hitman111 Posted November 15, 2009 Share Posted November 15, 2009 Just some ideas, do you guys think it's posibble for a relationship to last if things arn't terrible with your partner but you're just not in love with them and staying only for the childs sake, and your in love with someone else? Link to post Share on other sites
justforfun Posted November 15, 2009 Share Posted November 15, 2009 Just some ideas, do you guys think it's posibble for a relationship to last if things arn't terrible with your partner but you're just not in love with them and staying only for the childs sake, and your in love with someone else? People do it all the time. And studies have contradicted the popular belief that the children are better off with two separate happy parents than a complete family unit. Leaving abuse of any kind out of the equation. Would you be in a relationship with the person you are in love with? That would add another dynamic. If you're not do you think it would work with your husband. I suspect probably not. But if you are committed to making this work then, absolutely it can. Link to post Share on other sites
Author hitman111 Posted November 15, 2009 Author Share Posted November 15, 2009 yes I would be with the person I'm in love with and torn between. They treat me really good we broke up because of the child. Do you mean add a good dynamic or bad? Link to post Share on other sites
justforfun Posted November 15, 2009 Share Posted November 15, 2009 yes I would be with the person I'm in love with and torn between. They treat me really good we broke up because of the child. Do you mean add a good dynamic or bad? Well, it would add another dynamic either way. I really don't know but I would think it would be easier to stay if you had this relationship in addition to the marriage. Do you think that would work? Is that something that you and your husband are considering? If the relationship is a secret one then you would be investing a lot of energy into just not getting caught. Energy that would be taken away from your family that you are trying to maintain. I would suggest that that would lead to an inevitable split between you and your husband. I am really just throwing ideas out there though. I have no experience of your situation. But maybe I can add a few ideas. Link to post Share on other sites
Author hitman111 Posted November 15, 2009 Author Share Posted November 15, 2009 I had a relationship with the person for a year. My partner and I were split up but they weren't happy. I went back for the childs sake cos they wanted me back. I want to be with the person I'm in love with but don't want my daughter to hate me in the future. Thanks for advice anyway Link to post Share on other sites
HarmonyHope Posted November 15, 2009 Share Posted November 15, 2009 You can "survive" in the existing empty relationship, but you won't be fulfilled. Especially now that you know what you're missing with another person- love and passion. If you can live with having a big part of your happiness missing, then stay where you are. If you go with your affair partner you will lose the satisfaction of having your family in tact until your child gets older. Which loss are you more easily able to live with? It has to be one or the other. Kids can adjust just fine to divorce, especially if the partners can be somewhat amicable. Link to post Share on other sites
Author hitman111 Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share Posted November 16, 2009 I'm not actually married but we live together. Do you think I'll argued more with my partner the more time passes and I feel the one I love slipping away. I know you may not know the answer as you don't know us but anythoughys of what may come? Link to post Share on other sites
SincereOnlineGuy Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 you're... staying only for the childs sake A truly foolish idea in almost every case. Link to post Share on other sites
Boundary Problem Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 A truly foolish idea in almost every case. Living in a household without central unity fostered behaviour problems in my son. Meaning he was turning into a monster. We would go to people's homes and they would ask us to leave because of his behaviours. It was bad. It was beyond spoilt behaviour. I'm now divorced. My son is doing so much better now (he's 6). Behaviour and learning issues are resolved for the most part. There is a different set of rules in each household and he morphs back and forth. Going back and forth does cause him some stress. But stress is manageable, particularly if there are routines and it is anticipated. He is succeeding at school. The people who asked us to leave their homes when he was younger CANNOT believe the change in his behaviours. We are consistently invited everywhere now. Plus my son is seeing what it looks like for a parent to live a happy life. Sure it has problems, but both his parents are genuinely happier and we get along amicably. In fact last weekend we just spontaneously all went out for brunch - the 3 of us. There is no reason that divorce has to mean the end of "family". It depends on how BOTH parents choose to handle it. Why did I write all this - just to say that it can be better being divorced than miserable in marriage for both parents and the child. Link to post Share on other sites
ann09 Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 Funny - I posted about this in the divorce sub-forum and most people encouraged me to stay with my husband who I am not in love with because I made a commitment and have 3 kids. Personally - you need to do what makes YOU happy. Link to post Share on other sites
Lizzie60 Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 Yes it is possible.. a lot of people are living together because of the child/ren. It all depends on each situation. If you're NOT that unhappy.. then it could be possible. One thing though.. I'm convinced that when the parents separate when the children are very young (less than 5 for example).. the damage IMO is not as bad .. they adapt more easily. Link to post Share on other sites
threebyfate Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 Just some ideas, do you guys think it's posibble for a relationship to last if things arn't terrible with your partner but you're just not in love with them and staying only for the childs sake, and your in love with someone else?IMO, people use children as an excuse. In reality, it's not due to altruism, that they stay in unfulfilling relationships. They stay due to wanting to be a major part of the children's lives, fear of the unknown if they leave the security of the family unit and also, for financial reasons. Link to post Share on other sites
justforfun Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 Funny - I posted about this in the divorce sub-forum and most people encouraged me to stay with my husband who I am not in love with because I made a commitment and have 3 kids. Personally - you need to do what makes YOU happy. Without seeing the thread I can't comment on that. But as far as doing what makes you happy. I totally disagree. To me that sounds like a selfish statement. Link to post Share on other sites
justforfun Posted November 21, 2009 Share Posted November 21, 2009 IMO, people use children as an excuse. In reality, it's not due to altruism, that they stay in unfulfilling relationships. They stay due to wanting to be a major part of the children's lives, fear of the unknown if they leave the security of the family unit and also, for financial reasons. I absolutely agree with this. They do stay because of the children but not in an altruistic sense. They stay because they don't want to be a part time parent. The MM I am seeing could never wake up in the morning knowing his kids weren't going to be there or that he wasn't going to see them for a few days. He's not 'involved' in his marriage but he spends a lot of time with his kids. He is doing things with them all the time, without his wife. He adjusts his work schedule so he is there for every event. He even volunteers at his kid's schools! The fear of the unknown, especially when they can't envisage a happy life alone. The MM I am seeing couldn't cope with being alone. The meaningless flings are okay for him when he can return to the 'bosom of the family'. I also think that he fears commitment. As in, he has committed once and got it terribly wrong and is to scared to risk moving on and committing to someone else. His situation is financial too. I don't see him being happy supporting a family home he was not a part of. He's too selfish for that. And he loves 'expensive things'. Things he knows he couldn't have if he were supporting two households. So, in his situation he absolutely can 'stay for the kids.' Link to post Share on other sites
SincereOnlineGuy Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 Why did I write all this Of greater interest, is the reason why you quoted me as if to seem at-odds with my response. Keeping children in an environment of outward or inner hostility between their major sources of examples of how "loving relationships" exist, is downright cruel. Even if they're angelic in school the next day, 25 years from now they will be relatively unarmed when needing to forge a thriving romantic relationship for themselves. Link to post Share on other sites
justforfun Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 Of greater interest, is the reason why you quoted me as if to seem at-odds with my response. Just as an observer I would say that the poster quoted you because she was in agreement with your point and then went on to illustrate that point by sharing with us some of her own experience. I'm at a loss as to see how that would be of 'greater interest' than the content of her post or as to why you would view her post as being at odds with your own. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts