PDA

View Full Version : Are you with or against?Should couples with children to be divorced?



lit.girl
12-25-2010, 05:02 AM
My topic is clear. So what do you think? Should couples with children to be divorced?

About me they have not to be divorced even they have difficult problems that they can not solve them with each other. Children desperately need their parents. They need their cares and love with tenderness. i think its children rights and parents should do every things for their children to make them happy. Moreover, if they lack of interest with them children may grow up unitize, and mentally ill. In this way, it leads to many huge problems. For instance, children may be grow up criminally and this mean they will damage every things even if themselves.

see how it will effect children in the future. children need their parents, need the happiness and love.

what do you think?

Sorry i want more idea about this topic because next week i have writing essay exam it worth 20% of the grade omg!
if you have good resourses to use it in writing please do not skimp.
and thanks all

Big Dante
12-25-2010, 06:58 AM
Good start. It's a topic that I wouldn't normally make a decision about and I still won't but because you need it for your exam.

If you are expected to have an opinion do what is right to you because you will be able to provide a stronger arguement than going against your beliefs.

Otherwise don't be biased, give arguements to both sides but then you will probably have to pick a side when summing up in your conclusion. (you may be able to avoid doing so however)

lit.girl
12-25-2010, 12:46 PM
Good start. It's a topic that I wouldn't normally make a decision about and I still won't but because you need it for your exam.

If you are expected to have an opinion do what is right to you because you will be able to provide a stronger argument than going against your beliefs.

Otherwise don't be biased, give arguments to both sides but then you will probably have to pick a side when summing up in your conclusion. (you may be able to avoid doing so however)


yeah you are right. But its my opponents to write my side not other side the opposite. In the counter argument i have to write other side but in my thesis i must write my side to write first and second argument. That why i want more idea about what people think to develop my counter argument and also conclusion.

please people i have started write my essay please help me i need more ideas pleeeeaaaaseee

weltanschauung
12-28-2010, 02:25 PM
parents should get divorced sooner. lets go even further, people shouldnt get married.

lit.girl
12-29-2010, 12:53 AM
why not give the reasons??

iamnobody
12-29-2010, 02:07 AM
In an ideal world all children would be raised by two loving and happy parents. That is not always the reality. When two people are no longer happy but try to stay together "for the kids" resentment builds, causing everyone even more stress and anxiety. Children are not better off being raised in a toxic environment with fighting, miserable parents. Not only do they (the children) feel all the tension and stress in the home, but they also may feel guilt. They know what's going on.

Buh4Bee
12-29-2010, 10:28 AM
I say it is better to stay married and miserable. It's better for a child to be raised in a miserable home than a broken home. This may not be true if there is some kind of on-going domestic abuse.

Nazish
12-29-2010, 10:51 AM
I say it is better to stay married and miserable. It's better for a child to be raised in a miserable home than a broken home. This may not be true if there is some kind of on-going domestic abuse.

I completely agree.

Haunted
12-29-2010, 10:58 AM
Here's the arguments for divorce:

one:
So a child growing up in a family where they parents don't love each other and fight all the time is a good thing for the child's mental health? That's insane.

two:
You are not giving children enough credit. Children are not stupid. They can sense what's going on between the parents. Parents are the immediate role models of their children. What kind of role model would you be living a lie?

three:
You assume that a stepparent is always detrimental for the child, but they can provide love and care the child didn't experience with a biological parent.

motherhubbard
12-29-2010, 11:14 AM
I say it is better to stay married and miserable. It's better for a child to be raised in a miserable home than a broken home. This may not be true if there is some kind of on-going domestic abuse.

I agree as well. Domestic abuse is not healthy for anyone.

Most of the time when I hear that people are getting divorced they say it's because 1)they are just not happy anymore, or 2)they just don't love the person anymore.

I think happiness and satisfaction in a marriage comes from working to make the other happy. I know too many people who say they are just not happy anymore or that the other person just doesn't make them happy anymore. I don't understand why there is so much fuss about happiness. I think that very often that's selfishness. It's not fair to expect someone else to make us feel happy.

I think love is what you do for someone else not how you feel about someone else. If you don't feel that loving feeling I say do something loving. And, do it without any selfish motive.

In a marriage you find what you are looking for, good or bad. I believe that every problem and feeling can be worked out.

Haunted
12-29-2010, 12:00 PM
Most of the time when I hear that people are getting divorced they say it's because 1)they are just not happy anymore, or 2)they just don't love the person anymore.

I think happiness and satisfaction in a marriage comes from working to make the other happy. I know too many people who say they are just not happy anymore or that the other person just doesn't make them happy anymore. I don't understand why there is so much fuss about happiness. I think that very often that's selfishness. It's not fair to expect someone else to make us feel happy.

Isn't the pursuit of happiness a human need? If we don't want to be happy, we are not human.

It's totally fair to expect reciprocating acts of love and happiness from a partner. Everyone needs to be nurtured. How do you feel if your partner doesn't care about your happiness? Isn't mutuality a basis for a relationship?




I think love is what you do for someone else not how you feel about someone else. If you don't feel that loving feeling I say do something loving. And, do it without any selfish motive.

Love can't be one way. If we can do all the loving all by ourselves, then we might as well just pick anyone off the street and marry them.




In a marriage you find what you are looking for, good or bad. I believe that every problem and feeling can be worked out.

Ever heard of irreconcilable differences in a divorce document? Some things just can't be worked out.

motherhubbard
12-29-2010, 12:27 PM
Isn't the pursuit of happiness a human need? If we don't want to be happy, we are not human.

