AI prompts for parents and families

Help me create a family routine and chore chart.

FAMILY MEMBERS: [NAMES OR ROLES AND AGES OF CHILDREN]
SCHEDULES: [WORK, SCHOOL, ACTIVITIES]
JOBS THAT NEED DOING: [LIST - or ask you to suggest a list]
WHAT GOES WRONG NOW: [e.g. mornings are chaos, one person does everything]
ANY REWARDS OR SCREEN-TIME RULES WE USE: [DETAILS]

Produce:
1. A WEEKLY CHORE CHART table, with age-appropriate tasks for each child and a fair share for adults
2. MORNING AND EVENING ROUTINES as short checklists children can follow (with picture ideas for young kids)
3. A FAIRNESS CHECK - estimated minutes per person per week
4. A simple system for rewards or consequences, if we use them, that is consistent and easy to track
5. A 10-minute weekly family check-in agenda to adjust the plan

Keep it realistic - a plan that is too ambitious will be dropped in a week.

Help me plan meals for the week.

WHAT I HAVE IN: [FRIDGE, FREEZER, CUPBOARDS - as much as you can list]
HOW MANY PEOPLE: [AND ANY DIFFERENT NEEDS]
HOW MANY MEALS I NEED TO COVER: [e.g. 5 dinners, 3 lunches]
TIME I HAVE TO COOK: [ON WEEKNIGHTS, AND WHETHER WEEKENDS DIFFER]
WHAT WE LIKE AND DISLIKE: [PREFERENCES]
DIETARY REQUIREMENTS: [ANY - allergies, intolerances, vegetarian, halal, kosher, anything]
BUDGET FOR TOPPING UP: [AMOUNT, or 'as little as possible']

Produce:

1. WHAT NEEDS USING FIRST - anything in my list likely to spoil soonest. Plan those meals earliest in the week.

2. THE MEAL PLAN - each meal with: what it is, roughly how long it takes, and which of my ingredients it uses. Match the longer recipes to the days I said I have time.

3. THE SHOPPING LIST - only what is genuinely needed to complete these meals, organised by shop section. Keep it minimal given my stated budget.

4. THE OVERLAP - ingredients used across several meals, so nothing is bought for one dish and then wasted. Half a bunch of herbs and a tin of something are the usual casualties.

5. THE BATCH OPPORTUNITY - anything worth cooking once for two meals: a base, a sauce, a grain, a roast that becomes something else.

6. THE QUICK NIGHT - at least one meal that takes under fifteen minutes, for the evening when the plan does not survive.

7. THE FLEXIBLE MEAL - one that works with whatever is left, so the week does not fail because one ingredient ran out.

8. THE LEFTOVERS PLAN - what becomes lunch, and what to do with likely surplus.

9. THE DIETARY CHECK - every meal checked against my stated requirements. If I named an allergy or intolerance, flag any ingredient that commonly contains it as a hidden ingredient, and note that labels should always be checked.

10. THE HONEST NOTE - if the plan is more ambitious than my stated cooking time supports, say so and simplify it.

This is meal planning, not nutritional advice. If I have specific dietary needs for health reasons, those should come from a qualified professional.

Help me support a child with something.

THE CHILD'S AGE: [AGE]
WHAT THEY ARE STRUGGLING WITH: [THE SITUATION]
HOW IT IS SHOWING: [BEHAVIOUR YOU ARE SEEING]
WHAT THEY HAVE SAID: [IF ANYTHING]
WHAT I HAVE TRIED: [YOUR RESPONSE SO FAR]
HOW LONG IT HAS BEEN GOING ON: [TIMEFRAME]
MY RELATIONSHIP TO THEM: [parent / grandparent / carer / teacher / other]
WHAT I AM WORRIED ABOUT: [YOUR CONCERN]

Produce:

1. WHAT THE BEHAVIOUR MIGHT BE COMMUNICATING - children frequently express difficulty through behaviour rather than words, particularly at younger ages. What I described could indicate several things; list them as possibilities rather than conclusions.

2. THE AGE CONTEXT - what is developmentally typical at this age, and where what I described sits. Some of what worries adults is ordinary for the age, and some is not. Say which this appears to be, carefully and without false reassurance.

3. HOW TO OPEN A CONVERSATION - children often will not answer direct questions about feelings. What works better at this age: talking alongside an activity rather than face to face, asking about others rather than them, and leaving space rather than pressing. Give specific approaches.

