This weekend I learned that our two close friends are getting divorced. They have a young son.
For me, divorce is like a kind of death. It's the ending of two lives together, a relationship that has perhaps been long dead, now formalized. My reaction was to hold my wife tightly that night.
I feel for the boy. I remember talking to his parents recently about his future education. They're considering putting him in the French School. Perhaps in later years he would go to France for a broader eduction. I remember thinking the usual snide thoughts about the real kind of education he would receive in France. It's an expensive proposition. Perhaps a simple, solid marriage between his two parents and public school would be far more valuable than a child of divorce learning French at an expensive school somewhere. Perhaps.
But dad wants to be free -- to travel, to be unshackled and to untie the weights he feels bind him to the ground. They consider their differences irreconcilable. I hope this is for the best -- it might be if the alternative is a miserable marriage on daily display to their son. As it stands, they lead secret, separate lives around the boy.
Looking at my parent's era, marriage seemed like it was a more stable, enduring union. There was less divorce then. Marriage was ordained by God more than man in those days. But I also know a lot of people from that older generation through my friends. The marriages are largely intact, but I've detected no shortage of angst among many of them, now that they are elderly. I can see the bitterness in some of these people's eyes. Perhaps they are wondering what lives they might have had if they'd been with someone else. More of these older people maintained their vows, but in so doing they may not have been true to themselves. It's hard to say.
Among my 40ish year old friends, my wife and I have felt isolated. There are very few marriages among our friends and peers that we feel we can look up to. She and I are very happy with our daughter. We love our family life, and each other without condition. But that seems rare among our midlife friends. We feel like a little island amongst all this marital disquietude. Is this unique to my generation?
The grass is always greener somewhere else. Whether married or not, I think it's in our nature to imagine the other lives we might've had. But the grass we stand on, here and now, is what matters. Regret is inescapable sometimes, as much as we might dislike that word. These people are my friends. I love them. What a cold day this is.
Divorce is a kind of death, Cicero. It's the death of the dreams that were formed when the marriage was young. Dreams like those have as keen a reality as the kind of reality you can touch or see.
One of the differences between today and years ago is that so many people go into marriage with one foot out the door. People don't see it this way but that's the way it is.
And, of course, a sad thing for you in the breakup is that couples date other couples and befriend other couples. You'll lose at least one friend out of the divorce, probably two.
I always hate it when anyone breaks up. It always seems like hope, and/or the very little bit of persistence or permanence there is in human life anyway, is being killed. Wrote about it a while ago. Not that people should be forced to suffer in a bad situation. But are they leaving in pursuit of a chimera that they will only seem to find over and over, just to watch it elude them again? Sometimes it seems like something larger, that involves many people, is being sacrificed to the insatiable stone god of the self.
Hmm. I'm gonna be a little hard here.
Tell the Dad he is short term selfish and long term foolish. Switch it around and it's still likely true.
His job in the marriage is to accommodate himself to the other two family members and to participate in family building.
It's not 'all about him'.
Tough , if he isn't 'happy'.
And it is not about 'happiness' or fulfillment.
Yep, the grass is colder on the other side of the divorce fence, and whatever he can't make work now will surely dog him. Odds are he'll have these same shortcommings in his next relationship(s).
If he insists on divorce I certainly hope he has made arrangements to have his son living with him 50% of the time.
Our parents were less apt to worry that they weren't 'fulfilled'. Perhaps the best of them cherished their own spouses as being their best friends.
Hey Cicero, EVERYONE looks up to you and your wife !!! Congratulations !!!
Take yourselves off for a weekend and really hold her tight.
Best regards,
TV
This is the hangover from the Sixties. Feminists from Kate Millet, Germaine Greer, Andrea Dworkin, Catherine McKinnon, and Barbara Ehrenreich have consistently viewed that Marriage and the traditional family are the enemies of mankind and human potential, "make women and children sick," and should be replaced by "amorphous structures that raise children in a free-flowing communal nature" according to Ehrenreich.
Basically, more Marxist claptrap of a "new Man" etc.
Lest anyone think I'm exaggerating, check out Ehrenreich's 2001 Time Article. Marriage and Family have been viewed as a prison by Feminists since the mid-sixties. Ehrenreich in particular has called for "more good divorces" and fewer marriages, saying that "a village" is better at raising children than "two frail reeds."
