Freedom Now Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 I always have respect for someone who can tell the truth. If I found that my parents had lied to me abut something so important as this, I would lose respect for both of them The truth is important in the case of divorce so that the kids don't blame themselves. If I was to have an affair (when h*ll freezes over), I would much rather my kids know the truth, then think it's their fault. I am responsible for my own actions and take responsibly for the fall out of anything I choose to do. I wouldn't do anything in the first place that would hurt my kids. Maybe if the MM would think about these issues before he had the affair, he wouldn't have to worry so much about how his W and kids will react. We aren't talking about lying to the kids. I didn't do that and neither did my parents. We are talking by being vindictive and vengeful in the separation which turns the kids against a parent all in the spirit of just "telling the kids the truth." The children do NOT need to know every detail of a breakup. It isn't right nor necessary. At no time did my father or mother lie to us kids. And neither did my ex-husband or I. But the divorces had a very different outcome for the kids involved based on the manner in which the breakup was handled. Link to post Share on other sites
Ladyjane14 Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 Bonehead, Why is everyone ignoring your questions? I would like to read the answer to your questions myself. Who ignored it? I know I already answered it already on page 10. I have no problem using a word like "deserting" if it's true. And I'm certainly not going to shrink from using it here in this forum, because to be honest... that's the way I see it. But.... it's unlikely I'd use that word with the kids unless there were also an element of real abandonment. The word itself, "desertion" is capable of transferring perceptions unless it's used in it's correct context. Link to post Share on other sites
Freedom Now Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 I'll answer. No, BN, if the father has done no such thing, then it's wrong for the mother to lie about it. Where is the father that the mother is alone with the kids to tell them such awful lies about him?\ In my case, my father was not allowed near my brothers or sisters. And eventually, after hearing her trash him over and over again, they didn't want him around. He missed three of his kids weddings because he wasn't invited. He wanted to go but was not welcome. Now THAT is sad. (And, BTW, the three siblings that didn't invite him to their wedding deeply regret it and now have a relationship with our dad.) Link to post Share on other sites
Ladyjane14 Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 I always have respect for someone who can tell the truth. If I found that my parents had lied to me abut something so important as this, I would lose respect for both of them The truth is important in the case of divorce so that the kids don't blame themselves. If I was to have an affair (when h*ll freezes over), I would much rather my kids know the truth, then think it's their fault. I am responsible for my own actions and take responsibly for the fall out of anything I choose to do. I wouldn't do anything in the first place that would hurt my kids. Maybe if the MM would think about these issues before he had the affair, he wouldn't have to worry so much about how his W and kids will react. EXACTLY. But failing the foresight to prioritize the kids, it seems to me that the MM or MW could at least 'own' their junk and take their lumps for the sake of clarity. So often people want to sit around saying 'it's all about the kids', when meanwhile back at the ranch, they're making a mockery of the family dynamic. Link to post Share on other sites
Freedom Now Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 It is incredible to me that some people actually think that what my mother did to us kids was justified. I will bow out of the conversation. It is too difficult for me to post on. Walk twenty years in my shoes and perhaps you will understand where I am coming from . Peace to you all and Happy New Year. Link to post Share on other sites
Author herenow Posted December 30, 2006 Author Share Posted December 30, 2006 We aren't talking about lying to the kids. I didn't do that and neither did my parents. We are talking by being vindictive and vengeful in the separation which turns the kids against a parent all in the spirit of just "telling the kids the truth." The children do NOT need to know every detail of a breakup. It isn't right nor necessary. At no time did my father or mother lie to us kids. And neither did my ex-husband or I. But the divorces had a very different outcome for the kids involved based on the manner in which the breakup was handled. What we are talking about is facing up to the consequences of your actions. In general, what I'm reading here is that those involved in affairs fear what the BS will do if the truth is told. They fear that the kids will either, "be taken away" (not legal unless there are grounds for it), or the kids will hate them for it (very possible), or that MM will lose his dignity (probable), and so on. I'm just saying that maybe people should think about these things before the enter into affairs in the first place. What happened to ending a bad marriage because it's bad and moving on? I'm sure will all the divorces out there, kids can understand that better than an affair. Link to post Share on other sites
