Happily Married

[MissBee]

Wow! Do people like that really exist, or is this another LS straw man?

 

I can't speak for those who live on the planet / in the countries where you find people like this, but amongst "normal" people, one doesn't expect anyone else to magic your life into some fantasy park. But you do expect those who promised you love, respect, intimacy, sex, concern, interest, etc to keep their promise. And if they can't, or won't, they should be honest and say, my feelings have changed, I no longer love / respect / desire / etc you and I can no longer authentically deliver on the promise I made to you. Would you be happy for me to continue going through the motions inauthentically, providing an intact home for our children until they leave, or would you prefer to find someone else who can actually give you what you need and what should reasonably be provided in a loving R?

 

But they seldom do. They just expect that the unhappy spouse should "downsize" their expectations because the other spouse has determined that other things have a higher priority.

 

People like this exist...

 

My ex was like this...he's been married 2 times in 5 years and in between changed girlfriends every 3 months. His father was also a man of multiple marriages (he's on his 3rd) and girlfriends in between. Both are essentially unfufilled men who think the newest Mrs. So and So or the next fling will make them happy....of course they are "happy" with this person for but a while until life happens and they're unhappy again, and instead of seeing it as life or their own deal, they attribute all unhappiness to their romantic partner and think finding a new one will somehow help. It's a never-ebnding and unfortunate cycle.

 

It will not take much to Google or search psychology journals or read relationship books that will discuss this type of orientation in the world that some folks have. It certainly is not an LS invention and you need to read a bit more if you have no concept of people who behave like this. Just like people exist who blame all their failings on everyone but themselves, so too there are people who feel they cannot be happy unless in a relationshipn and who also expect relationships to fulfill roles they cannot. Within studies on relationships and counseling this is a topic that comes up quite often, as many people are sold this idea that finding Mr. or Mrs. Right will lead to a happy life and bliss forever then when life happens they don't see it as them buying into a myth, but truly feel it must be this person who is at fault. Some folks have their own issues that they don't care about fixing but externalize instead, and relationships are a kind of drug for them that they use an escape from self. But like all drugs the relationship/romantic high wears off, and if your relationship was an escape from yourself, then all of a sudden they start blaming the other person instead of realizing that this is not about the other but them.

 

According to your prescription of what normal people do, it is safe to say that pretty much most OW who come here are dating abnormal men, as your characterization of a normal person as one who: "expect those who promised you love, respect, intimacy, sex, concern, interest, etc to keep their promise. And if they can't, or won't, they should be honest and say, my feelings have changed.." clearly doesn't apply to most A stories and is not what MM do, or else they'd not be MM dating OW lol. What happens often is years long secret As with the BS unaware that things have changed...not to mention MOST OW do not end up with their MM in an open relationship. Many get thrown under the bus or an OOW replaces them. That said, it is safe to say most MM don't behave "normally" then and most are nimwits who don't have the guts to divorce their oblivious spouse who is making them unhappy and not meeting their needs...or of course they are martryrs who will suffer unhappiness at the hands of their spouse for the kids. But of course, no MM is someone who may be unduly blaming their spouse and not seeing their own complicity in their relationship.

 

I don't know what planet you are living on...but I'm glad you've come to LS where you can read everyday about people who are exactly as described. It seems your lens is that every M includes one spouse who is oblivious or happy and another who is unhappy so has to cheat because this other person wants to ignore problems (I'm unclear about whether or not your assumption is that the WS has ACTIVELY addressed these issues...most likely they haven't IMO). This is completely simplistic and doesn't take into account the fact that marriage is a two way street and that so many other factors lead to As or "unhappiness". I acknowledge that some people truly may be with spouses who aren't meeting their needs...yet it seems you cannot at all wrap your head around the fact that for some people it's not about that. Why is your worldview not open to other possibilities? Do you believe your perspective is just a little bit biased and more sympathetic towards MM/WS's than BS's? If so...you should ask yourself if your assessment is even logically sound or simply a bias that is but ONE explanation precluding others.

Edited October 15, 2012 by MissBee

[Furious]

Unhappy marriages exist, the divorce rate confirms that.

 

It boggles my mind, that for those unhappy marriages that do end, without an OM/OM waiting in the wings, somehow manage to divorce, in contrast to those who are unhappy and have an OW/OM they can surely be with openly do not do so.

 

Also, I would add if the marriage is going through a natural evolution of ups and downs, the entrance of a third party will only make the marriage weaker.

For a WS, who claims to be in an unhappy marriage, they will eventually make that a realty with the support of their affair partner.

[MissBee]

Unhappy marriages exist, the divorce rate confirms that.

 

It boggles my mind, that for those unhappy marriages that do end, without an OM/OM waiting in the wings, somehow manage to divorce, in contrast to those who are unhappy and have an OW/OM they can surely be with openly do not do so.