4. WHAT TO SAY AND NOT SAY - responses that help a child feel heard rather than managed. Avoiding minimising ('it's not that bad'), rushing to fix, and reacting with more alarm than they have, which teaches them not to tell you things.

5. THE LISTENING - letting them finish, not correcting the account, and tolerating that the first thing they say may not be the real thing. Children often test with something small before saying the real thing.

6. THE PRACTICAL SUPPORT - for this specific situation, what actually helps. Often something concrete: a change to a routine, a practical arrangement, or removing a pressure.

7. WHAT NOT TO DO - the well-meant responses that backfire: solving it for them where they could manage it, over-questioning, discussing it in front of others, or making it a bigger event than they want it to be.

8. WHO ELSE SHOULD KNOW - school, another parent, or anyone else involved, and how to raise it with them constructively.

9. THE TIME FACTOR - I said how long this has been going on. Say what would be reasonable to expect over what period, and at what point a lack of change would warrant more.

10. WHEN TO SEEK MORE HELP - the signs that this needs a professional: a GP, the school's support staff, or a specialist service. Be specific rather than vague, and clear that seeking advice early is sensible rather than an overreaction. If anything I described suggests the child may be unsafe or at risk, say so directly and what to do.

This is general practical thinking. Anything concerning a child's health, development, mental health or safety should involve a qualified professional who can actually assess the situation.

Help me organise a family gathering.

THE OCCASION: [WHAT IT IS]
WHO IS COMING: [NUMBERS, AGES, AND ANY RELEVANT DYNAMICS]
WHERE: [VENUE OR HOME]
WHEN AND HOW LONG: [DATE AND DURATION]
BUDGET: [AMOUNT]
WHAT I AM WORRIED ABOUT: [YOUR CONCERNS]
WHO CAN HELP: [OTHER PEOPLE INVOLVED]
DIETARY REQUIREMENTS: [ANY]

Produce:

1. THE SCOPE DECISION - the most common way family events become miserable is scope. One person plans something elaborate, does most of it, and does not enjoy it. Say what a manageable version looks like for my numbers and time, and be more modest than I probably intend.

2. THE DELEGATION - specifically what to hand to whom from the people I said can help. Assign actual items, not 'helping'. People are usually willing and rarely volunteer for something unspecified.

3. THE TIMELINE - what happens when: the week before, the day before, the morning, and the event itself. The purpose is to move as much as possible off the day.

4. THE FOOD PLAN - what can be made in advance, what must be done on the day, and what to buy rather than make. Something bought is better than something made by a host who is then too tired to enjoy the event.

5. THE DIETARY REQUIREMENTS - I listed any. Plan for them properly rather than as an afterthought, and note that anyone with an allergy should be able to check ingredients themselves, so keep packaging or a list.

6. THE SHAPE OF THE DAY - roughly what happens when. Gatherings with no shape drift, and the middle hours are where things flag. Not a schedule to enforce, but a sense of the arc.

7. THE DYNAMICS - I mentioned any relevant ones. Practical arrangements that help: seating, timing, having something to do, and giving people who find each other difficult a reason to be in different rooms. Handled through arrangement rather than through conversation.

8. THE CHILDREN - if any are coming: what they will do, where, and who is responsible. Unplanned children are the most common cause of a gathering becoming stressful.

9. THE HOST'S ENJOYMENT - the specific things that let the host actually be at their own event: preparing in advance, accepting help, lowering the standard, and deciding not to do the washing up until later.

10. THE EXIT - how the event ends. Gatherings with no natural end point overrun and everyone leaves tired. A stated finish time or a natural closing activity helps.

11. WHAT TO DROP - if the plan exceeds the budget, the time, or my energy, what comes out first. Usually the elaborate thing nobody would miss.

Help me prepare for a difficult conversation with someone close to me.

WHO: [THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO YOU]
WHAT IT IS ABOUT: [THE SUBJECT]
WHAT I WANT TO HAPPEN: [YOUR HOPED OUTCOME]
WHAT HAS HAPPENED BEFORE: [PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS AND HOW THEY WENT]
WHAT I AM WORRIED ABOUT: [YOUR CONCERN]
THEIR PERSPECTIVE AS I UNDERSTAND IT: [WHAT YOU THINK THEY THINK]

Produce:

1. WHAT THE CONVERSATION IS ACTUALLY ABOUT - often the stated subject and the real one differ. The argument about the washing up is rarely about the washing up. Say what this might really be about, offered as a possibility rather than a diagnosis.

