Why is there more of the WALK-AWAY WIFE syndrome?

I was reading the Divorce Busting site (i've been on so many that i think it was the Divorce Busting site!) But it seems to be ringing true. I am not trying to be closed minded here, but it seems that a large majority of the wives here leave and never come back as if they are positive they made the correct choice, but the husbands leave for OW then have second thoughts and a large majority come back to the marriage. Has anyone else noticed this trend or is it me. I don't mean to depress anyone, or simplify anything, it's just something I noticed of the "Walk Away Wife" syndrome.

T24G,I can't speak for walk away wives since my H walked away. But in my case, if I had ever gotten the courage to walk away, I would have never come back. I know I would have made the right choice. If my marriage had ever gotten to the point where I had enough, I wouldn't have looked back at all! Maybe it's because some (not all) women think things thru more than some (not all) men do. I don't know. It's just a thought.Mitzi

EXACTLY MITZI, they say women mature faster than men,(sorry guys, not flaming) but maybe that's what it is. Most women look at the long-term effects of our actions, or how it would effect those we love, when a large majority of men assume that all can be swept away with no consequences in the future. And I AM NOT SAYING ALL MEN AND ALL WOMEN.

I've read everything I can find on divorce.One thing I find written about alot is "one year later" undates.H's standard of living usually rises (more money to spend on himself)W's standard of living usually lowers (she is single mom with extra responsiblity of "home repairs", etc. that H used to handle)H usually regrets divorce and wishes he was back in marriage (misses home cooked meals, laundry services, regular safe sex, and someone who cares and worries about him)W usually moves on with her life enjoying the independence (doesn't miss the extra laundry, the extra cooking, and enjoys not worrying about him anymore)This is not my opinion, this is what I've read in numerous books and articles.Keo

trying2_4give,Maturity or money? I suspect the latter.My views on this aren't politically correct, but here goes. I think a lot of why you see "walk away wives" is that we, as a society, enable it. We have divorce courts and child custody courts that are incredibly biased against men. When the going in a marriage gets tough, the economic incentives encourage women to file for divorce and child custody. Once they've made that committment, and they see the beneficial economics of that decision, they figure that repairing a broken marriage is more hassle than looking for a new husband.Check out: <A HREF="http://users.erols.com/afc/minority1.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://users.erols.com/afc/minority1.htm</A> "In today's world, if one investigates the simple question, "Who initiates divorce?" we find from Monthly Vital Statistics Report, May 21, 1991, that from 1975 to 1988, in families with children present, wives filed for divorce in approximately two-thirds of the cases each year. In 1975, 71.4 % of the cases were filed by women, and in 1988 65 % were filed by women. While these statistics alone do not compel a conclusion that women anticipate advantages to being single rather than remaining in the marriage, the do raise that reasonable hypothesis -- one that the Commission majority refused to consider. If women can anticipate a clear gender bias in the courts regarding custody, they can expect to be the primary residential parent for their children. If they can anticipate enforcement of child support by the courts, they can expect a high probability of support moneys without the need to account for their expenditures. Clearly, they can also anticipate maintaining the marital residence, receiving half of all marital property, and gaining total freedom to establish new social connections and intimacy relationships. Weighing these gains against the alternative of remaining in the marriage with a spouse who may, in the wife's judgment, be oppressive, unfaithful, or just plain boring, could result in a seductive enticement to obtain a divorce. Solutions to this hypothesized scenario are elusive, but without question, should include reconsideration of the ease with which divorces are granted when children are involved."Bystander

Koesha, it's funny that you say what the wife doesn't miss, because when H and I were seperated, I LOVED not having extra laundry, didn't have to cook, if I didn't feel like it, and I was too busy with my girlfriends living the single life. Yes I thought of him every second, but it wasn't in the "Woes Me" syndrome, just the "Oh Well, I don't have to worry about what's going to happen next, because he is out of the house and that's one less thing to worry about". Wierd isn't it!

Dear Mitzi & Trying2_4give,I'm going to have to disagree with you. Mitzi: my wife is a Walk-a-Way, and believe me, she has not thought it through. Her expectations of the future are very unrealistic. When I asked her what she wants, it's in negative terms ("I want to be not married to you.") or when asked about her plans for the future, she answers in vague concepts only ("to be independant") but without any concrete steps about how to do that (she has no job, and little experience or training).Trying: as children girls mature sooner than boys. But boys catch up. There is no truth to the generalization that women are more mature than men.The key to the WAW syndrome is this: some woman are afraid to express their true needs and feelings. They put up with a situation they are unhappy with, but will not do anything to help fix. Then, when they can't take it anymore, they bolt. Some WAW plan an exit strategy, some don't.Why the difference between men and women then, when it comes to walking away? Maybe men take their wives for granted too often, they walk for whatever reason, then reconsider their action when they realize what they're leaving. And maybe the stoicism of the woman who puts up with an unhappy marriage flips over into an adamant refusal to reconsider her actions once she has walked.Sincerely, Kenneth

Keosha,I'd bet that the standard of living argument you've seen is based on _The Divorce Revolution: The Unexpected Social and Economic Consequences for Women and Children in America_, written by Lenore Weitzman, PhD, in 1985. The study was fatally flawed, and Weitzman admitted as such in a 1996 paper in American Sociological Review. The problem is that her paper was used by many, many states to upwardly revise child support awards. Because custodial parents don't have to account for a nickel of where child support is spent (something I would change by law), this means that child support now serves as a form of veiled alimony in many, if not most, situations. Weitzman's flawed paper is still, however, held as gospel by many.For a longer discussion of how Weitzman's thesis is wrong, see Sanford Braver's _Divorced Dads: Shattering the Myths_. <A HREF="http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?isbn=087477862X" TARGET=_blank>http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?isbn=087477862X</A> Bystander

Kenneth,In no way, can I judge the thinking of a walk away wife. I would not have walked away from my marriage unless I was sure it could never work out. However, I didn't get that chance. I didn't mean that all women think things thru and all men don't. I meant that possibly it may be true in some cases. I know from the men on this board that not all men just walk away, and not all women think it thru carefully. It was basically just a thought that popped in my head.Mitzi

Bystander and Kenneth, i have to disagree with a few points. I think that women are nurturers by nature and before we walk away, we try (AGAIN i say, NOT ALL women)everything within our power to make it work, counseling, workshops, books, tapes,etc. From what I have seen here and other board, men usually don't try until the wife has left or has OM, and then the wives don't make as much contact with ex-husbands. Don't get me wrong, wives also don't realize until H have affairs that they need to work on it, but like I said before it seems once the wives leave, they don't look back, and I see most H that betray do go back to wives to try again. As far as money being a factor, isn't money a factor in EVERYTHING. When i was seperated hell yeah, it sucked having to pay for everything myself, but I did it, without child support. Don't get my wrong, if the kids are living with me then HELL YES H is going to pay, and I would expect to pay child support if kids lived with my H. No one should get out of that.

Keosha,You say you read that "W usually moves on with her life enjoying the independence". While some women report that, most, over 70%, report that they probably could have fixed the marriage if they had really tried, most report loss of self-esteem, loneliness, lowered standard of living, and high levels of guilt. Check "The Case Against Divorce" by Diane Medved.One year after updates are also not very revealling. Divorce takes 5 to 10 years to get over emotionally, according to the statistical longitudinal studies.Finally, if an ex-wife feels her life has improved because she doesn't have to do his laundry anymore, I can only say she has warped values. Accepting the pain and devastation to a family that divorce brings, so that she can have a life with less laundry is a sad view of life.The most interesting statistics are that 80% of divorced people remarry, indicating they still want to be married. Sad thing is that 60% of these re-marriages will end in divorce, which is higher than the average. This indicates that divorce is more due to an individual's inability to face problems and overcome them, than with the fact that the marriage has problem.In short, if you have a relationship problem, you can fix it, or you can leave, taking the problem with you to the next marriage. And then leave again.Kenneth

Who needs a study to be done? All of my female friends/relatives, except for one, all suffered a significant drop in living standard when they divorced. Women with children (sorry guys) still do the majority of child care. If the guy was doing most of the child care and had stayed home with the kids, then he can get primary custody. In situations where the woman is dependent on a man financially, she naturally is afraid to speak about her needs, for fear of being abandoned. Even if she is not afraid of being abandoned, our society conditions both men and women to believe that her needs are not as important as his needs. I don't know how many times I've gotten on my soapbox about a man's need for sex, for instance, and how everyone is so quick to try and convince the woman to just "put out" rather than tell the guy (if he were here) that he needs to use his other head FIRST.Add to that, the still prevailing social norm in ANY country, that the man is the "head" of the household, and it doesn't really matter what her needs are cause he, supposedly, gets the last word. Men should be tired of doing all the economic heavy lifting for the family, and I'm sure women are sick of being treated like substitute maids, cooks, and prostitutes. Both would benefit by doing the jobs typically assigned to the other.

