"any infidelity will immediately result in divorce"
Just from this page. Those are all absolute statements.
People are more complicated than that. An immediate divorce when there are children involved seems very selfish to me. The parents owe it to the kids to try.
Posts: 232 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
You break a vow with me, we are done. If vows aren't taken seriously then don't bother making it.
Posts: 91 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
KirKis...Well, then we agree on that point. Sorry for any confusion.
dkw...In discussing mandatory testing previously, I suggested that people have the ability to waive the test. That it not be "mandatory" but simply, "opt out" instead of "opt in". This would provide satisfactory results in all your above scenarios I believe.
I'm still for leaving it as is, as so many have pointed out, if anyone wants to know without their spouse knowing that they want to know, all they have to do is have the test.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
If I were calling for all people to do as I choose to do, perhaps you would have a leg to stand on.
The fact of the matter is, I am not. Again, my wife and I made a decision about this before we were married. And to be perfectly frank, our decision about our marriage is none of your business.
What I advocate is that the person who is cheated upon should decide the proper course of action.
You on the other hand are trying to get me to submit to the absolute statement that all married couples with children who go through infidelity need to try and stay together for the children.
I am trying to get you move away from an absolute position, you are trying to get me to move to an absolute position.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry DKW, I did misread your post... In honesty I kind of skimmed it.
Though I agree with SW's idea. You would still opt out of knowing. Some people just prefer to know just so they know. Others... do not. You won't know there is a problem unless your told. Some might want to know but not make it seem like they do. Some might not care either way.
There are all different types of people out in the world and everyone wants to be happy.
You can come up with many scenarios on why you wouldn't want to know... just like there are scenarios in which you would.
Posts: 91 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Like I said before, if you don't think about it, you won't act on it.
Think about that for a second. You're saying that if a man never finds out that he's not the biological father of one of his children, he'll never do anything differently.
So....Why is this an issue?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Truth has some intrinsic value. So does knowledge. But, specifically, what value does knowledge of the truth have in this scenario?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
For different people, it would have different value. Confirmation of your children being biologically yours is one possible value. For people like yourself who do not wish to know, either way, simply opting out would be an option.
Another possible value would preventing a child being switched at birth in hospitals which still use a nursery.
Plus some people would strongly prefer to know if indeed their children are not their own biologically.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
Could you please put down some serious effort to explain why you think it is that someone wanting to know if their spouse cheated on them makes them a selfish bastard Tom? Because to be honest (I was lying about everything before this statement, what a stupid phrase) I don't get where you are coming from even a little bit.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: For different people, it would have different value. Confirmation of your children being biologically yours is one possible value. For people like yourself who do not wish to know, either way, simply opting out would be an option.
But it serves SOCIETY better to make it opt-in, not opt-out.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is to society's benefit to have stable families. It is clear (from this thread, if not before) that providing people the information -- that they have not requested -- would destabilize families.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I'll certainly grant you your first point, but as to the second...I'm not convinced either way. Who is to say if it does more or less harm to find out this kind of thing sooner rather then latter...and as to those who would never find out, perhaps it is better for society by result, but I personally can't get behind any policy of "ignorance is bliss". I think the default with most information should be to err on the side of too much rather then too little.
All that being said, I'm still okay with our current "opt in" system.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm glad I'm not married to most of the women participating in the infidelity tangent of this thread.
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: I'm glad I'm not married to most of the women participating in the infidelity tangent of this thread.
You mean the women who make no praise or justification of infidelity, but point out that whatever the expectation is of things such as marriage vows, few indeed say anything like, "You break your word to me, my promises and obligations are void." *Those* women?
Take heart: I suspect they're at least equally happy not to be married to you. Win-win!
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: I'm glad I'm not married to most of the women participating in the infidelity tangent of this thread.
You mean the women who make no praise or justification of infidelity, but point out that whatever the expectation is of things such as marriage vows, few indeed say anything like, "You break your word to me, my promises and obligations are void." *Those* women?
Take heart: I suspect they're at least equally happy not to be married to you. Win-win!
Yeah, *those* women. I would prefer a wife whose marital commitments and expectations are the same as mine and one who agrees that infidelity constitutes a level of dishonesty and betrayal that merits separation.
Look, this a totally subjective. If you don't mind your wife sleeping around that's your prerogative. If I say cheating merits separation and my wife says cheating merits separation, I don't see a place where I'm required to factor in your opinion. As I've stated above, I think that for the spouse who was cheated on, separation is completely justified and I can continue to argue this point (though I don't see the sense in continuing this belabored discussion.)
But..
As for the nonsense of spousal rights vs. the rights of the children: The rights of all family members are inextricably linked. You harm one you harm all. The successful families I've seen are founded in honesty and trust. This is why vows are made and expectations outlined. The only case where adultery wouldn't harm the family in some way is if the spouse is completely OK with it. In which case the spouse would probably know beforehand and it wouldn't be called cheating.
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: As for the nonsense of spousal rights vs. the rights of the children: The rights of all family members are inextricably linked. You harm one you harm all. The successful families I've seen are founded in honesty and trust. This is why vows are made and expectations outlined. The only case where adultery wouldn't harm the family in some way is if the spouse is completely OK with it. In which case the spouse would probably know beforehand and it wouldn't be called cheating. [/QB]
Just because the child is "hurt" by the dishonesty doesn't mean all of his/her rights are vacated. I mean, if a woman's husband and children are in a car accident and the husband dies on the scene, you don't stop trying to save the kids because "oh well, the family is already destroyed."
Likewise, if a husband and wife have children, a man may divorce his wife to run off with a younger woman without vacating his right to still be a father to his children. He has destroyed his bond to his wife, but though his kids may be very angry with his, his relationship to his children has not actually been severed and may yet find a way to thrive despite the dissolution of the marriage.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think some of the "adultery ends the marriage" proponents here are missing the fact that there aren't any people here (unless I've missed something) saying "adultery should never cause a marriage to end."
There's an important and not-all-that-subtle difference between these two:
1. Zero tolerance, M.A.D. policies toward cheating are likely to cause some unnecessarily bad outcomes for families with children. When possible, families with children should examine what subsequent choices will be least destructive, rather than automatically seeking divorce.
2. Never get divorced because your partner is cheating on you, if you have kids. It's always wrong.
As far as I can tell nobody is arguing for #2, but several people seem to be responding to #1 as if it was #2.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If you don't mind your wife sleeping around that's your prerogative.
Is this something not even close to anything that's been suggested in this thread? Why, so it is!
What *has* been suggested but never quite outright stated more than once in this thread, though, is the suggestion that to respond to infidelity with anything other than ending the relationship is weak, foolish, lacking in self-respect, unreasonable, etc. Sometimes followed by a, "I'm not saying this is a rule for *everyone*..."
But please, carry on describing what something like infidelity means for a relationship as though it were anything but a personal opinion.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:If you don't mind your wife sleeping around that's your prerogative.
Is this something not even close to anything that's been suggested in this thread? Why, so it is!
What *has* been suggested but never quite outright stated more than once in this thread, though, is the suggestion that to respond to infidelity with anything other than ending the relationship is weak, foolish, lacking in self-respect, unreasonable, etc. Sometimes followed by a, "I'm not saying this is a rule for *everyone*..."
But please, carry on describing what something like infidelity means for a relationship as though it were anything but a personal opinion.
What? Why don't you just say what you mean instead of the (tiresome) sardonic remarks and sarcasm? Maybe that's why your position on certain issues comes across so poorly.
Honestly, it seemed as if some in this thread - you included - would react rather casually to the confession of infidelity by your spouse, which could mean you do have *that* kind of relationship.
If you read back a page you'll see some of us are defending the zero-tolerance stance and do, in fact, believe separation can be a 'best-for-the-kids' solution, even if it's one based on principle.