2. WHAT I WANT, EXAMINED - is my stated outcome something the other person can actually give? Some conversational goals require the other person to think or feel differently, which cannot be produced by argument. Distinguish what is achievable from what is not.

3. THE OPENING - what to say in the first thirty seconds. Name the topic directly, say why you are raising it, and make it about the situation rather than about them. Opening with a grievance produces defensiveness before anything is discussed.

4. OBSERVATION VERSUS INTERPRETATION - what I have described, separated into what happened and what I concluded from it. Stating an interpretation as fact is the most common way these conversations go wrong. Show my version and the observational version.

5. WHAT THEY MIGHT SAY - including the responses I would find hardest. For each, something to say that keeps the conversation going rather than ending it.

6. WHAT I MIGHT BE MISSING - I gave my sense of their perspective. Three other plausible explanations for their behaviour, including ones where my own actions are part of it. Going in with a single explanation is how these conversations become arguments.

7. WHAT NOT TO SAY - the phrases likely to escalate: always, never, you make me, everyone thinks, and bringing up past grievances not relevant to this one.

8. THE LISTENING PART - specifically, what to ask so they can explain rather than defend, and the discipline of not preparing your response while they talk.

9. WHEN AND WHERE - the practical conditions that make a difficult conversation more likely to go well: not when either of you is tired, hungry, rushed, or in front of other people.

10. IF IT GOES BADLY - how to end it without damage, and how to return to it later.

11. THE HONEST NOTE - some conversations do not resolve, and a conversation that goes badly is not necessarily a failure. If there is a longstanding pattern here, or if this involves something serious, a counsellor or mediator is a legitimate route rather than a last resort.

This is preparation for a conversation, not counselling or therapy.

Help us sort out household responsibilities.

WHO LIVES HERE: [PEOPLE, AGES, WORKING PATTERNS]
WHAT NEEDS DOING: [THE TASKS, as many as you can list]
HOW IT WORKS NOW: [CURRENT ARRANGEMENT, if any]
WHAT IS CAUSING FRICTION: [THE PROBLEM]
WHAT EACH PERSON IS WILLING OR ABLE TO DO: [IF YOU KNOW]
WHAT HAS BEEN TRIED: [PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS]

Produce:

1. THE FULL LIST - everything that needs doing, including the invisible work: noticing what needs doing, remembering when things are due, planning meals, tracking what has run out, organising appointments, and keeping track of everyone's schedules. This mental load is real work, is usually carried unevenly, and is almost never on the list. Adding it changes the picture substantially.

2. THE CURRENT PICTURE - who does what now, including the invisible items. Note where the distribution is uneven.

3. THE FRICTION DIAGNOSIS - household disputes usually come down to one of:
   - Uneven volume of work
   - Uneven mental load, where one person does the noticing and organising even when tasks are shared
   - Different standards, where one person's threshold for 'needs doing' is lower
   - Delegation rather than sharing, where one person assigns and the other executes, which leaves the organising with one person
   - Unacknowledged work
   Identify which applies.

4. THE STANDARDS CONVERSATION - if different standards are the issue, this is not solvable by a rota. The options are agreeing a shared standard, accepting that the person who wants it done more often does it more often, or lowering the standard. Say so plainly, because this is the disagreement people avoid naming.

5. THE ALLOCATION - a proposed split, accounting for: available time given working patterns, what people can do, what people mind least, and crucially ownership of whole areas rather than individual tasks. Owning an area includes the noticing and planning, which is what shifts the mental load.

6. THE OWNERSHIP PRINCIPLE - the most effective change in most households. Instead of 'helping with' the laundry, one person owns it entirely: noticing, doing, and the consequences of not doing. This removes the assigning relationship that causes most resentment.

7. THE CHILDREN'S SHARE - if relevant, age-appropriate responsibilities, with the note that supervising a child doing a task is often more work than doing it, and the point is teaching rather than saving time.

8. THE SYSTEM - how this is tracked, kept as light as possible. Elaborate rotas fail; a shared understanding of who owns what usually works better.