bonehead Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 So... let's say for example that Dad ran off with his secretary. He hasn't been seen or heard from in over a year. Are you REALLY going to tell your kid that Daddy's on an extended vacation and there aren't any phones where he's at? C'mon. Then YOU are the one losing credibility with the kid. He already knows his "hamster" didn't run away. Why patronize him? Oh come on. Pull a no brainer like that one out?? You wouldnt need to tell the kids anything, they would see it. Link to post Share on other sites
Author herenow Posted December 30, 2006 Author Share Posted December 30, 2006 It is incredible to me that some people actually think that what my mother did to us kids was justified. I will bow out of the conversation. It is too difficult for me to post on. Walk twenty years in my shoes and perhaps you will understand where I am coming from . Peace to you all and Happy New Year. FN, I'm certainly not justifying what your mother did. I believe I said that I was sorry you had to experience such and ordeal. I think there are other ways to handle these situations as parents together. Your mother was not putting your best interest first. She was looking out for herself. I feel that the MM is looking out for himself when he makes parenting decisions on his own. Link to post Share on other sites
Ladyjane14 Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 It is incredible to me that some people actually think that what my mother did to us kids was justified. Who said that? It doesn't sound like your mother told you the factual truth. It sounds like she applied liberal opinion to her version of it. And for the LAST TIME.... that's the difference we're talking about. Kids rarely end up hating their parents, regardless of the fact that some of them probably should. How many people tolerate relationships with parents who are actually toxic to them, even when they're all grown up and don't have to. My mother's father abused her horribly to the point of broken bones. And yet... she managed to forgive him for it. Go figure. I have no illusions that my parents cheated on one another before their divorce. But because they were dishonest and neither has ever admitted it, I can't respect their truthfulness even all these years later. I'll forever take their words with a grain of salt. Because even though they won't admit it, I KNOW they've lied to me. Link to post Share on other sites
bonehead Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 However, if he's spending his time elsewhere and isn't around for the kids' soccer games and to help them with homework and be there to listen to their problems and successes and to give them a goodnight kiss, yes he has abandoned them emotionally. A 10 minute phone call per night from his OW's place is hardly being there for his kids when he is choosing to be elsewhere solely for the purpose of carrying on his affair. but he can be THERE for them without being THERE for the marriage. So if a ten minute phone call at night isnt acceptable, then a joint custody arrangement isnt acceptable? Link to post Share on other sites
Freedom Now Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 FN, I'm certainly not justifying what your mother did. I believe I said that I was sorry you had to experience such and ordeal. I think there are other ways to handle these situations as parents together. Your mother was not putting your best interest first. She was looking out for herself. I feel that the MM is looking out for himself when he makes parenting decisions on his own. Yes, the best interest of the kids is to be first and foremost in a divorce. And telling them that their dad abandoned or deserted them is not in the best interest of the kids under any circumstances. Sadly, though, many children hear just those words. And, sadly, that is what many MM fear. No excuses. But, based on my life experiences, a fact. And that is why some (not all) stay. It just isn't worth it to leave. Link to post Share on other sites
bonehead Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 HN, Yes I fully agree with you first post here. And I am sorry this subject gets to me so much Link to post Share on other sites
Ladyjane14 Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 You wouldnt need to tell the kids anything, they would see it. They see all the other bullsh*t going on inside their family too. It's the grown ups who are too naive to see that they're leaving unanswered questions, and thus allowing the kids to imagine the worst. Hubris. Link to post Share on other sites
puddleofmud Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 EXACTLY. But failing the foresight to prioritize the kids, it seems to me that the MM or MW could at least 'own' their junk and take their lumps for the sake of clarity. So often people want to sit around saying 'it's all about the kids', when meanwhile back at the ranch, they're making a mockery of the family dynamic. INDEED! ~ very wise words and something to ponder. Can one truly be a family while faking being a family? This doesn't mean that spouses are having having sex or not having sex--this may not be the definition of family, as spouses' sex lives are none of their children's business-(sex is an adult behavior--even if it is quite passionate and working well), thus, making it so obvious that one parent is sleeping on the couch is throwing that in the children's faces. Not really healthy nor that telling a child Mommy is over at sos and sos and not with us because she wants to be w/ him more than w. us... I feel what children need is that "united front". Whether living together or not: "Your Mother and I both agree that you are too young to wear make-up--so give me the make-up and go wash your face". "Your Father and I both agree that your bed time is at nine on school nights--so go to bed!". Children do need normalacy but not one that is skewed. Remaining in a marriage for the children could be possible but only if both spouses communicate honestly and have a set plan as to how they will deal w. it as the status quo is no longer there and an illusion will not suffice. Link to post Share on other sites