 

Also, I would add if the marriage is going through a natural evolution of ups and downs, the entrance of a third party will only make the marriage weaker.

For a WS, who claims to be in an unhappy marriage, they will eventually make that a realty with the support of their affair partner.

 

Precarious position isn't it...

 

People in unhappy marriages divorce all the time.

 

Lots of BSs advocate for the "divorce me but don't cheat on me" route.

 

Yet many OW/OM spend copious amounts of time explaining how and why their MP is sooooooooooo unhappy but cannot leave. I'm thinking "Ma'am, Sir...you should be on the divorce but don't cheat side too!" Unless you specifically like dating married people. But if the A is just an unfortunate situation...maybe less time should be spent explaining all the reasons why they can't (while making sure we all know how unhappy they are) and instead figure out well why CAN'T you???

 

It's very odd that people often speak of other people loving the institution of marriage, no matter what and are tied to it...yet those people who are suppsoedly tied to it are the one's saying "DIVORCE IF YOU AREN'T HAPPY WITH ME!" while the accusers are the ones actually reinforcing reasons not to divorce and will explain over and over why the MP can't. It's an odd position...shouldn't it be the other way around?

 

As most issues boil down to: people are ultimately where they want to be (whether happily or unhappily). Summer Breeze once spoke about her door and how she has to jiggle it or some such to get it to open and her friend asked why she just doesn't fix it and she says she was fine with it. I loved that little anecdote and find it appropriate. I think even if something is "broken", some people are used to it or actually have some weird affinity for this broken situation, believe it or not...and would much rather stay put than do soemthing different. So if your MM/MW is sooooo unhappy but not a part of the 50% of folks who are unhappy and divorcing...he/she is where they want to be (happily or unhappily).

 

To the point of affairs weakening marriage: interestly there is the idea that sometimes As stabilize the marriage situation. It depends on what weakens mean, but it seems that many MM with OW actually continue to be married versus leave. So another thing for OW who like to defend why he can't leave should think about: if you do want him to leave, your presence may be making him nice and comfy and is allowing him to "endure his torture" or liven up the mundane so he has no reason to go anywhere speedily.

Edited October 15, 2012 by MissBee

[Owl]

They can choose to leave the relationship if their speaking up and other attempts to improve things fail, indeed. But those of us who were raised to put others before ourselves weren't brought up to leave our children and break up their home simply because things are not going our way. We try to improve things, we get rebuffed. We speak up, we get ignored. We see the devastating impact a separation has on our children and we just have to swallow our misery and put up with it because we want what's best for our kids. That doesn't make our needs go away. We try, but eventually we have to get those needs met somewhere.

 

Of course that's not how things would work in an ideal world. In an ideal world, we would be listened to when we expressed unhappiness. Our spouse would be willing to work with us to improve the marriage. Our children would be robust enough, from good parenting, to withstand the trauma of a parental separation. But most of us don't live in an ideal world, we live in the real world, and we have to deal with the cards we're dealt, not those we wish we had been dealt.

 

Radagast, I see no "ownership" in this. I see someone claiming "victim" throughout the whole thing, but no ownership of your own choices and actions.

 

You tend to describe yourself as having fallen prey to the evil, seducing older married woman who forced herself on you against your will, and then held you captive for decades so tightly wrapped up that you couldn't even tell you were unhappy.

 

Then suddenly your OW shows up...pretty much as your KISA, saving you from the clutches of the evil, insane witch who has held you spellbound and destroyed your ability to think, reason, or make choices for yourself.

 

There's no responsibility for your own choices in this tale, no ownership for making the choices you did that led you to where you were...no recognition of the fact that in reality, you were right where you chose to be. No admittance that you had the power to change your life all along...but simply chose not to do so.

 

There's so much 'victimhood' in these posts, so much denial of your own role in things.

 

Honestly...and I mean no offense...but I've never once seen a man write the way that you do, in all of my years here and on several other sites. I've seen many woman post in the same "powerless" sense that you do...but you're the first man I've ever seen to describe your situation that you do.

 

As I've said before...a very unique situation indeed. Singular, in fact.

 

Being so unhappy for so long...and not taking action to change it...ties right into the questions that have come up on this thread.

 

What, IN YOU, prevented you from making change? You describe a deep sense of selflessness, of serving others before yourself...where are YOU at in all of this?

Edited October 15, 2012 by Owl

[nofool4u]

Well I guess I could see something along the lines of:

 

"I have a happy marriage, I just wanna jump in the sack with you for some easy fun....whaddya say?"

 

I wonder how that line would work on a woman from a MM? He'd probably still have some takers.

[Spark1111]

MY H and I had always considered ourselves happily married.

 

We turned a corner after a really rough patch (HIS!, and by marriage, our's naturally).

