ask of parents in high-conflict mediation or parenting coordination?

Say yes to what you can say yes to.

If you need meaningful conditions, ask for them.

If you are prepared to try something temporarily and then come back and assess whether it worked, suggest that.

Let the past help you be thoughtful and careful about making changes. But don’t let it quietly have you saying no simply to even out the past.

‍That is tit for tat. And, since our children are watching us carefully, is that what you want them to see? We have all heard the expression “two wrongs don’t make a right”. It hurts sometimes, but it is true.

The goal isn’t to leave the past behind, or ignore it, or not learn from it.

‍The goal is to change what we do with it.

‍ ‍