Gut Reaction Please...

[valerie]

Boy, you don't mess around with the easy questions, do you?



I don't have any children, but since you're just asking for a gut

reaction, I would say that you shouldn't stay with someone you get

along with "reasonably" well. Children are smart, and I think a happy

mom is better for them. OR a happy dad, for that matter.

[Raven]

flopstock wrote: Which is better for a childs happiness...



Staying together in a loveless relationship where you get along reasonably well, or separating in order that you both have a chance to find someone to be fulfilled with?



What are the 'positives' of your position, not the negatives of the other choice?
I wouldnt stay. If I was absolutely sure the love couldnt be rekindled, I would go.

Children adapt. As long as both are committed to the child(ren) then both should share equally in the upringing. But you dont have to live together to do that. Children know whats going on.

They dont learn anything of value from a suffering parental relationship. And they will always question why you stayed.

[buttercup]

oh floppy that is a tough one, i was a single mum for 10 years, i'll discuss it with my girls now 20 & 17 as they have gone through the spectrum of emotions regarding this whilst growing up & still managed to end up well balanced women

in the meantime what i can say is as long as you can stay on friendly terms in the event of a split & always work together for what is best for the children you cant go far wrong

[BabyRider]

Being in an unhappy marriage, or even a stale one that can't be "re-lit", can only have a negative impact on the children. They are very astute, and sense things most adults don't give them credit for.

[minks]

my 2 cents worth, I would have to say it depends on kids ages. When I was going through my divorce the Dr told me something very interesting, Children are "taught" coping skills so if the children are very young, it would be awful for them to have their parents split if the parents could still function together. If the children are older, they know when there is no love and for those older children moving out of lovelessness shows them there is hope down the road for a second chance.

Not to cut and dry is it.

[BabyRider]

minks wrote: Not to cut and dry is it.
It almost never is, huh? :-2

[minks]

BabyRider wrote: It almost never is, huh? :-2


Sadly no

[along-for-the-ride]

Never separate with the hopes of finding someone better. Separate for you own peace of mind amd spiritual growth and inner-happiness. This will make you a better person, a better mom.

[chonsigirl]

Pros and cons both ways, Floppy.

How well can the married couple be together? Is there physical violence involved? The impact on the children? Children are well aware of the situation, and it will influence their future relationships.

But so would a separation. If it is amicable, then there is not as much damage to the children. The children could have two fully participating parents in their lives, if things are done in a civil manner. Which does not happen so many times.

Gut reaction-I tried this once, and stayed for a very long time with my first husband. The physical damage was to me, not the children. But I never ratted him out, until about 2 years ago. My youngest son asked me why I divorced his father-and I told him. The other kids already knew, you cannot hide these things really. But it kept him a part of their lives, for what he contributes to them as a father. (on an emotional level, never monetarily)

Every situation is different, and has to be judged by the person in the relationship. I do think children should have a priority over the self, until they are grown and on their own. I choose the children's needs first, and then my own. I am not sorry I made this decision.

[Tigerlily]

I am a second wife. I have three stepdaughters in their 30s. If I'd known then what I know now, the way they've turned out, if I'd known him when he left them I'd have told him not to. They were in their early teens. His first wife was dull but not so dreadful he couldn't have managed life with her.

Their particular problems seem directly related to their father leaving. I don't think it's a response to his actual absence - my father was a merchant seaman and I hardly knew him but that was life - but the fact that he left has certainly been damaging.

We have had our ups and downs and I could have taken our little girl and left, but have stayed and she has benefited.

However, I have a number of acquaintances who I refer to as my friend's 'embittered divorcee pals' whose husbands have left them in their early 50s because they (the husbands) were looking for pastures new. Not a lot the abandoned wives could do about it. Everyone suffers apart from the ex-husband.

Women who are married to abusers are in an entirely different position, but if a veneer of civilisation can be kept, and life isn't actually intolerable, I think it's best for parents to stay together, just until the children are adult. A life is never wasted if it's putting someone else first.

[Nomad]

My gut reaction is that unless your in danger or some other serious situation you damned well better stop thinking about yourself. When you had children your life became for them. Whatever it takes.

[Nomad]

flopstock wrote: ummm.. that doesn't answer the question, lemondrop.. in fact it actually restates it.