It's totally fair to expect reciprocating acts of love and happiness from a partner. Everyone needs to be nurtured. How do you feel if your partner doesn't care about your happiness? Isn't mutuality a basis for a relationship?

Happiness is not a need, it's just nice. You will not be happy everyday of your life. You may be overall happy, but that is dependent upon you, not your spouse. Yes, reciprocity is important. But, there are times it will not happen. Mutuality is not the basis of my marriage, and I doubt you will find a happier couple. Mutuality keeps score. I did the dishes you do the laundry, I didn't complaine when you bought a 15th chainsaw so I should get to purchase another ceramic chicken. Marriage can't be based on stupid crap like that.

Think about happiness in a different perspective. Having a baby is a pretty happy experience, but what if things go wrong? What if your baby is born with a serious condition that will never go away? You're sorrow will be heavy and it will not make you happy. But, you will still be devoted to the child. Even if there is nothing wrong with your child they will still bring you sorrow at some point. They may be difficult or challenging, needy or pouty. They will refuse to hold your hand in public, and at some point sas you. At low moments when you throw your hands up in digust you still do not throw in the towel. You love them and you keep doing the best for them. If you act with their best interest in mind through these hard times they will come back around and the more mature relationship will be better that than that baby love.


Love can't be one way. If we can do all the loving all by ourselves, then we might as well just pick anyone off the street and marry them.

I think that you could pick up anyone off the street and make it work if both parties were committed to making the marriage work. Then again you could marry your life long friend and it will fail if you're not committed to making it work.



Ever heard of irreconcilable differences in a divorce document? Some things just can't be worked out.

I don't believe in ireconsilable differences. Do your best for your spouse and find happiness in the doing, not in the reaction. Pick up the slack when the other can't carry his/her load. Forgive graciously. Look for the best in yourself and your partner.

It's not their job to make you happy. It's your job to be happy. Too many people seek happiness like it's the holy grail of love. No, there is something on the other side of devotion through unhappiness and hard times that is the prize. It's sad to me that so many will never know what it means to be one.

Haunted
12-29-2010, 02:02 PM
Happiness is not a need, it's just nice. You will not be happy everyday of your life. You may be overall happy, but that is dependent upon you, not your spouse. Yes, reciprocity is important. But, there are times it will not happen. Mutuality is not the basis of my marriage, and I doubt you will find a happier couple. Mutuality keeps score. I did the dishes you do the laundry, I didn't complaine when you bought a 15th chainsaw so I should get to purchase another ceramic chicken. Marriage can't be based on stupid crap like that.

Think about happiness in a different perspective. Having a baby is a pretty happy experience, but what if things go wrong? What if your baby is born with a serious condition that will never go away? You're sorrow will be heavy and it will not make you happy. But, you will still be devoted to the child. Even if there is nothing wrong with your child they will still bring you sorrow at some point. They may be difficult or challenging, needy or pouty. They will refuse to hold your hand in public, and at some point sas you. At low moments when you throw your hands up in digust you still do not throw in the towel. You love them and you keep doing the best for them. If you act with their best interest in mind through these hard times they will come back around and the more mature relationship will be better that than that baby love.

About happiness not being a need, I do prefer to feel miserable. So you got me there. By mutuality I mean reciprocality. Imagine you have to do everything. Make meals alone, do their laundry, pick up the beer cans they throw around the house, mopping their pee on the floor, putting it up when they give you the finger, pretending it's ok that they are having an affair.... Is that good enough for you?

I think with children it's different. They are your flesh and blood so you would try harder. Afterall it's you who brought them into the world, so you should be responsible. But it doesn't mean you have to stick around in a sucky marriage.



I think that you could pick up anyone off the street and make it work if both parties were committed to making the marriage work. Then again you could marry your life long friend and it will fail if you're not committed to making it work.

Commitment is not enough. What happened to being in love with each other first? Loving is not the same as love itself. What's the point of being loving when the other person doesn't love you? How do you make it work?



I don't believe in ireconsilable differences. Do your best for your spouse and find happiness in the doing, not in the reaction. Pick up the slack when the other can't carry his/her load. Forgive graciously. Look for the best in yourself and your partner.

It's not their job to make you happy. It's your job to be happy. Too many people seek happiness like it's the holy grail of love. No, there is something on the other side of devotion through unhappiness and hard times that is the prize. It's sad to me that so many will never know what it means to be one.

I'm glad your marriage works for you and God bless you for your selflessness. But this concept of ideal relationship just doesn't happen to everyone. There really is such a thing as point of no return and we can't live in denial.

ClaesGefvenberg
12-29-2010, 02:04 PM
My topic is clear. So what do you think? Should couples with children to be divorced?It is quite impossible to set any hard and fast rules on this topic: It all depends on the people caught up in the situation.

So be it that it is a wee bit too easy to end a marriage today, and that the result of this can be that some people are not really trying to make things work out. If the marriage in question is very bad, it may cause a child much more harm trying to keep it together rather than just ending it. What would living in a family with a marriage on life support be in aid of?

As Haunted so correctly remarked, children are not stupid. They see and hear things and draw their own conclusions.

/Claes

Paulclem
12-29-2010, 03:43 PM
I agree with Claes on this. There are no hard and fast rules. I live next door to a loving Mother who divorced her alcoholic husband when the kids were just babies. Are they better off than in that marriage? - definately. I'm sure there are lots of othersituations where divorce is preferable such as drug users etc.

