Many have divorced over sexual dysfunction. If your spouse had a sexual dysfunction and you decided to stay 'for the kids' would you tell them? [/quote]

If I was using them as a reason to base my decision to try recover....then yes, I would.

No offence taken, but it was a serious question. And it wasn't directed to you, but you certainly welcome to your opinion.

I think that perhaps sexual dysfunction could lead to one spouse not being particularly happy in a marriage, especially if SF was a very high need. But this is off topic.

Back to why children are a cop-out and shouldn't be considered when pondering reconciliation.

That's exactly what I am attempting to argue with this example.

I hate Woody Allen.

People divorce because of sexual dysfunction. That's a fact.

If you would follow the example fully introvert I believe you cannot make the 'radical honesty' exclude you from telling your child based on your earlier comment about radical honesty.

Father to son " Son I'm staying married to mommy for you even though she can't have sex with me for medical reasons"

Not something a child should know.

I can understand sexual dysfunction as a step leading to other issues that could lead to divorce. But if there is a jack@$$ out there that would actually divorce for this reason alone, then the real reason for the divorce is that daddy is a jack@$$! Honestly, there are ways to achieve sexual fulfillment despite a variety of medical dysfunctions if that is a particularly important EN.

When I hear something like this, I am reminded of history. Until the last couple centuries, arranged marriages were more common than not. One did not always expect happiness in a marriage. One expected companionship, even friendship, and working together toward a common goal. Many times, they did grow to love one another as they spent enough time together to see the other person's strengths. But they did not commonly expect to walk away from that marriage just because they didn't get prince charming or Lady Godiva.

What's the difference today? Entitlement. This new phenomenon that we are entitled to happiness, like it's due to us, or something. Ask any manager of 20-somethings who they want to work for them, and they'll tell you anyone over the age of 30 to 40. Why? Because this generation has grown up with the notion that they are supposed to get what they want. That somehow, society owes it to them. That, if they don't get promoted within 2 years, they'll quit.

More and more, people are learning to abrogate their responsibilities and seek out their own happiness at the expense of others; and it's showing up in the marriages and the children, as people walk away from marriages that could have been saved, if the two weren't expecting so much for so little work.

I don't disagree with you but it happens.

Although, I wouldn't word it the same way you did, I would tell the child. Not because of the reasoning of the sexual dysfunction, but becasue the child has a right to know that they are the reason for trying to recover. You keep trying to base this on sexual dysfunction...the reason for the marital problems is a moot point to the child...the child being used for recovery is not a moot point to them.

Sure, the H may be a jerk . . . but no more so than a wife that leaves her husband only because he refuses to work . . . or gambles all the money away . . . or doesn't bathe, or won't ever talk to her . . or is controlling . . . or . . .

People get to define what needs are important to them. To some SF is the be-all end-all. Others it is conversation or financial support.

Actually the reason for the marital problems is critical to the child. Children tend to blame themselves. They need to know they are not responsible for what it happening to them. The only way to truly understand this is to know what exactly IS responsible for it.

As far as being "used" for recovery, I don't think that's actually how the dynamic works. A couple may attempt recovery BECAUSE of the children, but I don't see how they would USE the child to achieve recovery. Children do know their parents are together only because of them - whether you tell them or not. It's not an ideal situation but what broken/damaged home is? I agree with whoever said that it does demonstrate to them how important they are to their parents(think it was Melodylane but not sure). Even younger children will still wish their parents back together regardless of how bad family life was before the breakup. They will appreciate this.

I agree completely. But you wouldn't hesitate to tell your child you are leaving because of mom/dad's gambling or unemployment either and that was the point of discussion.

I believe it is referred to as Generation X, born between 1965 and 1980.

They are all about "me".

Next group coming up is even worse. Generation Y.

Born between 1980 and 1994. This group is the "why" group. Why can't I have everything I want at the expense of everyone BUT me?


I truly believe that if BOTH parents continue in the marriage for the sake of the children, they will make it work because they are working toward a common goal.

If only one of them stays for the children it is going to fall flat.

When only one parent behaves as they should and is "committed" to the marriage, it screams dysfuntion. The kids will surely pick up on this.

The woman that stays for the children, while her H drinks irresponsibly, is financially irresponsible, and whores around town, is giving the impression that these are normal things.

Daughters don't need to be a witness to this because they will choose these types of men for their own husbands.