Bystander,By now we all know where you stand on the child support and custody issues. I feel somewhat insulted that, according to your way of thinking, I am doing this for financial gain. I will not gain that much financially. Actually my life has sucked since my H left and has refused to help with taking care of the kids, and the bills that WE accumulated during the marriage. I will NOT be better off. I have a H that has refused to help financially for a month now, and who has not seen his children for a month. He is the one who resents helping with the kids. He uses any excuse he can think of to not help with them or see them. So, yeah, I'm sure I'm really coming out ahead!And yes, I will have custody of my kids and his visitation will more than likely be restricted and supervised. And yes, he will pay child support! Too bad! If he had them I would gladly pay him. That's just how it works!!Mitzi[This message has been edited by Mitzi (edited March 13, 2000).]

try2_4give,Objectively, you asked why there are more walk away wives. I don't mean to be unkind here, but when we incent a certain behavior, we shouldn't be surprised to see people behaving themselves in a fashion that follows the incentives. Appeals to "women being more nuturant" notwithstanding, if our divorce and child custody courts are rigged to favor women, we surely shouldn't be surprised to see them doing the majority of filing. And that is *exactly* what what we see.As for child support, the formulaic approach our society has adopted generally awards too much money, making it a form of veiled alimony in most cases. While this veiled alimony is morally wrong (its just sick, really), it clearly adds to the economic incentives women enjoy when contemplating divorce.Bystander

TheStudent,I agree that the majority of women do childcare - but isn't that a chicken/egg problem? Is it fair to regard a father as less able to nurture, when it was in both he and his wife's interest to have him work full time? Its bizarre to me...A couple makes a rational financial decision (i.e., the man work a full time job, and the woman work full time in the home). Years later, they divorce, and the man is then demoted to being treated as little above an income stream. Its sick. It really is sick.But studies are very important. Your friends don't represent what's really going on in society.Mitzi,Yeah, my views are known by now, I guess. [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

[Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

Anyhow, I'll bet when the smoke clears in your situation, you'll be getting more child support from your husband than it takes to actually raise your children. The last month sucked, sure, but wait until the support judgment is made. I'll bet you come out ahead financially. Mitzi, I DON'T mean any of this as a personal attack - I'm just outraged that we've botched the divorce and child custody issue so badly, and I want to change it.Bystander

Bystander,No I will not get more than enough to raise my kids! I know about what I am going to get and I know what my monthly expenses are. (and yes they are being handed over to the courts!)How am I supposed to get so much money from a man that works when he feels like it. Gets a job and then either quits or asks for a lay off when he gets tired of it. Can't squeeze blood from a stone.

First of all I want to point out that what I wrote above was NOT my opinion. I was simply quoting some facts I've read. It's strange how these same facts are repeted in numerous places. Maybe they are all quoteing from one single source, maybe different studies, I don't know where the writers obtained their information.It was reported as "facts" not "opinion". One of the sources was a anonomus poll taken by playboy mag.As a veteran of divorce, I can say make these statements from personal experience.1. I can not forgive multipal physical affairs 2. X did try to reconcil within 6 months to a year. (He remarried the following year)3. my life style (with 3 children) did lower drasticly. I was awarded $25.00 per week per child. H paid for 5 weeks and I've never seen another penny. (I can assure you that the "lure" of big child support was not a reason for my divorce.)H did NOT provide medical insurance or ANY benefits at all.For financial purposes it was as if he never existed.Am I bitter about it? DAMN RIGHT!!! He owns his own business and lives like a king while my kids did without the things that his step children enjoyed.He had a shiney new boat and spends weekends at the lake. (my kids went to the river to swim)He had a snazzy new Harley motorcycle (my kids didn't even have a bicycle)He drove a new Caddie (I drove a 1963 chevy that broke down often leaving me and the kids stranded)Maybe you believe the story about the X living in luxery. But don't try to convience me of it.I don't want to hear the fairy tale... Keo

.[This message has been edited by kam6318 (edited March 13, 2000).]

Mitzi,OK, I'll take what you say on face value. What your husband is doing is morally wrong. He should not abandon his children financially. A pox on him (and I mean that)! However, if he doesn't pay, he'll quickly run into arrears, with interest charges, etc. Strangely, child support is the ONE area where we still run debtor's prisons in this country (its also the one area where Constitutional protection against involuntary servitude don't apply, believe it or not). So if he continues to refuse to pay, you can have him thrown into prison.Anyhow, in more general terms, I am truly apalled by a system in which a woman can unilaterally divorce and claim a substantial portion of a man's income for "child support" without ever having to account for so much as a nickel of where the money is spent. Child support should NEVER be a form of veiled alimony, yet in many (if not most) cases this is exactly what is happening. The way to fix this is to move to a default of 50% physical custody with NO child support money changing hands. That completely removes the incentives for these ugly custody battles, and is IMO in the best interests of the children. Many fathers would love to be with their children half the time, and the system shouldn't be set up as a "winner take all" among the parents. But I've said all this before, right? [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

Bystander

I read somewhere that men, in general, are happier with the state of being married than women in general are. Doesn't mean the men are happier with their specific partner, just that they like being married in and of itself - I know this is certainly the case with me, probably because I'm pretty much of a homebody when not at work. So men, I guess, figure they lose more when they leave the marriage.I think the "walk-away wife" syndrome IS real. My 1st W was one and my current W was one from her 1st marriage and looks like she's about to do it again!--Wex

Bystander,You know, it's really sad to say, but in the area I live in, enforcing child support is a joke. My aunt's X went several years with out paying a very small amount of child support, and it took her 10 years to get it from him. And, guess what? He was never arrested.

according to Harley:"Simply stated, women leave men when they are neglected. Neglect accounts for almost all of the reasons women leave and divorce men."for a great answer to your question, go to the Marriage Builders main forum page (where all forums are listed - link is at top of this page) and read the article "Why women leave men"....I believe we leave not for money, but because we are fed up...not many believe or subscribe to the 'filling each others' needs' theory, and women, are tired of carrying what they see as too many burdens (ie: housework, child rearing, job out of home, sex goddess, mommy to one and all, step-mom at times, social director, financial advisor, bill payer, quality control of contents of the fridge, etc..), while many (not all) men believe that as long as they bring home an adequate paycheque, they are doing their job...I want to share my ENTIRE life with someone....good and bad, but after being taken for granted, and ignored, not spent time with, and expected to do all around the house alone, I was ready to walk away....lucky for me that my H then had an affair....(sarcasm added)....now i truly feel appreciated and loved.....LOLbut I was indeed ready to walk...and not take anything from him either, by the way..I believe in standing on my own 2 feet....but what I viewed as neglect was too much to bear..I am not his mother..I am a life partner....that is what I want...the same love, respect and admiration I receive is what I give...also, in my opinion, it is EASIER to walk away than it is to fix the relationship...leaving is easy...staying is hard....and I have never taken the easy way out of anything before ....so why start now?? Dylan

trying...Wow, your post got taken over! I will tell you I agree I see a lot more women leaving and leaving for good. I agree that men for the most part tend to want to go back at some point.I don't know why it happens, but yes a lot of women are giving up their kids, and having affairs. I found that when I came here, I figured I'd talk to a bunch of women but truly the men are not all a bunch of cheaters like I perceived them to be.I feel a great deal of pain for the man whose wife has left him. There must be a logical explanation for this.

Bystander, you are actually saying that YOU believe that women find it easier to file for divorce than to work on their marraige because in the end they will get a nice alimony or child support check! You must have A LOT of money hungry women who marry for money, because I know of NO cases where a women has suggested, implied, or said that she would rather cash a check than work on her marriage. I will agree that the courts are kind to those who need child support, but I would also agree that A LOT of men find it easier to sign a check than to actually be there to CARE and yes that word again NURTURE their children! I also hear a lot of men here who take care of their kids, but I also here of the ones who don't, but take on the responsibility of the OW's child, neglecting their own kids. And as far as someone saying that it's easier to be divorced because LAUNDRY is easier IS a wharped sense of values, AND NO ONE has said that is why it's easier to walk away. Kenneth you took that comment and flew off with it. I or no one here said divorce is so much easier since laundry and dinner is smaller. GEESH, this was meant as a little something that I PERSONALLY have noticed to be true FOR MY SURROUNDINGS and here on this board and it was taken to the 10th degree by a few offended men. Sorry if it offends, but I still stand by my statement. Most men wander back and forth after saying their decision is final, when most women after saying they are leaving usually do so and don't look back. No matter how many statistics you throw out there will ALWAYS be someone with a different statistic if it co-signs the point they are trying to make.

trying2_4give,You asked why there are more walk away wives, and I've offered a falsifiable hypothesis that our society perversely incents this conduct via biased divorce courts and child custody courts. Your claims to not knowing any such women are not the basis of a valid scientific test. While its certainly possible to test my hypothesis (e.g., a random-assignment, quasi-experimental design changing divorce/custody laws in some states but not others), practically speaking it cannot happen. So I'm left arguing my position based on what I believe, you're right, and an appeal to the morally sick system that is our divorce and custody courts. I already said my position may not be popular - but on the other hand, I am probably right.Mitzi,Again, I personally believe what your husband is doing is wrong. It is wrong for custodial parents to take more than appropriate in child support, and its wrong not to pay an appropriate amount.Anyhow, I guess I've got everyone torqued off at me, so I'll leave this thread unless there are any direct questions.Bystander

Bystander, fine, you stick to your scientific tests to try to understand why women are quicker to leave if thats what you need to get you through your day. As far as being torqued, you sound EXTREMELY torqued that men have to pay child support.

Hi All,Another interesting discussion. I had this discussion with a lady on an airplane about 10 years ago. She quoted the men do better financially and women do worse financially stuff to me. I pointed out to her, that I had never heard of a company providing a raise or a bonus for getting divorced. Further, I don't care how she slices it having two residences is much more expensive than one. She of course "did not believe me". But I just laughed and told her to cite one example of bonuses or pay raises for divorce. There are none.So what is the problem, well as Mitzi says you cannot squeeze blood from a turnip. Also many don't pay the child support. I do agree with Bystander about many things, but still the issues brought up here are more the exceptions. Where the H is not paying the court mandated child support. I'll stay out of the rest of the argument, because while I do believe that the economic bias and child care bias toward men is significant, I am not convinced that because women are the ones asking for the divorce means they wouldn't or didn't try to save marriage.For example, if H has an affair and won't file for divorce and won't leave OW, and the W files, is she bailing because of economic incentive? No, She is bailing because he won't work on the marriage and has an OW on the side.Oh! Well, keep up this discussion. It is interesting.JL

This is getting carried away.All I know is that I wish my wife would give us a chance. Knowing that its harder for W to come back makes me feel worse off than before.Happy?J

try2_4give,I'm torqued by the injustice against men in divorce courts and custody courts. I'm torqued by the "winner take all" approach that we have adopted in these courts, because it operates on the false assumption that any given man is somehow less nurturant than any given woman. I am torqued that a woman can abuse the system to unilaterally take a man's children away from him, and financially rape him for far more than will ever be needed to raise the children. Do these things always happen? No, of course not. But the fact that they can happen at all is a problem. And the way to fix these perverse incentives is to move towards a default of 50% joint physical custody with no child support money ever changing hands.Its absolutely true that some men don't want their kids half the time, and in that case men should share in the *documented* child expenses. But men who WANT their kids 50% of the time should have the RIGHT to them 50% of the time. That's what equality is about...And how can anyone morally justify arguing against equality?JL,You're right about this being interesting, especially when someone steps in and starts questioning the bogus conventional wisdom that women's standard of living tanks after a divorce. But it does get me in hot water [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

Bystander

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Anyhow, in more general terms, I am truly apalled by a system in which a woman can unilaterally divorce and claim a substantial portion of a man's income for "child support" without ever having to account for so much as a nickel of where the money is spent. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>This is simply not true. When deciding how much child support should be paind by the non-custodial parent, both parents fill out a financial statement itemizing what their incomes is vs what the expenses are. Women do NOT divorce for financial benefit. They do so because they simply cannot tolerate the conditions of their marriage any longer. I think that the statement that women are not as happy in marriage in general as men is probably accurate. Do they leave because they didn't try? In most case I'd have to say no. They tried, the husbands were so content with their situation they didn't want to change anything to make things better for the wife. By the time the women decide to leave, they have already reached their limit and there's no turning back after that.I think men are slower to commit, and quicker to leave when unhappy. They may then reconsider once they realize what they'd be giving up. Women are quicker to commit (maybe because of the pressure for having a family, the biological clock thing?), slower to leave. After all, the responsibilites of the household (the aforementioned child care, laundry,etc.) usually fall on her shoulders. She doesn't want to shirk her responsibilities. But slowly she becomes unhappy. When her unhappiness crosses the threshold of what she can bear, she leaves. Does she reconsider after realizing what she's giving up? No. Why? What is she giving up? A lifetime of unhappiness?I think the solution is for women to learn a lesson from the men. When it comes to making a commitment, be afraid. Be very afraid. This is a LIFETIME we're talking about. That's a REALLY LONG time! For most of us, it's too late. The commitment has already been made.

My wife is one who represents this..... I had a meeting with her this weekend and i have never met anyone who has a more hardened heart. She has fallen for someone else and there is no going back, no remorse, no feelings what so ever. I was looking in the eyes of someone that has absolutely no need nor want of me.... and I did the laundry. She has a better paying job than I, maybe that's one, she is way more attractive than i maybe that's two... the reasons pile up, I still don't know the real reason other than another man became more intimate, could open her feelings better than I.... don't know. I do know it happens all the time and it's easy. The funny thing about this so-called maturity that women have or the long term thinking that is involved... how long term is it to know that your "baggage" just got bigger, the stuff that your husband does or does not do will not be so different than the substitutes unless you are not planning to re-marry and live your independant life. Sorry but I still just don't see it. To my mind my wife did not try, she did not tell me her feelings, she just made the decision and went on.... how many studies are out there which depict if the substitutes were all that better.... or more wisdom was used. Sorry for rambling... still hurt .... mkn

I am kinda sorry I have to get in on this one. My H left us. He does not want any STUFF as he calls it. He just wants out. I have been a stay at home mom for 14 years. I will be financially worse off than when I was marriad (not divorced yet).I cannot depend on getting married to someone else. I must depend on me and have to worry about being self supportive. Since my H is the one that wants out and makes a good income, I feel it is only right that he help me with college expenses to get a degree so I can be self supportive. I stayed at home while he traveled, worked late ect so he could futher his career, well I need help now.I have agreed to 2 nights a week and every other weekend for visitation. I also said I am flexible and the kids can see him more. Has he taken me up on it? NO!Since he left in Oct, he has not had the kids once for a full weekend. He has had them the longest for 4 hours. He seen them once a week and would take them out to dinner. (He was home for one month kinda in this duration).I am not saying that there not some great Dads out there who deserve custody. But I am not divorcing my H for money. I had to, to protect myself, and for custody because he was going to split the kids up, he only wanted the son. How would that make his girls feel? In a sense I am protecting their feelings for him.I just hope that the statistics are right, and the H does want to come home eventually. I miss ironing his clothes and cooking for him. I did this because I loved him, not because I feel like a slave.

Truthseeker,I disagree...I have posed a falsifiable hypothesis that at least some of the time women use the biased divorce courts and custody courts for pure financial gain. My argument is that if we eliminate the biases in these courts, then the percentge of women filing for divorce will fall. In any event, even if you're right that women divorce for other reasons, my point that we should remove the biases in the divorce courts and custody courts is still valid.As for filing expense statements, lets hold out the issue of gaming such statements. What I mean is that once a child support award is made, the custodial parent can basically spend the money on anything: booze, cocaine, a new two-seater sports car, a new wardrobe for the OM she was sleeping with, etc. Custodial parents don't have to prove that the money is being spent on the children, and as a result, excess judgments are carried until the children are emancipated. Hence child support is often a form of veiled alimony.Bystander

Dear friends: Call me lazy, but my reasons for not leaving my spouse after 25 years of marriage is because I am too tired to deal with a new person, new habits and as I said in another post, I know my spouse and I have grown comfortable with him. Yes, there are alot of changes we need to make to rebuild our marriage. Plus, in the back of my mind and deep in my heart, I still truly love him. We grew up together and developed bad habits as teenage parents. After trying to negotiate and renegotiate our marriage, I made a full right turn and left the marriage to fend for itself. Not good. After a near disasterous error, we both decided it's time to reevaluate our behavior and take the necessary steps to heal. It has been a rough road, but I believe we will make it. I don't know much about divorce statistics, child custody, but I do know why I chose not to walk away. I can't speak for anyone else because each has their own unique situation that may or may not be repairable. With the exception of abuse of any sort, I believe both individuals should look at their relationship closely to see if they are worth saving. Sometimes we(myself included) are too quick to make rash decisions without thinking things thoroughly and the long term consequences that could affect us and others. Remember, I am speaking from my experience only and not an authority by any means.

So if money isn't being exchanged to take care of the kids, how are the kids supposed to be taken care of? Let the courts take the money and then go clothes shopping, food shopping, money for extra-curricular activities. Are the women who are left with no other choice but to go through the court system in the first place because Dead Beat Dads won't pay, supposed to TRUST that these men will live up to their responsibility. I don't think so. These deadbeats brought it on themselves to have to be treated like children because they don't want to take care of their responsibility! Now as far as those men who are a part of their childrens lives and expenses, then yes in a perfect world it would be nice for BOTH parents agree on who pays for what so that it equals out. But if one person has proven they can't be depended on, why would you want to risk the chance of NOT being able to trust that they will take their kids best interest at heart. Face it, when their is an OP involved the betrayer is extremely selfish at EVERYONE'S EXPENSE.