More broadly, you can't "fulfil yourself" and do your own thing while being a responsible parent. You have to choose and the Boomer Way is to pretend you are 22 forever. It's sad and pathetic really.
The death of a marriage is reenacted by the children over their lives, in their death of trust, their fear of intimacy, and in many other ways, mostly subconscious. The parents' wedding vows should include their mutual obligation to their children. Marriage is about the children, not the parents. In fact, marriage implies the death of the freedom of the single life. Parents who would regret its loss and would seek to regain it should never marry. People who want "it all" usually get nothing.
#1 Dave Schuler
You'll lose at least one friend out of the divorce, probably two.
I hope not. They do appear to be amicable so far. But you're right -- it's a strain in unexpected ways.
#2 amba
Sometimes it seems like something larger, that involves many people, is being sacrificed to the insatiable stone god of the self.
Thanks for this. I wrote about regret. It could be that years from now they'll look back at this time as when they had everything and didn't know it. That's the part that makes me very angry. They have so much, and they want so much more.
#3 tom vikander
Tell the Dad he is short term selfish and long term foolish. Switch it around and it's still likely true. His job in the marriage is to accommodate himself to the other two family members and to participate in family building. It's not 'all about him'.
I would agree. You would have to know him though. His life is something of a miracle -- his being here is due to total impulsiveness under circumstances that were extremeley constricting.
Still, I think you enter marriage and certainly fatherhood with an acceptance that what life gives you from that point is not the same as before. I don't think he realizes this, or has the capacity to.
Hey Cicero, EVERYONE looks up to you and your wife!
It is a strange position to be in. We have a very simple life together, in a way. We love simple pleasures, and humor. And each other. We were lucky to have found each other.
#4 Jim Rockford
Barbara Ehrenreich
Yes, I know about Ehrenreich. She scares me. But honestly, I don't think that is the whole story here. The last 40 years has been about more and more choice. On a basic level, no one argues with having more choices. And it also means a mentality develops where everthing is disposable on some level, since we can always choose something else.
More broadly, you can't "fulfil yourself" and do your own thing while being a responsible parent. You have to choose and the Boomer Way is to pretend you are 22 forever. It's sad and pathetic really.
I would disagree. You don't know me, but I certainly haven't stopped living and doing what I do, using my talents, while being a parent. For starters, if your statement were true, I should stop blogging, immediately. And sometimes I consider that, given the stress of fathering. I know that would be foolhardy. My daughter's happiness is not contingent on the lack of my own.
#5 PacRim Jim
The parents' wedding vows should include their mutual obligation to their children. Marriage is about the children, not the parents.
Perhaps, but a commitment to children is implicit in the vow -- or at least it used to be. If a vow to a spouse can be broken, then so too a vow to children. It's just another vow, after all.
Frankly, in this era, and especially where I live, marriage isn't a vow anymore; it's a sentiment. And it isn't about children. At best, it's about love, and a commitment to love. If love diminishes or is lost, then the marriage is considered dead. On some level, I can't entirely disagree with this concept since I don't believe living out a life sentence in a loveless marriage is necessarily healthier for either parents or children.
On another level I recognize that when marriage became about love and not children, an essential, ancient social writ was cast aside. And eventually, Ehrenreichian (see #4) anti-family theories became possible.
Love isn't a feeling, it's a verb.
People who don't understand that end up repeatedly frustrated and cause an amazing amount of emotional damage as they blunder through life.
There are two kinds of marriages: hard marriages and bad marriages.
The challenges are part of the reward.
People who bail, except in the case of one of the four 'A's -- adultery, abuse, addiction, or abandonment are lazy, self-centered losers.
Just remember that it is November. Not always a warm and happy month. Your mood will turn around. This calls for balance, a sense of time and your place in it.
"The marriages are largely intact, but I've detected no shortage of angst among many of them, now that they are elderly. I can see the bitterness in some of these people's eyes. Perhaps they are wondering what lives they might have had if they'd been with someone else."
I like to use my parents' marriage as a counter-example to the demonization of divorce. They were married for over 40 years till my mother's death. My father had affairs, was a bully in his family in constantly erupting in anger. (He was also a loving generous man, today he would be diagnosed as ADD or rapid cycling bi-polar and given medication.)