On the question of happiness in a relationship - it has to be a mutual thing. One constantly giving and another constantly taking is no good for anyone. Bitterness, resentment, abuse, dissatisfaction are sure to follow - and what an example that is to children.

motherhubbard
12-29-2010, 04:13 PM
About happiness not being a need, I do prefer to feel miserable. So you got me there. By mutuality I mean reciprocality. Imagine you have to do everything. Make meals alone, do their laundry, pick up the beer cans they throw around the house, mopping their pee on the floor, putting it up when they give you the finger, pretending it's ok that they are having an affair.... Is that good enough for you?

I think with children it's different. They are your flesh and blood so you would try harder. Afterall it's you who brought them into the world, so you should be responsible. But it doesn't mean you have to stick around in a sucky marriage.

Misery alone is more managable than misery in a marriage- I think anyway. You are talking about a marriage where one party does not respect the other. A selfrespecting person will not marry someone who doesn't respect them. It's better to think twice and marry once.

I totally understand how one can feel resentful about turning socks in side out or pulling wet moldy towels out of the hamper. But, I know that we all have our downside. While I put up with my husband's shirts all having to face left he puts up with my 18 in. stack of mail that I'm going to sort through tomorrow.

As for the case of excessive drinking- I wouldn't tollerate it. But, I also wouldn't divorce my husband. If it came down to it he could pack his things until he can be a husband.

As for an affair- I've seen many marriages come through this problem. Now, I can't see staying with someone who has affairs. I've heard it said that you don't put a dog down if it bites one person, but if it bites again...


Commitment is not enough. What happened to being in love with each other first? Loving is not the same as love itself. What's the point of being loving when the other person doesn't love you? How do you make it work?

I think being in love with each other is a changing thing. Young love is different from a long mature love. My skin doesn't flush and I don't break into a sweat when my husband walks in the room even though he still does it for me. That being in love that people feel that makes them want to marry is nothing, not even a shadow, of what comes after 20 or 30 years. When you stick it out your spouse is your own flesh and blood- completely.

I don't know how the other person doesn't love you thing happens. You have to be proactive and stop trouble before it gets carried away. If you both know that you will not divorce than you both know you better get serious about making it work.




... this concept of ideal relationship just doesn't happen to everyone. There really is such a thing as point of no return and we can't live in denial.

Ideal relationships don't come easy. Sometimes we take the good with the bad, but so does the spouse. There is a point of no return. We just never let that near us.

OrphanPip
12-29-2010, 04:33 PM
I wish my parents had got divorced, would have saved me a lot of headaches.

Haunted
12-29-2010, 06:17 PM
Misery alone is more managable than misery in a marriage- I think anyway. You are talking about a marriage where one party does not respect the other. A selfrespecting person will not marry someone who doesn't respect them. It's better to think twice and marry once.

Misery in a marriage is still misery, isn't it?

People change. There are so many sweetheart stories of perfect couples but after they got married, the partner would become a totally different person. Take wife batterers for instance. They didn't beat the women up while they were still dating.


I totally understand how one can feel resentful about turning socks in side out or pulling wet moldy towels out of the hamper. But, I know that we all have our downside. While I put up with my husband's shirts all having to face left he puts up with my 18 in. stack of mail that I'm going to sort through tomorrow.

As for the case of excessive drinking- I wouldn't tollerate it. But, I also wouldn't divorce my husband. If it came down to it he could pack his things until he can be a husband.

As for an affair- I've seen many marriages come through this problem. Now, I can't see staying with someone who has affairs. I've heard it said that you don't put a dog down if it bites one person, but if it bites again...

I think if there's enough of these downsides, like 300 of them, then the resentment builds and things would go downhill.

I can't tolerate affairs. It shows the partner is off to a different path. There's no reason to make them turn around to where they were unhappy. It's pointless. I would just let them go their way.



I think being in love with each other is a changing thing. Young love is different from a long mature love. My skin doesn't flush and I don't break into a sweat when my husband walks in the room even though he still does it for me. That being in love that people feel that makes them want to marry is nothing, not even a shadow, of what comes after 20 or 30 years. When you stick it out your spouse is your own flesh and blood- completely.

by being in love I'm not just referring to romantic love. That will fizzle out in time, but to be life partners they still have to be in love. So I was saying, if love isn't there and there are just acts of loving, it would be very superficial and make leaving very easy.



Ideal relationships don't come easy. Sometimes we take the good with the bad, but so does the spouse. There is a point of no return. We just never let that near us.

Still think it's too simplistic for most of us. People change and couples grow apart. It's a fact of life.



I wish my parents had got divorced, would have saved me a lot of headaches.

So did I. It would have saved me time and money to my therapist.

JuniperWoolf
12-29-2010, 08:36 PM
In my experience, when two people SHOULD get divorced but force themselves to stay together for some reason (kids, money, etc.), they literally go crazy. I've seen it in four married couples, their brains just don't function in a normal way. Imagine being forced to pretend to care about someone that you absolutely hate, this person that you can't stand being your supposed "other half," you could see how that would drive you nuts. One couple that I know is still together, the woman is an almost exact replica of Salad Fingers and the man just stands in the back yard, stalk still, for hours... it's creepy.

Anyway, I think that the effect of divorce on kids is very overrated. Give most of them about five years, and they really won't care anymore. Divorce is easy on kids in the long run, double the presants at Christmas and Birthdays and two places to stay. My friends with parents who stayed together are usually the more neurotic ones (there are also far fewer of them).

Paulclem
12-29-2010, 09:33 PM
I wish my parents had got divorced, would have saved me a lot of headaches.

Mine too. They would have saved themselves. They were awful together - vindictive, violent, exploitative. My Mother eventually "escaped" from my Dad and died three weeks later. She had stayed with him for my siblings, and left when my youngest sister left home. They were very bad examples of parenting, but I think given the chance to make different lives for themselves they may have been better people. Certainly things would have been easier for the kids.

motherhubbard
12-30-2010, 02:00 AM
Misery in a marriage is still misery, isn't it? I think misery is worse in a marriage because it gives you the opportunity to blame someone your partner. Once you start doing that you give up your power to be happy, unless you leave.




People change. There are so many sweetheart stories of perfect couples but after they got married, the partner would become a totally different person. Take wife batterers for instance. They didn't beat the women up while they were still dating.

True, people change. The point of growing old together is to change together. It takes work and care to mantain togetherness.

As for wife beaters, there very often are signs of abuse during dating. I often wonder if wife beating is as common in other places as it is here. We are very back woods. Most people think that the "rule of thumb" is on the books!



I think if there's enough of these downsides, like 300 of them, then the resentment builds and things would go downhill.

I can't tolerate affairs. It shows the partner is off to a different path. There's no reason to make them turn around to where they were unhappy. It's pointless. I would just let them go their way.

I laughed a little here. 300 would be a lot:yikes:! What if it's the same one thing all the time? I forget to close the cabinet doors. I really intend to, but there it is open so that my husband raises up into it whacking his head on the corner. Poor guy. I'm also bad to leave drawers open, but that's much less painful.

As for affairs, I don't blame you. I would give another chance, but I don't blame you.


by being in love I'm not just referring to romantic love. That will fizzle out in time, but to be life partners they still have to be in love. So I was saying, if love isn't there and there are just acts of loving, it would be very superficial and make leaving very easy.
My point is the way to stay in love is to do those acts of loving.


Still think it's too simplistic for most of us. People change and couples grow apart. It's a fact of life.
It's a fact, but it doesn't have to be that way. Happy marriages are as simple as putting the other person first.

Haunted
12-30-2010, 10:27 AM
I think misery is worse in a marriage because it gives you the opportunity to blame someone your partner. Once you start doing that you give up your power to be happy, unless you leave.

There you go, there is such a thing as misery in marriage. Not only can children tell, they may even take it out on them. At some point divorce needs to be an option.


True, people change. The point of growing old together is to change together. It takes work and care to mantain togetherness.

Are you a marriage counselor? :D



I laughed a little here. 300 would be a lot:yikes:! What if it's the same one thing all the time? I forget to close the cabinet doors. I really intend to, but there it is open so that my husband raises up into it whacking his head on the corner. Poor guy. I'm also bad to leave drawers open, but that's much less painful.

I think most pet peeves are tolerated, but there are bad behaviors that can't be easily forgiven. Sometimes a personality doesn't reveal itself until they are married and in the comfort zone.

I still think when a marriage deteriorates to a certain point, it would become traumatic for the children. I doubt that children want their parents to stay together and watch them destroy each other. Does a parent really want their children to witness that day in day out? I lived it, I wish they had divorced. You can't imagine the anxiety I felt.

Delta40
12-30-2010, 10:50 AM
Anyway, I think that the effect of divorce on kids is very overrated. Give most of them about five years, and they really won't care anymore. Divorce is easy on kids in the long run, double the presants at Christmas and Birthdays and two places to stay. My friends with parents who stayed together are usually the more neurotic ones (there are also far fewer of them).

I agree with you. When couples separate mutually and divorce, the children get by. Unfortunately, so few couples part on amicable terms. They have alot of unfinished business with each other on an emotional level and this too often gets translated into issues labelled 'the kids welfare' which isn't the case at all but just a way of point scoring, hurting and getting back at the other person. The kids have little choice but to denigrate one parent to the other in order to feel like they are accepted by that parent. Its an awful thing to put a child through and parents so seldom handle a failed marriage well. They go ten rounds over an extra 30 minutes visitation rights not to mention all the crap involved in settlement. The victims are the children but the parents are so damn busy licking their own emotional wounds, they can't see that their behaviour is like a knife in the heart of their own kids, who they profess to the family court they love more than anything else in the world. Mothers and Fathers feed of each other until they finally run out of steam and then expect the kids to just carry on.

Please, somebody start up boot camp for divorcing parents! :boxing_smiley:

motherhubbard
12-30-2010, 11:58 AM
One of my students has divorced parents that are so outstanding I sometimes marvel at them. The parents and step parents all come to conferences. They work together, are friendly, respectful... it's like they all love each other. It's almost strange to watch.

motherhubbard
12-30-2010, 12:13 PM
There you go, there is such a thing as misery in marriage. Not only can children tell, they may even take it out on them. At some point divorce needs to be an option.

I don't deny that there is misery in a marriage. I've been miserable at times. But, I choose to work to make things better. My husband and I are both committed to that. Now, I know that many people are not so committed to working with a partner. The problem then is not marriage, but the choice in of spouse.




I think most pet peeves are tolerated, but there are bad behaviors that can't be easily forgiven. Sometimes a personality doesn't reveal itself until they are married and in the comfort zone.

I remember looking critically at my husband when we were dating. I looked at how his father treated his mother, how he treated his mother, how he treated different types of people in general. I paid very close attention to how he treated me under different and difficult circumstances, and how we resolved our differences. We dated for two years, long enough to know secrets.




I still think when a marriage deteriorates to a certain point, it would become traumatic for the children. I doubt that children want their parents to stay together and watch them destroy each other. Does a parent really want their children to witness that day in day out? I lived it, I wish they had divorced. You can't imagine the anxiety I felt.

I agree that a marriage can deterioate and that that can be traumatic for children. I would encourage everyone to do something about it before it gets to that point. Children could see their parents destroy each other, that's bad. They could see parents let things go to the point of wanting to destroy each other, also bad. Or they could see parents who worked out their problems and faced adversity with respect and love for the other.