 

When he landed a great job, one we had been praying for, he crashed into her.

 

Working long hours together on a new project sparked an attraction between them.

 

The more the attraction was fueled, the unhappier he became with me and the marriage.

 

Once the full on affair commenced, he was pretty downright miserable with me and by extension, our marriage.

 

I would have to agree. The marriage was miserable as he gave nothing to it or to me. I gave up asking what's wrong? Let's go to therapy, only to be told no and nothing.

 

After dday, and the end of the affair and NC with the OW, he became happily married again and deeply in love with me.

 

Imagine that?

 

And I have read it over and over and over again on these forums.

[MissBee]

I see so many rationalizations in the below post that it makes my eyes bleed, and then you take it even further and suggest that if one see things differently than you, they aren't being realistic.

 

Life is messy sometimes, but the messy parts in my experience come because I have created the mess or gotten myself involved in someone's else mess.

 

I do agree that we make mistakes, we are human of course.......but trapped? Come on........you claim to be a mental health professional, surely you realize that one is only trapped if they choose to be. No one is trapped in a marriage or relationship in the free world.

 

Sitcom? What person here indicated they would like their life as a sitcom?

"I choose to live in the real world" you said.........well where the hell do you think the rest of us live? Mars? Or is that you consider yourself more enlightened than the rest of us? lol

 

 

I think there are different orientations in the world. Some people are more quick to throw out the idea of "no one is perfect" etc. as a means of avoiding accountability or as a means to set one's expectations low and not having to try hard or do the right thing, "since life isn't perfect".

 

We all live in the real world, and in the real world, you have different people who make different choices. Simple. Some people live in the real world and don't like excuses, they change their circumstance, they are honest, they are always improving and an excuse is their LAST resort. Some people live in the real world and always look for excuses, always dodge responsibility, never try to change their circumstances or try very feebly, then say "Well no one's perfect" to make it not their fault but the fault of life why xyz couldn't be done.

 

Clearly some people live in a world where all they look at are they "can'ts" and "imperfections" while others work around them and look for ways they can. Some people see a way where there is no way and some as soon as they face ANY difficulty shy away and say "See...no one's perfect. Can't be done." I would rather be in the latter group and frankly, all the people I have come to admire as successful in relationships, their career and who are happy in life in general seem to be the ones who have ideals and standards and who try as much as possible to craft a life that suits it versus being at the ready to say life isn't perfect or people aren't perfect. No one expects that...like come on.

 

I love the quote: "Being realistic is the most traveled road to mediocrity". It may be slightly tangential, but I just love the idea that the people who do change the world and change their lives are people who don't spend time expaining how much life isn't perfect, but who understand this but decide what they want for themselves and make it happen (even when others are quick to point out it can't be done). Save your can'ts for yourself. Obviously your can'ts shape YOUR reality and is exactly why you're with someone who can't do this and that and you're an OW for 50 years. Great for you. Your world is dictated by your focus on the can'ts and imperfections...so it is no wonder you keep getting more of the same. Others can choose a different reality and a different focus where they CAN and DO actively make difficult/not easy choices, that change their circumstances.

Edited October 15, 2012 by MissBee

[skylarblue]

Seeing a happily MM just means FWB or PA only type of R. Personally, I have no problem with casual sex Rs if that's what I'm seeking (which used to include married men). I assumed xMM was happily married when he began the A, and I was perfectly fine with the thought. I really didn't have a reason to think so (since I knew nothing about him previous to) other than intuition and the fact that he kept their wedding picture up at work. We started out and maintained alot of the R in a PA fashion so a lot of things weren't a factor. He never discussed his W or M until years later and didn't mention he was unhappy until I asked. I've told him I didn't believe him and thought he was happy before the A and it was me/the A causing him to be dissatisfied with his M, but he claims he was unhappy before I came along. I'm still not convinced.

 

First, I just don't believe someone as unhappy as xMM projected himself to be would go to the lengths he did in prioritizing the W and making her happy. Second, he's never really given me what I think are "valid" reasons for his unhappiness. They sound more like "mountains out of mole hills", annoyance type of things. Third, he never took the opportunity to correct anything. He's told me his W has tried to discuss the state of their M during the A, and each concern she brought up was met with lies and/or blameshifting. So, he was stonewalling any chance to make things "better" for himself or his M.

[ThatJustHappened]

They can choose to leave the relationship if their speaking up and other attempts to improve things fail, indeed. But those of us who were raised to put others before ourselves weren't brought up to leave our children and break up their home simply because things are not going our way. We try to improve things, we get rebuffed. We speak up, we get ignored. We see the devastating impact a separation has on our children and we just have to swallow our misery and put up with it because we want what's best for our kids. That doesn't make our needs go away. We try, but eventually we have to get those needs met somewhere.