9. HOW TO RAISE IT - if this needs a conversation, the framing. About the arrangement rather than about anyone's failings, and ideally proposing a system rather than listing grievances.

10. THE REVIEW - a point to check whether it is working, so adjusting is routine.

Help me plan my week.

WHAT I NEED TO GET DONE: [LIST, WITH ROUGH TIME FOR EACH IF YOU KNOW]
FIXED COMMITMENTS: [APPOINTMENTS, WORK HOURS, ANYTHING UNMOVEABLE]
WHEN I WORK BEST: [morning / afternoon / evening / varies]
WHAT USUALLY GOES WRONG: [WHAT DERAILS YOUR WEEKS]
ENERGY THIS WEEK: [normal / low / stretched]

Produce:

1. THE TIME AUDIT - total hours in the week, minus sleep, minus fixed commitments, minus the ordinary business of living (eating, travel, household). What is genuinely left. This number is always smaller than people assume and is the reason plans fail.

2. THE TASK TIME - my list with realistic durations, which for most tasks is longer than the estimate. Say the total and compare it to the available hours. If it does not fit, say so now.

3. WHAT COMES OUT - if it does not fit, what gets deferred, delegated or dropped. Deciding this now beats discovering it on Thursday.

4. THE SCHEDULE - specific, with tasks placed at times. Demanding work at my best hours; admin and low-concentration tasks at the rest. Most people schedule by deadline and get this backwards.

5. THE BUFFER - at least a fifth of the available time unscheduled. Things overrun, things come up, and a plan with no slack breaks on the first interruption and is then abandoned entirely.

6. THE BATCHING - similar tasks grouped, because switching between different kinds of work costs more time than people account for.

7. THE DERAILMENT PLAN - I said what usually goes wrong. For each: what to do when it happens, so the week bends rather than breaks.

8. THE MINIMUM WEEK - if energy is low or things go badly, the reduced version: what must happen and what can slide. Having this defined prevents a bad Tuesday becoming a lost week.

9. THE ONE THING PER DAY - for each day, the single item that makes the day a success. Everything else is a bonus.

10. THE FRIDAY CHECK - five minutes to see what happened and adjust next week's assumptions.

Help me work out how to split these costs.

WHO IS INVOLVED: [PEOPLE AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP]
WHAT IS BEING SHARED: [rent, bills, food, a trip, a joint purchase, household expenses]
THE AMOUNTS: [WHAT THINGS COST]
THE SITUATION: [equal incomes / different incomes / different usage / different circumstances]
HOW IT WORKS NOW: [CURRENT ARRANGEMENT, if any]
WHAT IS CAUSING FRICTION: [IF ANYTHING]
CURRENCY: [CURRENCY]

Produce:

1. THE SPLITTING OPTIONS - each with what it is fair to and what it is unfair to:
   - EQUAL SHARES: simple, and unfair where usage or income differ substantially
   - BY USAGE: fair for things people use differently, and requires tracking
   - BY INCOME PROPORTION: fair where incomes differ a lot, and requires disclosing income
   - BY ROOM OR SPACE: for housing costs where rooms differ
   - MIXED: equal for some things, proportional for others
   Recommend one for my situation and say why.

2. THE CALCULATION - the actual split for the amounts I gave, under the recommended method, shown clearly so everyone can check it.

3. THE FRICTION SOURCE - I said what is causing problems. The usual causes are: unequal usage of something split equally, one person always paying and chasing, unspoken resentment about different incomes, and no agreement about what counts as shared. Identify mine.

4. THE CATEGORY QUESTION - what counts as shared and what does not. Most disputes are about this rather than about amounts. Make the boundary explicit: shared food versus individual, communal items, guests, and anything one person uses far more.

5. THE MECHANISM - how money actually moves: a joint account, one person paying and being reimbursed, an app, or a monthly settle-up. Pick one that removes the chasing, because chasing is what causes resentment.

6. THE CHASING PROBLEM - whoever pays first ends up chasing, and that role wears thin. The arrangement should not depend on one person being the bookkeeper. Say how to avoid it.

7. THE DIFFERENT INCOME CONVERSATION - if relevant, how to raise proportional splitting without anyone having to disclose more than they want to. Options exist between equal shares and full disclosure.

8. WHAT TO AGREE EXPLICITLY - the handful of things that should be stated rather than assumed, because assuming is what creates the awkward conversation later.