Bystander,I have seen far too many instances of custodial parents trying to make ends meet with the little bit of child support that they receive to put any merit to what you are saying. don't forget that in order to keep up with the bills, the custodial parent will most likely have to work which means that they will have to find andd pay for adequate child care to do so. Do you know how much child care costs? At the very least the non-custodial parent should pay for half that amount. Add in food, clothing, and a percentage of the shelter and I don't think you can say that the average award is excessive. These are real expenses. Are there some women who misspend the money? Yes. Some are irresponsible and their children do without. Are most women like that? No. If the shoe was on the other foot, the same would be said about the male custodial parent. I know personally of a case where a woman was asking for more money than she was getting. The judge looked at her expenses and the amount of the award and said "No. You're getting enough to cover your children's expenses" and suggested that she learn to manage her money better.So I don't think the courts in general are as biased as you believe when it comes to awarding money. And it's certainly not an incentive for women to divorce.As far as awarding physical custody of the children goes, I agree, the courts are a little biased there. But that is more for historical reasons. Women have historically been the caregivers. Is that always the case these days? No. But it is most of the time. That is changing slowly. And I think you'll see a shift in the decisions of the courts to reflect the shift in society. The courts will probably always lag behind some.[This message has been edited by TruthSeeker (edited March 13, 2000).]

trying2_4give,"Deadbeat dads" are largely a myth: See Sanford Braver's book, the one I cited earlier.As for splitting expenses, you raise a valid issue with my proposal. Someone who tries to game the system by not contributing equally should face a custodial and a mandatory child support judgment as a consequence. I'm not against punishing people who refuse to play by the rules here. However, note that my system also carries a significant bludgeon against mothers who refuse to let the fathers have the children 50% of the time: The fathers could then file to have full custody because the *mothers* are abusing the system. As it is, there is basically NO punishment whatsoever for custodial parents who deny NCPs access to the children. My approach would change that: anyone who starts denying the other parent their 50% access would risk losing their OWN 50%. Nice, huh?And really, knowing that you'll HAVE to work it out with the other parent changes it from a "winner take all" battle to the death to a system in which everyone - and especially the children - can win. Its a lot easier to spend money, tally up the receipts, and pay the amount than it is forking over money for some OP's cocaine habit.Look, I know what I'm proposing won't work all the time. I know that some men are creeps who walk away. But we're kidding ourselves when we deny that some women are using the biases in the divorce courts and custody courts to garner a financial windfall. Its morally wrong, and I want to change that.Btw, my gripes about this whole system are because of a child support disaster a friend of mine here on MB is facing. I don't personally have a dig in this fight, but I admit I'm drawn to fighting against injustices.Bystander

Truthseeker,You are basing your views on anecdote without scientific merit. I'll just counter your anecdote: I have seen cases where custodial parents are getting many TIMES what they need to raise the children, and are spending this windfall on themselves. Thus, we can argue anecdote tit for tat in perpetuity, but it won't change the facts.Women are incented to divorce because they will, on average, get a windfall in divorce and child support. Maybe most women don't file for these reasons, but the presence of these biases should be eliminated anyhow. Isn't that what equality is about?And if the courts are "lagging" society, then they will be reacting to complaintants such as myself, who believe that a 50% physical custody (with no support money changing hands) is truly the fairest outcome of all.Bystander

WHAT!!!DEAD BEAT DADS ARE A MYTH!!! You know what, I didn't even bother to continue to read the rest of your statement, because after that statement, I can tell there is NOTHING else that you could EVER say that I would ever want to hear. I truly feel sorry for you and that mythical world you live in! END OF DISCUSSION.

trying2_4give,Read the editorial reviews yourself: <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ts/book-reviews/087477862X/ref=pm_dp_ln_b_5/002-5934471-8319405" TARGET=_blank>http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ts/book-reviews/087477862X/ref=pm_dp_ln_b_5/002-5934471-8319405</A> See especially the Kirkus Review. Better yet, buy the book and read it yourself.Bystander

Bystander, I'm really sorry but deadbeat dads are not a myth. Please get in touch with your local child advocates office and ask them. Go to shelters and ask these women about it.Can you tell me which social class you're looking into when you say that most women get a financial windfall in a divorce? Please explain how a woman who divorces her H who only makes, let's say, $30,000 a year can gain an enormous amount of money? Oh, and for the record, I don't buy cocaine, clothes for another man, and I don't spend a dime on myself unless it's for food or utilities. My H has put me in the situation where I'm forced to sign up for public assistance until I can go to work. So I would have no problem showing my expenses to any judge. I offered to do that. And no I didn't cheat on my monthly expense worksheet either. I kept the #'s as low as possible, because I didn't want to look like I was trying to be unreasonable.

Bystander,I clicked on the link and read the review. According to the review, the info was based on the study of 1,000 families in Arizona. I'm in WV and I know for a fact, (not just because of my situation), that dead beat dad's do exist. I want to clarify this. I know that there are also deadbeat mom's. I wanted to make sure that point was made. Don't want the men thinking I'm bashing them.[This message has been edited by Mitzi (edited March 13, 2000).]

Mitzi,Your case notwithstanding, take a couple who makes exactly the same amount of money, say $50,000 per year each. Lets say that they can both arrange their schedules to take the children exactly 50% of the time. Lets say that they live in an apartment, and an exact duplicate of this apartment is next door.Even though they could share all expenses exactly 50%, the way the current laws are set up, if one parent is declared "custodial," they will receive a child support amount that (by definition) is in excess of what's needed. That's wrong.As for Braver's study, you're right its based only in Arizona. Its the best study to date, though. Do some "deadbeat dads" exist? Of course, and perhaps you're hapless enough to be associated with one. Just as there are men hapless enough to be associated with women who unilaterally use the divorce courts and custody courts for financial gain. I can change the latter, and my solution would help address the former. Its not a pancea, but then again, there are really few panaceas in life anyhow.Really, what's your complaint with my postings? That I'm willing to say that the system unfairly benefits women, and that some women might (just might) use the system for financial gain? Are you upset that I'm working for genuine equality? I really draw fire here, and I'm curious as to why.Btw, I'm going to be offline until tomorrow, but I'll check back. So "fire away" for awhile [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

Bystander

Like I said, someone who put their OWN statistics to sell a book for their subject/book and you bought it HOOK, LINE AND SINKER, since you needed to believe SOMETHING. PUHLEASE! NEXT!

Bystander, Your ideas ingeneral do not bother me. What does bother me though is that you make too many generalizations. It's almost as if you're saying all women who get child support buy drugs and don't take care of the kids. And that only women would file for divorce for financial gain. If women could do that, what about the men whose spouses happen to make a lot more money than they?I admit, right now, I easily get offended by some comments. But just for the sake of the feelings of some of the women here who genuinely didn't want a divorce, but had to file for protection, try wording things a little differently. Please don't lump all women into one category. I am gaining nothing financially. I am losing a marriage. The money doesn't mean **** to me.

I'll have to way in here as I guess I'm one of the few males that is receiving child support.I guess Ohio is different than most states, in that they determine child support by the amount you finacially contribute to the marriage. My wife contributed roughly 35% to our income, so on a chart they looked up our gross income and then went over to two children and came up with a figure of what is spent on two children and then awarded me 35% of that.What bothers me is that, while she was "only" responsible for 35% of the income and thence only 35% for the child support, she is entitled to 50% of the house and my pension. To me it would seem fair that it should be either 35 or 50% percent across the board.MY lawyer even disagrees with that. He believes that this is an equiptable solution.As for why more women are walking away. It is a societal change. Woman were always pretty much raised to be homemakers. But society looks at homemakers as not contributing to society so there is pressure for them to enter the workforce. As the become acustomed to having the career they start learning male traits, aggressiveness, ego gratification, etc. BUt they still have the maternal instincts that take over when they get home. They want to have children and take care of them and take care of the home and family.However societal roles haven't changed for men. Basically, men are still pretty much expected to be the major bread winner. The only other job is too mow the grass and make house repairs.Where has anyone ever seen any adds that hint that to be a real man you have to help with housework. Usually men who do are the brunt of jokes.Meanwhile the women are working and are still expected to do all the housework, and then see the man come home and sit down and for the most part not help(I'm generalizing here), that is wehn the resentment builds. When the bring it up, the man usually hears it as nagging, and then withdraws, and she then feels rejected/abandoned. This then either leads to an affair or walking away. Also with more woman working better jobs, there is not the financial incentive to stay home, lots of woman can afford to be on their own. I got this info from a book called "What Your Mother Couldn't Tell You and Your Father Didn't Know" the author is the same one who wrote, "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus."

Bystander I suspect as in my case that many "women" file over men, because they are forced to due to financial reasons. If she is a stay at home Mom, and the H walks away. What do you suspect she do? Wait until she is evicted from her home, or the children have nothing to eat before she tries to get the court system involved. I too did not want to file, felt I had no choice since H wanted a Divorce, but didn't want or couldn't make that move himself, and yet still did not send any support. Remember we are dealing with very wild emtions from both partners and sometimes we all do things without thinking of the conquences. If there was a way to get temporary support until we could think clearer, I myself would have waited. I had nightmares of being evicted, children not having anything to eat, Yes I depended on my H's income, we made that decision for me to stay home, and then when I became disabled I knew I would not be able to return to the work force. There are many I've talked with (women) that share how they would have stayed and not filed if they could have. Do you "men' tell each other the same thing or just say you're glad the B----is out of your life?.( Even if she was the best thing in your life....) Again if I felt I had a choice I would not have made that choice. I'd still be waiting , instead of now moving on the best way I can.

THANK YOU !!!!!! THANK YOU BOB..!!!(((((((((((((((RWD))))))))))))))I still am at a loss to explain how a simple question got to be this big a thing, and how suddenly it's about child support and custody, and who does what with whose money....to me, women walk away when they are unhappy...they then generally stay away. I don't purport to know why, but if I had tried and tried, had no success with the marriage, I probably wouldn't look back either...there is only so much you can give while feeling as if you are not receiving...Dylan

Interesting topic and loaded with responses! I can tell you from my personal experience that my soon to be X has the house, primary custody of our kids, and he is still required by the courts to pay me not only spousal support, but child support as well. He's paying upwards of $2000.00 per month to me. I bet he didn't think that he'd be paying child support when he has the primary responsibility for the kids. This is mean to say, but somehow this is retribution for him cheating on me.

Quite the post,and all in one day.I'm staying out of the child support issue even though my sister has to fight to get it sometimes.I did read somewhere that men will stay in a somewhat undesirable marriage,and still be content,whereas a lot(not all)of women won't stay in an unhappy marriage at all.Maybe it's an emotional thing.I realize that probably some women run away because their H has been cheating on them,and won't stop.But I do seem to know a lot of men(my neighbor,my doctor,my cousin,my broker,and several co-workers)whose wifes just up and left without a warning.Usually for another man or co-worker who convinced them that they could make them happier.Another issue some friends and I discussed was the media.What do men usually watch on TV?Football,baseball,wrestling,Rambo,Die Hard,etc.What do women(again,not all) usually watch(including my W).Soap operas,romantic comedies,romance movies,etc.How about magazines?Men read Popular Mechanics,Yachting,Golf,Car Craft,perhaps Playboy.Women(my W,and my friends W's)read People Magazine,Redbook,Cosmopolitan;usually magazines that deal with relationships.I've read the covers of these while waiting in line,such as:"Are you getting enough quality sex?","Are you compatable with your husband?",or"My affair,and why I did it"(I kid you not on that one).I just wonder if articles like these get women thinking too much about their marriage,and if it's fulfilling enough for them.While the men are reading about the latest sportscar or golfclub,women are filling out a survey to see if all their"needs"are being met.I'm probably going to get flamed for some of this,but I believe I've made some valid points to consider.Ladies,please don't slap me too hard! --Murph

Howdy,My XW cheated last year, we have joint custody. She lives in subsidized housing ($160 a month). I have kids majority of time; I pay $60 a week for 2 kids. Reason: Income discrepancy (sp?), since I make more, it's "not fair", so even though we share all of the responsibility and I still must take care of the things that demand attention (hair cuts, witer coats, swim class, etc.), I'll pay because I am evil because I work hard and produce more. One thing that I have noticed with many WAW is the claiming of "victim status", even though the true damage exists in the act. I guess I had the audacity to be flawed (so she says), I was punished for it. Gee, in my case I was unhappy in our marriage too, but I kept my fly zipped and kept trying. What bugs me about society in some circles, I am the one who blew it. That what bubbles the anger to the surface for me. The tender compassion that is bestowed on a poor single mom (by her own hand); "There must be a monster behind this... THE HUSBAND!" [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

They are correct, there is a monster but it isn't me, it's infidelity. Hey, that rhymed! I'm starting to sound like Jesse Jackson [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

! NOT!Heck my 2 cents... Eric

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Bystander:"Deadbeat dads" are largely a myth: <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>life has been a battle for the those of us who lived the "myth"do you have any idea how many children today are living substandard lives because of deadbeat dads? (to be fair about it, there are deadbeat moms too)check out some of the lawyers offices, look at the high piles of files at the legal aid offices, go to any court house in America and look at the backlog of cases where the children are not receiving the support that was court ordered. I spent YEARS fighting the system trying to force the childrens father to live up to his responsibility to support his children. I met women that were living on welfare and food stamps, women who slept in "safe houses" because they couldn't afford to pay rent AND babysitters on a minimum wage job.maybe there are a few cases of over compensation on the records. maybe there are a few women who divorce to gain money.If they exist, they are a very tiny minority. My X was never placed in jail for failure to support. Just the opposite! He lived in Arkansas when Clinton was govenor. When I filed to garnish his wages for back support he "explained" to his boss that I was "the wicked witch of the west". Guess what... they didn't with hold a penny out of his pay for his children. All he had to do was cry to the boss and the children continue to go without the court ordered support! I raised my children the best I could. I worked in a Levis factory sewing fancy jeans that my X bought for his step children! YES, I'M BITTER ABOUT IT. my children are grown now and have children of their own and I still get mad when I hear about how many children are living in slums when they should have a better life.I've discovered that back child support never goes away. The interest is like the energizer bunny, it keeps going and going ....When the deadbeat dies, I can step in and claim his estate to recoup the $185,000.00 that he owes me! I'll do it too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ok, I'll step down off my soapbox now... [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

Keo

Being a PhD student, I'm well acquainted with the methods people use to massage data to make it look more attractive or fit their theory. I DO base my judgements on what I observe in my everyday life, because at least I know where the data is coming from :-)No, not all of my friends are college educated. I also do volunteer work at an inner-city elementary school in Atlanta, not Phoenix, or some cush metropolis like that. Deadbeat dads are still a HUGE majority. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that (most of the time), whomever stays home with the kids all day is most likely the one who is better at parenting them. Just like the woman probably wouldn't be as good economically. So, until guys start doing BOTH (i.e working and providing the majority of childcare), like many,many women do everyday, then things won't change. Tough! Ya know, I push a pretty hard line with the women too. I tell women they have to be self-sufficient in case hubby decides to run off. I'd tell the hubby he needs to be very involved in the children's activities and be able to prove it. If hubby is so work-oriented that he hardly knows his kids, well, it is his own fault if he is now a cash-cow.

I, for one, will NEVER allow myself to be financially dependent on a man. And I would NEVER expect more child support than what is fair to provide for my child's needs. But even if I could afford all of my child's expenses on my own, I would expect SOMETHING from his father. RWD - I think you hit the nail on the head with the reason why so many women become unhappy in their marriages and leave.

I haven't read through every single post to this thread, so I don't know if this has been addressed already or not.The definition of a "walk away wife" is not simply a woman who leaves. A walk away wife has spent a good amount of time expressing to her husband what her needs and wants are out of the marriage. When it becomes clear to her that the husband is not really listening, she withdraws. Husband then thinks "great, things must be better, she is not nagging me anymore." He doesn't change, and she begins to plan her escape. When she does leave, husband is shocked.In earlier days, when divorce was not as easy for a woman to "live with", a woman in this situation would stay, remain withdrawn and the marriage would become dull and sterile. Now that divorce is easier for women to survive, they leave.This is not to say that I believe it is right for woman to walk away - but I think it is important to clarify that a WAW doesn't just up and leave on a whim one day - there IS a period of time that they try to communicate their unhappiness to their spouses. And a Walk Away Wife DOES think her "escape" through.As for the entire alimony/support issue, I have to say that I don't know any women whose husbands have left them and who are rolling in dough. My sister's ex has had little to do with his son since the child was 3 years old - imagine what it must be like for him to know that his own father wants nothing to do with him and actually moved to the "deadbeat dads" haven state to avoid paying his child support. And, in my own case, I had my household income slashed in half while my living expenses remained the same. My credit is shot - and it is not through anything I did to myself... it is all due to the fact that my husband decided that "having fun" must take precendence over honoring committment.I guess I'm not too objective on this particular topic...------------------ terri I believe in miracles...

WOW! What a heated debate!Since I just came across this topic, it's tough to throw myself into the argument. So, I just thought I'd stick to the subject of why women seem to have an easier time leaving the marriage.I am taking a course in marriage and family this semester, and just last night I came across the following information. It was under the discussion of breaking up.Research has suggested that men tend to fall in love more readily than women, and women tend to fall out of love more readily than men. Social scientists suggest two possible explanations for women initiating breakups more often.First, a married woman's income and status are far more dependent on her husband than his on her. Consequently, women must be especially discriminating, whereas men can afford to be romantic. Second, women are more sensitive than men to the quality of interpersonal relationships. Hence, their standards for developing love may be higher than men's. A woman may experience lack of rapport or self-revelation in a relationship, for example, while the man does not. As a result, women may evaluate and reevaluate their relationships more often.Well, just thought I'd pass that information along. I've recently learned that it's better to keep away from the heated issues here. [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

------------------ The best and most beautiful things in the world cannot be seen or even touched. They must be felt with the heart. Helen Keller

Well, my staying away didn't last too long. [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

I just wanted to share my personal experience with child support and alimony. My parents divorced when I was 13 (17 years ago). My father was ordered to pay a fairly large sum of money. With alimony, it totaled $2000 a month. Unfortunately, my mother had to have his wages garnished in order to get her money. Once my father was pushed to live a much lower standard than he was accustomed to, he started to resent me for it. Like it was my fault! How can someone get angry with having to own up to their responsibility? It's beyond me! I ended up losing my father emotionally, when I had been a daddy's girl my entire life. Talk about devestation! That money didn't mean anything to me, at least in retrospect. I would rather have been poor than not have my father's love.As far as my mother and what she did with her money. She spent most of it to pay the bills and the remaining of it trying to ease my pain (as in buying things for me, didn't work!). Sad, but true. She never spent any on herself. She was just trying to make up for a relatively absent father, and the pain this can cause an adolescent girl. She was awarded $900 of lifetime alimony. After all, it wasn't her fault that after 18 years, he decided that he didn't want to be married anymore! She could have taken advantage of that. But, you know what she did? She settled with him a few years later for what amounted to about 18 months worth of alimony. She stopped taking his money because she felt guilty. No, it's not about money. It's about responsibility. So, even when dads do pay, the children can often suffer. At least I did. I'd rather have my father's love any day of the week! Unfortunately, many children suffer with having to worry about where their next meal is coming from. They are the innocent victims here and nobody has a right to say they should live different than what they're accustomed to. Especially when it means the difference between eating and starving!------------------ The best and most beautiful things in the world cannot be seen or even touched. They must be felt with the heart. Helen Keller

