Who Decided What a Child “Should” Be Able to Do?

2–3 minutes

A friend was telling me about their 10-year-old and screen time.

They had an agreement: the child would set a timer when using the device, and stop when the timer went off. Simple. Clear.

Except the child kept not doing it. And the parents kept getting frustrated.

Their worry wasn't about punishment. It was deeper: if he can't manage himself now, what happens later? Will he become the teenager who can't control himself, who pushes back on everything?

As we talked, something surfaced. The parents had a whole list of "shoulds." A 10-year-old should manage screen time. Should keep promises. Should empathize when parents are tired. Should clean up toys without being asked.

But who decided these shoulds?

The parents did. And they felt completely reasonable about it.

But here's what I noticed: a child at that age is still learning how to interact with the world. They can be wonderfully kind to friends at school and completely oblivious at home. That doesn't mean something is wrong with them. It means the system at home has its own dynamics.

The parents eventually changed their approach. Instead of expecting the child to set the timer, they managed the device themselves. When the child wanted screen time, he would bring the timer himself. The parents controlled when the device was available.

The frustration dropped. Not because the child changed. But because the parents stopped handing over responsibility the child wasn't ready for, and adjusted the system.

This is true at work too. When a junior engineer misses a deadline, a manager's frustration often comes from an invisible "should." They should flag risks early. They should be more proactive.

But maybe the system needs adjusting. The check-in cadence, the clarity of expectations, the safety to ask for help.

When you feel frustrated with someone, you're often frustrated with the system you've built together. And in every system, there's something you can adjust too.


朋友跟我讲他们10岁孩子的屏幕时间问题。

说好了的——看屏幕要自己定闹铃,闹铃响了就停。但孩子就是做不到。家长越来越frustrated。

他们的担心不是惩罚本身。而是更深层的:如果他现在就管不住自己,以后怎么办?会不会变成那种越来越控制不了自己、什么都要对着干的小孩?

聊着聊着我发现,家长对这个孩子有一整套"应该":应该能管理屏幕时间,应该说到做到,看到爸妈累了应该去共情,玩具应该自己收。

但这些"应该",是谁定的呢?是家长自己定的。还觉得特别天经地义。

可是这个年纪的孩子,他还在学怎么跟这个世界互动。他在学校对小朋友很友善,回到家就像白眼狼一样。这不是说孩子有问题。是家里的互动形成了一个系统,有它自己的惯性。

后来家长改了方式。不再指望孩子自己定闹铃,而是自己管理device。孩子要看的时候,自己拿闹铃过来。家长控制device什么时候可以用。

frustration减少了。不是因为孩子变了。是因为家长不再把孩子还没准备好的责任交出去了。系统调整了。

职场也一样。manager的frustration背后常常有个隐形的"应该"。但也许需要调整的是系统本身。

当你对一个人frustrated,你其实是对你们之间的系统frustrated。而在每个系统里,你自己也有可以调整的部分。

Try this: pick one "should" you hold for someone. Ask yourself – is this a reasonable expectation, or am I handing them something the system hasn't set up for?


I'm a bilingual Burnout and Relationship Coach for Tech Professionals and Parents. If this resonates, apply for a Free Clarity Session at mengchen.co.

Discover more from Meng Chen

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading