Should one put one's children first?

[olazani777]

I would like to soem views on the following:

 

Should one put one's children before their mate?

 

Personally, while I think children are important and need quite a bit of nuturing and lots of love. Our mates need the same. Adults need love, compassion, concern, and the like too...Both men and women. From my viewpoint, children are the byproduct of a man and a woman coming together "with love" (or at least they should be). The keyword here is byproduct!!! It is not logical to put the byproduct of a circumstance before that which produced it. Hence, it is wrong for a man or a woman to put their children before their mate!!!

 

What do you thinK?

[Ally Boo]

Your kids need attention from you BOTH, but unless you have a strong bond, how can you show a strong relationship to your kids? Your mate is supposed to be your best friend, not your child.

[BeReal]

I think it depends on the situation. Your spouse is important but sometimes the kids need to come before your own needs. An adult can take care of most their own needs while a child needs help and guidance. I think when you choose to have children, you choose to do some sacrificing. Did you have a specific situation in mind?

[Ally Boo]

Of course the kids have needs that go before the relationship, like eating, nurturing, etc. But what we're saying is, the relationship doesn't need to go on the back burner. It's important that you invest just as much if not more time into having a healthy relationship with your spouse...because in a way, that's providing for your kids too.

[Lila]

I was always taught family first. I don't like the term "children first." It sounds like you're spoiling them. However, children are generally more needy and require more attention...so, it often seems as though they come first.

[jessicakicksbut]

I am not sure of anyone's beliefs in this forum, but the Bible states that the husband/wife is supposed to come first, then the children.

[HokeyReligions]

Originally posted by jessicakicksbut

I am not sure of anyone's beliefs in this forum, but the Bible states that the husband/wife is supposed to come first, then the children.

 

Which bible? Where does it say that? I'm just curious.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I was brought up that children come first. That does not mean that the spouse should be ignored, but Children's needs must be top priority. Children don't choose their parents, but the parents choose each other. If it came down to a choice between husband or children, the children would win hands down. I would expect that of my husband too.

 

I remember arguing with my mom when I was a kid - maybe 7 or 8, and it was something about families and my logic at the time was that I was born into the family and she only married into it! But that actually says a lot about how my family views children. I come from a long line of christians which is why I'm asking where in the bible it says that the spouse comes first and in what context that is written. I had to read the bible a long time ago when I had to go to sunday school, but I don't remember it now.

[Carly]

The late and very beloved Fred Rogers, ("Mr. Roger's Neighborhood) once said that the best security blanket that parents can give their child is a close, loving relationship between each other.

 

Of COURSE the child's needs come before either of the parents when it comes to care, nurturance, protection from harm, and survival. Any of you parents reading this know that you would give up your life and that of your spouse in order to save your child's life.

 

But what I think this thread is really about is where your allegiance lies: with your partner or your child.

 

I think that in any healthy family relationship, the child should know that he or she never does and never will break the primary allegiance or bond between his parents.

 

I think that it must be scary as hell for any child to know that he has the power over his parents' relationship to cause friction between them and undermine their matrimonial bond.

 

I hate to see parents arguing about a child rearing issue in front of the child. It is distressing to see when a child can ask one parent for permission to do something and then can turn around and ask the other parent for a better answer if he doesn't like the first answer.

 

It is equally distressing to see one parent intervene when the other is disciplining the child or rendering a decision that the child doesn't like. Undermining the other parent in front of the child is no good for the child or the relationship.

 

Rule of thumb: Whichever parent makes the decision first sticks. End of story.

 

And another beef I have is when parents spend no time together alone, yet spend inordinate hours with their kids. If time together is limited, spend of that time with the whole family, but make sure to keep some time aside for mom and dad.

 

Worse than all of these is when parents allow the child to sleep in their bed -- thereby giving the child the power to interfere with the intimate bond between his parents. There is some scary subliminal incestuous message there as well, but I am sure some readers will be offended by this suggestion.

 

One of my favourite children's books is Bedtime for Frances. It's about a little girl (hedgehog or something) who doesn't want to go to bed and keeps getting up. Try as she might, Frances never manages to break the bond between mom and dad, who continue to enjoy their private time together (sitting close, watching tv, sharing a snack).

 

All this said, a parent has EVERY right to intervene and show primary allegiance to their child if the other parent is abusive toward their child. That is where the parent's responsibility to PROTECt their child from harm comes in, and if such actions are required, then they parents shouldn't be together anyway.

[Newlywed8676]

I am not sure if it is even officially stated in the bible but I have always been taught that per Christian beliefs, your mate should always come first. I know this subject was touched on several times during the marriage preparation classes. In fact it may have even been a question on the compatibility test. It is true though that children require nurturing and guidance especially at young ages and should in no way be neglected. If you create a child it is your responsibility to give them everything you have to give. I am a newlywed & currently pregnant and I don't see how I could ever not make my husband my main priority but the thought of my upcoming child not being my main priority seems horrible too. Can't it just be both?

 

Unless you are talking a dramatic hypothetical situation where you can save one or the other (presuming there is only one child in question) from a terrible death & giving your own life instead is not an option. If I were asked that question now I would say my mate but could very well have a different answer after the child is born.