 

Of course that's not how things would work in an ideal world. In an ideal world, we would be listened to when we expressed unhappiness. Our spouse would be willing to work with us to improve the marriage. Our children would be robust enough, from good parenting, to withstand the trauma of a parental separation. But most of us don't live in an ideal world, we live in the real world, and we have to deal with the cards we're dealt, not those we wish we had been dealt.

 

How is cheating on your spouse 'putting your children first'?

[ThatJustHappened]

It's the OW's business as to whether or not he's happy. As an OW I have every right to my own opinion on anything I think is happening in a relationship that he is participating in, because he's also participating in a relationship with me. I also have opinions on things his friends do, his mom, his dad.. just like any girlfriend would and he has opinions on the other relationships in my life as well. I think what I'm hearing in your post is that you are upset with the OW in your life and because of that you are trying to impose your values. I understand and respect that, but the WS is the one that shared it.

 

 

Excellent points Summer.

 

 

I accept that my participation is wrong, but what you need to recognize is that I would know nothing about her if he didn't share it. There are many OW that know NOTHING about the BS, some don't even know what she looks like and could have lunch next to her and woudln't know. So, if the OW knows anything it's because it was shared by the BS's husband. I'm never going to tell him that I don't want to listen to anything he wants to tell me because I want to know anything he wants to share with me. Why do you think it's going to be a flat out lie or an exaggeration? I started to share a story, but I get rambley sometimes and suffice to say, I know he tends to downplay most of her most unattractive behaviors.

 

 

 

It is at the top of mine. I think it is for MOST people.

 

 

Mine did. I guess I don't find that all that odd. Why would he lie about it? If he knew he was going to get the "prize" being sex even if I was ok with him being happily married, and he knew that I abhor the idea of him not being honest with me, wouldn't telling a lie skew his opportunity?

 

 

I'm absolutely in my right mind and I knew from day 1 that he wasn't unhappy. That was my "plan" just plain sex, 1 night. The problem is I liked him. Not the sex, I didn't instantly fall head over heels... he was good company, he was fun, he was entertaining and funny and enjoyable. He became my friend. THAT lead to the affair.

 

You think affairs come from pity sex? Really? That seems.. shortsighted. I've never been at ANYONE's beck and call so that implication just seems silly to me.

 

 

 

I said almost exactly that when things began. Except I was MUCH more eloquent and a lot less crass.

 

 

Life would be better for everyone is people weren't so concerned with putting the children first. They'd be more honest with each other and actualy deal with their issues and situations instead of hiding behind their kids. It's not fair to the kids.

 

Wow. Just...wow. There are no words.

[Furious]

He's a very smart man, and he'd laugh a lot at the idea that you find me "docile"

 

He didn't have to be "good" at anything. I'm not a victim, I make my own choices and go into them with my eyes open.

 

 

 

A smart, happily married man, would have no problem having his OW believe she is not a victim and has her eyes open, he'd be a fool to argue with that.

 

Happily married or not, for the WS, it's really about keeping everyone on their proper side of the triangle and enjoying all sides of it.

[Saba]

You really think that people should use their kids as excuses to not be honest? Or to place the blame for things on? I don't.

 

I do believe that everyone should actually consider the welfare of their children. I believe that kids are the ones that are the innocent parties in this, they had no say in what the big people around them do, all the stupid choices made on EVERY side sometimes, but I think it's a worse situation when people tell each other (or themselves) that they are staying for the kids.

 

Think how those kids would feel to be told that.Whether it was true or not actually. And if it IS true would you want ot know that your parents stayed together because of you? I know I woudln't.

 

As an aside, I do not believe that kids should be brought up to think they are the center of the universe because it causes them to not take responsibility for their own actions, nor should they think they always have a say in adult matters. They should be taken care of, but adult choices, adult situations shouldn't be shoved in their faces.. that includes making them the scapegoats for someone else's choices. And you know, making them that, THAT's something that actually makes ME kinda .

 

Ohhhhhhhh dear. Putting children first does not mean you have to lie about what you want and need. It does mean that you have to treat your family (spouse and children) with respect regardless of what happens between the parents (divorce or stay and reconcile).

Edited October 16, 2012 by Saba
computer problems

[AnotherRound]

You can believe I'm bitter all you like if it makes you happy. Fact is, he's never once told me he was staying for his kids. If there was anything that would make me dump him that comment would probably be it. It bugs me when I hear of married men (and women) doing so. It bugs me when I hear people tell themselves they are staying for the kids and think it puts a lot of pressure on those kids for them to be "unhappy" all that time for them.

You were so busy trying to twist what I was actually saying that you missed that largely I AGREE with you. I think it's one of the worst things someone can do, to use their children as their excuse. It's not honest, it's not fair to the kids and it's setting the kids up to be hurt. You are welcome to infer any other meaning out of that if you'd like, but I'm usually pretty clear about saying what I mean.