And the "suggestion that to respond to infidelity with anything other than ending the relationship is weak, foolish, lacking in self-respect, unreasonable, etc." isn't the position I hold. I don't even think anyone here has suggested but I feel the opposite has been suggested. Perspectives and, I guess, ideals...
Posts: 570 | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:@Rabbit - Don't be ridiculous, biological father is happy because he doesn't have to stick around. Why would he want to? The baby will have two parents. He doesn't have to pay child support. He can just walk away. Sure he is happy about the situation.
I spent years fighting for custody of my daughter. I requested the DNA to prove she was mine since her mother wanted me to stay out of the kids life. If she were married to someone else and I got her pregnant... I would STILL step up and take responsibility. She is MY child.
In what possible way do you see these two statements as compatible? You were given the option of not sticking around for your biological child and far from being happy about it, you fought hard against it.
[ July 13, 2011, 06:37 AM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: I'm glad I'm not married to most of the women participating in the infidelity tangent of this thread.
You mean the women who make no praise or justification of infidelity, but point out that whatever the expectation is of things such as marriage vows, few indeed say anything like, "You break your word to me, my promises and obligations are void." *Those* women?
Take heart: I suspect they're at least equally happy not to be married to you. Win-win!
Amen to that.
In my experience, the men who are the least charitable towards others have the highest need of forgiveness for themselves. It's the guys who haven't kept their covenants that are obsessed over whether I've been perfect in mine. It's the men who consider women interchangable that are convinced that if they don't want to date me I'll throw myself off a bridge. And it's the men who know they don't live up to a perfect standard who demand perfection from others.
It was strange the first time a guy who had cheated in his previous relationship was obsessed with who I talked to and whether I'd ever cheat. I have since encountered several men who think the only way to ensure their own happiness is for me to understand that causing them the slightest bit of grief would result in a scorched earth, my humiliation and degradation, and absolute unforgiveness. Those men are crap. It's the double standard I'm not a fan of.
It seems like the best guys - the ones that shrink from even the thought of breaking their covenants - are those that assume the best of me, and also assume that if cause them grief, it isn't because I was secretly the evil manipulator of their nightmares but instead that I might be, like them, human and trying my best. The best people have the highest standards and the humility to know they don't always live up to it.
I am not a fan of absolute statements when it comes to people. I think they serve more to protect and prop up the speaker who cares about their pride more than the outcomes and justice.
----
To be clear: no kids, and the relationship is over as soon as someone wants someone else and acts on it.
With kids, and you owe it to them to give the person a chance to repent.
Refusing to even give the other person a chance to repent means breaking your children's family for the sake of your own pride, when it didn't have to be that way. That is incredibly selfish to me. Not as selfish and evil as adultery, but still horrendous, and something the father would have to answer for.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Rabbit - I wasn't given an option. My ex abandoned me in Montana a month after the baby was born. I was serving our country in the Air Force at the time.
If you read another one of my comments, I said a man should own up to his responsibility. My responsibility was to my child. So I fought hard. I finally got the DNA court ordered to prove I was the father.
On the other hand, If I were the type of man who doesn't own up to his responsibility, I would have been happy that I didn't have to be stuck for 18 years.
I don't understand how you don't understand this. It's not hard. It's not complicated either.
Posts: 91 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Katharina - I don't know if your married or not. Lets say, you are. You have a child with your husband. You find out through e-mail, phone call history, text messages, or even caught in the act your husband is cheating on you. Of course you'll be angry at first. Your trust has just been smashed to bits. Your heart is now broken. You feel that you can hardly breathe.
Thoughts race through your mind about recent events. Those subtle hints he displayed are now making sense. He was seeing another woman. He would rather sleep in the bed of another woman than with you.
Now thoughts race to your child. A door opens and your husband appears and repents. He says the woman didn't mean anything to him. He tells you that he will change his ways and that he loves you.
If you accept this and still be with him. You will always think "what if he is still cheating on me?" Your trust was smashed to bits remember. You can't trust him. He broke his vow to you. You will never know if he is still cheating or not.
This type of life is unhealthy for the child and can/will cause harm. The child will grow up in a home where two parents are estranged. The child will think that this is what a normal relationship is like. The father will eventually turn spiteful because, normally, the one who does the crime will try and turn it around on the victim.
It is better if the child lives in two, seperate, happy homes then living in one unhappy one.
Posts: 91 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am aware of adultery is. I was and am not confused as to what that means. Laying it out in detail doesn't change anything.
Secondly, what you described is not what I proposed. Do you know what "repent" and "healthy" mean? Or do you not believe the repentance is every possible?
quote:It is better if the child lives in two, seperate, happy homes then living in one unhappy one.
I am honestly not sure about this statement. It is something divorcing parents devoutedly want to believe, I'm sure, but considering 1) the considerable negative effects of divorce, 2) the often resulting poverty, and 3) the likelihood that the resulting two households will not instanntly be happy, I won't take that as absolutely true.
The rough truth of staying together for the kids is that it genuinely often is better for the kids. Worse for the parents, better for the kids. You have the right to choose yourself, but don't fool yourself that you're doing it for them.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:@Rabbit - I wasn't given an option. My ex abandoned me in Montana a month after the baby was born. I was serving our country in the Air Force at the time.
You were too given options, the option to let your child go and have no contact and no responsibility or the option to fight for her in court. You choose the latter option. Ergo, not all man are happy to have no responsibility and no contact with their own children. When you know that many men fight for custody of their children, it isn't rational to assume the biological father will be happy to walk away from the responsibility of fatherhood. I've even known a couple of generally irresponsible men who've fought for custody of their children and some otherwise responsible guys who've protested paying child support for their biological offspring.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Seriously: no one has proposed staying with someone who doesn't repent. What I suggest is that not giving someone a chance to come back from the evil of adultery is visiting the consequences on the child instead of yourself. The key word here is "repent", with all that entails.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
@katharina - I believe that one who changes loyalty can always change again.
I don't know if your parents are divorced. Mine was growing up. When I was younger, before they divorced they were always fighitng. That wasn't a good place for me to grow up in. They just constantly fought. Yelled at each other. All I could do was cry. It started to even take a toll on my grades in school. I can still remember my mother throwing a lamp at my father. It was horrible.
Yeah when they split up and started sharing me every week... at first it was weird. But it wasn't as bad as when they were always fighting. I'm glad they divorced.
When a relationship goes sour and there is no love. It can't do anything but hurt.
Posts: 91 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Rabbit - If you want to get technical with me... No I did not have any options what-so-ever. You see, in the Military if you have a child you are obligated to pay child support. Unless a court decides you don't have to. They automatically garnished my wages every month after the mother left. It wasn't anything I set up. the First Sergeant visited me and told me this was going to happen.
Where did you get that I said "all men" ? I thought i've repeated it over and over. There are men who accept responsibility and there are men who don't. Now your doing this on purpose...
Sure there are men, like me, who would accept responsibilty. There are also nubs who don't. Those that don't are the ones that are happy they don't have to.
Posts: 91 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:I believe that one who changes loyalty can always change again.
I believe anyone can betray. You can be happily encased in a family that works like gangbusters and then it all falls apart, and that can happen at any time. There are simply no guarantees. Adopting a zero tolerance policy doesn't create one. It actually sets a family up to fail.
My parents were not divorced - they were very happily married until my mother died, and now my father is happily married again. I have a lot of conversations with my dad about relationships and things, and something I've gathered from him and from my mother before she died is a forgiving charity towards the other person. They were faithful, non-abusive, compatible, and loyal, and it still took an absolutely tremendous amount of charity and forgiveness in order for them to be happy together. I think it always does.
