There are conflicts that don't appear in any manual, but they are part of the daily reality for any organization that works with minors. They aren't major crises or exceptional situations. They are small, repeated, seemingly simple scenes that are more draining than isolated, high-intensity episodes.
A minor who refuses to comply with a rule that he did comply with yesterday.
An argument over a consequence that “isn’t that big of a deal”.
One educator who is flexible in a situation and another who is not.
A rule that, applied as written, doesn't seem to help anyone.
Socio-educational intervention is built precisely in that uncomfortable terrain where the norm clashes with reality. And that is where many of the doubts, conflicts, and also the most frequent mistakes arise.
The rule as a starting point, not as a refuge
In daily practice, rules serve an essential function: they provide order, structure, and a predictable framework. For many children, especially those from disorganized backgrounds, rules are a necessary reference point. The problem arises when rules cease to be an educational tool and become a defensive refuge.
When professionals cling to the rule to avoid considering the specific situation, the intervention loses its meaning. Not because the rule is wrong, but because it is applied without understanding the context, the moment, and the child's process.
This creates a very common paradox: the rule is followed, but the conflict increases.
Conflicts that seem small, but are not
Much of the strain on resources doesn't come from serious situations, but from poorly resolved everyday conflicts. Repeated delays, constant refusals, small transgressions that accumulate. Each one, on its own, seems manageable. All together, they end up overwhelming the team.
In these cases, the key question is not "which rule has been broken?", but:
- What's going on here?
- Is it an isolated incident or a pattern?
- What function does this behavior serve for the child?
- What are we standing for as a team?
When these questions aren't asked, the response is usually automatic: consequence, punishment, warning. And before long, the conflict resurfaces.
Inconsistency as a generator of conflict
One of the biggest sources of tension in these resources is not the child's behavior, but the team's inconsistency. Rules that are applied differently depending on the shift, the professional, or the moment create insecurity, conflict, and an increased challenge.
For the child, inconsistency translates into confusion. For the team, it leads to burnout and internal recriminations. In this scenario, the rule loses all its educational value and becomes just another source of conflict.
Working towards coherence doesn't mean absolute rigidity, but rather clear agreements on when and how to be flexible. And, above all, that this flexibility is shared and well-reasoned, not improvised or individual.
Flexibility is not giving in
One of the most common fears among teams is that relaxing a rule will lead to a loss of authority. However, experience shows just the opposite: rules that are explained, contextualized, and applied judiciously tend to generate more legitimacy than those imposed without any leeway.
Flexibility isn't about making constant exceptions or negotiating everything. It's about adapting the educational response to the specific situation without losing sight of the overall framework. It's about maintaining the boundaries, but choosing how and when to apply them so that they are meaningful.
This nuance, which seems simple, is one of the most complex lessons for professionals joining a resource for the first time.
Conflict as an opportunity… if you know how to work with it.
Not every conflict is a failure of intervention. Many conflicts are, in fact, educational opportunities. The problem is that they require time, analysis, and the ability to sustain the tension without resolving it hastily.
Working through conflict involves:
- Listen without justifying the behavior.
- Name what is happening without labeling the child.
- Maintaining boundaries without escalating the confrontation.
- Accompany the frustration without withdrawing emotionally.
None of this is intuitive. It's learned through practice, supervision, and training. Without these tools, conflict is perceived as something that must be eliminated as quickly as possible. It's not about learning the basics, but about acquiring real tools for a job that is as demanding as it is necessary.
When the rule becomes a punishment
One of the most frequent risks is that the rule will be used as a disguised punishment. Disproportionate consequences, an accumulation of sanctions, or the systematic withdrawal of rights are usually more a response to team fatigue than to an educational strategy.
This not only fails to improve behavior, but it reinforces dynamics of confrontation and mistrust. The child learns to comply to avoid punishment, not to understand the meaning of limits.
Socio-educational intervention loses its essence there.
Intervention with minors isn't just about the major milestones of the process, but also about the everyday aspects. It's about how boundaries are set, how minor conflicts are managed, and how the team maintains a standard without breaking the bond.
This is where it's decided whether the rule educates or punishes, whether the conflict teaches or becomes chronic, whether the professional supports or defends themselves. Considering these aspects is not secondary. It's about intervening where the intervention actually happens.
Would you like to study these and other current topics related to childhood and adolescent development? Learn about the Postgraduate in Intervention with Minors and work on what you really like!