 

Agreed. And the saddest part is, those who stay for the kids aren't doing the kids any favors. It's more damaging to stay and model a bad relationship, or a loveless relationship, than to just divorce and find happiness - bc at least then the children have two happy parents instead of two miserable ones. AND, they have a good idea of what a good relationship should look like - so we can break the freakin' cycle - ugh.

 

My exMM truly believed/believes that children from divorces end up in prison. He honestly does. He feels like that is the WORST thing that can happen to a child. However, now that he and stbxw are separated, and living apart - and divorcing - his child is THRIVING. His child's stress level has dropped and is practically non-existent bc he's not trapped in a house with two people who don't want to be together. He has better times with his mother and his father separately, bc they are happier apart. He is acing school, acing his sports, and MUCH happier and settled. ExMM has commented, "why the f was I staying all those years? My kid is doing great". *sigh* I tried to tell him.

 

I wish people would research this - divorce is NOT the end of the world for the people involved, or the children. Children are resilient, and adaptable - and as long as both parents remain present and involved and can be amicable - the children will be better than fine. Too bad so many believe the opposite and stay - and then later the kids are like, "wtf? you stayed for us? We HATED living with you two together!". *sigh*

[Mme. Chaucer]

It's the OW's business as to whether or not he's happy. As an OW I have every right to my own opinion on anything I think is happening in a relationship that he is participating in, because he's also participating in a relationship with me.

 

Are you, in your own opinion, an inherently superior human being to his wife?

 

Is that your explanation for why you have every right to my own opinion on anything you think is happening in a relationship that he is participating in, because he's also participating in a relationship with you?

 

But she is not entitled to the same the same right?

 

WHY?

 

That sounds really lame.

 

I mean, you have been perfectly upfront that his family means nothing to you, but when you say you have "rights" to know about his personal life, I'm wondering why the person he has chosen to spend his life with would not have at least these same "rights." From my perspective, she should have a lot more.

 

And I'm sure he thinks he has special "rights" in this trashy situation, particularly the "right" to tell the various women in his life whatever he feels he needs to in order to keep you all in your proper places.

[Mme. Chaucer]

I wish people would research this - divorce is NOT the end of the world for the people involved, or the children.

 

In the context of this thread, and this forum, for the most part we are talking about subjecting children to a life defined by parental lying, sneaking, emotional abandonment and cheating - not divorce.

 

I am probably not alone here in believing that it would be far preferable for children if a person who wanted to have sex with various folks besides their husband or wife would get a divorce rather than to lie and cheat.

 

Kids pick up on a lot. And being honest in ones life is one of the best things a person can model for their children.

[waterwoman]

Ahem! Radagast - I think you are guilty of selectively reading my post about 'the ideal world'. I went on to see that we don't live in an ideal world hence people not doing the right thing all the time. I have immense sympathy for people struggling in a complex situation who don't know which way to turn - that's most of us IME at some time or the other.

[frozensprouts]

Ohhhhhhhh dear. Putting children first does not mean you have to lie about what you want and need. It does mean that you have to treat your family (spouse and children) with respect regardless of what happens between the parents (divorce or stay and reconcile).

 

agreed.

 

This may get me some negative feedback, but I really do believe that when you make the derision to have children, you also make the decision to stop being selfish and seeing yourself as the center of the universe. You have to put your children's needs ahead of your own, and part of that is setting a good example for them.

 

Setting a good example includes teaching them things like kindness, compassion, empathy, and,most of all honesty. having an affair does nothing to teach them about any of these things...rather, it is an act of pure selfishness, and no words will change that fundamental fact. When you cheat, you make the choice to bring a bunch of r@p into their lives, whether they like it or not. They get hurt and the effects can last their whole lives.

As a parent, what right do you have to do that to your kids? What right does anyone have to do that to a child?

 

if you are that unhappy in your marriage and you really have tried everything to chnage it, then it's time to end things on the best of possible terms. Cheating will do nothing to help the situation.

[Spark1111]

You really think that people should use their kids as excuses to not be honest? Or to place the blame for things on? I don't.

 

I think someone should just say, I'm not happy, I've found someone else.

or

This isn't working and I'm moving out.

or

I want to be with you but I'm never leaving my wife and family because I don't want to.

or

I like my money and my car and not having people made at me.

or

I didn't really expect you'd want to place demands on me, but I'm not ok with that so I'm breaking up with you.

 

But instead, many people use their kids as excuses, not just for affairs but for lots of other things, career choices, moving, spending time with inlaws (or not), money issues, etc, the list goes on and on.