The 'not' making it a 'physical' danger situation is what I think presents the largest issue .. is the lesson to the child then, to just suck it up and take disappointments and not try to correct mistakes? Or is it that you hope they learn that sometimes you have to do the best you can with what you have to work with and just settle..


Well the latter is a very good lesson for anyone. However the parents lessons should not be the childs lesson. The point is in my opinion, that your responsibility is 100 % towards the child, and that means that whatever it takes to give them the best possible chance of succeeding is where your energy should be directed. That means a home, a family, parents, two of them.

If the parents are having difficulties, then get it fixed. Theres no room for selfish behavior when you should be DEDICATING your days to the child. Thats my personal concern, for the child. Nothing else matters.

[Nomad]

flopstock wrote: So how exactly does one 'fix' not loving someone else nomad?




Im sorry but you suck it up until the child has been raised to the very best of both the parents abilities.

Thats my gut telling me the child comes 1st.

[gande06]

Floppy.......One thing that I have always been told by my younger brother who has counseled many couples with this same circumstance is that "It is never wrong staying together for the sake of your children, NEVER wrong!!" (of course as long as there is no abuse taking place) We as parents have such a great responsibility for our children.....We must be Oh so careful before making such a drastic life changing decision that might have many benifits for us but be so very detrimental to our children. They have not asked for our adult problems....all they have asked for is for us to love, care for and nurture them.....and protect them from all harm....

I read this article a couple of months ago.

No good divorce

The children's perspective







In her book Between Two Worlds: The Inner Lives of Children of Divorce, Elizabeth Marquardt examines the impact of divorce on children. Her book is based on a survey of 1,500 young adults which allowed her to compare the experiences of children of divorced parents with the experiences of children of married parents. Marquardt, a graduate of the University of Chicago Divinity School and a researcher with the Institute for American Values, calls the study the most comprehensive ever undertaken on the subject. We talked to her about her findings and about the impact of divorce on children's moral and spiritual lives.

The title of your book suggests one of its major themes: that in divorce a child is caught between two worlds. Why did you choose this metaphor and why is it so important a theme?

One of the big challenges for any marriage is to bring together two worlds”two people with different backgrounds and often different values. The rubbing together of these two worlds is often not neat or pretty, but some kind of unity is established.

After a divorce, the job of making sense of the two worlds and the conflicts that arise between them doesn't go away”it gets handed from the adults to the child. The child has to negotiate by himself or herself the different beliefs and values and ways of living that the child finds in each world. And these two worlds often become more different as each year goes by and the divorced parents develop new relationships, new jobs, new interests.

You refer to children of divorce as "early moral forgers." What do you mean by that?

Children who grow up traveling between two worlds feel early on the need to confront”alone”the big moral questions: What's right and wrong? What do I believe? Where do I belong? Is there a God? What is true? They feel the need to confront these questions because they see dramatically contrasting answers in each parent's world. In fact, they're much more likely to see their parents as polar opposites even when they don't fight. Any answer they glean from one world can be undermined by looking at the other.

Many people have noticed that children of divorce often seem independent. They tend to help around the house or travel between parents' homes alone or take care of their younger siblings by themselves. They also have to become independent moral thinkers. Some people might say: Well, this need to be independent is a good thing. But while some children certainly can rise to the occasion, they lose their childhoods, and I think that that's something that we should mourn, not celebrate.

And some children cannot rise to the task. This helps explain why children of divorce are two to three times more likely than other children to end up with very serious social and emotional problems. The ones who cannot handle the difficulty of making sense of two worlds might be the ones who numb their pain with addictions or early sexual activity, or who suffer from depression.

How has your own experience as a child of divorce shaped your investigation?

I'm now 35. My parents split up when I was two years old. When I was in divinity school in the mid-1990s I went looking for resources on the moral and spiritual impact of divorce on children. I found there were none. That was remarkable, given that the divorce rate had been quite high for quite some time. It seemed to me, as a child of divorce who was struggling with questions of faith, that there is a huge connection between one's family experience and one's approach to questions of faith, including the images and stories of the Christian faith.

A lot of the questions we asked in the national survey were ones that came from my experience. They were questions no one had asked these young people before”questions like: Did you feel like a different person with each of your parents? Did you see your parents as polar opposites? Did God become the father you never had in real life?

The survey results have given me the confidence to claim to speak for a generation that for the first time is telling the story of divorce from its own point of view. Until now the discussion has been conducted as if divorce is only about and for the parents.

What is the impact of divorce on children's religious lives?

We discovered that children of divorce are far less likely when they grow up to say they are very or even fairly religious. They're far less likely to attend a house of worship frequently. There is about a 14 percent difference in this area between children of divorce and children of intact families. They're also less likely to be a member of a house of worship or to be a leader there.

Partly this is because the children are less likely to have been involved in a community of faith as a child. Divorce itself makes it difficult logistically for parents to stay connected to any kind of community.

But there are deeper issues. For example, when children of divorce hear that God is like a father or a parent because God's always there for you, they experience a disconnect. For them, parental absence is as common an experience as parental presence.

It's remarkable to talk to the children of divorce about the parable of the prodigal son, in which the father waits for his errant son to come home. They recognize the act of leaving home, but in their experience it was the parent who left, not the child. It was the parent who left the family, or who was always leaving to go to work or out on dates. If anyone was staying home waiting for someone to return, it was the child waiting for mom and dad to come home.

The parable is about the patient love of God. This means that children of divorce see themselves in the role of God in the story. What a scary, strange feeling that is for such children”especially if no one around them in the community of faith understands how they're seeing it. These kinds of disconnects are what keep the children of divorce as they grow up more distant from church.

Yet the findings overall are somewhat complicated. Though generally the grown-up children of divorce are substantially less religious than those from intact families, a portion of them become much more religious. And I have heard anecdotally of many children of divorce who seek out the church because they're looking for the meaning and stability they find there.

What would you say to pastors about ministering to children of divorce?

First, questions of truth and of belonging are central in the minds of these children. Even as young teenagers, even as preteens, they're attuned in many ways to paradox, to suffering, to the deep questions of faith

I think the story of the exile is really powerful for children of divorce. Exile describes for them their sense of being fragmented inside, of feeling like divided selves, torn between two worlds. They feel like they have multiple places to call home, none of which really feels like home.

In the Christian tradition, exile is not the end of the story. Those in exile can come home to God and find healing and wholeness in God's presence. Preach a good sermon on that theme and I guarantee that people will be touched.

Do you think a more realistic understanding of the impact of divorce on children would have a measurable effect on divorce rates?

I don't think it would slash it in half or anything like that. But I do think we would see some correction in the divorce rate.

I think this understanding would encourage people to save marriages that could very well be saved without undo pain on the part of the adults. I'm thinking of marriages that are ending because of boredom or because of a desire for a new partner or not being sure you really love your partner, or because you feel that you've grown apart. Those issues are troubling to adults, but they are not that apparent to kids.

That's where the "good divorce" language can be so damaging. It makes parents think that divorce won't be a big deal so long as they do it right. There's such a thing as necessary divorce, but there's not such a thing as a good divorce.

Isn't it important that a divorcing couple gets along amicably after divorce and that each parent stays involved in the child's life?

Obviously it's better for a divorced couple to get along and be involved in the child's life. But from a child's perspective, the fact that the divorced parents are getting along reasonably well and are staying involved makes the divorce in a sense more inexplicable. The child still feels the weight of a big burden”to make sense of two very different worlds”and if the burden feels overwhelming, the child feels that she has only herself to blame. That's the moral drama that no one has ever talked about, and it's a drama that faces children even when their divorced parents don't fight a lot”and most of them don't.

What qualifies as a "necessary" divorce?

There are high-conflict marriages characterized by abuse, violence, or serious and frequent quarreling in which divorce is a vital option. What most people don't know is that two-thirds of divorces end low-conflict marriages.

Does the ending in divorce of many low-conflict marriages suggest that people have inappropriate expectations of marriage?

There is an interesting historical background to this issue. When the divorce revolution took off with the advent of no-fault divorce in the 1960s, experts predicted that marriages overall would be happier because all the unhappy people would get divorced. Studies have shown, however, that as the divorce rate grew, the marital happiness rate fell. As marriage became easier to get out of, the threshold of what constituted a problematic marriage was lowered.

At one time, society made it too hard to get out of a horrendous marriage. But we have gone too far in the other direction. We have adopted a trickle-down notion of happiness: if the parents are happy, then the children will be happy. By that reasoning, if the parents need a divorce to be happy, that's fine, because everybody will be happier if the parents are happy.

That idea has no bearing on children's experience. Children's happiness is not simply a product of adult happiness. Frankly, if theirs is not a high-conflict household, children in many ways aren't all that concerned if their parents are happy.

Some people, including pastors and other church people, may be reluctant to raise the issue of children's experience of divorce because they don't want to add to the guilt or shame felt by divorced parents.

I know that people are sensitive about this issue. But even if we were to grant that every single divorce in this country is necessary, it would still be important to study the experience of children”just as we study the experience of heart patients after surgery. We don't say, "Well, the surgery was necessary, so whatever happens afterward is irrelevant."

Too often the debate on children of divorce gets turned into a debate on whether parents should be getting divorced in the first place. That move silences the experience of kids.

I imagined the first audience for my book being the grown children of divorce; it's aimed at helping them understand and articulate their experience. The second audience I imagined is married parents who may have considered divorce. I want to help them understand not just what divorce does to a child, but what marriage does for a child. And finally, for divorced parents I think this book illuminates the inner experience of their child in ways they may not have considered. If they can better understand their child's inner world, they can help their child feel less isolated.





by the Century editors

[BabyRider]

Nomad wrote: Im sorry but you suck it up until the child has been raised to the very best of both the parents abilities.

Thats my gut telling me the child comes 1st.
Sorry Nomad, but I gotta go with Flops on this one. Of course the children always come first, but in some instances, that means having the happiest parents they can have. If that means separated parents, as opposed to the child knowing his/her parents aren't truly in love and are just "getting by", that can be more damaging than anything. It can also make a child feel guilty. You'd be surprised what kids sense, Nomad. They are so much more observant and aware than adults give them credit for.

If you're not happy with your partner, you cannot be the best parent you can be.

[Nomad]

BabyRider wrote: Sorry Nomad, but I gotta go with Flops on this one. Of course the children always come first, but in some instances, that means having the happiest parents they can have. If that means separated parents, as opposed to the child knowing his/her parents aren't truly in love and are just "getting by", that can be more damaging than anything. It can also make a child feel guilty. You'd be surprised what kids sense, Nomad. They are so much more observant and aware than adults give them credit for.

If you're not happy with your partner, you cannot be the best parent you can be.




I understand this, I realize that not all parents can or should stay together. My sentiments arent an absolute, however I would sure hope all avenues had been exhausted before the family splits up.

My dad had every right to leave very early on, but he didnt, he stayed. One night when I was 13 he told me he would be leaving after the 3 of us were self sufficient. He lived through hell, but he stayed and finished out his obligation, he wasnt happy but he did the best he could. He wasnt thinking of himself. I respect that.

Thats just my take on it.

[Nomad]

flopstock wrote: Wouldn't an answer also have been to take you kids with him?




School, friends, our lives would have been disrupted.

[Nomad]

flopstock wrote: This is somewhat off topic, because that is not the situation described in the question, but were you kids not living the same 'hell'?



And I'm really sorry if I'm being too personal, I just wondered. Feel free to ignore me when and if i overstep please.:-4




Yea we all were foops, it was a frickin nightmare. I think it just wasnt black and white, I dont really know. My dad has apologized, thats about all he can do. If its a nightmare in the house then by all means get out. Im just thinking about keeping the kids healthy you know ? Thats where my heart is but it may not be realistic. Tough road no matter what foopy honey.

[LilacDragon]

Hmm.

My first marriage was awful but it was far from "hell". My ex-husband was there physically but is an emotional wasteland. It was my job to cook and clean and perform sex acts on demand and his job to be as self serving as humanly possible. It was not uncommon for him to invite his girlfriend over for dinner (until I found out she WAS his girlfriend, that is.) I was miserable. And I didn't want my daughters to grow up thinking that life should be like that.

I met my current husband 6 months after my divorce. We waited 10 years to get married. (He needed to grow up a bit first.) While we do not have the perfect relationship I think that it is a much healthier relationship and one that my daughters can and have learned from.