In my opinon, this is one of the few times a question was answered based on facts rather than opinion. Of course there's always exceptions but Terri is telling the facts.Terri said: "The definition of a "walk away wife" is not simply a woman who leaves. A walk away wife has spent a good amount of time expressing to her husband what her needs and wants are out of the marriage. When it becomes clear to her that the husband is not really listening, she withdraws. Husband then thinks "great, things must be better, she is not nagging me anymore." He doesn't change, and she begins to plan her escape. When she does leave, husband is shocked.' -----------------If the wife is filling her husband's sexual needs, (his #1 need), then he could stay in the marriage a lot longer before he realizes he's not happy or feels he wants out. When the wife's emotional needs (her #1 need) aren't met, having sex isn't satisfying enough to stay in the marriage. Unless emotional needs are met, then the sex is Just Sex for her. Women can have sex just for sex with anyone. Women don't put a high enough value on sex to stick around for that alone. In fact, if the wife's needs AREN'T being met and the husband's are having sex with them, then the husbands should be doing the cooking, cleaning, laundry, etc. (JOKING! Don't get all bent out of shape!)When men screw around on the side they don't have to feel emotionally committed to an OW. When women screw around on their husbands most often it's because an emotional bond has developed. Women could leave if they were only having an EA with OM. I doubt any man out there would leave for a woman because he was just having a great emotional relationship with her. LOLMen that leave for that sexual attention and fullfillment, they end up seeing that women are women. They realize that the OW eventually has the same emotional needs their wife had. The honeymoon is over and then what? If they are going to fill emotional needs for a woman, they might as well do it for their wife and be able to live under the same roof with your children and not have to pay out the support. Women aren't going to leave for sexual attention. If they are leaving for sex it's because along with that sex, there are very fullfilling emotional needs being met. When women get that from their OM, there's no turning back. Unless......the OM slacks off with satisfying emotional needs once he marries her. Maybe this happens more times than not, which would account for the high failure statistics on 2nd marriages.

Hi, Lots of replies here and I did not get a chance to read them all but it sounds like it is ending up talking about divorces.I will reply to original question first. I think that it is true that when women stray it is much easier for them not to return. I really don't know why. Maybe because they felt neglected by h throughout marriage and do not feel guilty. When men leave their wives they might start thinking about how good home was compared to what kind of attention they get at OW's home. Also, many women tend to be more of the "romantic" type and getting back to reality might be hard for them. I have an online friend who all of the sudden got up and left her husband of 24 years for some man she met online. She went to visit other man out of state and never looked back, she stayed with OM. I could not believe that people could do this, but it happens.About divorces and who should get what, I believe that if a woman walks out on her husband due to affair that they should not expect big payments from the hard working husband who supported and loved them through the years. Heck! she has this OM now! Now if a H leaves a dependent wife he should pay through the nose to make sure his wife and children will thrive. I also think that marriage counseling should be mandatory when a divorce is started. In today's world with the internet and everything it's just too darn easy for many to stray. I live in a no-fault state, this is not good. I have no recourse if he files. What ever he wants he gets no matter what caused the rift.I think it's about time that the divorce laws are changed to make it tougher to get one. It's just too easy nowadays and that is sad. I have thought of writing my state congress people to suggest something be done about the state of marriage and divorce today.Thanks, Pam[This message has been edited by Pinky (edited March 14, 2000).]

DT,I would buy your arguement, but I find it hard to believe that women fill men's needs while men don't fill women's needs. Certainly, not by the margins the statistics suggest.This is particularly true, since if you talk to most married men, the sexual needs are rarely met, especially after children come into the equation. Yet, there is this hugh disparity between who files.I would guess there is more to it than just needs and who wants out of the marriage. My suspicion that some of the old attitudes still exist. In time past before no fault divorces, the honorable thing for a man to do was allow the wife to file for divorce even if she was the one that strayed. Second, there is the wife that files although the husband has strayed but won't file for divorce.This latter one brings back the arguement that economics enters the decision. If men are going to lose the house, the kids, the money, AND the wife, they are more inclined not to ask for divorce even if they are the once that are cheating or not having their needs met. If the wife, knows that she will get the kids, the house, and some measure of economic security, then she has less to lose by getting rid of wayward H.Now if the wife is cheating, not meeting needs, etc. the H still stands to lose the house, the kids, the money and the Wife they did not want to lose. While the wife will in all likely keep the house, the kids, the money, the OM, and get rid of the H, she wanted to get rid of.So the economics is not why women are filing for divorce per se, but rather that given that both sides lose the wife loses relatively less: especially the most valuable of all things the kids. So given that the marriage is in trouble, the bias is for the women to have relatively less to lose than the man. And the money is not as major as the kids.So to my mind, the disordinate number of women filing represents some old traditional thinking about the honorable thing to do. Some modern realities about the children and about money and the ability to earn it. But probably not who wants out of the marriage more often. Women are fully into the workforce now. However, the filing rate is not really about greed because, unless there are pay raises for those getting divorces, all parties lose. It is just who gets to keep the most valuable thing in the family, the children.My suspicion is that it is roughly 50/50 for wanting out of the marriage. This is different than determining who filed for the divorce.By the way, in the very old days, the children were most often awarded to the H not the W, because the H could afford to raise them. So the pendulum does swing. Couldn't stay out of this either [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

JL[This message has been edited by Just Learning (edited March 14, 2000).]

JL!!!!I'm so happy I took another peek here before signing off.You won't believe this! By reading your very logical (I love logical) response to an issue I'm not troubling with, I was able to read it without thinking, "YEAH, BUT WHAT IF THIS and YEAH WHAT IF THAT". I'm officially a JL follower. Hey Francis! Did you hear that? You were the one that led me to Francis in the first place, remember?Sorry everyone for the interruption of thought. I just get excited when I realize how logical, open minded, and smart someone is. JL has my vote!

Just an observation from being a member here for about six months.It seems that men have affairs for a variety of reasons, including the "I don't know" reason. It also seems that alot of the men who have affairs don't necessarily want to get a divorce.It also appears that, for the most part, women who have affairs believe they are in love with the other man.Since generally women place a higher emotional need rating on the love and romance aspect of relationships, doesn't it make sense that they would give up a marriage for what they perceive as a chance at "true love"?There are plenty of exceptions right here on this site, but it seems that the majority of our "success stories" are those in which the man has been the betrayer. And there are plenty of examples on this forum where the woman has been the betrayer and the man is doing everything he can to save the marriage with not much success.I'm sure that there are dead-beat dads, dead-beat moms, women who take financial advantage of divorce, men who take financial advantage of divorce, and everything else that has been mentioned on this thread. The problem is in stereotyping all men as one thing and all women as another. Or in stereotyping all betrayers as one thing and all betrayed as another.No two situations are alike. Obviously, one's own experience affects their judgement. Bystander's belief seems to be that his wife's financial situation improved greatly after their divorce. I'm sure that is true in some cases, but I don't believe it is in the majority. It is probably true that some people divorce for financial reasons, but I don't know anyone who ever has.Perhaps I misunderstood the point of this thread. I thought the question was why do more women seem to leave their marriage with no-looking-back and an unwillingness to try to save the marriage. Is that the wrong interpretation of the question?Peppermint

Hi, I'm very new to this site. I posted a 'roll call' to let you know a little about me. I would have to agree with Peppermint and some others that have responded. I 'walked' away because after some many futile attempts at improving my 'sterile' marriage, I couldn't live with anymore. STBX this time around even went so far as to do the'religious' route. Notice the difference between 'religious' and 'relationship' with our Lord. Even so far as to leave his bedroom door open so I could "see" him on his knees praying. So much for the prayer closet. Had the church ' surrounding' him even though this very church couldn't be bothered with the agony I was going through the previous 5 years that I was INVOLVED with the church! Alot of friends are going through the very same emotional turmoil, even making feeble attempts at leaving, but deciding the best thing to do is to stay, because their primary role is stay at home moms. One is utterly devoted to her four girls, homeschooling them, and is trying to stand up for herself. She even packed them up last summer and went out of town for a week, not telling hubby where she was. He knew she would come home, however, things seem to be better, and he's a Pastor! having done "marital' counseling even! The other has packed countless times, and I was the one who talked her out of it a couple of times. Nothing has changed in her situation. She's still unhappy, etc. There are others, but I won't go on. Since filing last March ('99), and trying to do it as gently as possible (still the 'fixer of boo-boo's'), STBX has let his true colors show, It's just that now everyone else can see what I've been trying to tell. Sorry if I veered off course [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