 

I do believe that everyone should actually consider the welfare of their children. I believe that kids are the ones that are the innocent parties in this, they had no say in what the big people around them do, all the stupid choices made on EVERY side sometimes, but I think it's a worse situation when people tell each other (or themselves) that they are staying for the kids.

 

Think how those kids would feel to be told that.Whether it was true or not actually. And if it IS true would you want ot know that your parents stayed together because of you? I know I woudln't.

 

As an aside, I do not believe that kids should be brought up to think they are the center of the universe because it causes them to not take responsibility for their own actions, nor should they think they always have a say in adult matters. They should be taken care of, but adult choices, adult situations shouldn't be shoved in their faces.. that includes making them the scapegoats for someone else's choices. And you know, making them that, THAT's something that actually makes ME kinda .

 

About the bolded: Children give not one whit about the state of their parents romantic happiness; those ego-centric little monsters!

 

And why should they? They are children fercryin'outloud!

 

Married or divorced, children want mommy and daddy to ACT as if they like and respect each other, no matter what they feel privately about each other.

 

Miserably married and can't hide it? Get out because your acrimony is hurting your children.

 

Miserably divorced and can't hide it? Have a mediator pick up and drop off the children.

 

Children do want mommy and daddy happy, but not at the expense of the happiness of the other parent.

 

Happily married, telling yourself and others that you are a solid family person, and having an affair is an oxymoron and a convolution of logic.

 

Unless you are a sociopath or narcissist who can succesfully compartmentalize your life to the extent that even those closest to you do not suspect a lesser investment of time and resources - emotional, physical, and financial.

[Decorative]

For some marriages this is correct. If the kids are under siege due to highly dysfunctional crazoid parents then perhaps a divorce could be better. However, this only applies to marriages from hell.

 

 

 

You have got to be kidding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

Psychiatry. 1991 Aug;54(3):268-80.

Academic performance in children of divorce: psychological resilience and vulnerability.

Mulholland DJ, Watt NF, Philpott A, Sarlin N.

Source

Major General James H. Rumbaugh Child and Adolescent Mental Health Clinic, Fayetteville, NC 28303.

Abstract

Parental divorce can be conceptualized as a stressful event for all children, but one must recognize that reactions to divorce can vary widely among children. This investigation was based on two basic ideas: 1) children of divorce as a group would show deficits in academic performance compared to children from intact families, even several years after their parents' separation, and 2) because factors that promote psychological resilience and vulnerability, we expected to find normal heterogeneity within the divorce sample. Among 96 middle-school adolescents from a suburban school district near Denver, children of divorce showed significant performance deficits in academic achievement, as reflected in grade-point average and scholastic motivation in middle school, but not in nationally normed tests of scholastic aptitude and other less direct measures of behavioral conformity. An analysis of GPA over time revealed strikingly disparate patterns of achievement between divorce and control groups. Corresponding patterns of scholastic aptitude scores, absence from school and comportment revealed no systematic differences over time. These results suggest strongly that parental divorce can be a critical event in the academic development of children. Large differences in academic achievement between our divorce group as a whole and the controls cannot be attributed, at least at the time of sampling, to differences in social class or intellectual ability. Despite a similar family background, i.e., marital dissolution, a minority of the children of divorce showed vulnerability in the pattern of academic achievement over time while the majority demonstrated academic careers not unlike that of the controls.

 

 

 

A 60 year literature review of 347 experimental studies confirmed that many studies have concluded that divorce has negative consequences for children's academic achievement (Kunz, 1992).

It was interesting to see if students whose families were intact had significantly different test scores and grades from those students who's parents had been separated or divorced. Such factors as emotional distraction and confusion were thought to be strong indicators of a difference in these two populations of students. Thus, the hypothesis would be that the students who had to deal with another factor in life, such as the divorce or separation of their parents, would achieve lower test scores and grades than those who did not have to deal with such distractions.

 

The Effects on Academics of Children Who Come from Divorced Families - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com

 

Children of divorce in the 1990s: An update of the Amato and Keith (1991) meta-analysis.

Amato, Paul R.

Journal of Family Psychology, Vol 15(3), Sep 2001, 355-370. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.15.3.355

Abstract

The present study updates the P. R. Amato and B. Keith (1991) meta-analysis of children and divorce with a new analysis of 67 studies published in the 1990s. Compared with children with continuously married parents, children with divorced parents continued to score significantly lower on measures of academic achievement, conduct, psychological adjustment, self-concept, and social relations. After controlling for study characteristics. curvilinear trends with respect to decade of publication were present for academic achievement, psychological well-being, self-concept, and social relations. For these outcomes, the gap between children with divorced and married parents decreased during the 1980s and increased again during the 1990s. (PsycINFO Database Record © 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

 

I was just getting ready to come on here and start refuting her claims. Thank you!