9. HOW TO RAISE IT - if changing an existing arrangement, the wording. Framed around the system rather than around anyone's behaviour.

10. THE REVIEW - a point at which to check the arrangement still fits, so adjusting it is normal rather than a confrontation.

Help me plan an evening.

WHO IS COMING: [PEOPLE, AGES, HOW WELL THEY KNOW EACH OTHER]
THE OCCASION: [WHAT IT IS, or 'nothing in particular']
WHERE: [SPACE AVAILABLE]
HOW LONG: [DURATION]
BUDGET: [AMOUNT]
EFFORT I WILL PUT IN: [minimal / some / I enjoy organising]
WHAT THIS GROUP LIKES: [PREFERENCES]
WHAT TO AVOID: [things that will not work with this group]

Produce:

1. THE GROUP READ - what suits this particular group. People who know each other well need less structure; people who do not need something to do, because an evening of pure conversation is hard work for a group that has not met.

2. THREE OPTIONS - each with: what it involves, what it costs, how much preparation, and why it suits this group. Vary the effort level so there is a low-effort option.

3. THE STRUCTURE - a rough shape: arrival, something to do, eating, and the main activity. Evenings with no shape drift and end awkwardly early.

4. THE ARRIVAL PROBLEM - the first half hour is the awkward part, particularly when people arrive at different times. Something to do or look at on arrival solves it: food out, a drink to make, music, or a low-stakes activity people can join.

5. THE FOOD - proportionate to the effort I said I would put in. Something bought and good beats something cooked badly by a stressed host. What works for this number and space, including anything that can be prepared entirely in advance.

6. THE ACTIVITY - if one suits this group, options at different levels of commitment. Include ones people can opt out of, because in any group someone will not want to play.

7. THE OPT-OUT PRINCIPLE - the most important consideration in group activities. Anything that forces participation makes at least one person uncomfortable. Choose things people can join or watch.

8. THE PRACTICALITIES - seating for the number, where people will put things, and whether the space works for the plan.

9. THE ENDING - how it finishes. A stated rough end time helps everyone, including the guests who are wondering when to leave.

10. WHAT NOT TO DO - over-planning, forced icebreakers, an activity that requires everyone to be good at something, and anything that puts one person on the spot.

11. THE MINIMUM VERSION - if the day gets away from me, the version that still works.

Help me plan a party.

THE OCCASION: [WHAT AND FOR WHOM]
HOW MANY GUESTS: [NUMBER AND AGES]
WHERE: [HOME / VENUE / OUTDOORS]
WHEN AND HOW LONG: [DATE, TIME, DURATION]
BUDGET: [AMOUNT]
WHAT THE PERSON ACTUALLY WANTS: [IF IT IS FOR SOMEONE ELSE]
HELP AVAILABLE: [WHO ELSE]
WHAT I AM WORRIED ABOUT: [YOUR CONCERN]

Produce:

1. WHAT THE PERSON ACTUALLY WANTS - if this is for someone else, the plan should follow their preference rather than what makes an impressive party. Some people want a large gathering and some want six people and a meal. Say what my description suggests, and to check rather than assume.

2. THE SCOPE - what is manageable for my numbers, budget, and help. Parties become miserable for the organiser through scope, and scaling back usually improves the event for everyone including the guests.

3. THE TIMELINE - four weeks out, one week out, the day before, the morning, and the event. The aim is to leave almost nothing for the day itself.

4. THE INVITATION - when to send, what to include (time, place, duration, food, what to bring, anything guests need to know), and how to get a reliable head count, which is what everything else depends on.

5. THE FOOD AND DRINK - quantities for my numbers, what can be prepared in advance, what to buy, and what to serve that does not need attention during the party. Specific quantities are useful; people routinely over-cater on some things and under-cater on others.

6. THE SHAPE - roughly what happens when: arrival, food, the moment (cake, speech, whatever the occasion has), and the tail end. A party with no shape drifts and the organiser cannot relax.

7. THE SPACE - for my numbers and venue, whether it works. Where people will stand, sit, put coats, and get drinks. Crowding at one point is the most common practical problem.

8. THE CHILDREN - if any: what they will do, where, and whose responsibility. Unplanned children is the usual reason an adult party becomes stressful.

9. THE DELEGATION - specific jobs for the people who can help, assigned as items rather than as general help.

10. THE ORGANISER'S ENJOYMENT - the things that let the host attend their own party: preparing in advance, accepting help, lowering standards, and not starting the clearing up.