Our mother put up with all this and didn't want to leave him because she was insecure about being a divorced woman; often one of the divorced couple loses all the friends and social network, so that's a realistic concern. She would have gotten a good financial settlement, but didn't want to take the chance.
I often wonder if we would have been better off growing up without him in the house.
Vikander and Hall are right. To abandon your marriage and especially your children is reprehensable and unconscionable. Cicero, your friend is a selfish lout. True, I don't know him, but I know what kind of people act the way he has.
Bart's bit about love being a verb is the most spot-on thing on this whole page, which is saying something. And I totally buy the belief that this is a tragedy at least and very possibly a big mistake. A cold day, indeed.
Having said that, I don't know what the real deal is in that relationship.
I am strongly about saying "love matters, faithfulness and commitment are huge, families are about something much bigger than personal gratification - especially when kids are involved..."
But the same affinity with the conservative project that pulls me toward these beliefs also makes me hesitant to prescribe for others whose circumstances I do not truly know. After all, isn't that the eternal and inevitable fiasco that I see liberal statism pulling all the time?
Don't get me wrong, it's important to put all of these messages about love, family, and commitment out there. Strongly, and often. Even in ways that may seem hokey, vid. "Promise Keepers" etc. It's incredibly important, actually, because it sets the baseline for what "personal responsibility" and like terms really mean, and causes more people to buy into them. Which is good for us all.
Once we've done that, the temptation is to step forward and apply it to each individual case. To which I reply, that's a bad instinct - step back instead. We need to be more than a bit humble before our lack of knowledge of the specific circumstances of any given case, and recall that personal responsibility means that people will exercise theirs by their own lights. I have seen divorces that I'd call a good thing for reasons that may not have been clear to the outside world.
To me, the best approach is to judge confidently on a macro societal level, but rarely and with great caution on an individual level.
The reverse approach currently in vogue, of tabloidized personal judgment and societal "what, me worry?", hasn't served us very well.
I can't say anything about the particular relationship. I don't know anything about it. Odds are that its been pretty sick for a long time now. Odds are that both parties are responcible to some extent, though typically one party bears more responcibilty than the other. Odds are that neither party is willing or able to make the changes that would resusitate the relationship. If both parties were that responcible, we wouldn't be having this discussion. The leading cause if divorse in my experience us childish irresponcibility.
Make no mistake though. Divorse is death. It's the death of a family. The only real question is whether or not the family is already dead, and the divorse is merely a certification of that (and an oppurtunity to bury the body),
Bart, Jim, Fred, how judgemental you are towards someone you haven't met. And whose shoes you have not walked in. The farther you are from Cicero's friend, the less you have to say about him. The closer you are to him, the sadder and more compasionate you are towards him. There's no room to sling stones.
I honestly think that it's unhealthy to be thinking of your life's "what ifs" instead of dealing with your life at the present. I know we can't help but be tempted by this kind of thoughts, but we have to remember that we chose the current lives we lead because it was our decision to. It would do us no good to just think about these what ifs in our lives.
Ultra,
I couldn't disagree more. Is it really your position that society should not take a position in favor of maintaining marriage and family committments, and against divorce "simply because I feel constrained"? If not, pray tell how we are supposed to communicate this, then?
Kirk,
Just throwing in my $.02 worth; in response to your question about how to communicate pro-family and pro-committment positions to society. In my opinion the only way to communicate with society on that level is by personal action.
To paraphrase the popular bumper sticker; "Against divorce? Don't have one."
It sounds to me as though Cicero's friends are beyond the influence of blog posters to stop them. It sounds like they're way beyond Cicero's ability to sway. When a marriage is that far gone only the 2 adults involved, acting together, can decide where it goes next.
My wife and I have been married for 8 years, and before that lived together for another 7 years. We've grown (aged?) together and apart during that time, and the next year will be a pivotal one for us. Neither one of us is sure if we love the other anymore. Or at least if we love each other enough to be together. We have a 4 year old daughter, who weighs heavily on my mind when I think of what I am to do. Of course I want her to have a family, and of course I want to be part of it 24/7/365. But I also feel that if my wife and I are not happy together we're teaching her how to suffer by our example. It's not an easy decision to make.