You sound like you've seen things that leave you feeling cynical. That's understandable, but it doesn't have to be that way. You can believe in a good marriage as long as you and your partner are willing to work through anything together.

JuniperWoolf
12-30-2010, 09:42 PM
I agree with you. When couples separate mutually and divorce, the children get by. Unfortunately, so few couples part on amicable terms. They have alot of unfinished business with each other on an emotional level and this too often gets translated into issues labelled 'the kids welfare' which isn't the case at all but just a way of point scoring, hurting and getting back at the other person. The kids have little choice but to denigrate one parent to the other in order to feel like they are accepted by that parent. Its an awful thing to put a child through and parents so seldom handle a failed marriage well. They go ten rounds over an extra 30 minutes visitation rights not to mention all the crap involved in settlement. The victims are the children but the parents are so damn busy licking their own emotional wounds, they can't see that their behaviour is like a knife in the heart of their own kids, who they profess to the family court they love more than anything else in the world. Mothers and Fathers feed of each other until they finally run out of steam and then expect the kids to just carry on.

Please, somebody start up boot camp for divorcing parents! :boxing_smiley:

As a fairly recent child of divorce, surrounded by other children of divorce, that totally wasn't my experience. Marriage makes people feel trapped is what I've seen, and once you can actually get out of it you can relax and stretch your existential legs. When the parents are happy and fulfilling their human potential, it makes the kids feel better (it makes me feel happy to see my mom and dad happy and not struggling to maintain a crappy marriage). We're not stupid, we can tell when the people that we love are miserable and that's not a good situation for us.


One of my students has divorced parents that are so outstanding I sometimes marvel at them. The parents and step parents all come to conferences. They work together, are friendly, respectful... it's like they all love each other. It's almost strange to watch.

My parents are a lot like that, my mom was the first one at the hospital in the next city two hours away when my dad got into a motorcycle accident on the highway and she was obviously concerned (given the fact that she was bawling and losing sleep to make sure that he was taken care of). They had a VERY embittering divorce, but with a little room and some time they finally respect and care about each other (which they haven't done for the last six years of their marriage). Once you stop forcing yourself to be constantly around someone that you don't get along with, you can actually breathe and think. People who are divorced have the love of their children in common, and they share a lot of happy memories. Again, after that period of about five years things level out and bitter feelings just kind of dissipate and divorced couples sometimes remember what they used to like about each other once upon a time and become friends. It's nice, especially for me and my brother. Most of my friend's parents are the same, as is my mom's boyfriend (who is also divorced) and his ex wife (although my mother doesn't like her very much). The exception is my friend Mitchell who's parents still totally hate each other. I keep telling him to give it another couple of years.

faithosaurus
12-31-2010, 12:42 AM
What my thoughts are that if the terms between the parents are rough, but controllable then they should stay together.

The problem is when the children start to get frustrated and worried when the parents are fighting all the time. At this point, if the parents are that unhappy with each other and feel the need for a divorce, it's probably the best option. The child growing up in an environment where the parents are always arguing will not solve anything, and could possibly be more harmful to the psyche.

Now, the flaw in this is that if the parents drag the child into the divorce (which is usually the case, with custody and such) that would also put an immense amount of stress on the kid, so in the end the parents must figure out which solution is best.

motherhubbard
12-31-2010, 11:34 AM
The problem is when the children start to get frustrated and worried when the parents are fighting all the time. The child growing up in an environment where the parents are always arguing will not solve anything, and could possibly be more harmful to the psyche.

It's really hard for me to understand saying hateful or hrutful things to people, let alone someone you live with. It seems like a lot of times people will put their best foot forward for a stranger, then turn around had show their butt to their spouse (or other family or close friends.)

I think it's important for children to see that parents are not always 100% in agreement on every issue, and how they resolve their differences peaceably and respectfully. Fighting takes a toll of children and parents. I think once you start down that road it's really hard to turn things around. I can understand being really upset, but I can't understand grown-ups dealing with their problems like that. I think the goal of fighting is to win by any means. That's not going to help the marriage.

Haunted
12-31-2010, 12:33 PM
It's really hard for me to understand saying hateful or hrutful things to people, let alone someone you live with. It seems like a lot of times people will put their best foot forward for a stranger, then turn around had show their butt to their spouse (or other family or close friends.)

They say hateful and hurtful things especially to their spouse. They take them for granted and being that close give them the comfort zone to act out what they try to hide from strangers.

Parents are often under stress. Having children compound the situation as more time, money and self sacrifice is involved. When parents fight their children get in the crossfire. At some point divorce makes more sense.

motherhubbard
12-31-2010, 01:44 PM
I think acting respectful and mature makes more sense.

I know what it is to be a wife and parent with all of the problems that come with that. Being hateful to my spouse would only make it worse.

Haunted
12-31-2010, 07:06 PM
Children are not likely to think how wonderful it is that their dysfunctional parents are sticking together; most likely they know their parents are not getting a divorce because of them, and then they'll feel guilty and blame themselves.

Paulclem
12-31-2010, 11:38 PM
Unfortunately parents are not always rational. That may be because of substance abuse, some personality problem, mental illness, a violent temperament - whatever. There comes a point where sticking in a marriage is no longer good for the children. More than that though, I'm all for kids being taken off their parents where there is good cause. There have been high profile cases in the UK where the Social Services have put the rights of the parents before the good of the child, and lives might have been saved. I'm not for taking children away from families at the drop of a hat, but it might be best in a bad situation.