11. THE CUT LIST - if the budget or the time does not stretch, what goes first. Usually decorations and the elaborate food nobody would miss.

Explain [TOPIC] to me.

WHAT I ALREADY KNOW ABOUT THIS AREA: [BE SPECIFIC - this determines everything]
WHY I WANT TO UNDERSTAND IT: [THE REASON - curiosity, a decision, work, study]
HOW DEEP: [the gist / enough to discuss it / enough to use it / enough to teach it]
WHAT I HAVE READ OR BEEN TOLD ALREADY: [WHAT DID NOT WORK]

Structure the explanation as follows:

1. THE ONE-SENTENCE VERSION - what this is, in plain words, before any terminology.

2. WHY IT EXISTS - what problem this idea solves or what question it answers. Concepts make far more sense when you know what they are for. Most explanations skip this and start with the definition.

3. THE CONCRETE CASE - a specific example, in full, before any generalisation. Build the abstraction from the instance rather than the other way round.

4. THE MECHANISM - how it actually works, built up in steps from what I said I already know. Do not introduce a term before it is needed.

5. THE TERMINOLOGY - each technical word, introduced once the idea it names is already in place, with a note where it means something different in ordinary usage.

6. THE ANALOGY AND ITS LIMITS - one analogy, and explicitly where it stops being true. An analogy without stated limits becomes a misconception.

7. THE COMMON MISUNDERSTANDING - what people usually get wrong about this, and why the wrong version is appealing.

8. WHAT I ASKED ABOUT THAT DID NOT WORK - I said what I have read already. If there is a standard explanation of this topic that commonly fails, say why it fails and what to use instead.

9. THE DEPTH CHECK - stop at the level I asked for. Do not continue into detail I do not need; it obscures what I came for. Say what the next level down would cover, so I know what is being left out.

10. THE TEST - one question I should be able to answer if this landed. It should require applying the idea, not repeating it.

Do not open with a definition. Do not use an analogy in the first paragraph.

Help me plan a trip with a group.

WHO IS GOING: [PEOPLE, THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO EACH OTHER, AGES]
WHERE AND WHEN: [DESTINATION AND DATES, or 'to be decided']
HOW LONG: [DURATION]
BUDGET SITUATION: [whether everyone has a similar budget, and how different]
WHAT PEOPLE WANT: [THE DIFFERENT PRIORITIES, if you know them]
WHO IS ORGANISING: [just me / shared]
PREVIOUS GROUP TRIPS: [HOW THEY WENT]

Produce:

1. THE THINGS TO AGREE FIRST - before any planning, the decisions that cause problems if left unspoken:
   - Budget, including what 'moderate' means to each person. This is the single biggest source of group trip friction and the most avoided conversation.
   - Pace: how much doing versus how much resting
   - Whether the group does everything together or splits up
   - Who pays for what and how it is settled
   Say how to raise each without it being awkward.

2. THE SPLIT-UP PERMISSION - the most useful thing to establish early. Groups that assume everything is done together produce compromise activities nobody wanted. Agreeing in advance that people can do their own thing on some days removes most of the tension.

3. THE STRUCTURE - a plan with: things everyone does together, optional things, and free time. Say roughly what proportion each should be for this group.

4. THE DECISION PROCESS - how choices get made, agreed in advance. Groups stall on restaurant choices for an hour every evening. Options: a rotating chooser, one person decides per meal, or a shortlist agreed in advance.

5. THE MONEY MECHANICS - the practical system: a shared pot, one person paying and settling later, or an app. Decide the method before the trip, not during. Include how to handle people with different budgets without anyone having to say they cannot afford something.

6. THE DIFFERENT PRIORITIES - I said what people want. Where these conflict, say so now and propose how to accommodate both rather than discovering it on day two.

7. THE ACCOMMODATION DECISION - whether shared or separate suits this group, and what that does to the budget and the dynamic.

8. THE PREVIOUS TRIPS - I said how they went. If there is a pattern, design around it.

9. THE ORGANISER BURDEN - if I am doing all the planning, what to delegate. Resentment from doing everything is a common way group trips sour.

10. THE CONFLICT SCENARIOS - the two or three most likely friction points for this group, and what to have agreed in advance to defuse each.