To think DH/in laws springing meal on you is unfair?

[OpalAnt]

Interested to hear people’s thoughts on this scenario.

Attended a conflict resolution/having difficult conversations workshop the other day at work, as I have recently started a more managerial role (I work in healthcare). It was quite interesting overall, exploring different behaviour types: the aggressive ‘bulldozer’, the submissive ‘doormat’ , the passive-aggressive ‘sniper’, and the healthiest way to handle these situations is with assertive behaviour. However one aspect of it didn’t quite sit right with me.

The scenario given (think in context of NHS hospital) was…

You’ve had a horrific day at work, so busy you’ve had no lunch break, headache, trains are delayed/stuck in traffic en route home. All you want to do is get home and crash out before your next shift tomorrow morning. You get through the door, and your DH says, ‘finally you’re home, get ready, my parents are going to take us out for a meal.’ 😳

The trainers’ reasoning was because your relationship with DH is high value and your own want (to go home and relax) is low value, i.e. you could suck it up (???), is that the smoothest way (and presumably what they were insinuating was that it was the BEST way) to deal with it, should go along to the meal because you value your relationship with your DH/in laws, and you don’t absolutely need to rest.

A couple of us pointed out that actually, isn’t that passive/doormat behaviour? We suggested an assertive but polite way to deal with the situation would be to say ‘sounds nice but I’ve had a horrendous day and just need to unwind. You go to the meal and enjoy your time with your parents, but I’ll be sitting this one out. Also, it’s not really fair to spring this on me when I’m already late home and you could have text to ask me at any point in the day, if this was ok with me?’

Trainer seemed a bit dumbfounded and said that responding with ‘it’s not fair’ is bulldozer behaviour! But why would DH and in laws needs be more important than mine? Isn’t it important to protect your own wellbeing and boundaries, and isn’t it somewhat disrespectful of them not to check in with you first?

What does everyone think? (I was thinking about it afterwards and realised I am probably biased as I don’t really have any kind of relationship with my in laws and pulling this sort of shit on a really inconvenient day sounds like something they would do lol- I probably would go along to the meal if I actually liked them 🤣)

Any conflict resolution training that suggests that there's only one way to resolve a given conflict is not good training.

Choosing a personal example certainly got the discussion going but not I think in a helpful way; just a distraction from the principles involved.

I don't blame you for being a little annoyed.

Very strange training... Pretty sure that the first rule of conflict resolution is not to call people derogatory names even if you disagree with their behaviour. "Bulldozer"? "Doormat"? I can't believe NHS commissioned this company. I had conflict resolution training many times in my role and have never come across this. I also teach effective communication sessions and we don't use terms like that. We talk about communication styles without the need to be condescending. On that basis, I would disregard the training entirely and bring this up with the organiser.

What’s being a manager got to do with it?

Why would your dh/in-laws spring a surprise meal at the end of a busy work day? That doesn’t seem very realistic. The more realistic scenario would be a communication from your dh asking would you like to go out for a meal after work courtesy of the in-laws.

Unless they are encouraging ‘people pleasing’ your response should be whatever is true to yourself (yes lovely it will help me de-stress or no thank you I haven't got the energy or brain space but thanks for the offer).

What a bizarre scenario.

I hate surprises, so it's probably no to me if it's only being sprung on me after I've got home, regardless of the kind of day I've had. (Possibly yes if it was a nice day and the restaurant was very local and I was comfortable enough with my in-laws that I wouldn't feel I had to be "on" with them.)

But no one I've ever known would do that. They'd message me during the day to ask if I'm up for it, and if I said not tonight but let's do it another time, they'd accept that and we'd plan it at a time of mutual convenience. Saying "sorry, not feeling it tonight, can we do it next week" should not cause any issues whatsoever. If it did, that's a relationship I should have less of in my life!

Is it just me or I find it quite odd that workplace training was trying to imply a 'right' and 'wrong' approach to a situation in your personal life? - as the responses on here show a person's natural responses would tend to vary from 'great' to 'fuck off' as someone else succinctly put it, based on a thousand different nuanced factors that are completely individual to the situation at hand. There's something almost intrusive I find in workplace training about conflict resolution (presumably in the workplace) trying to teach that there's a way (a right and wrong way) to deal with specific personal situations. Not saying that you can't take certain things from the training and find ways to apply them in your personal life but think again that would be very individual.

I want to show your post to DH when he's saying I'm rude for declining time with his family occasionally!

It is lovely to have that different dynamic sometimes, isn't it?

My ILs made a big fuss about coming over for my husband's birthday last Saturday, but we both had busy weeks, and my husband didn't have the wherewithal to suggest a plan that wouldn't exhaust him. He spent the entirety of the morning before they came stressing about preparing, which I know wasn't his intention.

Very interesting as this recently happened to me. In December after a very busy and stressful few months at work, whilst juggling full on family life and a series of draining hurdles, my DH ( a couple of days in advance admittedly) sprang on me a last minute in law dinner on Xmas Eve after a day at work.

i was on automatic firefighting mode and had accounted for every hurdle and this was an unexpected extra one. My in-laws are nice, but I live abroad and am expected to converse in their language and fit into their ways. Fine. Except each visit feels like a 3 hour language test, which for me is draining. When my DH told me about this mandatory’ language test’ visit expected after a day at work, I ( out of character burst into years. I said no, you go with the kids, not me.

He said it was arranged and expected. I said no. Back and forth. The good thing was as it was 2 days in advance we could reach a compromise of sorts. He would go early with the kids, I would work from home and follow later at my own time ( with opt out if I had had a terrible day.)

As it was I was able to tidy the house after they left, and prepare for Xmas, and felt a lot calmer. I turned up just before food was served, so had to do nothing, and we left when I asked ( again this was part of the compromise.)

i still feel that I was bulldozed, but was able to bring it into something that was acceptable to me. In the reverse situation I would never have expected DH to attend. We come from totally different family types which generate different experiences and expectations. Compromise is the only way.

I’m an introvert, rest is high value to me, without it I will burn out easily so I couldn’t think of anything worse! I’d rather grab a takeaway and cosy up on the sofa with a movie after a hard day, I definitely would not have any energy to go out and socialise.

I mean it depends on so many variables (relationship with your in-laws, what the meal is meant to be celebrating, the familial value of the meal, how far you need to travel, how you will travel, relationship with DH, whether or not you have work the next day, how bad the headache is, childcare arrangements) that it's essentially useless as a scenario.

It was a training exercise … it wouldn’t be very good if you all just agreed with one thing. The trainer is there to spark debate, so you really think about your answers.

a lot of this training is a tick box exercise tbh

ive done a few and there are always case studies that don’t make sense and often if you challenge it the trainer just shuts you down - so it’s not about learning to do with conflict it’s to do with behaving the way the trainer says you should

in your example, I hate last minute plans and even if I’d had a great day DH would know not to spring it on me!

It’s all so personal isn’t it. My DH hates surprises so I’d never do anything like that to him, and he wouldn’t do it to me either, although my way of relaxing after a bad day (bearing in mind I don’t work in the NHS) can be with a change of energy.

People make mental plans all the time. Even if it's "can't wait to get home, eat dinner and watch tv"
To people who've had stressful busy days interacting with many people, that's a much needed respite.
To then be told at the last minute to change your plans, you're placed in a position that is trying to make you powerless.
You may welcome it and be grateful that you get to spend time with relatives and eat good food or it may add to more stress thinking you're tired, you can't think what to wear, you have no more energy to interact with people.
Neither is wrong.

I am interested in the question, in that the training sounds like a load of bollocks. Good old cash strapped NHS.

I think in this particular (unlikely!) scenario, the dh/in-laws are the ones exhibiting bulldozer behaviour.
My assertive response would be to say it’s a lovely thought, unfortunately I’m feeling quite rough, and just want to have a shower and unwind, but go ahead without me this time and enjoy the meal. I’d be apologetic, but firm.
I’d also be asking dh privately to check with me first before agreeing to impromptu arrangements on a work night!

There are too many variables.

Some people would love the distraction after an awful day. Others really wouldn't.

Some might really hate having a meal out sprung on them, irrespective of whether they have had a bad day or not. Others will be up for that most of the time.

For me I would hate that, and my partner knows that so wouldn't spring a meal out on me

It’s a bit strange that training courses tell us the right and wrong way to behave, isn’t it?

Such courses should be more focused on techniques on how to converse and resolve a conflict, and how to avoid escalating a minor conflict. How to talk and interact, not what the end outcome MUST be.

Feel like as a society we are increasingly being told what we must do and follow a script in any given situation, what’s socially acceptable etc.

We should learn how to accept nuance a bit more. Every person and situation is a bit different, and the expectations and needs of the other party are also different.

This sort of strict guidance on a training course really enforces stereotypes of happy and close families, and that everyone enjoys social meals out for example, whereas not everyone has this situation.

Total lack of nuance. Situations can have different outcomes, training courses are supposed to coach you how to navigate situations, not what the outcome must be. If the outcome is pre-decided, neither of the parties will feel heard or their needs considered, which is the point of negotiation and conflict resolution.

I could go on how this applies to work scenarios…

The training sounds like it's grooming you into being expected to be bulldozed and work and to respond with good nature.

For me the key problem here is that the trainer is saying that your needs are at the bottom of the list in that scenario. It immediately sprang to my mind about the female/male roles. For some reason I couldn't imagine a woman expecting to a man jump to attention after a hard day at work and go for the meal because generally I find men put their needs and wants first.

So I think the problem is that the training material/trainer wasn't very good. Why in this scenario particularly would you put yourself last? Maybe if a family member was very ill and you had to go to them but not for a last minute meal! It would be a good scenario however if different ways of being assertive had been explored. The fact she just criticised and said you would be bull dozing shows a lack of experience.

Just having a think, and maybe I’m misunderstanding, but that scenario isn’t really appropriate for conflict resolution training, surely, in that you’re part of the ‘conflict’ - their wants against your needs - so a neutral party would have to be brought into resolve it. It wouldn’t be appropriate in a work situation to have conflict resolution led by one of the involved parties, would it? Or is ‘conflict resolution’ just another way of saying ‘sort it out between yourselves’?

Ils no, friends yes!

Also as is often said on here "it's an invitation not a summons!"

‘I have a headache, enjoy yourself’.

Honestly, people just don’t lie enough these days.

I think you're absolutely right to be bothered by the suggestion that not going out is the 'wrong' choice.

These exercises only work well when the trainers use the examples to provoke thought rather than to try to label certain choices and behaviours as inherently xyz.

For those saying refusing to go out would be inherently selfish: I think that's a really narrow-minded view. It is arguably selfish to assume your partner will always be available for whatever you want to do without any notice.

It is absolutely about context - how much you are struggling with work and tiredness and how far your partner understands this; the nature of the meal out and how long it would take you to do whatever your version of 'getting ready'; whether your partner and in-laws have form for assuming you will always be available without checking on what is convenient for you; the reasons that the in-laws have for the surprise (maybe they've just had amazing news that they'd love to share, or one of them has been really depressed and anxious for ages and their mood has suddenly lifted); how realistic it was for your partner to contact you in advance... So many factors.

I also think there's a big difference between training you all about how to communicate well and between training you on how to make decisions about what you value most / are prepared to compromise on. These are not the same things at all! The first area is less subjective as it's about fairly universal skills based on an understanding of human psychology and communication theory. The second area is highly subjective and personal.

Very strange.

Ime most of these trainers are failed actors who probably go on a one day course and then are inexplicably paid silly amounts of money

my boss arranged one for my team once and we are all a bit no nonsense so it ended 30 mins in as we were challenging her too much!!

Agreed. Such a shame NHS money is being used on this sort of bullshit.