Ladyjane14 Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 but he can be THERE for them without being THERE for the marriage. Not if he's actively mistreating their mother within the same home. Link to post Share on other sites
Author herenow Posted December 30, 2006 Author Share Posted December 30, 2006 HN, Yes I fully agree with you first post here. And I am sorry this subject gets to me so much No worries BH. I think it's good to express whatever you want. That's what these board are for. I learn so much from other peoples experiences. Agree or disagree, it's what we think and who we are. Can't change that! Link to post Share on other sites
bonehead Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 Not if he's actively mistreating their mother within the same home He doesnt have to be in the home with their mother to be there for the kids. Link to post Share on other sites
Author herenow Posted December 30, 2006 Author Share Posted December 30, 2006 INDEED! ~ very wise words and something to ponder. Can one truly be a family while faking being a family? This doesn't mean that spouses are having having sex or not having sex--this may not be the definition of family, as spouses' sex lives are none of their children's business-(sex is an adult behavior--even if it is quite passionate and working well), thus, making it so obvious that one parent is sleeping on the couch is throwing that in the children's faces. Not really healthy nor that telling a child Mommy is over at sos and sos and not with us because she wants to be w/ him more than w. us... I feel what children need is that "united front". Whether living together or not: "Your Mother and I both agree that you are too young to wear make-up--so give me the make-up and go wash your face". "Your Father and I both agree that your bed time is at nine on school nights--so go to bed!". Children do need normalacy but not one that is skewed. Remaining in a marriage for the children could be possible but only if both spouses communicate honestly and have a set plan as to how they will deal w. it as the status quo is no longer there and an illusion will not suffice. POM, thank you, thank you, thank you. That is what I have been trying to say all along! Staying for the kids is a two parent decision! Link to post Share on other sites
norajane Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 but he can be THERE for them without being THERE for the marriage. So if a ten minute phone call at night isnt acceptable, then a joint custody arrangement isnt acceptable? Yes, I agree he can be there for them if not the marriage. That's why I said he might have abandoned the wife emotionally, though perhaps not the kids. But it's also possible he might NOT be there for the kids as well as not being there for his wife. It depends on what his actions actually are or are not when it comes to whether he has abandoned his kids as well as the marriage. Why are you putting words in my mouth about joint custody? When did I ever bring that up? I was talking about the 10 minute call in the context of a parent who is not parenting because s/he is away carrying on an affair. Joint custody is an arrangement that happens after a divorce, not during an affair. Joint custody implies that both parents spend time caring for their children. It also implies that even when dad or mom doesn't have the kids, they do attend to their needs by showing up for events in their kids lives and being available to their children. And if a parent can only call his kids when it's not his turn to have them in his own home, that's very, very different from the parent who only duty calls his kids while away with his/her affair partner. Link to post Share on other sites
Ladyjane14 Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 He doesnt have to be in the home with their mother to be there for the kids. Well duh. People don't necessarily have to be married to raise healthy kids. But they ought to at least be honest and respectful.... not only with the other parent, but also with the children. Lots of divorced people raise perfectly well adjusted kids, and they don't desert them emotionally or physically. As Puddle has so eloquently pointed out, it's possible to adopt all kinds of parenting strategies. But the key is to put the kids first, not personal lives and not secrecy. Link to post Share on other sites
bonehead Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 Sorry, as Im sure you have figured out this is a very sore topic with me. I do believe that there would be less " Im staying for the kids " if fathers were not looked down on for wanting out of a marriage, with or without an OW. Link to post Share on other sites
Freedom Now Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 I agree bonehead. (Yeah, this is a very sore subject for me, too.) Link to post Share on other sites
bonehead Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 a man CANT tell his wife that he is staying for the kids. Because she wouldnt accept that. Then he is kicked to the curb and deserted his wife and kids. Link to post Share on other sites
Author herenow Posted December 30, 2006 Author Share Posted December 30, 2006 a man CANT tell his wife that he is staying for the kids. Because she wouldnt accept that. Then he is kicked to the curb and deserted his wife and kids. But he can have a discussion with his wife about problems in their marriage even before the affair begins. That really has nothing to do with the kids at all. Link to post Share on other sites
Freedom Now Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 I think some of these MM are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Good thing I'm a woman. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts