Could staying married for the sake of the kids sometimes be for the best?

[LostNtrapped]

Fan Question RP Lisa

 

According to research and popular belief it has been stated numerous times that staying together for the sake of the kids is never better for the kids than divorcing.

 

Obviously if there is abuse, constant arguing, addiction etc than divorce is best for the kids.

 

My question is if the parents are more like best friends, than intimate lovers, and get along great wouldn't it be better for the family to stay together? The marriage would be monogamous and intimacy would happen on the regular, but the wife wouldn't be completely sexually satisfied. Divorce based on this would be selfish, so she is torn.

 

Also, in the case of parents who are best friends etc, if splitting up the family would lead to one spouse having to live in low income housing, and be on assistance(due to injury); wouldn't it be best to just keep the family together, rather than to put the children in that sort of situation?

 

I'm just curious for those who came from broken homes and were happier for it, if their situation involved parents who got along and were best friends would that have changed their view?

[mightycpa]

Would the parents have to stay monogamous? With whom? Is this something that kids of broken homes would know?

 

I just know that the children of divorced parents are going to bristle at that term, and declare that what you're proposing is the "broken home".

[road]

Staying in a bad marriage is not the goal.

 

Using the kids as motivation to stay in the marriage and recover

the marriage to make the marriage better then before the affair is

what motivation is all about.

[LostNtrapped]

Staying in a bad marriage is not the goal.

 

Using the kids as motivation to stay in the marriage and recover

the marriage to make the marriage better then before the affair is

what motivation is all about.

 

What affair? I'm asking if a marriage is pretty good and the couple gets along well etc wouldn't staying married be best for the kids? The whole 80/20 rule thing ya know?

[Gr8fuln2020]

Fan Question RP Lisa

 

According to research and popular belief it has been stated numerous times that staying together for the sake of the kids is never better for the kids than divorcing.

 

Obviously if there is abuse, constant arguing, addiction etc than divorce is best for the kids.

 

My question is if the parents are more like best friends, than intimate lovers, and get along great wouldn't it be better for the family to stay together? The marriage would be monogamous and intimacy would happen on the regular, but the wife wouldn't be completely sexually satisfied. Divorce based on this would be selfish, so she is torn.

 

Also, in the case of parents who are best friends etc, if splitting up the family would lead to one spouse having to live in low income housing, and be on assistance(due to injury); wouldn't it be best to just keep the family together, rather than to put the children in that sort of situation?

 

I'm just curious for those who came from broken homes and were happier for it, if their situation involved parents who got along and were best friends would that have changed their view?

 

Is there talk of divorce b/c the wife is not sexually satisfied? If she isn't then wouldn't she seek it elsewhere? And if so, you are encouraging an adulterous affair? The children will never know? Find out? Friends, family?

 

Why the talk of divorce?

[LostNtrapped]

Is there talk of divorce b/c the wife is not sexually satisfied? If she isn't then wouldn't she seek it elsewhere? And if so, you are encouraging an adulterous affair? The children will never know? Find out? Friends, family?

 

Why the talk of divorce?

 

There is no actual talk of a divorce. I was simply asking more so from people who could think hypothetically. Just because a spouse is not sexually satisfied, thst doesnt automatically mean adultry will occur. If it did everyone would end up cheating at one point or time throughout a marriage, no one is sexually satisfied 100%. Basically ending a marriage over lack of sex isn't a legitimate reason to split is it?

[somanymistakes]

If you're both actually happy to stay together and stay married it wouldn't really be an issue in the first place that required you to 'stay for the kids'

 

It would be silly to end a marriage because one person wants sex 20 times a month and the other only wants it 19. But if one wants 20 and the other wants 1, that is a huge unsustainable gap that is going to lead to one or both partners being constantly unhappy. Whatever the reason, if one partner is constantly unhappy and the other cannot or will not fix it, there's an issue.

 

Of course a lack of sexual satisfaction doesn't automatically mean adultery will occur, but if someone is unsatisfied over a long term it's either going to lead to adultery, divorce, or being miserable. And while it might be the most good for the most people to stay together - "Well, I'm happy and the kids are happy, only you are miserable, so this is the best choice!" - that sucks a lot for the person being chosen as the sacrifice.

[MJJean]

Fan Question RP Lisa

 

According to research and popular belief it has been stated numerous times that staying together for the sake of the kids is never better for the kids than divorcing.

 

Obviously if there is abuse, constant arguing, addiction etc than divorce is best for the kids.

 

My question is if the parents are more like best friends, than intimate lovers, and get along great wouldn't it be better for the family to stay together? The marriage would be monogamous and intimacy would happen on the regular, but the wife wouldn't be completely sexually satisfied. Divorce based on this would be selfish, so she is torn.

 

Also, in the case of parents who are best friends etc, if splitting up the family would lead to one spouse having to live in low income housing, and be on assistance(due to injury); wouldn't it be best to just keep the family together, rather than to put the children in that sort of situation?

 

I'm just curious for those who came from broken homes and were happier for it, if their situation involved parents who got along and were best friends would that have changed their view?

 

I firmly believe that staying in a "best friends rather than intimate lovers" marriage isn't best for the kids. Kids learn about relationships by watching their families. Kids tend to emulate the marriage modeled for them by their parents. A "best friends" marriage isn't something I'd want to model for my children.

 

Having lived in low income housing, I'd much rather move back to low income housing than stay in a sexually unsatisfying marriage. I met a lot of great people in low income housing who I am still in touch with to this day. We've watched each other grow up and we've watched our kids grow up.

 

Long story short-ish, my mom and Dad loved each other, but were about at the "just friends" point when my siblings were in elementary school. I didn't really get it at the time, I just knew something was "off". Hindsight being what it is, I am almost certain my parents would have amicably split if it weren't for us kids and finances. I wish they would have. I think my mother would have been much happier and my father would have been less tense all the time.

 

There is no actual talk of a divorce. I was simply asking more so from people who could think hypothetically. Just because a spouse is not sexually satisfied, thst doesnt automatically mean adultry will occur. If it did everyone would end up cheating at one point or time throughout a marriage, no one is sexually satisfied 100%. Basically ending a marriage over lack of sex isn't a legitimate reason to split is it?

 

No, sexual dissatisfaction doesn't mean adultery will occur. It just ups the chances.

 

I don't know who you've been talking to, but there absolutely are people who are married and 100% sexually satisfied. I'm one of them.

 

Considering how important sex is to a romantic relationship I'd say an unsatisfying sex life is a legitimate reason to divorce.

[aileD]

I read a study once that said it IS better (for the kids) to stay married for the kids if the marriage isn't volatile .

 

Theory is that kids don't really care about their parents happiness at most ages, they care about their own. They care about stability, structure, familiarity and it's better for their mental health that they don't have to deal with the stressors of divorce.

 

That's from the viewpoint of "are the kids better off". ....

 

If you don't take parental happiness into account and the marriage is not violent then they say yes the kids are better off.

 

 

A friend from high school had this happen. Right after he graduated (he was youngest) they took one more big vacation as a family then amicably divorced. He is thankful he had a stable home life and didn't have to deal with different houses and sharing holidays and guilt and step parents when he was focused on school and sports

Edited May 30, 2017 by aileD

[hippychick3]

I read a study once that said it IS better (for the kids) to stay married for the kids if the marriage isn't volatile .

 

Theory is that kids don't really care about their parents happiness at most ages, they care about their own. They care about stability, structure, familiarity and it's better for their mental health that they don't have to deal with the stressors of divorce.

 

That's from the viewpoint of "are the kids better off". ....

 

If you don't take parental happiness into account and the marriage is not violent then they say yes the kids are better off.

 

 

A friend from high school had this happen. Right after he graduated (he was youngest) they took one more big vacation as a family then amicably divorced. He is thankful he had a stable home life and didn't have to deal with different houses and sharing holidays and guilt and step parents when he was focused on school and sports

 

I read the same study.

 

I was in a fairly volatile marriage, as were my own parents, so cannot relate to the study.

[LostNtrapped]

I read a study once that said it IS better (for the kids) to stay married for the kids if the marriage isn't volatile .

 

Theory is that kids don't really care about their parents happiness at most ages, they care about their own. They care about stability, structure, familiarity and it's better for their mental health that they don't have to deal with the stressors of divorce.

 

That's from the viewpoint of "are the kids better off". ....

 

If you don't take parental happiness into account and the marriage is not violent then they say yes the kids are better off.

 

 

A friend from high school had this happen. Right after he graduated (he was youngest) they took one more big vacation as a family then amicably divorced. He is thankful he had a stable home life and didn't have to deal with different houses and sharing holidays and guilt and step parents when he was focused on school and sports

 

See this is what I meant. Do you possibly have a link to that study?

[mikeylo]

If its a huge dissatisfaction and the partner is completely ignoring and not contributing to make sex life better or bearable then its going to spread in other areas. Once it spreads to everyday life ( it will), entire family gets affected and then time becomes ripe for either affair or divorce.