So if a child breaks a sibling's expensive toy, not intentionally but recklessly, what consequences should there be?

[emkana]

dd2 let dd1's rollergirl Kennedy doll fall down the stairs today, not intending to, but in spite of being warned repeatedly to be careful or an accident would happen. Doll's leg broke, but could just about be stuck back together with gaffer tape. I got very angry (see other thread about shouting ), but in the end we got over it and dd2 was told that a/ she must be more careful (she constantly breaks stuff) b/ she is not allowed to play with taht particular doll anymore and c/ she will not get the two pairs of leggings she wanted but didn't really need (she only wanted them because dd1 got some this weekend, dd2 has plenty already)

.

How old is dd2? If she is always breaking stuff, I think I might be inclined to take the other siblings much-valued toy away from her rather than tell her to be careful.

Is she old enough to understand 'be careful'? Rather a vague message for a very small child.

she will be 5 in August

And she was told specifically "if you keep letting her go drive to the stairs there she will fall and break"

and the payback was ??

Nah - at 4 yo you were the adult who foresaw what might happen so it was your responsibility to take the doll away - 4 yos don;t have the same judgement as an adult.

However, on a different basis, as you have told her she won;t get the leggings then I think you have to stick to this.

It wasn't me who was warning me, I wasn't in the room at the time, it was dd1.

Bree, don't really understand your question?

Well why on earth did you allow her to keep taking the doll to the stairs? My ds is nearly five and if I can see trouble brewing, I step in.

I was in the bathroom, busy, and didn't have anything to do with it until after it had happened.

So are you all saying that you would have let it go?

As a rule I don't like to punish children for playing with a toy - afterall they are just doing what children do.

I would expect a toy to be robust enough to cope with a bit of rough and tumble.

So what would you say to the sibling who is very upset about the broken toy?

Keep it on a high shelf in her bedroom in future and bring it out when DD2 isn;t around.

TBH though, I wouldn't have bought it for her in the first place if it couldn;t cope with the normal wear and tear of being played with.

I've no idea what these dolls are like though!!!

I think the point is though Em, that you have already told DD2 what will happen and I think you should just stick to that if that is what you have said.

Although it isn;t what I would have done, neither is it a complete overreaction IYSWIM

I'm sorry soapbox but that seems totally impractical and unfair on the older sibling. (The doll is like a barbie doll, with roller skates, and a remote control so she can skate and dance around.) Only use the doll when dd2 isn't around? When does that ever happen? Not buy it for her when it was dd1's dearest wish for Christmas?

To second post: Fair enough. Just wanted to gauge MN opinion for future events, which are bound to happen considering dd2's rather reckless attitude.

Also the dd's share a room and a toy cupboard and due to being close in age and both girls pretty much all their toys.

So would you not have told dd2 off at all? Just said "things happen"?

I would take it back to the shop if it is a barbie doll on skates and tell them it is not fit for purpose and you want a refund/replacement. Honestly a barbie doll that breaks when it falls down the stairs

Now I know what it is (I was imagining some china doll given to her by great aunt agatha) then I feel even more strongly that your DD2 was doing nothing at all out of the ordinary in playing with it - the toy should have been robust enough to withstand normal play - that is wasn;t really isn;t DD2's fault!

So you wouldn't feel a teeny tiny bit angry?

When dd2 was told again and again by dd1 "take her into our room, away from the stairs, or she will break?" So that she knew what could happen? Surely a nearly 5 year old can understand that?

In a perfect world Em In reality I cannot imagine for one moment my DS taking much notice of anything his elder sister advised!

I would be a bit annoyed and sad for DD1 but for my children seeing my annoyance would be punishment enough IYSWIM.

We had a similarish incident here tonight - DD had been told to go to bed and came down hassling me to come up and give her cuddles - I said fine, I'll be up in a moment and sent her up to bed, saying 'watch my glass of wine' and of course she did the inevitable and knocked it over!

I was a bit cross - but really I should have moved the wine as she got up from the sofa. She was upset enough that she had knocked over the wine so I really didn't need to say anything more.

hm. I guess it's a question of temperament as well then. But I find it very difficult not to be angry in such a situation.

I think Soapbox is being unfair.
She's nearly 5, therefore she's old enough to have heeded her sister's warning. She chose to ignore it and the toy broke.
You did the right thing Emkana. Maybe next time she's warned she'll realise there could be consequences if she chooses to ignore it.

thank you lyra I was beginning to doubt my sanity then.

soapbox, I understand completely what you are saying and find it very valid, but I am at teh same time amazed that you wouldn't be angry! And I do feel that a nearly 5 year old, my nearly 5 year old can understand a warning like that and should act accordingly!

I've got a bigger age gap with mine, so it might eb different. But I've always insisted that they respect each other's property - and there are consequences if something gets broken - pocket money stopped til whatever it is is replaces or soemthing like that. I also made sure that dd (the older one) knew that she could say no the her little brother playing with her precious things, and I would support her in this. Big siblings have rights too!