Following on from this, I think the thread question is somewhat difficult to answer because it demands a yes/ no answer to a difficult set of circumstances. As Claes said earlier, there can be no hard and fast rules for dealing with such difficult situations. The question seems to force you to make a choice - for divorce - good against divorce = bad. I don't think many people would consider divorce good. Again, it may just be the best of a bad situation.

motherhubbard
01-01-2011, 12:07 AM
My point is that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. If you have a dysfunctional relationship don't marry that person. Once you are married then both people are responsible for making things work.

I feel like your argument assumes that you have to have your guard up once you are married because at any moment the spouse is going to stab you in the back with their unfaithfulness, addiction, belligerence, or out of control behavior. All of these things only blame the spouse. When we can only blame someone else for our own state of being then we have given the person we blame power over us.

I found this information at this site http://www.divorcerate.org/


According to enrichment journal on the divorce rate in America:
The divorce rate in America for first marriage is 41%
The divorce rate in America for second marriage is 60%
The divorce rate in America for third marriage is 73%


The divorce rate in America for childless couples and couples with children
According to discovery channel, couples with children have a slightly lower rate of divorce than childless couples.

Sociologists believe that childlessness is also a common cause of divorce.

These numbers really shock me and I can't help but wonder what's going on?

This thread has really made me think about marriage and happy relationships. I've been looking at the different people I know and what's going on with them. It's also made me take a look at what's going on in my own marriage and wonder what we are doing to be like this. I'm dead serious when I say everyone should have the relationship my husband and I have- there's nothing better. So what's going on? I'm a little confounded.

When I look at all of my peers I see happy marriages. I'm of an age where most of my peers have been married 15-25 years. We all have moments were we are stressed or upset with our spouse. But, even the least happy couple among us work on having a good relationship and get along most of the time. I'm talking about people I've known well for years. When I compare that to people I wouldn't call my peers, but that I know or went to school with I see a stark difference. These are poeple I don't know as well. But, I don't know why any of these people got married or why someone married them in the first place. They were rowdy drinkers who had little self respect and no respect for their dates.

I see a difference in fundamentals. One group took divorce off the table before they married, the other held it as a safety net. One group puts their spouse before themselves, the other is looking out for number one. I'm thinking most marriage ending in divorce are really over before they even kiss the bride.

So, maybe I'm in a happy marriage because we've given ourselves no other option. We know that we have to make it work because we are stuck together for better or worse. Maybe we don't see a million things that would make us angry or sad because we want to be happy. We wake up every day looking fow ways to please the other and that had endeared the other to us. When I say these things they sound so lame and stupid- even risky in some ways. So why does it work so well? And, since it works so well why doesn't everyone do it?

I don't know. I'm curious what everyone else thinks?

motherhubbard
01-01-2011, 12:18 AM
Unfortunately parents are not always rational. That may be because of substance abuse, some personality problem, mental illness, a violent temperament - whatever. There comes a point where sticking in a marriage is no longer good for the children. More than that though, I'm all for kids being taken off their parents where there is good cause. There have been high profile cases in the UK where the Social Services have put the rights of the parents before the good of the child, and lives might have been saved. I'm not for taking children away from families at the drop of a hat, but it might be best in a bad situation.

While I'm against divorce in general, I agree with this statement. I don't believe anyone should be in a dangerous situation. It kills me when children are neglected because their parents have rights.


Following on from this, I think the thread question is somewhat difficult to answer because it demands a yes/ no answer to a difficult set of circumstances. As Claes said earlier, there can be no hard and fast rules for dealing with such difficult situations. The question seems to force you to make a choice - for divorce - good against divorce = bad. I don't think many people would consider divorce good. Again, it may just be the best of a bad situation.

After reading this I looked back to the OP. I agree that a yes/no answer is difficult. I have to say divorce is only acceptable when a relationship is dangerous, but that most of those situations could be avoided in the first place.

I know it's not very PC, but I don't think being unhappy is a valid reason to divorce. I think that happiness is a choice and that once you've married you should find happiness within that marriage.

1n50mn14
01-06-2011, 08:52 PM
Two people in an unhappy relationship are more harmful to a child's development and happiness than a single parent with visitation rights. I was delighted when my parents got divorced (I was seven). Thought it was about damn time. Mind you, I'd like to take this back a step further and say that maybe they shouldn't have gotten married in the first place- too many people just rush into marriage and don't actually think about it. And then they produce children out of what is often an already unstable relationship. I think people have every right to get divorced- we all make mistakes- but maybe they should think a little harder before getting married and having children... nobody should have to suffer and strive for false happiness for the rest of their lives because they made a mistake.

Patrick_Bateman
01-07-2011, 09:03 AM
How about we just tear down the institution of marriage as a religious entity?

What's wrong with cohabitation? why do people have for this 'sacred bond under God' ?

Why does marriage have to be a law of union? which takes lawyers, money and papers to reverse?

If marriage was merely a ceremony to proclaim your love with those closest to you things would be a lot simpler.

Delta40
01-07-2011, 09:42 AM
As a fairly recent child of divorce, surrounded by other children of divorce, that totally wasn't my experience. Marriage makes people feel trapped is what I've seen, and once you can actually get out of it you can relax and stretch your existential legs. When the parents are happy and fulfilling their human potential, it makes the kids feel better (it makes me feel happy to see my mom and dad happy and not struggling to maintain a crappy marriage). We're not stupid, we can tell when the people that we love are miserable and that's not a good situation for us. .

