the case for not divorcing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My wife and I no longer love each other. We live together as roommates and that's it. The only reason I have not divorced her is because of our kid. But, once she is 12/13 I will file for divorce. For the time being we're fine being "mature" around the house so it's best for our kid's well being. But, I cannot wait for a couple years to pass.

Here’s the thing, you will end up in this exact situation with whomever is your next partner. If you want companionship and stability in your later years, family holidays with your child and possible grandchildren, etc. you should figure this out. I am not throwing stones, I am in the same situation and I am trying to reconnect with my DH, but I had a few long term relationships before getting married and I know that it’s not the person, it’s you (me). You and your DW need to lean into your marriage and do some hard work. Just like I need to do. Because if I leave my emotionally abandoned marriage, I will certainly fall madly in love again, but in 10 or 15 years I will be in the exact same position but this time with way less money, way less time with my kids, a weakened relationship with my kids, and I will have very deep regrets. Fix it, OP.

No here. In your case it's probably true that you are the problem. A few long-term relationships definitely points to that.

But it's not universally true that it will be the same in his next relationship.

If you want to remain married because you essentially know no one else will remotely tolerate your BS great do that but you don't get to condescendingly decide that for someone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My wife and I no longer love each other. We live together as roommates and that's it. The only reason I have not divorced her is because of our kid. But, once she is 12/13 I will file for divorce. For the time being we're fine being "mature" around the house so it's best for our kid's well being. But, I cannot wait for a couple years to pass.

That is the hardest age on a child, especially a girl, for parents to divorce. Why are you choosing that age?

Do you have data to support this claim? My parents divorced at this age and it was fine. Much better than if they stayed together until I was 16 or 18.

But you’re right, there is no benefit to the PP sticking around for a few more years. He’s probably just too cowardly to do it now.

[Anonymous]

Even if her parents remained married she might have to miss a playdate sometimes and yes even for a younger sibling

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What kids need to see is how their parents manage disagreements, fights and full blown crises. A good and lasting marriage is not devoid of those, but it’s one where those are resolved fully and respectfully. The kids don’t need to know the details of the issue but they will live through a cycle of calm-tension-calm and know that conflict is not the end of the world and can and should be overcome.

This board is the last place anyone should be getting relationship advice, so take everything with a big rock of salt.

Did you grow up like this?

Because I did and it was hell and likely contributed to my anxiety.

[Anonymous]

This reads to me like a case against choosing a partner who will prioritize their work travel over limited time with their young child.

Looks like two successive partners made this mistake.

It’s definitely not a case to remain with them, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why didn’t you drive her OP?

Personally I think remarrying and having babies when you have young kids is pretty tacky so I’m with you there.

Same. So trashy.

Quick, everyone stop living your lives because two losers on DCUM think it's "tacky and trashy."

BTW tacky and trashy are words you use when you're uneducated and haven't read enough to learn other, more descriptive words.

NP with a PHD. I agree. It’s both trashy and tacky.

Tacky is an attempt at argumentum ab auctoritate by citing your (sic) "PHD" instead of letting your ideas stand and fall on their merits.

It was entirely relevant since the previous poster said the previous PP’s conclusion implied lack of education. The PhD poster then showed that it’s possible to be very educated and make the same conclusion.

But you knew all that, didn’t you? You just wanted to sound clever.

—New NP also with a PhD

It does indeed show a lack of education when all you can do is resort to personal attacks and not properly explain why you disagree with certain behaviors. I don't believe for a second that either of you have a PhD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why didn’t you drive her OP?

Personally I think remarrying and having babies when you have young kids is pretty tacky so I’m with you there.

Same. So trashy.

Quick, everyone stop living your lives because two losers on DCUM think it's "tacky and trashy."

BTW tacky and trashy are words you use when you're uneducated and haven't read enough to learn other, more descriptive words.

That’s not it. I have many other words. But, that is not how words work. Tacky and trashy are absolutely perfect here so one need not expand. The most educated people know that words should be precise.

One could say selfish, unfair, shortsighted, small, limited, stifling, sad. All would work.

Or you can live your life the way you see fit. Stay married (happily or unhappily, I really don't care) and let the rest of the people do as they see fit for their own marriages. You have no idea what goes on behind closed doors and why people choose to divorce. Calling it tacky and trashy only implies your own personal judgment of the situation (which is irrelevant) and not any kind of logical reason that one should stay married.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many people on here are all "think of what you're role modeling for the children if you're not affectionate / don't love each other / are playing pleasant for the children!!!"

Yes ideally all children would have parents that are married, communicate well, love each other, model great boundaries etc etc etc. But the reality is that's a small % of marriages with young children

Do you divorce if you're not that b/c you're not role modelling an ideal marriage for the kids?

