Wedding vows - Till death do us part (52)
Friskyone: I know someone who is in a bad and unhappy marriage. Both parties are unhappy. They have small children. One parent insists on working through their problems no matter how tough it is. This parent is committed to keeping the family together no matter how tough times get. This parent is highly against divorce. On the other hand, the other parent wants the divorce in order to protect her children from living miserable lives by constantly seeing arguments, tension, stress and no sign of love and partnership between the parents.
My question is, do you fight to keep the family together and fulfill your wedding vows at all costs, do you end the marriage for the sake of the children, or stay in the marriage for the sake of the children?
My question is, do you fight to keep the family together and fulfill your wedding vows at all costs, do you end the marriage for the sake of the children, or stay in the marriage for the sake of the children?
Sake of the children and wedding vows are not always compatible.
I assume it depends on one's priorities.
Sake of the children because one finds people important,
wedding vows because one finds what other people think important...
While a healthy family environment is a great place for bringing up children, family in a conservative sense is overrated.
When it comes to the question of sake of the children wedding vows are always secondary or there should be so much outside social/religious pressure that it becomes relevant.
But in that case I suggest one changes the neighbourhood and or religion asap.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Children are better off with one happy parent than two unhappy parents. Constant arguing and tension make them feel unsafe. Ones ultimate goal should be to protect your children by creating a safe and loving home, especially in stressful times...
------ This thread is Archived ------
Sounds like the man is willing to put effort in and work thru the problems. Perhaps if the woman would some effort in also, rather than just jump to a divorce, there might be less fighting and misery. That would make it a better, healthier environment for the kids. Then they could grow up with both parents, a Man and a Woman, as it should be.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Cocheta: Children are better off with one happy parent than two unhappy parents. Constant arguing and tension make them feel unsafe. Ones ultimate goal should be to protect your children by creating a safe and loving home, especially in stressful times...
Well said
------ This thread is Archived ------
CapNemo: Sounds like the man is willing to put effort in and work thru the problems. Perhaps if the woman would some effort in also, rather than just jump to a divorce, there might be less fighting and misery. That would make it a better, healthier environment for the kids. Then they could grow up with both parents, a Man and a Woman, as it should be.
That is the "traditional" way by having both parents present but times have changed.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Friskyone: Well said
Thanks
Like the new pic
------ This thread is Archived ------
Friskyone: That is the "traditional" way by having both parents present but times have changed.
Changed in what way? You mean marriage vows are worthless now? I agree, but still find it strange that so many women who profess to be homemakers, still feel destruction of a family is better than working out problems and so ensure a loving and balenced family home
------ This thread is Archived ------
rizlared: Changed in what way? You mean marriage vows are worthless now? I agree, but still find it strange that so many women who profess to be homemakers, still feel destruction of a family is better than working out problems and so ensure a loving and balenced family home
Is not a loving, balanced home if created by a lone parent?
------ This thread is Archived ------
jac_the_gripper: Is not a loving, balanced home if created by a lone parent?
Though a single parent can try, and do reasonably well, it will never be as fully balanced as it should be. Not that it's bad, it's just not all it could be.------ This thread is Archived ------
jac_the_gripper: Is not a loving, balanced home if created by a lone parent?
No for something to be balanced there has to be equal weight on two sides, therefore a single parent cannot by definition create a balanced parenting environment.
I am NOT saying single parents are NOT good and loving parents, but having two parents must create a balanced and, possibly, ideal family, I believe all children should be able to view the world through the eyes of two parents as this teaches to see both sides of life.
It's my opinion and one I appreciate is not held by most single parents, for obvious reasons.
------ This thread is Archived ------
CapNemo: Though a single parent can try, and do reasonably well, it will never be as fully balanced as it should be. Not that it's bad, it's just not all it could be.
That's a prejudiced statement.
Balance, or emotional well-being is to do with behaviour, regardless of how many people belong to the family.
There's no way a family will be balanced and emotionally healthy if one parent is abusive, or abuses substances, for example. One parent can't negotiate those things and make everything better, unless the other is willing...and how often does that sort of situation change healthily in front of the kids?
In some situations the message we should be sending is 'get the children out of there'. To try and emotionally manipulate a situation where people feel obliged to stay committed for the sake of marriage vows, or for the sake of the children, or for any other reason is dangerous and naïve.
------ This thread is Archived ------
jac_the_gripper: That's a prejudiced statement.
Balance, or emotional well-being is to do with behaviour, regardless of how many people belong to the family.
There's no way a family will be balanced and emotionally healthy if one parent is abusive, or abuses substances, for example. One parent can't negotiate those things and make everything better, unless the other is willing...and how often does that sort of situation change healthily in front of the kids?
In some situations the message we should be sending is 'get the children out of there'. To try and emotionally manipulate a situation where people feel obliged to stay committed for the sake of marriage vows, or for the sake of the children, or for any other reason is dangerous and naïve.