[nofool4u]

Agreed. And the saddest part is, those who stay for the kids aren't doing the kids any favors. It's more damaging to stay and model a bad relationship, or a loveless relationship, than to just divorce and find happiness - bc at least then the children have two happy parents instead of two miserable ones. AND, they have a good idea of what a good relationship should look like - so we can break the freakin' cycle - ugh.

 

Easily said by people who are the one causing the pain.

 

Not so easy on the end that finds out they have been betrayed and faces not being able to be with their children on a daily basis.

 

Having said that, after being through it all, I always advise someone divorce their cheating spouse. There are better people out there to be with.

[Stephanie]

A general reminder to keep the off topic and inflammatory posts off this thread.

 

Thanks

[nofool4u]

Ok, I'll word it this way, there is nothing "eloquent" about how one engages in an affair.

[AnotherRound]

I cannot believe I'm going to say this, but I actually agree with your premise. What you don't understand, as someone without children, is that it's a lot more complicated than just simply "researching."

 

For instance, when I divorced my ex husband I had a VERY difficult choice. It was much better for my kids to not see and hear the abuse, of course. That part was clear, but everything became blurred when I thought about the ramifications on the kids like having to spend time with him without me there to try to minimize his verbal and emotional abuse on them.

 

Of course, that's not the only example of why it wasn't necessarily as easy as simple research...I had so many things to consider. Yes, it was better for my kids in the long run, but to say the children are "better than fine" isn't correct, either. They have suffered immensely over the years.

 

I'm certainly not arguing that people should stay in a marriage for their kids, because I do not believe that. It's generally preferable that they not continue to live in a household where the family is being lied to and cheated on, but I understand that it may not always be an easy decision.

 

If you had children, you would understand that our kid's wellbeing ALWAYS comes first (which isn't to say that they're the center of the universe...there is a difference) and sometimes the way to go about making that happen is not always as clear as we would like it to be.

 

I agree 100% with you on this. We just believe it for different reasons maybe? No, I am not a parent - however, I am actually an expert on children, their development, and the effects of trauma and abuse. So, that is where my perspective comes from - that knowledge. It's not lay knowledge, but expertise - and I actively work with children who have experienced trauma and abuse, and have for years. So, not being a parent (despite the fact that I have raised children who I did not give birth to) doesn't really affect my understanding of these issues.

 

I agree that a child's well being should always come first - it's part of the agreement you inherently make when you decide to bring children into this world. The problem I see is that people sometimes get confused about WHAT exactly is in the child's best interest. Some people believe that a child should always have a mommy and a daddy in the home - at any cost - that is a problem, and I've seen it played out so many times. That's why I said to research it. Of course, every situation is different, all children are different, all parents are different - there is no one size fits all. But, GENERALLY, staying for the children is a mistake.

 

If a parent isn't happy, or is actually miserable, they can't parent their child as well as they could if they were happy and content. Parents have to be "okay" in order to be the best parent that they can be. If a parent is not "okay", their parenting IS going to suffer to some extent - and that is NOT in the best interest of the child. Children deserve two parents who are whole and settled - so that they can give their best to their children. If the parents can't do that together - then they are robbing that child - even though they may have convinced themselves that they are doing the child a favor.

 

In my exMMs case - this has proven to be absolutely true. He and his stbxw both stayed for their child - bc they believed that was the best for the child. What they didn't understand, or couldn't see, or refused to acknowledge - is that their relationship was creating an atmosphere of stress for their child, and it was causing problems for him. He was acting out in certain ways, exhibiting anxiety, etc. Now, since they have been living apart and are getting along better than ever bc they are no longer under the pressure of pretending or trying to force an intimate relationship that neither of them wanted - the stress is GONE. Their child is absolutely thriving. No more acting out, perfect grades, acing sports - relaxed and happy child - instead of the ball of anxiety he was before bc even though he was pretty unaware of the particulars for the most part, he was picking up on their unhappiness, big time.

 

So, to me, it's just another case where the parents were doing what they thought was best for him - but they were so wrong about what that was. Without the pressures of pretending or trying to force intimacy or denying their own needs - they are both happier, calmer, more relaxed and able to give their shared child the parents he has always deserved to have. They don't have to fight anymore, bc they aren't in a relationship anymore. They are working together, and parenting together - and doing a fantastic job of that - and their child is blooming with all of that care and relaxed attention. Their intentions were good - but their actions were exactly opposite of what would have been best for their child. It's an honest mistake, and one I don't hold against anyone. I just wish more people were aware.

 

I never said it was an easy decision when children are involved - on that we absolutely agree. That is why so many people don't divorce and have affairs instead - they THINK they are doing what is best for the child by keeping the appearance of a marriage for the child's sake. This turns out to be false most of the time UNLESS both parents are extremely good actors, which also is hardly ever the case - most of us are just human and aren't very good at hiding discontent, especially for long periods of time. And kids are intelligent, they pick up on feelings even when they can't verbally express them or analyze them properly as an adult would (which confuses them and often causes anxiety and/or acting out).