Well I just texted a mom about a playdate with her daughter this weekend. She said it's the dad's weekend. The dad said he's out of town but to text the step mom. The step mom said it sounded fun but she didn't feel like the drive and it might mess up her toddlers nap time so no thanks.

Is this devastating to their kid? No. I'm sure you could argue that its great for the girl to learn to compromise. But she has new babies in both families and those families are both oriented around their full time kids instead of adapting the baby into the existing (part time) kids needs. Lets not minimize the impact of new spouses and new kids and lots of competing priorities and hierarchies of importance on a kids life. That truly can be more damaging to kids than parents stay together as platonic roommates instead of romantic partners. When second marriages have an even higher divorce rate we think thats providing a better model?

And I say this as a person who wished her parents would divorce each other when I was in high school bc they so clearly hated each other and the tension was so high

I don't know what you are thinking.

Nothing you wrote makes sense.

I grew up in a house where my parents stayed together for the "kids" absolute fail.

My brother and his wife did this and they ruined their only child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many people on here are all "think of what you're role modeling for the children if you're not affectionate / don't love each other / are playing pleasant for the children!!!"

Yes ideally all children would have parents that are married, communicate well, love each other, model great boundaries etc etc etc. But the reality is that's a small % of marriages with young children

Do you divorce if you're not that b/c you're not role modelling an ideal marriage for the kids?

Well I just texted a mom about a playdate with her daughter this weekend. She said it's the dad's weekend. The dad said he's out of town but to text the step mom. The step mom said it sounded fun but she didn't feel like the drive and it might mess up her toddlers nap time so no thanks.

Is this devastating to their kid? No. I'm sure you could argue that its great for the girl to learn to compromise. But she has new babies in both families and those families are both oriented around their full time kids instead of adapting the baby into the existing (part time) kids needs. Lets not minimize the impact of new spouses and new kids and lots of competing priorities and hierarchies of importance on a kids life. That truly can be more damaging to kids than parents stay together as platonic roommates instead of romantic partners. When second marriages have an even higher divorce rate we think thats providing a better model?

And I say this as a person who wished her parents would divorce each other when I was in high school bc they so clearly hated each other and the tension was so high

You can keep saying that all you want, but it isn't true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why didn’t you drive her OP?

Personally I think remarrying and having babies when you have young kids is pretty tacky so I’m with you there.

Same. So trashy.

Quick, everyone stop living your lives because two losers on DCUM think it's "tacky and trashy."

BTW tacky and trashy are words you use when you're uneducated and haven't read enough to learn other, more descriptive words.

NP with a PHD. I agree. It’s both trashy and tacky.

Tacky is an attempt at argumentum ab auctoritate by citing your (sic) "PHD" instead of letting your ideas stand and fall on their merits.

It was entirely relevant since the previous poster said the previous PP’s conclusion implied lack of education. The PhD poster then showed that it’s possible to be very educated and make the same conclusion.

But you knew all that, didn’t you? You just wanted to sound clever.

—New NP also with a PhD

It does indeed show a lack of education when all you can do is resort to personal attacks and not properly explain why you disagree with certain behaviors. I don't believe for a second that either of you have a PhD.

I explained why your post was disingenuous. As for you not believing me—oh well.

[Anonymous]

You’re describing a dynamic where the divorced parents both started new families. A lot of divorces and remarriages don’t result in any more kids. Personally if I were to ever divorce i would have zero interest in more kids and would want to be with someone who also put their kids from their first marriage first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What kids need to see is how their parents manage disagreements, fights and full blown crises. A good and lasting marriage is not devoid of those, but it’s one where those are resolved fully and respectfully. The kids don’t need to know the details of the issue but they will live through a cycle of calm-tension-calm and know that conflict is not the end of the world and can and should be overcome.

This board is the last place anyone should be getting relationship advice, so take everything with a big rock of salt.

Did you grow up like this?

Because I did and it was hell and likely contributed to my anxiety.

You have anxiety because your parents resolved their conflicts? What would you have preferred to have them do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I think one of the biggest problems is that the kid from the original marriage plays second fiddle to new kids from the new marriage(s). Usually new kids from an intact marriage go along with whatever earlier kids are up to, but not in new marriages.

The kid who has to fit in to the family that is centered around older kids doesn’t always do so great either.

[Anonymous]

Harville Hendrix, PhD posits in “Getting the Love You Want” that there’s an “Imago,” and absent material interior change people who divorce choose new partners who greatly resemble the old ones, do that they’re unlikely to “trade up.”

And the PP’s discussing the impact on children are spot on. People with kids from different marriages having to bring in grandparents and arrange additional housing because the different sets of kids can’t get along any better than their respective parents did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People are way too quick to get divorced in this country. Learn to forgive and work things out.

Forgive abuse?
My husband is emotionally abusive and at times, physically threatening. Doesn’t physically beat me up but gets pretty close. How should I forgive and work it out if he won’t discuss it?