Staying for the kids...

[bittersweet memories]

Just looking back through that thread, I see people telling the OP he owed it to his wife, his children, his AP, and to himself to make a decision.

 

I don't see anybody telling him to stay with his wife only for the sake of the children.

 

I agree I don't get it...

[Fallen Angel]

HMMMM

 

It's a long thread and maybe I missed something, but it seemed to me that people told the OP of that thread that he owed it to his wife and children to do the right thing and end the affair. Meaning divorce the wife if he didn't want to stay (and many many people told him to just man up and leave the wife) or stop cheating, and deliberately hurting the wife, if he decided to stay.

 

I didn't see anybody leading the charge for an intact marriage/family at all costs.

 

I would say that if the OP posted that he was deciding to stay in the marriage and make it work then some posters may have started posting to him about that since he said that is what he wanted, but other posters kept encouraging him look deeper and to be honest with himself and with everybody else in his life, including his wife.

 

IMO that OP got a lot of good advice from people on all sides of the triangle

 

I agree that he got a lot of good advice from a lot of people.

 

I just went back and read that whole long azz thread...and I didn't see what FA is talking about. Hundreds of responses and I didn't see it. Maybe I skimmed too fast, but even if I did, I wouldn't have missed "ALL" those people encouraging him to stay for the kids. 95% of what I read was telling him the kindest thing he could do was tell the truth and set his wife free. Not sure what you saw, but it would be helpful if you pointed out all those posts telling him to stay.

 

Just looking back through that thread, I see people telling the OP he owed it to his wife, his children, his AP, and to himself to make a decision.

 

I don't see anybody telling him to stay with his wife only for the sake of the children.

 

I am not going to go back through the whole thread to try and pick out one or two posts, but I know that I am not the only one who seems to have interpreted the tone of the thread the way I did.

 

The OP repeatedly stated that if he chose to stay it would be for his children and not because he felt love for his wife, yet the tone of the thread pushed him towards staying. that is how I read it, I stand by what I said I saw when I read the thread. http://www.loveshack.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2697623&postcount=212

 

It appears Dexter saw it the same way, and was advocating for him admitting to his wife the only reason he was staying was for the children. *shrug*

[Fallen Angel]

So dramatic... what are you talking about? I see BS giving him a little bit of everything some told him to leave, some to stay. Like everyone that post here on LS nobody always agrees. Not all BS agrees like not all OW agree on everything. Whats new?

 

Who said anything about BS or OW?

 

Why would you make this statement when I said nothing about anyone's status as BS or OW/OM? I simply was discussing the tone of the thread in advocating for him to stay in his marriage even after he plainly stated that he would only be staying for his children.

[Fallen Angel]

The point iof this thread was to ask a simple question. Do people believe that sometimes men (and/or women) sometimes stay in marriages they would otherwise leave, simply because they honestly believe they are acting in the best interests of their children by doing so?

[PhoenixRise]

AHHH, one or two posts...Got it.

 

Out of 417 total posts in the thread

 

 

The vast majority of the posts in the thread tell him he should 1. Make a decision and 2. Divorce.

[reboot]

The point iof this thread was to ask a simple question. Do people believe that sometimes men (and/or women) sometimes stay in marriages they would otherwise leave, simply because they honestly believe they are acting in the best interests of their children by doing so?

 

Yes, I believe they sometimes do just that.

[jthorne]

The point iof this thread was to ask a simple question. Do people believe that sometimes men (and/or women) sometimes stay in marriages they would otherwise leave, simply because they honestly believe they are acting in the best interests of their children by doing so?

Actually, I think it's for a much more selfish reason. Some men that stay for the kids stay not for the kid's wellbeing. They know kids are adaptable, and will adjust. They stay because they don't want to be away from their kids- they can't handle the every other weekends. JMO.

[PhoenixRise]

Actually, I think it's for a much more selfish reason. Some men that stay for the kids stay not for the kid's wellbeing. They know kids are adaptable, and will adjust. They stay because they don't want to be away from their kids- they can't handle the every other weekends. JMO.

 

I agree with this.

 

AND

 

I think if a MM/MW is truly staying for the kids it will show up in more ways than just their lip service and them constantly stating "I am staying for the kids". They will be active, engaged parents, spending time, and building relationships with said children.

[Mimolicious]

It baffles me that grown a$$ people make life changing decisions based on what internet friends suggest.

 

Now on the topic. I think that is best to have happy kids with separated parents than to be in a marriage where kids see abuse and disrespect. Keeping two separate 'happier' homes is way healthier...