Distrusting,You quoted the following: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Research has suggested that men tend to fall in love more readily than women, and women tend to fall out of love more readily than men. Social scientists suggest two possible explanations for women initiating breakups more often.First, a married woman's income and status are far more dependent on her husband than his on her. Consequently, women must be especially discriminating, whereas men can afford to be romantic. Second, women are more sensitive than men to the quality of interpersonal relationships. Hence, their standards for developing love may be higher than men's. A woman may experience lack of rapport or self-revelation in a relationship, for example, while the man does not. As a result, women may evaluate and reevaluate their relationships more often. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I think this is only partially true. Disclaimer: What I am about to say is very stereotypical and I don't fully believe ALL of it, but it is a theory that I have heard presented. I do believe that men are slower to commit and that women tend not to look back once they have decided to leave. There are, of course exceptions. There is no one model that fits all cases.Now for the theory:I don't agree that men fall in love more quickly. There seems to be an abundance of men who have a fear of commitment. I have heard the theory expressed (not on MB, but elsewhere) that men have an innate need (going back to caveman days) to 'spread their seed' as much as possible and this is what makes them reluctant to commit to one woman. I'm not sure if I agree with that or not. It's just something I've heard.Women, on the other hand are quicker to commit because of the historical dependency on the man to support her and the children. They have an innate need to have a family and need the security of a single committed man in order to do that.That explains why they have a difference in their willingness to commit in the first place. And I do believe that that difference is real. However, once a man DOES commit, he tends to stick around. He may be overcome occasionally by an urge to 'spread his seed' but he will ultimately return home to nest.On the other hand, if a woman has decided that the man she committed to is not holding up his end of the deal (and she will try to tell him, he perceives it as nagging and ignores her) she becomes very unsatisfied and will look for someone else who can do a better job. After years of being ignored by her husband, once she has FOUND someone who can do a better job (or maybe she finds that she can do a better job on her own, he is after all, extra work) she sees no need to look back.

Keo,I really appreciated this...H usually regrets divorce and wishes he was back in marriage (misses home cooked meals, laundry services, regular safe sex, and someone who cares and worries about him)W usually moves on with her life enjoying the independence (doesn't miss the extra laundry, the extra cooking, and enjoys not worrying about him anymore)... Extra dresser space, extra closet space, etc., etc...I find it so true yet I still miss my husband and want him to come home... Even though he is having an affair, he is still worth the extra work! Woozy

JL,I liked your post. You're right that in divorce, both husband and wife lose. I agree that because of the immoral bias in the divorce courts and custody courts, women usually lose less. I think that this bias against men should be eliminated, and I really don't think anyone disagrees with me on this.If my hypothesis is right, after we eliminate the bias against men, the percentage of women filing for divorce should fall somewhat as measured by time series analysis. If it doesn't fall, I'll happily "eat crow" on my prediction - but knowing the whole time that eliminating the bias against men was what I'm after anyhow.As for women spending money on cocaine instead of their kids...of course they are in the minority. But so are "deadbeat dads." We've built an army of faceless, compassionless bureaucrats to financially squeeze NCPs as hard as possible. Where is the corresponding army to review the expense receipts of CPs on a monthly basis? Doesn't *anyone* see the ridiculous inconsistency here?And I also agree with Pam - I think divorces should be a lot harder to come by once kids are in the picture.My, what a thread! [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

Bystander -- Who repeats: I don't have a dog in this fight. My interest in the immorality of the child support system stems from the experience of a friend of mine here in MB.

No one would disagree that the courts have been tougher on men, but not in ALL cases, but YES a large majority of the time. Their have been plenty of cases right here in the MB forum when the women are getting screwed, so I can imagine how often women are left with nothing but husbands added to the deadbeat dad list. And I do not agree that once the court system STOPS "sticking it" to men that women will stop divorcing, because they can't get hubby's paycheck, that analysis is superficial. Women who are physically or emotionally abused just want out. Yes child support would help, but I doubt VERY MUCh that it is the deciding factor of to divorce or not!

trying2_4give,Some women divorce because of the expectation of financial reward (or at least, substantially less financial loss). Once the scales of justice are balanced, this incentive is removed. Hence, we should see the number of women filing fall somewhat. I'm arguing for equality in the courts, and I'm predicting that the number of women who file will drop somewhat once the courts stop "sticking it" to men. As JL pointed out, perhaps my use of the term "incent" may be overstated...But it still follows that if women paid the SAME PRICE in divorce that men do, we'd see fewer women filing.Bystander

bystander, You have made your point over and over. We don't need to hear the same argument repeated many times. If it didn't convince us the first time, it won't convince us the 100th time.Just know that there are many people on this board (and out there in real life too) that disagree with you that there is a financial incentive to divorce and that the number of women filing will go down if they get less child support. I think the link you made between the child support awards and the number of women filing is faulty. Women are filing because of much more than monetary reasons.That said achieving balance in the courts is a good aim. I don't think anyone wants unfairness. But to say things like deadbeat dads are a myth is bound to inflame the many who are suffering because of deadbeat dads.If you believe there is injustice, go ahead and fight the good fight. Just don't step on the already downtrodden in the process.

THANK YOU TRUTHSEEKER!!!! Bystander you say you are speaking for a friend that this happened to, well have you thought that MAYBE just MAYBE your friend married someone who was just a money-hungry B%TCH! And that it was HIS bad judgement in the type of woman he chose, instead of the notion that "deadbeats don't exist" theory being used to try to ease a man's ego and pride.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU TRUTHSEEKER!!! Bystander, did you ever conceive of the thought that instead of blaming the courts and the absurd notion that dead beats don't exist because of a book you read, that maybe your friend used bad judgement, married a money-hungry B$TCH and instead of admitting his mistake due to pride or ego, is using this to insight the ridiculous idea that women jump into divorce for monetary reasons. IMHO

sorry i thought my original post was lost in space!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Some women divorce because of the expectation of financial reward...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>ROTFLMAO!!!Thanks, I needed that laugh!

When my H works, he brings home $720 a week. I was getting $300 weekly out of the goodness of his heart. Now I'm getting nothing until we go to court. BIG financial gain.BTW, he has no monthly expenses. I have them. He left me with all of the bills and is living with someone who doesn't make him pay for anything. So do I deserve a boat load of money every month? YES! Am I getting it? NOPE! NOT YET![This message has been edited by Mitzi (edited March 14, 2000).]

Truthseeker,My hypothesis makes sense from the standpoint of an economist. Further, its falsifiable, and I've offered two ways to test it (e.g., random-assignment quasi-experimental design, or time series analysis). I'm really amazed that such a simple prediction, that women are incented to divorce, and removing these incentives would lower their propensity to divorce, has received such a vitriolic response in here. I'm fascinated that posters acknowledge that the divorce courts and custody courts are biased against men and in the same post claim that these differential financial outcomes don't influence decision-making. Lowering the price of toothpaste sells more tubes of toothpaste; it follows that lowering the cost of divorce to women "sells" them on filing for divorce.Anyhow, I'm glad that we agree about the divorce courts and custody courts being biased against men. Fixing that will lower the percent of women who file for divorce. And if I'm wrong, we'll be doing the right thing anyhow.Bystander

Now he is equating the EMOTIONAL turmoil of women filing for divorce to the cost of toothpaste! WOW, now you are really desperate.

trying2_4give,You know, I'd go so far as to think that you're trying to make this ad hominem.Basic microeconmic theory: If you lower the price of something, demand for it will go up. Because divorce is less costly to women, their demand for divorce is higher.But trying2_4give, why the vitriol? There are plenty of injustices out there, and women abusing the divorce courts and custody courts is one of the injustices we can repair.You know, the weird part is that I got interested in all this because of a friend of mine here in MB. I actually oppose the income shares method of awarding child support because I believe it encourages OWs to become pregnant in order to lay claim on a man's income. Last month I asked a very good NY family law attorney if he sees any of these intentional pregnancies because of the income shares system, and he confirmed that it does in fact happen. Imagine that! Women responding to economic incentives!Bystander

Bystander,The thing that trying2_4give and others here are in opposition to is the assumption that the rules of economics apply in this case at all. Those rules apply if the object that is priced lower is something to be desired to begin with. Most people, women or men, would rather not divorce. And when they do, the experience is gut-wrenching for both sides. Lowering or raising the financial cost of doing so will not make much of a difference. The real price of divorce is MUCH higher than anything that could be measured financially.

Amen, truthseeker!!!