Of course I want to lead the sort of life that
I feel benefits society as a whole. More importantly than that I want to live my life surrounded by as much peace and love as I can manage to create. I want my daughter to be happy. I've come to the realization after talking to friends and family that only my wife and I can make an informed decision about what is right. No other man has any answers to give me. I wish it was as simple as just deciding that we'll just tough it out for the good of society, but when it's your life on the line you have to think of yourself. In my humble opinion.
Kirk:
- "Is it really your position that society should not take a position in favor of maintaining marriage and family committments, and against divorce "simply because I feel constrained"? "
(mystified) No. The trio made very judgemental, even rude comments about someone they didn't know. I replied to this.
My post made no comment about the role of society in supporting stable relationships.
But here is just such a comment. Legalize marriage for gay people. They are equal to non gay people, and it is in our interest to encourage stable mature relationships in both gay and straight folk.
made very judgemental, even rude comments about someone they didn't know.
I made "judgemental" statements about a group of people and established clear, rational criteria to define membership in that group. I made no comment about whether the individual in question does or does not meet those criteria.
Please name one situation not fitting into the four categories -- adultery, abuse, addiction, or abandonment -- in which you think divorce is appropriate.
People who won't do the hard work of building a good marriage are lazy. They are self-centered. And they do lose out on many of life's greatest things, many (most?)of which require hard work and are focused not on self, but on others.
I think the time has come to put a rapid and firm end to 'no-fault' divorce, which has been the clarion call of the most self-centered and narcissistic generation in American history.
You might even say that for at least thirty years we have collectively exercised phenomenally poor judgement in the name of 'self-fulfilment.'
it sure sounds passive--to this reader at least; your current situation is something that happened to you, not something that the two of you created by your decisions and actions. I have no idea if that's what you intended to communicate, of course...
Jack: Please explain something to me. You say you've lived with someone for more than 15 years.
How can you not get along? If you can live with someone for 15 years, what's changed to make you think you can't live with someone for 15 more? I really honestly don't understand any of this. I mean, surely you should have known that you couldn't live with this person after 6 months or something? And after 6 years living with a person, how could you not know everything there is to know about a person? If you are unhappy, why in the heck would you think that the problem is your marriage? Do you honestly think that after 15 years that if this relationship fails, that you could ever find another relationship that would make you happy? I'm not trying to dis you or judge you, I just don't FREAKING understand it. Divorse as a concept absolutely baffles me, especially when a) the marriage wasn't entered into a lark and b) its already lasted for some length of time.
It isn't logical! And if you aren't being motivated by logic, what really is your motivation? Please, explain this to me.
If you've changed, or she's changed, what do you mean by that? If one or both of you have changed, clearly its not been a change for the better, so maybe you ought to consider changing again or even changing back? What do you want that you aren't getting, and what makes you think that you could get it elsewhere?
I've been married to my wife for 10 years, and I dated her for 6 years before that. I literally can't imagine ever calling it quits on her no matter what happens.
I'm a borderline Asperger's case. Just nerdy enough that I can relate to a true Asperger, but just normal enough that I can relate to someone who isn't. Alot of human behavior doesn't come instinctually to me - in fact almost none of it did. I had to read books on body language and so forth in order to understand why my attempts at communicating with humans were failing (people like smiles and eye contact, who knew?). But of all the things that humans do, none is more baffling to me than divorse. Really, what gives?
I'm just going to vent here so please forgive me if any of this has been said.
I'm 23. I won't claim to have in-depth knowledge of a life-long commitment. But as young as I am I'm smart enough to have a horrible respect for marriage and what it entails. A family. Forever. Grandkids. While I can't tell you the costs of being the man of a family, I am scared to all hell of the responsibilities.
What I can tell you is what divorce does to people. As with many in my generation, I grew up with quite a lot of people, my peers, who had broken homes. The comparison between those with broken homes, especially those with no father, and those who lived with stable parents, largely, is noticable. Confusion, lack of direction, lack of common sense and morals, lack of purpose and discipline. This is my personal experience -- with close friends of mine -- and what is reflected in "study" after "study" on the matter. Kids need fathers. Kids need whole homes.