[Mimolicious]

Actually, I think it's for a much more selfish reason. Some men that stay for the kids stay not for the kid's wellbeing. They know kids are adaptable, and will adjust. They stay because they don't want to be away from their kids- they can't handle the every other weekends. JMO.

 

 

Let's add- Child Support. It's cheaper to keep them! (in some cases)

 

I was talking to a relative that is married with 2 kids. Funny, he said that he would rather stay "for the kids" then he went on to explaining that once he sat down and calculated what it was going to cost him to keep 2 homes, he couldn't make ends meet. That it was not fair for his kids and also for the person that he signed up to build this family with- his W. (I wish more men thought with their head and not with the 3rd eye)

 

Hence the fact that he is not in an A or cheating on his wife. People have other issues other than infidelity you know...

[reboot]

All other things being equal, children are almost always better off with both parents. You can all argue that if you want, but you'd be wrong.

 

Study after study has shown that children from two parent households are better adjusted, more likely to go to college, less likely to get in trouble with the law, etc, etc.

 

Obviously that's not true if the marriage is abusive and abrasive, if there is nothing but screaming and shouting and fighting. But just because mom and dad no longer love each other like they once did, or even at all, doesn't in and of itself make the home environment bad. Children simply don't romanticize their parent's relationship like that. They're mainly into security.

 

Men and women are capable of peacefully co-existing in a marriage for the sake of the children, even if there is little love. Is this a good thing to do? I won't even try to answer that. Some put their children first at all costs, some don't. I'm not sure you can say either is right or wrong.

[donnamaybe]

My take on that thread began with the OP where it was stated that he knew he was in the proverbial fog of the A. On that basis alone, I would have advised him to end the A, try to work on his M, and THEN decide if he wanted to remain with his W or not. If he felt he was clear headed and still was checked out of the M, THEN I would tell him to get a divorce.

[xxoo]

The point iof this thread was to ask a simple question. Do people believe that sometimes men (and/or women) sometimes stay in marriages they would otherwise leave, simply because they honestly believe they are acting in the best interests of their children by doing so?

 

Sure, people sometimes do this. But then they *stay in* the marriage, fully invested, either accepting it for what it is or working to improve it.

 

I think if a MM/MW is truly staying for the kids it will show up in more ways than just their lip service and them constantly stating "I am staying for the kids". They will be active, engaged parents, spending time, and building relationships with said children.

 

exactly

 

But once he disclosed that he intended to remove the OW from the equation and attempt to maintain the marriage for the sole purpose of doing what he felt was in the best interests of his children ather than because he loved his wife (which he fully addmitted he no longer felt love for her) the thread was supportive of that decision rather than stating what is often said here, that staying in a marriage for the sake of the children should not be and is not a viable option. That is why I was flummoxed. (Ten points to me for using the word flummoxed in today's conversation!!)

 

It seems that people were encouraging him to give finding the lost love in his marriage a shot. What is wrong with giving it a shot, after dday and going NC with the OW?

 

Once he made it quite clear that the love was never to return, the tide changed and people were telling him to leave.

[Mimolicious]

All other things being equal, children are almost always better off with both parents. You can all argue that if you want, but you'd be wrong.

 

Study after study has shown that children from two parent households are better adjusted, more likely to go to college, less likely to get in trouble with the law, etc, etc.

 

Obviously that's not true if the marriage is abusive and abrasive, if there is nothing but screaming and shouting and fighting. But just because mom and dad no longer love each other like they once did, or even at all, doesn't in and of itself make the home environment bad. Children simply don't romanticize their parent's relationship like that. They're mainly into security.

 

Men and women are capable of peacefully co-existing in a marriage for the sake of the children, even if there is little love. Is this a good thing to do? I won't even try to answer that. Some put their children first at all costs, some don't. I'm not sure you can say either is right or wrong.

 

I could have not said it better Reboot. I mean, what relationship is all butterflies and unicorns 24/7? No M, A, of whatever you may have with someone else is free of issues. You are very much on point here. To some parents the stability of their children comes before anything. Look at parents that are in an abusive relationship, sometimes they don't end it for themselves but for the safety and well-being of their kids.

[PhoenixRise]

I would have to agree that many posts were telling him to make a decision.

 

But once he disclosed that he intended to remove the OW from the equation and attempt to maintain the marriage for the sole purpose of doing what he felt was in the best interests of his children ather than because he loved his wife (which he fully addmitted he no longer felt love for her) the thread was supportive of that decision rather than stating what is often said here, that staying in a marriage for the sake of the children should not be and is not a viable option. That is why I was flummoxed. (Ten points to me for using the word flummoxed in today's conversation!!)