TruthSeeker,Okay, I see what you're saying, and I think you're wrong. As gut-wrenching as divorce is, money *does* matter in these decisions. Its obvious to me that we aren't going to agree on this absent more data, so I'm going to stop now and offer this URL once again: <A HREF="http://users.erols.com/afc/minority1.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://users.erols.com/afc/minority1.htm</A> Its long, but its worth the time.Bystander

Bystander,What is your point in posting the address to this article? As clearly stated, this is one man's opinion. I didn't read the entire page, but read most. Where is it stated that women leaving for financial gain was definitive? As with any "study" the results can be swayed toward the beliefs of the one conducting the study. I hardly find ample evidence that child support and alimony are why women give up on marriage.Has it ever crossed your mind that women now find it easier to leave a relationship where in the past they may not have be able to, simply because they were forced to endure misery. It was more important to have a roof over her and her children's heads, rather than leave an intolerable situation. In other words, many women stayed in these unions out of fear, financial loss, societal pressures, etc., but, lived a highly miserable life. Just because the financial aspect is often remedied, it certainly doesn't imply that women leave solely for the money aspect. As we all know, you can't live without money. So, if someone in a miserable or dangerous marriage can now leave it, they are somewhat guaranteed to be able to put food on their table and clothes on their back. It did state that during societal economic hardships, there were less divorce rates. But, where's the study on marital satisfaction during this time? During more economically prosperous times women initiated divorce more often, but this can be a result of many, many reasons. Least of which being an unfaithful spouse. As we've seen so often here, the men find it harder to leave the marriage for good. Often precipitating the woman's action for filing for divorce. Hardly a sound reason for advocating that women leave primarily for financial gain. Hey, I think women leave because they've grown tired of trying to get their hardheaded husband's to meet their needs. And I'm sure I could find a study to back that claim. [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

------------------ The best and most beautiful things in the world cannot be seen or even touched. They must be felt with the heart. Helen Keller

Distrusting,The minority report criticizes the majority for failing to consider the valid hypothesis that the expectation of favorable treatment of women in divorce and custody courts may be an enabler of divorce. See the quotation I posted earlier in the thread.Your question about economic conditions and perception of happiness in the marriage is an interesting one. I don't have an answer, but it certainly stands to reason if women decide to stay in marriages when conditions look bleak, they would be more likely to file for divorce when conditions (including highly favorable divorce and custody decisions) look better, right? Bystander

Bystander,There is a difference between making it possible for a woman to leave an abusive or otherwise destructive realtionship and still put food on the table for the kids and giving the woman a fincancial windfall (as you are claiming) for getting a divorce.Are you suggesting that a woman should not divorce in those cases? That it should remain impossible for her to feed her children if she leaves an abusive relationship? Or leaves a man who habitually cheats on her?As far as the study goes, just because you have two sets of numbers doesn't mean that it makes sense to link the two together. Especially when other factors (like the conditions of the marriage, the REAL reasons for filing, etc.) are overlooked.

DUH, women actually getting pregnant to get a man's money, HELL YES it happens, ask any professinal sports player out there. But that's not AND was never the topic. It started from the Walk Away Wife syndrom, of the wife leaving husband and not returning compared that to the husbands that leave wives and then return. Then you took this, as you called it "ad", to start your campaign of women divorce because they can always win in court. You want us to read some book that you praise as bible, when there have been plenty of people here to PROVE your theory wrong, silly and humorous! But no, you don't want to have any parts of the facts that are right here. Vitriol? Yes, you've impressed us all that you couldn't use the word angry.

TruthSeeker,Of course there's a difference between a woman barely putting food on the table and a woman who receives a financial windfall. But either way, a woman going into a divorce court and a custody court has better odds of a positive financial outcome than a man, given $X of assets and income. This unfair financial bias in favor of women lowers their cost of divorce, and hence their demand for divorce is higher.Do other considerations come into play in making a decision to divorce? Obviously. But money IS one of the concerns, and women's behavior reflects this. I'm really amazed that anyone finds this such a shocking assertion. Remove the biases in divorce courts and custody courts and watch the results. I'm with JL, I think the latent demand for divorce is probably 50/50, its just that men KNOW that they are going to be crucified in divorce/custody courts so they delay it as long as possible.As for women leaving abusive situations or philanderers - I wish my mother had done that in the early 1970s. You wouldn't believe the abuse I suffered at the hands of my father. [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

Bystander

trying2_4give,You and the others haven't proven anything. Anecdote is without scientific merit. Sure, I believe Mitzi's husband is treating her badly. But does that mean that most men don't pay child support? Of course not.Anyhow, Braver's book is the best piece of scholarly research to date - its limited in geographic scope, true enough, but its light years ahead of people posting competing anecdotes.Do women always win in court? No. Do they usually win in court? I'd answer that yes, to be honest. And that expectation translates into their having a lower economic cost of "walking away." Hence the reason I joined the thread. Etc.Anyone want to take this to email? That's a genuine offer. I think most of the MBers are probably sick of us discussing this by now.Bystander

Correction, i think they are just sick of your absurd comments, re: "dead-beat dads are a myth", "women divorce for monetary reasons"; the cost of toothpaste analogy compared to divorce, and the many other things you spewed out in here. End of discussion.

Trying2_4give,According to the Braver book, deadbeat dads *are* a statistical myth. You can read the book for yourself if you like. You might disagre with him, but that's another issue, really. Do women divorce for money? Some of the time, yes, and in any event, the expected financial outcomes are better for women, which in part could explain their higher rate of filing for divorce. The toothpaste analogy is valid, and it parallels simple supply/demand predictions I'd make in divorce or household commodities.We're going in circles here, I think.Bystander

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> We're going in circles here, I think. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>D'ya think?It's clear we don't agree on this issue. ButI do agree with one thing. I'm sick of listening to the same argument over and over. If there is at least one person who is suffering because of a deadbeat dad, then they can't be a myth, can they? I offer this as proof that your statistics are flawed.This is all I'm going to say on the subject. The horse is dead, let's stop beating it.

This thread has gone to h*ll in a handbasket.bystander, you can believe everything you read if you want to, but don't try to make us believe it too.you can believe that women only use men for financial gain if you want to, but don't try to make us believe it.you can believe anything you want to believe, but don't try to make us abandon our beliefs and follow yours.that's a very immature attitude that's not what this forum was put here for...Keo

Truthseeker,There's a difference between "statistical myth" and "complete myth." But you knew that already, didn't you?Bystander

Keosha,Go back an reread my posts...I've argued that court biases in favor of women incent them to divorce. Its not the only reason that women decide to divorce, obviously, but its part of the reason, and it IMO explains some of the difference in the filing rate between men and women.I agree that this thread is a lost cause. I have argued a reasonable hypothesis based on classic microeconomic theory, and have received little but hostility in return. I never meant to offend anyone (and if I did I'm sorry). But I'm truly amazed at the outright hostility my ideas have met here.Anyhow, I'm leaving this thread - but not MB [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]

Bystander

The solution to OW becoming pregnant and suing the guy for support is called aC-O-N-D-O-M.Also, amazingly, works in any situation where the guy doesn't want children. [This message has been edited by TheStudent (edited March 14, 2000).]

OK, Iv'e seen enough! I'm a little ticked today.HERE IS MY TRUE STORYI started an ambulance service in October of 1995 after leaving a very cushy job with an Advanced Life Support Service in the area. I saw what they were doing wrong, tried to tell them how to fix it, the board of directers weren't interested in hearing from me. Brilliant idea! Start your own service and make the improvements. Just what I did.Obviously being a newby company I wasn't going to kill the project the first years by drawing the same salary that I had for the previous service. I was the highest paid medic because of longevity and position.Domestic relations tagged me at the higher salary [even thou I was in reality bringing home $8,000 less a year] because it was what I was capable of earning. Hell if you want to go by that theory, I could be an Executive Director of Emergency Medical Services in New York and make a six figure salary. Hey, the XW being an RN with a degree would be capable of making more in a Philadelphia hospital being a Nurse Manager in an Intensive Care Unit.What is the point? I was making less and suffering. DomRel didn't give a rats behind. I sent letters and copies of pay stubs. Yeah, the system is fair by no means.BUT, that was not the point of the question first asked unless I'm an really MUD [DUM spelled backwards.]I go with Terri's definition.I don't know if I would consider Val being a WAW. I kicked her out after discovery. The affair had been going on for about a year then. She stayed here.Just my imput.Tim

I agree with Terri upto a point. I don't feel my x told me about all her needs not being met until way after the affair and until we started counseling.She did mention 3-4 times about going to a marriage encounter weekend, but I, like most guys I think, didn't want to go.As for needs not being met, we filled out the EN questionaire. I knew about her feeling about being abandoned and to which I do admit. But the others I had no clue. She said she wanted sex 3x per week. We were down to 1x per 6 weeks. She never wanted sex in morning and worked afternoon shift and every other weekend part time and didn't want me to wait for when she came hoem at night. We barely had 3 nights in a row together. She was always moody and that was a turnoff to me. I don't know whose to blame here, both I guess, why was she so moody and why didn't I try to get her out of the bad moods(she would wake up in a bad mood !). She also said I never appreciated her for all the house work and yard work she did and she always felt I left her too much to do when I traveled. I never demanded or asked that she do yardwork or shovel snow. She always said she liked being outside and doing it. How was I to know deep down she wasn't. OM promised her a smaller house and no yardwork and vacations anytime she wanted.Meanwhile we bought a big house and yard beacuse thats what we wanted. We couldn't take vacations anytimne we wanted because we have KIDS!!!! No she has none of that responsibility and I have it all. Also I don't have somebody paying for everything like her om's mother.She used all of the counseling sessions to slam me and never did give me a chance to show improvement.I don't know if I had a point to this or not know, I got caught up in it!!!Also just saw a statistic that that women suffer a 30% decrease in their standarrd of living after a divorce. I think that for the most part its the 80-20 solution. 20% of the people, deadbeat dads, women leaving for financial reasons, create 80% of the problems and get the most ink.