Sons do not need to witness it because they will grow up thinking that is proper behavior for a man.

These kids will NEVER be marriage material for anyone else, and the cycle continues with them.

You can reverse it and talk of the man that stays for the children while his Wife behaves in that manner.

It isn't a question that can be answered in black and white.

committed

now this is the most ridiculous comment yet on this thread. Comparing a medical condition (and divorcing someone for that) to a bum or degenerate gambler is off the charts stupid.

I appreciate your honesty. As a father, I completely disagree with you. But, that's why there called opinions.

I disagree with the thought that they are being 'used'. They are a result of the marriage. They should be 'considered' when the marriage faces disolution. As medc said, children have this habit of taking blame. Putting them in that position is unfair and devoid of love.

No, the point of the discussion was radical honesty including children.

Edit - And a T/J at that. Sorry I brought that example.

Me too.

I don't think the use of word 'use' is appropriate either.

Unless, the WS "uses" the children as a way to guilt the BS into staying in a marriage where infidelity is running rampant.

They don't want to do their part...they just want someone else to do the heavy lifting..but it's all for the kids dontcha know.

committed

I disagree with your assesment of what "devoid of love" to someone is.

Children more often than not know what is going on...more than adults like to think they do. It is very naive and irresponsible of an adult to think that they can be in an unhappy marriage and hide it from children. Like I've said before...children are not idiots...they know when their parents are not happy in marriage. And trying to dupe them, and hiding the fact of the matter is going to make them think they are responsible (and blame themselves) more than if you were honest with them...that is devoid of love....imho.

edit:

honesty is NEVER a bad policy...even with children. I don't have to be a parent to know this....I was a child once.

Introvert:

You waded into some deep water here.

When I read your (paraphased) quote about "Kids, Houses and dogs" I had the same reaction as some of the others.

I've buried three dogs in the backyard. I wouldn't be able to stand in the funeral home for my son.....

TWO totally different things.

To your original point: "Should you stay for your children?"

Whatever it takes to recover your M if it should be. If "staying for the children" works, then so be it. Each M is different and each recovey and reasons for it as well. But "staying for the children" is a very significant factor. But NOT the only one. Fake it till you make it, I say.

For example, Flamingo was going to stay until DS gradded from HS and then she was GONE. She even had plans to deliver the Plan D papers at the actual graduation. Why then? Because she felt that the hardest part of raising children was over. And having a somewhat stable, safe enviornment for her child until then was more important long term then subjecting our son to the drama/trauma of Divorce.

And like C_N states, I stayed because I DID want as much time as possible with my son. Was I shortchanging him as well, earlier in my M? Certainly. But I wanted as much time as possible, and staying in the M for my child was how I was going to get it.

Flamingo and I have a significantly better M now. My DS HAS A better home life now. He recognizes the differences in tone, manner and stress in the house.

As Mel stated, FIXING the DISCORD helped, not ending the M.

And about "sharing" with your children? If you had a child, you would never bring up a "sexual dysfuction" to your child.

Nor ever state to the children that you were staying together "because of them" Most children would internalize that to mean that there was something WRONG with them.

I'm here for my Son. I'm here for my W. But I would NEVER talk to my son about marital issues that had no relationship to him. I.E. a sexual dysfunction. I would however, discuss with him WHY we might be splitting up or divorcing. Or, if I was going to have surgery to "fix a sexual dysfuntion". That has a bearing on his life, and he needs to know in a age appropriate manner.

JMHO

LG

Yes, honesty is best. But not radical honesty. My teens knew my wife and I were in trouble. They now know we are well into recovery. They know we see an counselor weekly. They will never know the details. They don't care to. All they care is that mom & dad are home together loving them and eachother.

And having been a child, with a childs mind, does not give you ANY insight to parenthood.

I have another very close to home example I could bring up but after the last one I'm hesitant.

I did not stay in an unhappy marriage for my child. I decided to do the hardest thing I have ever done and work to improve my marriage so that my child could live in an intact home with a happy mom and dad who love each other.

I would not advocate staying married for the kids and being miserable. I did not realize earlier that that was your line of thinking.

When I said my daughter was my motivation to stay married, I should have also said that she is my motivation every day to be the best wife and mom, so that my family can be whole and so that my whole family can be happy.

Staying together for the kids does not mean staying miserable and doing nothing to improve yourself and your marriage.