I don't have a thread on this board and I'm not married but I am dating a woman (over 11 months now) who is very interested in MB and we talk about the concepts every day. We POJA as much as we can and have identified our EN's with each other.
We had a discussion last night and she asked a question that I have thought about myself and wanted to post it here to see what the experts might have to say.

The question is regarding EN's and if they can change over time. I noticed that I filled out the EN questionairre once when I was new to this stuff and was in a marriage that wouldn't survive my wife-at-the-time's waywardness. So I don't think my head was on straight really but I filled answers on the EN questionnaire that were quite different than after the D was final.

GF and I were also talking about older couples (80's 90's), because we both work with the elderly, and we were wondering if EN's are the same then or if they gradually shift. And most concerning, what if they change somewhat haphazardly? Or as the result of something else (like arrival of kids, e.g.)? Couldn't that throw even the best MB marriage into turmoil with one (or both) spouse(s) having to learn a whole new EN to meet?

Somewhat theoretical I know, but I was curious and really couldn't answer it fully myself so I thank you for any responses.

~Optimism

Emotional needs do change over time. Two examples I can think of from Dr. Harley: many women don't perceive a need for "family commitment" until children come around. And people who rank non-intimate emotional needs in the top 2 (anything besides SF, conversation, affection, RC) are usually in withdrawal, and when those needs are met and they start to feel safe in the relationship again and love bank deposits are being made, they begin to rate the intimate ENs higher again.

Wow, that is very interesting and it makes perfect sense. Optimism, while the non-intimate emotional needs may change over time, it is the top 4 intimate emotional needs that create romantic love. People fall in love, for example, when conversation, affection, sexual fulfillment and recreational companionship needs are met for 15 hours of UA per week. People don't fall in love, for example, over domestic support or financial support. The best protection for any future marriage is to make sure you meet those top 4 EN's for 15 hours per week.

I have a POJA/MB concept question.

Preface, full disclosure: Not married yet but I and my girlfriend, NatureGirl, have been dating over a year. It has been a relationship guided by MB principles from the very early days and NG now has read a couple books, and has been listening to the radio show. We talk about MB concepts all the time � love bank, EN�s, LB�s. We have talked about marriage but want to make sure it�s done right � I have 2 kids to consider, she has 2 grown as well. We will not live together first, in spite of the temptations.
We try to POJA when we can � usually it�s pretty natural. But�.

Yesterday I presented an idea to NG. It involves my DS15 � he has been wanting me to take him to a college basketball game in another state for a couple years (he�s become a fan of the team I grew up watching). This year he asked again and I put him to the task of looking into ticket prices and travel (3 day trip) although I did not consent to any final plan. The concept includes him and me.

We�ve always had pretty good negotiations and generally follow Harley�s model well. NG has become emotional before with things but never have we been disrespectful. This situation was no exception, however we have yet to get to an enthusiastic agreement (NG has reluctantly agreed that I should go). I am interested in following the POJA and I want her to be as enthusiastic about the trip as I am.

My perspective is that I have not spent time with my son exclusively in over 15 months when we went to a concert together in another town and stayed overnight. Since then NG and I have been together mostly and then it�s all of us, or Me and him and DD10. NG has been to Michigan with me twice and we�ve had multiple other weekends together.

Her perspective is that we should all go as a �family� and that we have already agreed to not take trips without each other (although I feel that this situation doesn�t constitute the same thing). She said she�s concerned it will become a habit when we�re married.

Thing is, I understand her concerns. I do. I also think she feels a little left out, and I understand that too. However, I really was looking forward to spending some time alone with my kid. I am not trying to be exclusionary.

So, I know we�re not married. But we are trying to employ MB philosophy to our dating life as much as we can, I guess in preparation for a wonderful marriage. How does the not spending time away from each other over night apply to an occasional trip with a teenage (or other aged) child? Or is this just one of the conflicts that Harley points to which renders the divorce rate of mixed-family marriages to the 85% range?

as usual, thanks for your input!