You call it what you want, I don't agree. In a non abusive household, a child's upbringing is best served by both parents, a man and a woman. Like I said, a single parent may do a reasonably good job, but it will never achieve the equality of both Mother and Father together in the same household.Balance, or emotional well-being is to do with behaviour, regardless of how many people belong to the family.
There's no way a family will be balanced and emotionally healthy if one parent is abusive, or abuses substances, for example. One parent can't negotiate those things and make everything better, unless the other is willing...and how often does that sort of situation change healthily in front of the kids?
In some situations the message we should be sending is 'get the children out of there'. To try and emotionally manipulate a situation where people feel obliged to stay committed for the sake of marriage vows, or for the sake of the children, or for any other reason is dangerous and naïve.
------ This thread is Archived ------
CapNemo: You call it what you want, I don't agree. In a non abusive household, a child's upbringing is best served by both parents, a man and a woman. Like I said, a single parent may do a reasonably good job, but it will never achieve the equality of both Mother and Father together in the same household.
Why not?
------ This thread is Archived ------
CapNemo: Read my first response. You should be able to read into that.
Can you explain what you mean to me, please?
------ This thread is Archived ------
jac_the_gripper: Why not?
And apologies, but I am not always able to stay on here due to poor signal out at sea, like I am now. But I don't see the need to have a six page discussion about that question because the answer should be obvious when you think about it.------ This thread is Archived ------
rizlared: I would guess just as often, as there seems to be a point where apathy, lack of interest and/or maybe the taking for granted attitudes get in the way of communication and compromise. Sad in my opinion, I know in my first marriage I was very guilty of being just that person, I could and should have listened more and communicated better, but just assumed that things would "work out on their own", instead I came home one evening to an empty home. I have learnt a lot since then!!!
That's very honourable and brave of you to say so, Riz.
Personally, I think many people simply don't have the skills to manage relationships. That was certainly the case with my daughter's father and I. I too can now see how I could have done things differently, but I didn't at the time. Not that it would have made much difference - I don't think I'll ever have the skills to manage a relationship with someone who isn't ready to address their self-medication.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Friskyone: I know someone who is in a bad and unhappy marriage. Both parties are unhappy. They have small children. One parent insists on working through their problems no matter how tough it is. This parent is committed to keeping the family together no matter how tough times get. This parent is highly against divorce. On the other hand, the other parent wants the divorce in order to protect her children from living miserable lives by constantly seeing arguments, tension, stress and no sign of love and partnership between the parents.
My question is, do you fight to keep the family together and fulfill your wedding vows at all costs, do you end the marriage for the sake of the children, or stay in the marriage for the sake of the children?
My question is, do you fight to keep the family together and fulfill your wedding vows at all costs, do you end the marriage for the sake of the children, or stay in the marriage for the sake of the children?
wedding vows are rethorics,, it's almost the same lines copied & copied everytime ,,, like all other vows there's a breach, change is a permanent thing ,,,
------ This thread is Archived ------
Friskyone: I know someone who is in a bad and unhappy marriage. Both parties are unhappy. They have small children. One parent insists on working through their problems no matter how tough it is. This parent is committed to keeping the family together no matter how tough times get. This parent is highly against divorce. On the other hand, the other parent wants the divorce in order to protect her children from living miserable lives by constantly seeing arguments, tension, stress and no sign of love and partnership between the parents.
My question is, do you fight to keep the family together and fulfill your wedding vows at all costs, do you end the marriage for the sake of the children, or stay in the marriage for the sake of the children?
My question is, do you fight to keep the family together and fulfill your wedding vows at all costs, do you end the marriage for the sake of the children, or stay in the marriage for the sake of the children?
Married or not wouldn't make a difference to me - I would be committed in a relationship where both people want to be in it and work on it.
I had committed relationships, but at some stage the willingness to talk and to work on things wasn't there anymore and I left - after giving this time and effort to resolve first. I'm just glad no kids were involved.
I think if kids are involved, both people would need to work on it. The possibility of having an outsider like a marriage counselor trying to help and both people willing to listen to the advice could help (it did with friends of mine). If there is no willingness from both sides to work on it and change, going separate ways might be better for the parents.
A toxic environment - with parents together or apart - is bad for kids. They are always the losers.
Think BEFORE you marry and have kids.
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
See It All The Time
Kultur-multur
The Real Stormy Story
your favorite topic?
biggest lie
I'm a 53 YEAR'S YUNG MAN that lives back in the 80s
What happened to CS while i was away.. (Long time)
Who will be The Last Person To Post... VERSION FOUR
Would you hire this guy - for any job?
Iran- Israel war
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Stats for this Thread
2,324 Views
51 Comments
in Chat Threads
Created: Apr 2015
Last Viewed: Apr 17
Last Commented: Apr 2015
0 Likes
My question is, do you fight to keep the family together and fulfill your wedding vows at all costs, do you end the marriage for the sake of the children, or stay in the marriage for the sake of the children?