That's why I'm leery of guys who say that there is no forgiveness possible. I suspect that extends to more than just this issue - and being a relationship with someone who never cuts slack for human frailty is hell on earth. That I AM sure of.
Posts: 232 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ Aerin - Your wrong. Not "anyone can betray." I would -NEVER- Betray someone i'm with. I take my promises and vows seriously.
I would never, ever cheat. No matter the circumstance or who might tempt me. If I wanted to get with someone else i'll leave my wife FIRST. Not AFTER.
I've told her that numerous times. She believes me (anyone would if they got to know me). I would bend over backwards for those I care about. I could never destroy someone like that.
So Evil.
EDIT: I was also raised up on "treat others the way you want to be treated." I would never cheat on anyone and I don't want them to cheat on me. No double standards here.
Posts: 91 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Life is long, no one is perfect, and absolute statements about future behavior don't ring right to me.
I'm not saying you will - most people don't (thankfully). However, reiterating your zero tolerance policy doesn't change my opinion of it.
I do agree with your opinion of adultery. It is flat out evil and overwhelmingly selfish, and the men I've known who got divorced because of their unfaithfulness had a patina of slime on them.
But I also believe in grace, and forgiveness, and I believe in the Atonement. If I had kids with someone, I would hope I'd give them a chance to repent. We all need forgiveness.
Posts: 232 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Repentance means far more than saying your sorry. When you have betrayed someone, repentance means putting in the enormous effort to rebuild trust. Truly forgiving isn't easy, but it is possible.
I have a friend whose husband fathered a child in an extra-marital relationship. They managed to save their marriage even though fidelity was and continues to be seen by both of them as a crucial commitment. It wasn't easy. It took a lot of work and commitment on both their parts, but they were able to rebuild a strong happy and trusting marriage. She says it took a long time but she was able to fully and completely forgive him. She supports him in being a decent father to her "step daughter" and even counts her as part of the family.
If you cannot imagine people being able to truly repent or truly forgive, you grossly underestimate the capacity of human beings.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Forgiving for saying something stupid, or missing your birthday is one thing. Completely destroying the trust and bond you two share is something else.
I know that nothing I say will change your opinion.
I've been cheated on before. I know what it's like. I even had a kid "after" it happened. I pratically caught her in the act. two sets of shoes in the bedroom... and a "adult"-DVD in the Playstation that I never seen before.
And both of them sitting outside on the porch bench talking...
Of course I couldn't prove anything so I had to go on as if nothing happened. I should have just ended it there.
If I knew then what I know now I would have. I had to experience it. I had to learn what it was like. The relationship didn't work out at all. Thats was the mother of my child. I'm glad I got my daughter out of it... Don't get me wrong. Though I stayed with her for the wrong reasons. I had no idea what I was getting myself into.
I'm not saying that every other relationship will end the same. Each situation is different. But you can save yourself a lot of hurt with the zero-tolerance policy.
Posts: 91 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Forgiving for saying something stupid, or missing your birthday is one thing. Completely destroying the trust and bond you two share is something else.
I know that nothing I say will change your opinion.
I don't disagree that the two are vastly different. The latter is however still possible. I've seen it done so I know it is possible.
You are right that nothing you can say will convince me that what I have personally observed do not actually happen.
I'm sorry your wife cheated on you and your marriage failed. It must have been traumatic. From what you've said, it seems evident that your wife was not sincerely committed to your marriage and had no inclination to repent. Under those circumstances, I would agree that divorce is best option. But not every instance of adultery is the same. Some people are genuinely repented and willing to make the effort to change and repair what they have damaged. When they are, it is truly possible to save the marriage.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's ok. I was young. 18 years old... just getting out of High School. My Mother was the type where "you move out when your 18, no exceptions" so she kicked me out of the house and so I moved in with my older girlfriend (the one who became the mother of my child).