~opt

opt, my feeling is that you don't subject your dating relationship to marriage rules. The fact of the matter is you are not a family yet. It is good to learn how to negotiate but the key is mutual agreement to follow the POJA when you are married. Those skills are appropriate for marriage.

Now, if you were married, then you wouldn't agree to go to basketball game unless you had NG's enthusiastic agreement.

You might want to email Dr Harely and see what he says. ALSO, be sure and get His Needs, Her Needs for Parents. There is a chapter in there for blended that you will find very helpful.

Thanks Melody!
I understand your sentiment. I guess you're saying that the dating relationship should be a little more...relaxed than marriage (?). We have been intent on "practicing" for marriage, I think. We are really into each other and see great potential, so maybe we're taking things a little to the extreme.

Along those lines, I was surprised to hear Dr. Harley say recently that he and Joyce had dated for 6 years prior to marrying. He has also said (I believe) that 2 years is generally enough to know if the relationship is marriage-worthy. Why did he wait 6 years, I wonder?

I will present this situation to the show. and also get the hnhn for parents.

Thanks again.

opt

Are you sure you understood that correctly? They were 19 and 20 when they got married. I don't they dated very long. They knew each other for much longer, I believe. I think Harley said if you haven't made your mind up in 2 years, it is probably time to move on.

This is the very type of situation that dating helps to uncover as a future potential problem.

Kids in the mix is tricky. When dh and I first met we agreed that our children were our top priority. Now we don't neglect our marriage to coddle our children, BUT taking a 15 year old on a trip with dad is far from coddling. If I were dating someone who was unhappy with that...I would probably begin to hear alarm bells. I think it is very important that you be VERY honest with her about how you feel about this. She too is interviewing and this type of thing may bug her enough that she doesn't want to be in a long term relationship with a man who wants to go off on a weekend trip with his son.

Dh and I set down between us very specific rules for how we would handle each other's children. It has worked well for us.

I second SW concerns with hearing alarm bells.

He is your son. Your are not married, and your children should be top priority. All parents deserve to have alone time with their children as special bonding moments.

Her comment about she is concerned this will become a habit after marriage is a major red flag for me. This is where it gets tricky as a blended family. Your children are here before NG. They are watching you and trying to get a feel for their importance in your life.

Is she telling you she wants to by #1 priority in your life above your children?

I would figure out her exact thoughts on this as well as get her thoughts on her expectations.

I've bolded the parts that I find alarming, and you'll notice it is your sentiments, not NG's. You are attempting to make exceptions to rules. I agree with Melody that you don't apply marriage rules to dating relationships. You don't live together, so you already spend nights apart, correct?

Here is another thing, and I believe Harley would agree, perhaps you can pose this to the show as well...once you get married, your spouse comes first before any children, regardless of whose they are. I came into this marriage with a child of my own. Perhaps it was simpler because my son was so young (a toddler), but in getting married I created a new family and family rules applied: spouses come before children.

I would never have married someone who told me that their children would always come before me. That's a disaster, and unnatural to a marital relationship. You can't make exceptions to POJA just because it involves children from another relationship. Well, you can, but at the peril of the marriage.

I have not remarried (heck, I'm not even dating yet!), but I agree. In a marriage the spouse has to come first. If you have already agreed to not take trips without each other, then you must honor your agreement. (Or renegotiate it as a general principle because you are not enthusiastic any more.)

However, the other part of the equation is that this is still a dating relationship. You need to decide if NG's resistance to your having alone time with your child is something you're willing to live with long term.

I'm curious...does NG have a close relationship with her adult children? Does she spend much time alone with them? She will probably expect you to eventually have the same kind of relationship with your kids that she has with hers.

I wonder how this can possibly play out in reality. Or what the definition of 'coming first' is. As long as I am legally and morally responsible for my child, his actual needs (vs. wants) will come before any other adult on the planet. Then again I wouldn't want to be married to a man who would expect otherwise.

Dr. Harley does draw a distinction between married and unmarried, as far as following his policies. I think he encourages people to practice the POJA and other concepts while unmarried, but at the same time I think he says that there is no real test or preparation for marriage, and even premarital counseling is woefully ineffective! The reason is that the minute you are married, you are in a different situation that you were when you were unmarried.

So he doesn't say that unmarried people who are dating ought to follow the POJA.

I think I'm representing what I've heard on the radio show as accurately as I can. It was kind of counterintuitive to me.

From "Caring for your Children" here on the site:

But the economic advantage of a lifelong marriage is not nearly as important as the positive effect it has on children. The greatest contribution that parents can make to their children's happiness and success is to love each other for life. If parents love their children, and want the best for their children, they must do everything possible to preserve their romantic relationship. That means caring for each other must be their highest priority -- they must meet each other's intimate emotional needs. It's not a choice between caring for each other and caring for children. The reality is that if you want to truly care for your children, you must care for each other.

He is writing about the original family, not blended families. Does he write about that in the Parents book? I don't have it. In Lovebusters, though, on page 210, he writes about making unilateral decisions having a greater negative impact on blended families than on ones where offspring are from both parents, because of the negative reaction to the bias of the parent toward the child.

He recommends POJA for all decisions regarding children, whether his, hers, or theirs.

Page 221, lovebusters:

Only when spouses make each others feelings their highest priority can children be successfully integrated into a family without the loss of love.

I, and dh, agree with this in principle. And perhaps we actually practice it...I'm just not sure of how it plays out in reality. So far we haven't had an issue come up that we couldn't POJA regarding the kids.

I certainly believe it to be true of intact families. However, in THOSE families it is assumed (almost always correctly) that both parents have the same level of natural love for the COM. That aspect is different for blended families especially with older children.

She is concerned it (taking trips without her) will be a habit when/if you get married.

What if you could come up with guidelines? "I will only take one trip a year for no more than 3 days exclusively with my son."
"I will only do one event (1 night only) every 6 months with my son."

Would she agree to that?

Also, do you do fun trips with her? Maybe she would like to go somewhere.

She is concerned it (taking trips without her) will be a habit when/if you get married.

What if you could come up with guidelines? "I will only take one trip a year for no more than 3 days exclusively with my son."
"I will only do one event (1 night only) every 6 months with my son."

Would she agree to that?

Also, do you do fun trips with her? Maybe she would like to go somewhere.

How it plays out in reality in blended families is that the spouses should POJA decisions regarding the children. When you marry, you make a commitment to put that person as your top priority, over everyone else, children included. What that means is in this game situation, if they were married, then NGs feelings about the trip should be a higher priority than how he and his son feel about it. He would need to consider her, and not go if she is not enthusiastic about it, or bring her if that works for both of them.

On the flip side, he could side with the son against his wife, and create all kinds of resentment problems.

But he's not married, so he is free to do as he pleases and if how he wants to conduct his relationship with his son is a problem for her, then now is the time to move on. I don't think he should lead her to believe that he would put her feelings first if what he really means is 'only about things not regarding my children.' If he is open about his priorities, and she accepts that willingly, fine. I don't think it would work for the long haul, but if people want to try it, I sure can't stop them.

Regarding Opt, I agree. This is a perfect opportunity for them both to examine how they feel about these type of issues and see if it will be a deal breaker.

As for the bolded.....when two people are committed to each other and to the family unit it is fairly easy to implement such a policy. However, my son is my responsibility, in a way that no other adult (or child-since he is my only) is. I have seen women neglect (in one way or the other) their children for a new husband and it sickens me. A child in a blended family has already lost his FOO and needs to feel that SOMEbody will have his back no matter what. I am that somebody for my son.

If I was in Opts shoes it would concern me that she is making an issue out of a rare trip away with his son. This son will be grown and on his own in a few short years...he needs his father right now.