Fathers give the straight and narrow. They're role models for discipline and ethics. Generally speaking, in good natured, stable families mothers teach values, ideals, morals, fathers teach reality and ethics. My opinion here has changed over the years, especially since I started interacting with people who run their families in this "traditional" fashion and who make it work. The difference between "traditional" and "new age" families is quite often night and day.
The catalyst here is seeing these families work and work well. Among the parents I interact with at work and through friends, the consistent winners are those with traditional values -- that means a father playing his part. Not every case will be the same on either side, I'm well aware -- but this has been my overwhelming personal experience. Have you met the right people in your life? If nothing else, some people get this experience through church (a good one); that may be a place you can start. And for the reference, I'm not a church-goer.
I'll get to the point of my rant. If the father here is leaving even in part because he wants to travel, then I would be more than willing to call him a coward and an immature boy to his face. You don't go about the business of bringing life into this world without a life-long commitment to rear them properly. Period. It's "men" like this that ruin the name for the rest of us and who, I personally believe, have a large responsibility for where our society as a whole is going.
I blame dumb women for having kids with men like these. I blame society for making this any form of acceptable behavior. But I blame the men for shirking their responsibilities to their families and their children. This is just unacceptable and I think will be an important catalyst in any long-term degradation of our society.
End rant. :)
Cheers,
Duckman
Im from the same generation and I agree with everything Duckman just said. Your decision making about your lifestyle ends the moment you conceive a child, or at least the number one and only priority must be what is best for the kid. There is a very perverse rationalization in our society that you cant make others happy if you arent happy, and hence whatever you do to make yourself happy ultimately is for the good of your kids. Thats crap, first it feeds into our obsession with happiness which is transient and fleeting at best. Wholesomeness and stability should trump happiness. Secondly its far too easy to use that rationalization any time when even a cursory examination of data shows that short of abuse a whole family unit is better for the kids than a split, albiet 'happier' set of parents.
To Jack --
Please understand my above post was a rant. I want to say something directly to you as a person, something I thought while reading your post:
The things you can give your daughter, the things you can show her as a father, the richness you can give her for her entire life, the things only YOU can give her -- all of these things far outweigh you being a grumpy dad.
Think of the pain a divorce will cause for the family. Your daughter, split between worlds, shuffled around, unsure of what her fault or role in her family is. As you two grow apart and lead different lives and have different rules and etc. -- when the family breaks up and no longer functions as a unit -- your daughter will lose some sense of her place in the world. This is the confusion I was getting at earlier. It seeps into very, VERY deep cracks in life that aren't obvious.
You are there to provide a flag to follow. Your family is a unit and works with purpose and direction. When you lose that coheasion, bonds are irrevocably broken and the pain will run deep.
These are the costs of divorce as I've seen them. And on the other hand, the benefits of a good father, as I've seen them, are beyond words. I mean that with all of my soul. The joy and good that you can impart upon your daughter cannot be underestimated. You are her hero, now and always. That's your job. When she grows up, you want her to stand there and wonder how you do it, how you made it through life, how you keep going and do so well.
I'm only 23 -- I know very little of being a father. But that is what my father is to me.
To give you background, my dad works offshore so he is home two weeks, gone two weeks. I've seen him half of my life. As you can imagine, I have a somewhat unique perspective on the differences between a home with a father and without.
I grew up fearing my dad. Even until I was 15, when he walked behind the couch I was sitting on I'd slightly flinch. He had a temper and though he never hit me, he could get quite angry every once in a good while. It's been one of the bigger negative influences on my life.
But as a role model, he has been amazing. He's in his 50s, has worked two jobs for just at 15 years each, and has always provided for our family. He has the amazing patience to raise someone like myself. He has a work-ethic that I only dream of.
My dad has a long list of faults. He's not a "caring" husband, openly anyway. He's a pretty rough guy at times, or at least has been. We didn't always get along. But now that I'm entering my adult years, every day I find him more my hero. As I experience the trials of life, I'm seriously amazed that he was able to get where he is. He's lightyears ahead of me in a fight I'm unsure how to win. My dad is my hero. Imperfect and negative as he has been on my life, he is my hero. The joys and good he has given me can't be put into words.
