Sometimes family obligations turn into chaos you couldn’t script in a sitcom. One woman on Reddit shared how her cousin kept dropping off her six-year-old twins, kids known for tearing up furniture, smashing glass, and making every gathering sound like a fire alarm test.
Instead of chasing them around, she pulled out a bag of M&Ms and trained them with commands like “sit” and “stay.” At first, it worked like a charm until a family party exposed the fragile truth: they were more loyal to the candy than to their mother’s authority. Want the full tea? Let’s dive into this deliciously messy family feud.
An aunt, tired of her cousin’s parenting failures, uses M&Ms to tame her destructive twins, igniting a fiery family clash
This tale sits at the intersection of comedy and concern. On one hand, the image of two unruly six-year-olds responding to a bag of M&Ms like puppies in obedience class is objectively funny.
On the other, the story reveals a more troubling truth: these children’s mother has abdicated her role in setting boundaries, leaving extended family to improvise discipline strategies.
The OP’s “training” method is essentially behavioral conditioning, rewarding desired actions and withholding rewards for unwanted ones. In fact, psychologist B.F. Skinner’s foundational research on operant conditioning in the mid-20th century demonstrated how reinforcement can powerfully shape behavior.
Used correctly, positive reinforcement is a legitimate tool in parenting; a 2020 review in Frontiers in Psychology emphasized that consistent, age-appropriate rewards can encourage prosocial behavior in children.
But the execution matters. As child development expert Dr. Laura Markham notes: “When parents rely too heavily on rewards or punishments, kids don’t internalize self-discipline; they simply learn to behave when someone is watching.”
In OP’s case, candy “training” works in the moment but risks creating a dependency: the twins behave for treats, not out of an understanding of respect or cooperation. When Amy intervened and declared “no more candy,” the children’s explosive meltdown illustrated precisely this point.
It’s also worth noting the family dynamic. OP wasn’t wrong to point out that she is not the children’s parent. Research consistently shows that inconsistent caregiving and unclear authority figures contribute to behavioral issues.
A 2019 CDC report found that children who lack consistent parental guidance are more likely to develop disruptive behavior disorders. In that light, the real issue isn’t the candy but Amy’s refusal to establish boundaries.
Advice? OP should stop using food as a training tool. Instead, if she’s pressured into babysitting again, she can set non-negotiable rules: structured play, time-outs for misbehavior, and clear communication with Amy about her responsibility as the parent. Family members should back OP up rather than enabling Amy’s neglect.
Here’s what the community had to contribute:
These users said OP was not the jerk, praising her quick fix and pointing out the mom was clearly failing at discipline
This commenter claimed that OP is wrong
This group leaned toward everyone is wrong, warning that training kids with candy can cause long-term issues since they’ll expect rewards for basic behavior
In the end, this saga isn’t really about candy or “dog training.” It’s about a mother refusing to parent and a relative backed into a corner. OP found a hack that temporarily worked, but the meltdown at the party showed how unstable the system is.
So, was she wrong for disciplining with M&Ms, or did she just expose the bigger problem, kids who only behave when bribed because their parent never taught them boundaries? Would you have pulled out the candy, or pulled the plug on babysitting entirely?
