Evaluate solutions for durability: realistic, mutually satisfying, safe

A collaborative solution that fails one of three tests — realistic, mutually satisfying, safe — will not hold.

Why it works

Children will not implement solutions they don’t understand or cannot realistically execute; adults will not honor solutions that leave their core concern unaddressed. A solution that is safe for everyone provides the non-negotiable floor. Evaluating all three criteria explicitly, rather than accepting the first idea that sounds reasonable, dramatically increases the probability that the agreed solution actually holds.

How to do it

1. When a solution is proposed, test it against three questions: Can the child realistically do this? Does it address both concerns? Is it safe?
2. If any test fails, say so without blame and ask for another idea: "I’m not sure you’d be able to do that when you’re really angry — any other ideas?"
3. Write down the agreed solution and review it once it has been tried: what worked, what didn’t?

Evidence

Solution durability criteria are a standard component of structured problem-solving models across clinical and organizational contexts; mutual concern-addressing prevents the solution from devolving into capitulation by either party. (mechanistic)

The three-criteria test is a heuristic within Greene’s framework; its isolated effectiveness has not been separately studied.

Common mistake

Accepting the child’s first suggested solution to end the conversation, without checking whether it actually addresses the adult’s concern — which means the adult’s problem remains unsolved.