They had affirmed that the method that same they had defined was very good. It had an exchange of ideas between that they had made agenda and the ones that had not made. Arguments between them had been used to display the positive and negative side of each one of options. We leave that the quarrel gains argumentativo body dense, therefore, during the meeting we notice that some of the participants do not possuam a well-known power of argument, do not possuam authority and certainty in its you speak. The participants had continued for some meeting to speak on its agendas, that they did not need the paper to program itself, for the pleasure that was if becoming that moment of them, every day remembered this moment, and made something that they judged that they were needing to make for them. In this meeting we work an activity where the participants exerted the paper of leader of the group, some had revealed anxious, however they had made the activity, they had commented on problems that have in leading, in society, in the proper workstation, had told that for being caretakers and not to have much instruction they feel themselves minors who other people, then feel fear of speaking, acting in the front of definitive people. According to some commentaries, in the family he would be more easy to have leadership, therefore there they they are the mothers and the children must obey, everything there what they speak are certain there they have voice, however, at a moment they had arrived at a contradiction, saying when she is difficult to deal with the adolescent children, who feel difficulties in having autonomy to say and to impose limits for children, therefore, they say something and they answer, as they do not have solid arguments do not obtain a good quarrel with the children, thus generating conflicts, not only with the children but with the remain of the familiar group. .