[AnotherRound]

In the context of this thread, and this forum, for the most part we are talking about subjecting children to a life defined by parental lying, sneaking, emotional abandonment and cheating - not divorce.

 

I am probably not alone here in believing that it would be far preferable for children if a person who wanted to have sex with various folks besides their husband or wife would get a divorce rather than to lie and cheat.

 

Kids pick up on a lot. And being honest in ones life is one of the best things a person can model for their children.

 

I agree with you. I wish that people would divorce and not have affairs, especially when there are children involved. The problem is though, that many people think that divorce will damage their children beyond repair - and that is simply not true (in most cases, there are probably a few, but I've not seen them or heard of them or dealt with them).

 

And, subjecting children to adult matters is not healthy - and I would never suggest it be done, ever. Children don't need those burdens on their shoulders, they can't carry them well and it will cause maladaptive behaviors - and the cycles will continue on and on. There are certain things in adult life that children should know nothing about - until they are adults, and even then it's dodgy at best.

 

And yes, being honest is paramount, and something I think all adults should model for children. Problem is, some people are convinced that it's less important to be honest than it is to present a faux marriage relationship for their children. That's where the disconnect happens - and I agree with you, it's not in the best interest of the children. I also think that men have affairs more partially bc of this situation. Historically, men have not been treated very fairly in family courts - and I don't know any men who are happy with 25% parenting time, or anything less than 100% - let alone 50% which is still a huge loss to what they have if they stay in the marriage. So, they hesitate to end a relationship that isn't working for them (or the spouse in most cases) for that reason. They are fearful of "losing" their children and understandably. They also almost always lose their homes - bc the mother is still the primary caretaker in the majority of cases in the US - and automatically gets the home bc she will have primary physical custody of the children.

 

So, men have a lot to lose in a divorce - so, they find a lesser loss (that of honesty, which their child may not even be privy to anyway) to deal with instead of the total loss by divorcing. I agree, it's not the best way to handle these types of situations - but people weigh out what they will lose, and these are their choices and I think that usually they truly do have good intentions. It's a messy situation for sure - and one that doesn't have a simple and easy solution.

Edited October 16, 2012 by AnotherRound

[Quiet Storm]

I agree 100% with you on this. We just believe it for different reasons maybe? No, I am not a parent - however, I am actually an expert on children, their development, and the effects of trauma and abuse. So, that is where my perspective comes from - that knowledge. It's not lay knowledge, but expertise - and I actively work with children who have experienced trauma and abuse, and have for years. So, not being a parent (despite the fact that I have raised children who I did not give birth to) doesn't really affect my understanding of these issues.

 

With 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 6 boys being victims of sexual abuse, I believe that a father's presence in the home can make a huge difference in the prevention of sexual abuse. Sexual abuse is a huge problem in this country.

 

A father in the home means that children won't be exposed to mom's boyfriends or stepfathers, which are often the perps. It means a father's presence will be felt and noticed by coaches and teachers, making the child a less favorable target for pedophiles. I have read countless stories of women who grew up without fathers in the home, and who admit to having daddy issues or abuse history. I think you have even admitted this with respect to your own life, AR. Sandusky's victims were fatherless boys. Would they have been victims and made to deal with that trauma for their entire lives if their fathers had been there? Does the absence of affection between the parents warrant the risks that kids of divorce often face? I don't think it even comes close. A father should feel the need to protect his kids, and telling him "it's all going to be fine" when you don't consider the risks or variables for those kids is wrong, IMO. Divorce often opens the door to many people and situations that are not in the best interest of the kids. Sexual abuse is not a rare thing...it happens to 25% of our nations girls!

 

I believe that divorce is a better option if the kids are exposed to abuse or addiction, but staying married is better for the kids in other situations. Kids are self focused and their parents happiness isn't that important to them. Especially not at the expense of their family unit.

 

In a perfect world, with perfect parents that have perfect coping skills, divorce could be a better option, but that almost never happens. Usually kids get stuck in the middle. They have to deal with pressure from both sides and divided loyalties. Their parents are not focused on them because they are dealing with financial problems, new partners & dating issues, and previously involved fathers often do the slow fade away. The reality of divorce and it's aftermath is very different from the fantasy of an amicable divorce where everyone ends up happier. Kids deal with it because they are given no choice but to adapt. Adapting and tolerating their new life does not mean that they are in the best environment to grow and thrive.

 

Life doesn't magically improve for the kids once divorce happens. They just get a whole new set of problems. Usually much bigger ones.

Edited October 16, 2012 by Quiet Storm