Then when I went to Basic Training she broke up with me over my first phone call home. Saying she met someone else. This was in August. During December I was allowed to go home for a week and she met up with me... she then proposed to marry to me right then-and-there. Once again... I was 18. So I said yes.
In Feburary we got married and she moved out to Montana to meet me there. A month after the baby was born she left.
Later on, after a few phone calls with the people we lived with... it turns out she was selling herself for rent $$. So of course I checked myself... clean... thankfully. But still... Then she didn't want me to be the father of my child...
I've been through a lot you can tell. So my opinion on this whole issue is from what i've experienced.
EDIT: If I had a Zero-Tolerance back then. It would have saved me a lot of heartache. Which is why I have a zero-tolerance now. It wouldn't matter even if she did repent in the way you are referring to. We still wouldn't have worked out after that. I was too hurt. Specially when I found out that she was selling herself for $$$ WHILE we were together.
So now you all know why I post the way I do. Why I take the stances I do. Every single thing i've said would have helped people like ME. There are other people out there in worse situations than mine. I feel bad for them because I know how they feel.
Posts: 91 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm really sorry you went though all that KirKis.
I would agree with people here that the injured party should consider reconciliation with a repentant partner in most cases. But I will not and never will agree that they are obligated to try. If after thoughtful consideration the injured party decides they do not want, can not handle, etc to try and reconcile, they should not be looked down upon for "hurting the children".
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: I think some of the "adultery ends the marriage" proponents here are missing the fact that there aren't any people here (unless I've missed something) saying "adultery should never cause a marriage to end."
There's an important and not-all-that-subtle difference between these two:...
...2. Never get divorced because your partner is cheating on you, if you have kids. It's always wrong.
If it was simply a matter of "it would be better if you considered it" there wouldn't be such opposition. Instead the attitude that is presented is, "If you don't try, you (the parent who got cheated on) is hurting your children out of selfish pride."
quote:Originally posted by katharina: It's the guys who haven't kept their covenants that are obsessed over whether I've been perfect in mine. It's the men who consider women interchangeable that are convinced that if they don't want to date me I'll throw myself off a bridge. And it's the men who know they don't live up to a perfect standard who demand perfection from others. ... I am not a fan of absolute statements when it comes to people.
Funny...all those absolute statements about people right before a declaration of how much you dislike them.
quote:Originally posted by Aerin: That's why I'm leery of guys who say that there is no forgiveness possible. I suspect that extends to more than just this issue - and being a relationship with someone who never cuts slack for human frailty is hell on earth. That I AM sure of.
That's quite an extrapolation from "This is a deal breaker for me." to "I will never cut you any slack." I submit that people who never forgive any transgression couldn't be in a relationship long enough to get married or have kids in the first place. People step on each other's toes all the time, but the difference between human frailty and a deal breaker is, when you specifically promise before entering into that level of relationship that it will never ever ever happen. Yes forgiveness is necessary for a relationship (any relationship, not just marriage) but there are also lines that should never be crossed. For some people, that line is physical abuse, some verbal/mental abuse, and for some it is infidelity.
quote:Originally posted by KirKis: I would never, ever cheat. No matter the circumstance or who might tempt me. If I wanted to get with someone else i'll leave my wife FIRST. Not AFTER.
+1
quote:Originally posted by KirKis: ...you can save yourself a lot of hurt with the zero-tolerance policy.
I think statements like this (while true in and of themselves) are exactly why some posters are attributing selfishness when it comes to this situation + children. If your only goal is to save yourself hurt (and I'm not saying that is or isn't true of KirKis) then it is not unreasonable to consider it selfish when you have children...it means you did not take into consideration their welfare. But if you have considered it, and still think separation/divorce is the best course of action then people shouldn't judge you and say you are being selfish and hurting your children. Even if that consideration is pre-consideration. There are such things as boundary issues, and different people have different standards, sensitivities and needs. Especially if this is pre-discussed with your spouse so that that understanding is known and agreed upon before the marriage (as in my case).
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
That's terrible.
