</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Like I can not have my own thoughts that do not co-inside with his-PLEASE </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">DING! DING! DING! KMEJ wins the prize!!!!!!!!

That's exactly what he wants! He wants you to do whatever he says. Whatever serves him.


Cherished:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Basically, Harley's approach is that you don't do anything without the enthusiastic agreement of your spouse, which means you wouldn't go to that party.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I am a little perplexed by how you mean this to relate to an abusive and controlling relationship.

IMVHO, I don't see how this approach can be in concordance with an abusive relationship. B/C while one person (KMEJ) would respect that philosophy and abide by it, her H would disregard that as 'silly' and do what he wants anyway. In other words, she would not go because he's not in agreement with it. But he would not care if she did not want him to go somewhere.....he would go anyway. And thus, in an unequal relationship, I see this as ineffective.

Perhaps I am missing something here (wouldn't be the first time <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> ), but I see that advice as just perpetuating the pattern of control and abuse. Her being everything he wants (because she wants to make sure he is happy) and him being everything he wants (because he wants to make himself happy). I think KMEJ needs to learn to make herself happy........

Again, JMVHO.

The idea is to convey to the spouse -- I won't do what is negative for you because I care about you. When that is done, it leaves the spouse with being unable to justify their own selfish behavior by playing the chit game -- you got to go to the party, so I should be able to go bowling.

The idea is that each spouse can veto the other spouse's actions to make decisions that both like.

Cherished

Cherished,

OK, I see what you are saying. But how does it work if only one person follows the rules? If KMEJ doesn't want H to do something.....and would rather do something else together (that they both like).....but H goes ahead and does what he wants (because quite obviously he 'is not that into' the M).......

Then how is that helping KMEJ emerge from the situation she is in now? It seems to me that it would just play into his control. She doesn't do anything he is unhappy with. He goes ahead and does whatever he wants - regardless of whether she is happy about it or not.

I guess that's the part I'm confused with. Sorry to be such a PITB <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" />

L.I.T. --
You are precisely correct. There is nothing that you else you can do.

You can say:
- That is negative for me.
- I won't do it if it is negative for you.

That's it. It's up to the other person to decide that they won't do anything that the other person considers to be negative.

It's about NOT doing things that are negative rather than DOING things that are positive. It's being considerate.

An affair, at bottom, is inconsiderate. So is abuse.

Here is the end of my call to Joyce's radio show. I call in as Jenny but my real name is Kathy:

Joyce: We’re going to go back to Minneapolis and welcome back Jenny. Jenny, we’re back on AM 980 KKMS. Jenny has got a situation in her household that she has been trying to deal with over the months and maybe even years I might add and that is the whole idea of Policy of Joint Agreement, negotiation, successful negotiation within her marriage. She’s getting her kids on board, they’re doing a great job, it sounds like, but her husband – as Bill said prior to the break is not into win-win. He’s into sacrifice and unless you’re sacrificing as far as he’s concerned you obviously don’t care and love him. And the big question is then: how, if at all, can we get him on board, Bill?

Bill: Well, one of the problems that I have always had trying to get couple’s marriages straightened out is that to some extent I begin with philosophy – now of course if you know me well, you know that I’m into changing habits ultimately, but there is a certain philosophical framework that is pretty much required in order to achieve some of the behavioral objectives that I have. As a couple, you guys never did attend one of my MarriageBuilders weekends.

Kathy: No.

Bill: And that may be a fatal mistake because to some extent like I say I have ten hours where I am able to indoctrinate people. The basic idea is that if I can’t talk a couple into the Policy of Joint Agreement at least on a trial basis to at least try it we end up with what you and your husband have which is going nowhere…

Kathy: Mmm.

Joyce: And very adversarial.

Bill: Yeah, it is. It’s an incredibly powerful concept that in a caring relationship you must care enough about each other that you would not require sacrifice. That is such a huge concept and for many people it goes against the grain. You get the feeling that if I am thinking of myself when I care for you, I must be selfish. And I keep coming back to the same argument, yeah, but in a mutually caring relationship, both people care enough about each other so that neither would want the other person to be hurt. It just seems to make common sense.

Joyce: We’ve got a couple minutes here, Bill… I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to interrupt..

Bill. Yeah, just let me finish my point… So I’ve got to get your husband, somehow or other, I’ve got to get him on the other side of this issue…

Joyce: That’s what I was going to ask. What does Jenny do in the meantime?

Bill: Well, she can’t do much. But I really think that the whole subject of the Policy of Joint Agreement philosophically is something that he has fought from day one. He doesn’t believe it. It’s almost like a religion. He believes that if you love somebody you love them unconditionally. You love them the way Jesus Christ loves people and if you don’t love people like Jesus Christ loves people where you’re doing things unilaterally, you don’t love them at all and so he can’t accept your love for him because it’s done in a way that takes your feelings into account too.

Kathy: Well, I have done one thing which is I will no longer agree to win-lose agreements so that I no longer…

Bill: But you see what that gets you…

Kathy: What it gets me is “You don’t care”

Bill: ..is the situation, yeah,..You don’t care, see that’s it.

Joyce: Should she drop the concept for the time being?

Bill: I really think that with whatever time you have if you could be cheerful about it and friendly to just talk about the Policy of Joint Agreement and the philosophy behind it and encourage him to call me.

Kathy: OK.

Bill: Because I really think … somehow or other, I’ve got to get this through to him because without it, it’s hopeless, it’s absolutely hopeless, and he’s just going to be continuing to feel like you don’t care about him – I mean, he continues to think that you don’t care about him simply because you’re not sacrificing for him.

Joyce: Jenny, thank you for the call…

Kathy: Thank you.


Dr. Harley has been so kind as to talk with me and with my husband. I haven't talked with him personally for about a year except on the radio show but my husband has. In October, Tom pushed our 10 year old and decided to go to counseling, so now he is going weekly to the best-known Catholic therapist in the Twin Cities, who has counseled other members of his anger management group. This therapist is also the father of my therapist, whom I started seeing 2 months after his affair began in late 2001. My husband did not call back Dr. Harley as a result of the radio show. He has shown mixed feelings about him and the MB program -- for example, saying in December that he's the head of a "cult." Tom is willing now to have us go to conjoint counseling, which was recommended by his therapist (Conjoint is the two of us with his therapist and my therapist together). We've gone once, and now we have three sessions scheduled in the next month.

What my therapist has drilled into me is that I cannot control Tom. All I can do is inform. The choices are up to him. If he chooses to continue being inconsiderate, then I need to decide what I want to do -- put up and shut up, or leave him. The best I can do is try to be considerate of him.

When you have such a mess, as KMEJ and I do, with both mutual abuse and a husband's infidelity, it seems that you really need to do more -- but I have come to realize that all you can do is inform and be considerate yourself.
Making your own independent decisions (I'm going to the party because you're at work anyway and I deserve it) is independent behavior which puts you on the path to divorce and gives your husband the opportunity to justify his own inconsiderate behavior.

The book Buyers Renters and Freeloaders seems to me to be the best book I have read for getting to the bottom of why abuse occurs. When I called in, I asked for that book and donated it to my husband's anger management group.

Cherished

<small>[ February 14, 2005, 07:51 AM: Message edited by: Cherished ]</small>