Thanks for testifying to your experience but I don't see your point. Because you weren't exposed to the abusive brutality of separation, you think it makes a difference to those who were? Please. I so object to blase generalisations that kids get over it - that makes the parents feel better for the crap they put their kids through. I felt safe and secure and blissfully ignorant in the hub of my family. When that deteriorated, I was cast to the side, except when one of my folks could use me to point score (I think it is called 'the child's best interest) While they fought over the years (or as you phrased it, fulfilling their human potential) neither of them noticed that I was being repeatedly molested.

Neither of our views are accurate reflections of the facts and who the hell knows what they are?

JuniperWoolf
01-07-2011, 10:05 PM
Because you weren't exposed to the abusive brutality of separation, you think it makes a difference to those who were?

That's melodramatic. Kids aren't made of glass, anyone who's spent any time at a schoolyard can tell you that. "Abusive brutality?" So you're saying that parents abuse their children by getting divorced? Tell that to a kid who was actually abused by their parents and watch their reaction.


I so object to blase generalisations that kids get over it - that makes the parents feel better for the crap they put their kids through.

People are resiliant to pain and change. When someone that you love dies, do you grieve forever? No, you grieve for a little while and then you get used to it. When people around you are constantly fighting without any relief, it eats at you more than a sudden clean hurt and then relief, that's been proven. People really do get over divorce, that's also been proven. It's honestly not so bad, considering some of the horrific things that happen to us. You think that kids are stupid enough that you can protect them from all of the bad in the world by pretending that they live in a happy family when they so obviously don't? They aren't that stupid, and trying to put them in that situation is sure not helping them any. What coping skills are they going to learn from that? That if you have a problem you should just feign ignorance and hope that it goes away on it's own?


I felt safe and secure and blissfully ignorant in the hub of my family.

That's not fair to your parents. They're people too, and they deserve a chance at happiness even if it means waking you up from "blissfull ignorance" (which by the way, sounds like a terrible way to live to me).


When that deteriorated, I was cast to the side, except when one of my folks could use me to point score (I think it is called 'the child's best interest) While they fought over the years (or as you phrased it, fulfilling their human potential) neither of them noticed that I was being repeatedly molested.

Well that sucks, but deviates from the origonal arguement, since sexual abuse and divorce aren't correlated. My friend was sexually abused by a family friend and there's no point in saying that she might not have been if she had two parents around to keep tabs on her or if her mom decided to be a dental hygenist instead of a psychologist thereby having less work hours or if they had stayed in Vancouver instead of moving to Alberta where the rapist happened to live. It's not like each decision was associated with "well, my kid might get sexually abused, but that's a chance I'm willing to take" in their parents' minds. Arbitrary life decisions that lead to a situation in which bad stuff happens can't be blamed for anything.

You're also twisting my terms. The fighting itself isn't existential purpose, it's everything that they do besides that. You can't be happy if you're forced to listen to someone that you can't stand every single day. That's obvious.


Neither of our views are accurate reflections of the facts and who the hell knows what they are?

That's because personal experiences aren't valid in any discussion, which is why you have to use logic and reason to come to decisions instead of emotion. Logically, is it better to live in a dysfuncional family setting and ignore what's happening on the premise that doing so is somehow healthy for a developing mind (and by the way, people can only take so much - the entire thing might potentially blow up in everyone's faces when one of you just can't take it anymore thereby shattering the child's entire concept of reality), or is it better to end the dysfuntional situation and strive for a situation that is actually healthy and not a lie? The answer is obvious.

Revolte
01-08-2011, 05:22 AM
I think it's horrid for ones mental health to stay with someone they are not happy with, if they are bad parents they are bad parents it has nothing to do with them being divorced and no kid is going to hold it in their heads "oh I'm crap my life will be miserable forever because my parents decided they where better off not together, even though they are both there for me!" I mean even IF they did think that for a little bit, you know they are going to be full of stupid reasons why their life is miserable all the way up until high school ends.

It's not the parents fault that there is no sense of community left and they shouldn't have to throw their happiness away to meet some absurd standard on what being a good parent is. Half my life I would have been better off without my dad and I know cause my rents haven't always been together, and when my childhood was wrecked when they were together.

I suppose you can debate anything, but I think we can all agree that one good happy parent is better then two ok parents who are always angry and miserable, how is that in anyway a better environment to raise a child in??

OrphanPip
01-14-2011, 02:25 PM
I.

_Why should a foolish marriage vow,
Which long ago was made,
Oblige us to each other now,
When passion is decayed?
We loved, and we loved, as long as we could,
'Till our love was loved out in us both;
But our marriage is dead, when the pleasure is fled:
'Twas pleasure first made it an oath._

II.

_If I have pleasures for a friend,
And further love in store,
What wrong has he, whose joys did end,
And who could give no more?_
_'Tis a madness that he
Should be jealous of me,
Or that I should bar him of another:
For all we can gain,
Is to give ourselves pain,
When neither can hinder the other._

- John Dryden

Cunninglinguist
01-14-2011, 04:47 PM
It is an indubitability that in the assessment of any marriage there is always a special, exclusive context to be considered. Each marriage exists in its own way, that is, it exists under different external circumstances of the environment, and under different internal circumstances of the constituents that comprise the marriage. Since marriage is so manifold it becomes, as said before, “quite impossible” to give a generalized answer to the original question of the OP. Context must always be considered to properly discern the costs and benefits of the various options available to individuals of the marriage.


About happiness not being a need, I do prefer to feel miserable. So you got me there. By mutuality I mean reciprocality. Imagine you have to do everything. Make meals alone, do their laundry, pick up the beer cans they throw around the house, mopping their pee on the floor, putting it up when they give you the finger, pretending it's ok that they are having an affair.... Is that good enough for you?