Yes, we fight. No, we do not fight behind closed doors. When the fight is over, we make up. There is no violence other then raised voices. My children understand that people can love each other very much and still fight.

As for not removing the children from a nightmare relationship because they will have to make new friends and go to a new school - sorry - I disagree. Life happens. Sometimes, for reasons beyond our control, things happen that take us away from our comfort zone. By learning that one can make new friends and fit in at a new school, they are more prepared for those things that happen later in life.

But then, I don't keep many secrets from my children. Before my DH left for Iraq, we sat down with my young son (he was 7 when Dad left) and explained to him where dad was going and what could happen. My son watches the news with me and I answer his questions about world events as honestly as possible.

[Defiance]

Hi All

Interesting thread...

My folks divorced when I was 11 and at the time my world turned upside down.

However, hindsight has shown that the situation my parents were in i.e a rapidly disintegrating marriage was doing myself and brothers no good whatsoever.

Still don't know exactly what went on but I do know that when it ended, the shouting and screaming stopped and we no longer lay in bed at night waiting for the raised voices and slamming doors. Kids are not stupid - even my brother, who was 5 at the time, knew that things were not right and became much more settled once seperation had occurred.

The following couple of years were not easy for anybody but my parents made sure that we suffered as little as possible. We spent alot of quality time with both parents and now have excellent relationships with them both.

By no means am I saying that a split should occur here as I agree that if things can be resolved then all effort should be made to do so. However, if things start getting nasty in any way then that is the time to seriously think about a change in circumstance. Whatever happens, be honest with the kids and give as much stability to them as possible. Kids are resiliant little buggers and can deal with more than some adults give them credit for.

[DesignerGal]

IMa child of divorce and I thank God everyday my parents split. Since they split they both have happier lives and in return can give me the love and nurturing I needed because they were happy themselves and in loving relationships that were healthy.

Staying together in a loveless marriage doesnt help. THe friction and tension no matter how subtle is always picked up by the kids. Trust me.

[Nomad]

My experiences were my experiences foop. Its what I learned because its what I saw. Each situation deserves to be considered as unique and original. I havent walked in your shoes honey. You follow your gut. You know whats right.

And if you fall Ill be the first one to help you up. At least Ill be in line with all the others that love you.

[weeder]

My former husband was a monster. (Divorced him 15 years ago) He was destroying the 3 of us. It was emmotional abuse. He was a drunk,gambler, cheater and liar. Still, it was incredibly difficult to make the decision to put him out. Difficult because I had to make a decision that affected 3 not just me. I will never forget discovering ( when he was gone) that the boys loved him very much despite everything he was. I thought they would be relieved, because the silent tension in our home was so so awful. I wonder to this day if I made the right choice. The obvious facts say I did. But the damage done to two small boys is what makes me look back and think" Should I have bitten the bullet? Those "boys" are 21 and 25 now, Each of them have issues because of growing up without a male role model. One has issues with intimacy, He often shows a lack of empathy for others. The other began medicating himself with drugs because of emmotional pain. I didnt divorce their dad in order to find someone else. Actually its surprising to me that here 15 years later... there isnt anyone else. I was so wrapped up having to be Mom, Dad, and head of household$$ that that wouldnt have even been a possibility. You change so much having to live the life of a single mom that often you arent a candidate anymore for a typical man woman relationship.

On the other hand... I know there are many horrible scenarios that could have unfolded, had I stayed with him. And so I continue to this day, assuring my sons that I love them... trying to help them with the demons I described that they both battle. I certainly didnt plan on having a broken home when I brought my children into the world. It was devastating for me also to have to flush the concept of my little family down the drain. If you are an intelligent emmotionally functioning human the action shakes you to your very soul. We can only weigh the pros and cons of making any decision. Certainly this decision is one of the toughest to make. Then, we deal with the consequences ( whatever they are) But it is important to realize that there are consequences. It is never just happily ever after when we move on. The actions we take are always the beginnings of packing that baggage that we drag with us our whole lives. Responsibility for others is the largest of those bags. To me.... anyone who is missing that largest bag isnt playing with a full deck. Despite the fact that my life has been very hard.. I would never want to be someone whose role in life was of someone who only thought of myself. In having observed people who live that way, I see that they are very shallow people. I guess Im just trying to give you a glimpse into the life of someone who decided to move on. All circumstances are different. There will always be a different outcome. There are 99 billion combinations possible whenever action is taken in one direction or another.

[buttercup]

flopstock wrote: Which is better for a childs happiness...



Staying together in a loveless relationship where you get along reasonably well, or separating in order that you both have a chance to find someone to be fulfilled with?



What are the 'positives' of your position, not the negatives of the other choice?


i said early in the thread i would ask my daughters (20 & 17) about this

response - kids at school made the occasional hurtful comment but other than that they knew they were loved by both parents, had a happy childhood & much as they would have liked mum & dad to stay together all they really wanted was for us to be happy, they dont believe any harm came to them mentally because of our separation

my own opinion - life is so short floppy, everyone deserves to find happiness, if you & dad stay on friendly terms & dont miscall each other in front of the children a split can work out, thinking of you - hugs

[Misha]

flopstock wrote: Which is better for a childs happiness...



Staying together in a loveless relationship where you get along reasonably well, or separating in order that you both have a chance to find someone to be fulfilled with?



What are the 'positives' of your position, not the negatives of the other choice?


I keep reading about,"oh you must think about the children"

Puh-leez, give them more credit. They are very adaptable, especially if they are in their teens. Bring them up with truth and reality instead of living a lie and the TV family syndrome or they will repeat what they learned from your loveless relationship and could suffer through

a similar fate. Show them that you love them and that it is not their doing and to make choices that follows their conscience and not breed another generation of martyrdom. They have many opportunities to make their own mistakes and learn from them. One day they will be gone and make a life of their own.

You will end up older,loveless and bitter, regretting that you missed out on a chance to find a loving relationship. A unhappy parent makes unhappy children.

[Misha]

BabyRider wrote: Sorry Nomad, but I gotta go with Flops on this one. Of course the children always come first, but in some instances, that means having the happiest parents they can have. If that means separated parents, as opposed to the child knowing his/her parents aren't truly in love and are just "getting by", that can be more damaging than anything. It can also make a child feel guilty. You'd be surprised what kids sense, Nomad. They are so much more observant and aware than adults give them credit for.

If you're not happy with your partner, you cannot be the best parent you can be.


Phew! I see that you are on a similar wave length.

As a man, I know that I will be attacked for sounding insensitive but I consider myself to be much more sensitive then some of the hard nosed criticisms I have seen on these forums that guise themselves as advice. And they are supposed to be the gentler sex.

[Misha]

Nomad wrote: Im sorry but you suck it up until the child has been raised to the very best of both the parents abilities.

Thats my gut telling me the child comes 1st.


No, it's not a gut. It's social conditioning.

How can you say it is best for the children if you are living a lie and thus lying

to them. Think about it.

[Misha]

Nomad wrote: My experiences were my experiences foop. Its what I learned because its what I saw. Each situation deserves to be considered as unique and original. I havent walked in your shoes honey. You follow your gut. You know whats right.

And if you fall Ill be the first one to help you up. At least Ill be in line with all the others that love you.


I don't wish to be nasty but that is arrogant and condescending.

My apologies.

[AussiePam]

My gut reaction is that I would still do my best to put my kids' wellbeing first. And this idea, for me, accommodates the fact that there are indeed situations where kids are better off if the parents do split. It very much depends on what's going on in each individual case. And I would never presume to judge someone else's choices.

[cherandbuster]

Floppy, please tell me to mind my own business if that's appropriate here.

Did you start this thread as a general discussion or does it hit close to home?

[Sheryl]

Yikes this question hits close to home for me. I went through a major bump in my marriage, I had every right to kick Dave out and go solo with raising my kids. i didn't though because I was scared of being a single parent. I was raised by one and hated my childhood. I didn't want to put my children through what I grew up with. So I chose to stay and put myself through emotional hell until I had the strength to forgive and go on. It's now been close to 3 years since the bump, things are better and I'm happy with my choice.

[cherandbuster]

Sheryl, thanks for being so honest with us.

I'm glad you've reached a better place & are content with your decision:)