 

 

 

 

 

FA

 

Nobody encouraged him to stay with the wife ONLY for the sake of the children. People told him that if that was his decision he needed to go NC with OW,stop the affair, stop the gaslighting , but NOBODY encouraged him to make that decision, in fact, people encouraged the opposite.

 

I am flummoxed that you, who I always thought tended to be fair, took a few posts (I still don't know which ones, I didn't see them) out of a thread that contains 417 posts and characterized the thread and the posters in that thread the way you did in your original post here.

[reboot]

Is this thread about the question the thread topic asks, or is it really about that other thread? Just to avoid any more confusion.

[NoIDidn't]

I agree with those that feel that the OP of this thread mischaracterized the statements made in that other thread.

 

To take the two posters that said those things and then expand that to the gist of the thread is totally disingenuous.

 

And regarding the violence from his W: we only has his word. The word of an admitted liar and gaslighter. Seems he stopped posting after he felt he worked the LS readers up into enough of a curious frenzy to want to know what was going on with him. I haven't been back to that thread in several weeks since he was no longer posting and didn't really seem to be trying to get help. So to use that thread to point out hypocrisy is reaching.

 

The OP admitted to practically gaslighting his W to within inches of her sanity, and people are armchair refereeing about the fairness of her losing it - when that's exactly what he wanted her to do.

 

I wouldn't have attempted to use that particular thread to make a point. If this is what the MM of this forum are doing to their families, I'd advise the OW to run as far as she could from him regardless of his "staying for the kids" excuses.

[PhoenixRise]

My take on that thread began with the OP where it was stated that he knew he was in the proverbial fog of the A. On that basis alone, I would have advised him to end the A, try to work on his M, and THEN decide if he wanted to remain with his W or not. If he felt he was clear headed and still was checked out of the M, THEN I would tell him to get a divorce.

 

 

This is another reason people encouraged him to go NC. More than once he said he was aware that the affair was shading issues in the marriage. He himself talked about NC as a way to get clarity. AND people did probe to see if he had any love for his wife or if his feelings for her could be renewed or recovered. But I will say again, nobody encouraged him to stay married for the sake of the children.

[Fallen Angel]

Is this thread about the question the thread topic asks, or is it really about that other thread? Just to avoid any more confusion.

 

THIS thread is about the question the thread topic posed.

 

I only cited the other thread because it is what got me to wondering about what people truly believe as it seemed to me that what they believe was dependant upon the situation, and that it is not always even to those who most often claimed it to be so, as cut and dried as it appears.

[bentnotbroken]

He was a butt to say the least. But no one felt that him staying wasn't a great idea. The abuse was exhibited on both parts. He pushed for her instability and he got it. I wondered if he was capable of doing the mind games with his children as well.

[donnamaybe]

This is another reason people encouraged him to go NC. More than once he said he was aware that the affair was shading issues in the marriage. He himself talked about NC as a way to get clarity. AND people did probe to see if he had any love for his wife or if his feelings for her could be renewed or recovered. But I will say again, nobody encouraged him to stay married for the sake of the children.

 

And, yes, it was right for people, in his admittedly confused state of mind, to encourage him to go NC with the OW and try to find out if his M was worth saving.

 

I agree the other thread was mischaracterized.

[reboot]

THIS thread is about the question the thread topic posed.

 

I only cited the other thread because it is what got me to wondering about what people truly believe as it seemed to me that what they believe was dependant upon the situation, and that it is not always even to those who most often claimed it to be so, as cut and dried as it appears.

 

I thought so, but while a few are trying to discuss the OP, it appears most are just arguing about that other thread.

[NoIDidn't]

I thought so, but while a few are trying to discuss the OP, it appears most are just arguing about that other thread.

 

But isn't that usually what happens when someone uses another situation to start the conversation. It typically becomes a conversation about the other situation, not the point being raised. Especially in the case of the situation not actually being what was claimed.

 

The OP stated that the other thread was about people basically telling the MM to stay for the kids, when that simply was not the case.

[reboot]

But isn't that usually what happens when someone uses another situation to start the conversation. It typically becomes a conversation about the other situation, not the point being raised. Especially in the case of the situation not actually being what was claimed.

 

The OP stated that the other thread was about people basically telling the MM to stay for the kids, when that simply was not the case.

 

You're right as far as that goes, but I think FA just made a mistake using that other thread for an example. I believe she intended to spark a conversation about the question she posed in the original post. I really don't think she intended for this to degenerate into an argument about that other thread.

[jthorne]

In a nutshell, I think when a MM says he's staying for the kids, he's saying he values full-time access to the kids more than he values full-time access to the OW.