My wife thinks this is what we should do (I'm not the OP). But it doesn't make sense to me. It would imply that whoever says something first is right.
Why can't parents disagree sometimes? Might be a valuable lesson for kids, too. And perhaps less scary, too. Maybe it's nice to have somebody to turn to, and not just one parent unit?
> It would imply that whoever says something first is right.
On the other hand, it's wrong for the child to play her parents of each other. If mom says 'no', it's not OK to go ask dad.
If Mom gave a different answer than Dad would have, Dad should discuss it with Mom if it's important, perhaps in private. But it's also OK for kids see parents disagree and work things out in a healthy way. Then Mom can change her own 'no' to a 'yes' later and retain her authority (and get to be reasonable and nice).
But, yes, first-to-answer is a silly way to make decisions.
When I was reading books before my daughter was born, I came across an idea that really stuck with me. I don't remember source book unfortunately, possibly Brain Rules for Baby, http://www.brainrules.net/brain-rules-for-baby.
It was addressing this topic of parents arguing – an extreme form of disagreeing – in front of the children. Studies have shown that parents arguing can be traumatic for children. It makes them feel unsafe and emotionally threatened, and it results in increased depression, anxiety, aggression, etc.
However, what most of the studies failed to include in their analysis is what happens after the argument. Children who see their parents constructively resolve their argument, e.g., through negotiation and compromise, actually show decreased mental health and behavioral problems when compared to children who never saw their parents argue.
Children learn compassion and how to use love and kindness to solve disagreements. They also learn that disagreeing with somebody you love is okay. It doesn't mean they'll stop loving you.
Not exactly the same as showing a united front or whatever but relevant in my opinion.
The last thing I'll add is that it's also pretty well established that children respond best to clear boundaries. They need to clearly understand what behavior is acceptable and unacceptable, i.e., what is safe and unsafe. If dad gets angry about something and mom doesn't care, it's confusing for them and leads, again, to emotional instability.
So yeah, it's complicated. It can be good to disagree and model healthy resolution behavior, but at the end of the day, both (all) authority figures do need to set similar boundaries.
I've set the expectation for my kids that my answer will be "no" if they've already asked Mom (this also helps out an end to the "go ask your father" redirect. If they ask me after Mom had already said "no", but hide the fact theyasked her already, then even if I say "yes" but later find out they played us, the answer becomes an absolute "no" also carries an additional "no" that would have otherwise been "yes" for future questions.
IMO it's not about avoiding disagreement - I think that modelling appropriate 'conflict' resolution is important for kids - but rather making sure that kids DON'T learn that the easy way to get a 'yes' is to ask the other parent.
Why can't parents disagree sometimes? Might be a valuable lesson for kids, too. And perhaps less scary, too. Maybe it's nice to have somebody to turn to, and not just one parent unit?