[jessicakicksbut]

Yes, I was always taught as per Christian beliefs that the mate comes first as well, and remember reading a verse in the Bible stating this. I am going to do a little research and try to find that verse. As soon as I find it, I will post it. If I don't find it, I will let you know as well.

[HokeyReligions]

But what I think this thread is really about is where your allegiance lies: with your partner or your child.

I don't see it as a choice - allegiance, imo, should be with the family and that includes both.

 

I think that in any healthy family relationship, the child should know that he or she never does and never will break the primary allegiance or bond between his parents.

 

I think that it must be scary as hell for any child to know that he has the power over his parents' relationship to cause friction between them and undermine their matrimonial bond.

No child has that "power" any friction between parents is theirs and has nothing to do with the child. A child can be used as a weapon or a shield, but holds no power or authority over the decisions that parents make.

 

I hate to see parents arguing about a child rearing issue in front of the child. It is distressing to see when a child can ask one parent for permission to do something and then can turn around and ask the other parent for a better answer if he doesn't like the first answer.

It's natural to play one parent against the other - kids do it all the time as they test their boundaries growing up. It's up to the parents to teach their children that tactic doesn't work and why. Unfortunatly, a lot of parents don't have good parenting skills and don't know how to deal with this situation.

 

Worse than all of these is when parents allow the child to sleep in their bed -- thereby giving the child the power to interfere with the intimate bond between his parents. There is some scary subliminal incestuous message there as well, but I am sure some readers will be offended by this suggestion.

Well, I'm not offended, but I did get a good laugh out of this! I don't see anything wrong with the kids sleeping with the parents - it helps build a closer bond with parent and child. What safer place is there for a child then snuggled between mom and dad in a warm, safe bed, cradled by their parents? My kids did that at different times and for different reasons when they were little. Having your child sleep in the bed with you in no way interferes with an intimate bond between the parents, unless the parents make a decision to allow that to happen. If the parents feel that it is interferring, it is not because of some power the child has, but because of the decision of the parents. Sometimes my husband and I would be filled with so much love for our children and what we created together, that it brought us even closer.

[Carly]

I reason that I love this site is that is allows the original poster to see such different views on the same issue.

 

Hokey, you suggest that having your children in bed with you did not interfere with the matrimonial bond between you. But have you not declared in previous posts that your marriage has been celebate for the past decades? Your situation hardly makes a strong case for your position.

 

Don't get me wrong -- I am not passing judgement on this arrangement between you and your husband. But I think that if you are disclosing your own experience as support for your view that kids in parents bed have no bearing on a family's sexual dynamics, then you should be honest with all relevent facts to help the reader make up his or her mind.

 

And I almost wince to push this delicate point, but I believe that celebate couples who bring their kids in bed are committing a grave psyhcological disservice to their kids for reasons relating to oedipal complexes and repressed incestuous desires.

 

Come to think of it, any couple sleeping with their kids every night bloody well BETTER be celebate or they are committing an even greater crime in front of their kids; unless of course they hook up in the middle of the day while the kids are napping?! Heck, that's when I used to run the laundry and clear the breakfast table off but maybe I was old-fashioned...).

 

Guess I've laid my psychoanalytic cards on the table on this one, and I'm sure you don't buy any of it. But that's OK with me because I know full well that my beliefs could never be proven either way.

 

Psychoanalysis is a lot like hokey religions (or any religions): The true believers don't require any proof, while the non-believers will never accept any proof (or something like that I once heard about religion).

[Beffie40]

You will be with your mate a lot longer than your children will be with you. While children are incredibly important, the partnership between you and your mate should come first.

[Reckless]

Interesting thread. First of all I can assure you it doesn't say anywhere in the bible that your spouse should come before your children or visa versa. All the bible says is that you should love God first and then your neighbour as yourself. As far as families are concerned, biblically it is the husband and wife that are considered 'one flesh' not the children. This is not to suggest that the children are unimportant, as has already been stated that depending on the circumstances, in a normal family there will be many occasions when both parents sacrifice their personal interests in favor of the immediate physical, emotional or spiritual needs of their children - this seems normal and logical.

 

However, the parents relationship is very much like the boat that the children live on, if the relationship goes down the children suffer. If a couple neglect each other, have nothing to talk about but the children, do not make time for to fulfill each others needs and the 'ship' of the family sinks, ending in at most a stale unhappy marriage or at worst a broken home, the children 'go down' there are no winners in that situation. Most children of divorced parents know that their parents love them, it doesn't stop the pain of seeing their family break up.

 

Of course there are circumstances, an abusive or alcoholic partner for example, when to protect the children someone might choose to sacrifice their union but in 'normal circumstances' one of the biggest errors people make is neglecting their partner in favor of the children. The strains and stresses of modern living may seem to impose a choice but in reality there shouldn't be a conflict.

 

Logically the love between a husband and a wife is unique, totally different from paternal love and the two shouldn't normally encroach on each other. I say normally because there are plenty of dysfunctional families out there where the lines between parental love and partner love are somewhat blurry.

 

Bottom line, neglecting your partner's basic needs in favor of your children is like failing to steer a ship around an iceberg because you don't want to give the passengers a bumpy ride - A happy stable marriage is the best thing you can give your children, by doing that you DO put them first!