Without him, I would be in a much worse place. To this day, he is still my guide.
I could write another post as long about the things my mother has given me, but that's beyond the scope here.
I don't know you nor will I pretend to. It's quite arrogant of me to even suggest that you could learn something from someone my age. But at the risk of looking like an ass, I'll just say this: I am fairly certain from what you've said that you aren't aware of just what good you can give your daughter, through all of the negatives. THAT, the benefit of a father, is something society forgot before I was born.
Life is not perfect and you and your wife won't be. The negative aspects of most relationships don't hold a candle to the raw power two parents can bring to a child's life. The good has to be taken with the bad. We're all human beings.
Please forgive me if I've overstepped the line anywhere here. Consider this part of my way of expressing something that I don't know can ever be adequately expressed: the respect I have for my hero.
Sounds cheesy to say something like that at 23? Maybe. But I mean it.
The sadness is for the child or children of divorce.
May parents argued a lot, and that was very painful to me. I can't imagine how it would have been had there been a nasty divorce.
I am married to a woman who is a wonderful step-mon to my kids, but hard as hell to get along with for me. I can't bring myself to deny my kids a mom, having lost thier first one to mental illness.
I'd say, love your kids first. Love yourself second.
Vern
Jack, I'm with Vern. That little one needs both of you, every day.
There was a lovely little family living next door to us, they had a boy and a girl. The walls are so thin that I lay awake every night when their first born caught the Whooping Cough (boil kettles of water in the sick-room till the condensation is running down the walls). Our driveway isn't so wide that I could drive out without moving the little girls tricycle (pink) out of the way.
Couple of months ago, She announced that she just didn't want to be married to Him anymore. This news devastated the bairns, her husband, both sets of Grandparents, all of their friends, their local Congregation, and the entire neighbourhood.
Well done, thou vain and faithless harlot.
Also I shall never forget a Quantas flight from Heathrow to Sydney. A seven year old boy next to me, and on the other side, his Dad. Custodial parent and child domiciled in New York. They were flying to New Zealand so the little lad could spend some time with his Mother.
That's great, isn't it? Right next to the most important bloke in his life, but half a planet away from the distaff party.
And his only respite from the torment of a 36 hour flight, was the chance to stretch his legs over the ample lap of an obliging and sympathetic old English biddy.
After which he screamed at me and called me a "rotten bugger". (I made the fatal mistake of laughing, you aren't supposed to laugh when they say bugger.)
Well, you see I disembarked at Syd. He had another 4 hours airborne to look forward to. You can probably understand why he was so bloody annoyed.
To give a little different view, my parents were divorced when I was 10(ish). My only memory of them being together is arguing all the time. They had been together rougly 15 years, but they just did not see eye to eye on how to live their lives together, and realized that the instability in their marriage made them unable to be good parents.
So they were smart: they went to a marriage counselor, and when that didn't work they went to a single lawyer, together, and asked him how they could evenly split their belongings as peacefully as possible, and create an environment where my brother and myself were free of divorce turmoil.
My Dad got the house, and paid my mom for half of it's worth. Meanwhile, my brother and I split time evenly between households. My parents lived within a mile of each other, so that we could freely visit the other parent at any time (and usually did, via bike). They went to great length to work together and raise us even though they no longer held a marriage vow. While this setup was not 'ideal', I was raised well, and my father and step-father (mom's husband) even walked down the aisle together at my own wedding.
I don't pretend that this is the normal outcome of divorce, or that this hasn't deeply affected my own view of marriage. I was just recently maried (2 months ago) and I deeply love and cherish my wife, and hope that we never part ways. On the other hand, if it came to the point where it became impossible to sanely live together anymore (I'm talking like after serious, serious counseling) I would consider a divorce. This has made her a little quesy, and I have to admit the complications in my own life have made me spend alot of time soul-searching on the 'marriage' issue.
I read an intereasting article the other day in 'salon', about how marriage has never really existed the way we think of it. Go back 200 years, and marriage was rarely state-certified, because it was expensive. usually families just had a big celebration, but there was no documentation to back it up. If new couples moved to small town (especially w/children) it was just assumed that the couple was married, often incorrectly.
