In three studies (N = 854), including one pre-registered study, we examined factors that might influence American parents’ decisions to side with owners versus promote prosociality or sharing when thinking about children’s property conflicts. We found that parents’ thinking about property conflicts was affected by the relationships among the parents and their children. Namely, parents were most likely to side with owners when their child was described as transgressing upon another’s property. Conversely, when the parents’ child was the owner, they were more likely to encourage sharing. Parents’ explanations revealed that their decisions were a reflection of their personal beliefs about the importance of personal rights and/or promoting prosociality. The findings also suggested that some parents were reasoning in nuanced ways about the importance of teaching children about consent and its link to ownership. The findings from these studies have bearing on the potential role of parental input in young children’s appreciation of owners’ rights. These results suggest that parents may be providing children with some informative input regarding the nature of ownership rights such as when they matter most.