I prefer lobster over steak over beans and rice. That does not mean I need lobster or steak. You're confusing preference with necessity. We don't need happiness to live, though the desire may be a necessary prerequisite to ones humanity, which seems to be your original contention.

According to the evolutionary biologists’ definitions:
Altruism is based on selfless intent. Mutualism is still based on selfish intent. Both can manifest as reciprocality, as two altruistic individuals acting towards each other can appear as if possessing mutualistic relations. Altruism and mutualism can only be properly distinguished by intent, not consequence. I think Motherhubbard's argument is that true love is based on altruism or selflessness, not trade, and that any relationship that possesses the sobriquet of "love" based on mutualism will inevitably fail. But when both parties are altruistic towards one another the relationship will yield its own fruits. I agree.


I'm glad your marriage works for you and God bless you for your selflessness.

Let's not do the ad hominem thing. Thank you.


I know it's not very PC, but I don't think being unhappy is a valid reason to divorce. I think that happiness is a choice and that once you've married you should find happiness within that marriage.

Depending on the definition of "unhappy," I agree with this. When two individuals marry they commit themselves to that circumstance and admit responsibility to maintain their relationship under it. However, in part due to the media portrayals of the expeditious rises and the even more expeditious falls of celebrity marriages (and marriages of similar natures) marriage is becoming something else. For the commoner who sees this, they start to lose this idea of commitment and responsibility in their conceptualization of marriage; and thus how the convention and function of marriage is looked upon by society morphs from that originally intended contract. Divorce becomes permissible and acceptable, nay, even common. The shallowest relationships cultivated are branded with what was supposed to be the most sacred epithet.

Delta40
01-14-2011, 06:00 PM
That's because personal experiences aren't valid in any discussion, which is why you have to use logic and reason to come to decisions instead of emotion. Logically, is it better to live in a dysfuncional family setting and ignore what's happening on the premise that doing so is somehow healthy for a developing mind (and by the way, people can only take so much - the entire thing might potentially blow up in everyone's faces when one of you just can't take it anymore thereby shattering the child's entire concept of reality), or is it better to end the dysfuntional situation and strive for a situation that is actually healthy and not a lie? The answer is obvious.

wish I could use the quote mechanism as well as everyone else. I don't endorse people who are miserable stay together. Dysfunction in marriage is just as bad as dysfunction outside of marriage. I have no problem with divorce. I have raised my girls alone since they were babies. Of course it is better to be happy and alone than hitched up and miserable - with or without kids. But I do think someone here should put a face of the exerpience for many children before flicking it off as 'meh, they'll get over it'

I know people survive and I know my parents are human too. They were not however, logical or objective in their choices. Why the objection to not discussing an emotionally charged situation unless it is reduced to rubble by logic? So we can digest it better and feel reasonable in our conclusions?

I baulk at the shield of logic. In discussions it is used as a strategy to negate emotional, subjective views. It is an attempt to discredit the view of a person by saying 'you're being emotional'. Subjectivity makes a person interesting- gives them substance. Subjectivity touches the hearts of people more so than 'the research and stats I've seen suggest.....' It is unfortunate to consistently hide behind logic so one does not have to face multiple truths on a case by case basis.

For many children, abuse correlates exactly with a broken home - what a sweeping statement to make that it doesn't. Did a study tell you that? Do you have permission to negate any indication that there is a correlation in somebody's personal experience? What will happen if you face that reality? Many people are unable to or are afraid to tap into their own emotional psyche. Logic defenses are like make-up. They mask the fact that people are emotionally subjective, in most things. Logic soon washes off.

Cunninglinguist
01-14-2011, 06:21 PM
I baulk at the shield of logic. In discussions it is used as a strategy to negate emotional, subjective views. It is an attempt to discredit the view of a person by saying 'you're being emotional'. Subjectivity makes a person interesting- gives them substance. Subjectivity touches the hearts of people more so than 'the research and stats I've seen suggest.....' It is unfortunate to consistently hide behind logic so one does not have to face multiple truths on a case by case basis.

I don't know how productive that attitude is. Logic has its place and emotions have their place. Logic is a powerful tool, but it definitely has its limits. How can we give the most good definition of good without getting caught up in circular argument? How can we logically justify logic without getting caught up in circular argument? We cant, and the circular argument is unsound as the truth of the premises is indiscernible; to solve the dilemma we have to refer to things like emotions. Some people overstate logic's case, but to understate it I don't think would be much better.

As for statistics, they can be highly erroneous, especially when the population they evaluate is very large. The primary flaw with statistical analysis is that it does not account for heterogeneity, or it treats a population as homogeneous, and leads to hasty generalizations.

Haunted
01-14-2011, 06:24 PM
You're confusing preference with necessity. We don't need happiness to live, though the desire may be a necessary prerequisite to ones humanity, which seems to be your original contention.

According to the evolutionary biologists’ definitions:
Altruism is based on selfless intent. Mutualism is still based on selfish intent. Both can manifest as reciprocality, as two altruistic individuals acting towards each other can appear as if possessing mutualistic relations. Altruism and mutualism can only be properly distinguished by intent, not consequence. I think Motherhubbard's argument is that true love is based on altruism or selflessness, not trade, and that any relationship that possesses the sobriquet of "love" based on mutualism will inevitably fail. But when both parties are altruistic towards one another the relationship will yield its own fruits. I agree.

It's heartwarming to hear that there are so many people happy in an unhappy marriage. God bless all of you.

And following that logic, screw the children, let them grow up unhappy in a miserable home with two miserable parents. Children don't need happiness to live their young life, because happiness is a preference, not necessity.




Let's not do the ad hominem thing. Thank you.

Please don't tell me what I can do or can't. Thank you.