Although divorce was rare (especially since men had control over the issue) often times 'splits' occured where one member of the couple simply left to a different state, often referring to themselves as 'widowed'. Since marriage licenses were run in individual states, few people would actually know the truth.
In fact, Andrew Jackson (president #7) was married illegally to an already married woman. After her marriage faltered, she left to another state and fell in love with Andrew Jackson. Hearing rumors that her husband was working on the divorce papers, they want to another state and got married (illegally). Even though it was brought up as a character issue at the election, he won anyway.
Again, this brings to a rut. I want people to try and work though the problems in their marriages, but at the same time I don't want people who get divorced to be demonized. There are ways to raise children that aren't ideal, but still work. At the same time, divorce is bad, and should not be 'argued for'. So maybe marriage should be 'harder to earn', and there should be less married couples? I don't know, it's complicated.
On cicero's couple: I competely disagree with the 'wanting to not be tied down by family' complaint, that's what you say BEFORE you get married, BEFORE you have children. Now you have responsibilities. Tough. He could still eplore the world and stay married if he really wanted: work something out where he vacations on his own a week or two a year (or every other year) if what's needed is a temporary break.
From the wife's perspective, does she even want to bother with this guy anymore? I would see that as insulting. I know lots of married couples who have survived devastating work situations (think about the armed services) this complaint says he just doesn't want the responsibility. I would probably get a divorce just to get the sleazebag out of my life.
on Jack's problem: You're right, you're the only ones who can make the right decision. Don't let the people on a pollitical blog tell you the answer. I hope you try everything you can possibly do to save the marriage, and then make the best of the situation if it ultimately fails.
"I would probably get a divorce just to get the sleazebag out of my life."
I guess that's the attitude I have a problem with. In general, I don't think "I" is a good word to use when talking about divorce. Relationships are about you. Marriage is about children.
You can have a relationship with a soulmate without marriage. Marriage is a pledge to never leave that person. With a soulmate, that should be a given. Marriage goes further -- it says even when things get rough, when everything falls apart, we don't. Relationships don't need that. Families do.
Relationships don't need regardless-of-what-comes-we-stick-together bonding. But your children ask that promise. That's my definition of marriage. Not many share it, it seems.
It's dishonest to ignore the good parents who raise kids in a broken family, but it's dishonest to pretend that these same good parents aren't capable of putting their problems aside for their children or not having them in the first place. It's a pretty simple thing to ask, though very difficult.
And that's why I'm scared of marriage.
I place high importance on a structured family unit giving their kids the right environment to grow -- like a petri dish, if you'll pardon the expression. The people I grew up with who lived in "traditional" families done right are the most caring, responsible, level-headed people I know and frankly are the most fun to be around. And it's responsible, wholesome, fulfilling fun, not the thin crap most of my peers (including my best friend) get into during their prime. I put a high importance on a family being together.
I imagine you have to see it to understand it, either in your own family or in that of someone you're close to.
I just get the feeling that there are a lot of questions and viewpoints not being seriously looked at in a society where casual sex is expected and marriage is no longer a "for the rest of my life" bond but a pledge to remain together until we figure it's too hard.
Sorry if I stepped on anyone's toes, I know this is a sensitive subject. Please don't think I'm trivializing the challenges of relationships: I'm doing the opposite.
"The death of a marriage is reenacted by the children over their lives, in their death of trust, their fear of intimacy, and in many other ways, mostly subconscious."
Well, I have all that, and my parents stayed married, and it was the first marriage for both of them.
Wow. My mini-rant generated a bit of feedback ... !
Thanks to all of you who've responded. The path I take through life isn't going to hinge on anyone's blog post, but it helpful to have the feedback.
@ Kirk; There's nothing passive about it. We've definitely created everything we have to deal with. I'm just leaving out the laundry list of our woes and issues. This doesn't really seem like the forum for a complete airing of them.
@ celebrim; A lot can change in 15 years. I have spent the last 5 years battling depression. In the last year I've made a lot of progress. My wife has a great deal of hostility and anger regarding my depression, and I'm not sure she can ever forgive me. Both of us can clearly see how much better off our family would be if I had been healthy during that time. She doesn't seem to be able to let go of it. Every word she says to me now is filled with loathing. We're trying counceling. Imagine what it's like to live with someone who no longer loves you, and every word they speak to you is filled with rage. It's difficult to look at the prospect of decades of it to come. Can we change? I hope so. I just don't know.
Would I ever find another relationship that does fulfill me? I have no idea. It's not really the point for me. Maybe I wouldn't. It's not as though I want to go look for a new partner. I'm just not sure I can continue with the partner I have.
My daughter is the most important person in my life. I cannot bear the thought that we are teaching her that this is how a relationship is to be lived. My wife has said some of the ugliest things imaginable to me in the presence of our daughter. I am an adult, and I can take it. What wounds me about it is the thought that my daughter will learn to live in that way; to think that to speak to a family member with such hatred is acceptable. There are no easy answers anywhere for me about this.
@ Yehudit; If I understand you correctly about your parents, this is exactly the situation
I fear the most.
Duckman: let me clarify, i had originally wrote more but I try to cut my comments shorter when they start getting long.
This guy has said he doesn't want 'to be tied down'. I may be incorrect, but this is what I hear:
I feel like he's basically saying he doesn't want to be part of a family. It sounds like he's saying the responsibility is too much. It would appear to me as though he wants no part (or a greatly reduced part) of his son's life.
That is jerkish. If the father is not there, the son will spend his whole life trying to understand why his father was not available to him. It will damage his ability to deal with relationships. Honestly, i almost wonder if it would be easier for the son to deal with a new male role-model than deal with someone who can't be 'tied down' by his own blood.
Of course, you can't just replace a father, but what good is a father who feels that he can't deal with the responsibility of raising a child? If I were the mom, I would bring in other male role models: Uncles, grandparents, good family friends, neighbors, big-brothers of america, etc. etc. etc. I think any of those willing to donate time, energy + COMMITMENT would be important and helpfull.
to Clarify: this is not a gender issue, I would feel the same way if the mom left the household.
Again, I'm just elaborating based on limited information, so I'm entirely willing to admit that I'm reading too much into this.
allchemist --
I agree. I think it's the father's responsibility to stick around and be a father. When the father absolutely can't or won't do that, alternatives should be considered -- I agree and I hope I haven't indicated to the contrary.
For divorce to occur with kids involved, someone is refusing to grow up. Often both parents seem to fit this description. The problem is when both parents blame this on each other or when both parents resign to "we can't grow up" thinking. Some people just can't grow up -- but it's sad how many can but won't. It's also sad when people pick children to raise a family with.
I grew up with people who had very nice, mature parents who were divorced. It just happened that when around each other, they turned into little children. Otherwise likeable, respectable people turn into temper-tantrum throwing four year olds.
When you have children, things are beyond "he said - she said" stage. "She started it!" doesn't make much sense to your children. They don't care -- they just want a mommy and daddy around when they wake up and when they come home.
In general, I'll just say that society has forgotten the benefits of Family and Fathers, even rocky ones, and society has forgotten the earned fear of breaking up families. Put this together with parent(s) who won't grow up, and divorce looks like an OK solution.
Sorry if I'm just dragging this out. I feel like there's a lot to be said that isn't being said today and it's somewhat therapeutic to put it down. :)
This thread is relatively old now; if anyone has any insight or experiences to give me, I would sincerely appreciate it. Flash me a note at hackerduck][gmail.com, substitute at for ][. Durn spam spiders.
Parents create the universe for their children. For better or for worse, what children learn from their family is what they believe the universe is like. Even when adulthood, maturity, and experience layer grown-up knowledge over those beliefs, they stay there underneath everything.
If the universe parents create is loving and stable, the children thrive. If there are strong, clear beliefs about right and wrong, the children believe in right and wrong, even if the details change over the years. If fathers and mothers are strong and fair, then children know how to become strong and fair when they grow up, even if they don't always do it.
If the universe the parents create is toxic, children grow up surrounded by poison. Many are damaged and twisted; some find ways to rise above it.
If the parents divorce, the universe breaks apart. There is no rock to hold onto in the midst of the storm. Parents stop being the foundation of reality. They are just sad people.
Is it worth breaking the universe apart to drain the toxin? Sometimes, perhaps. Often not.
Love and stability are what a good universe, a good family, provide for the children. But don't confuse love with liking and with happiness. It's closer to strength.
Good luck, Jack.