Ok, Mel.

You are right about the banning issue. I made some assumptions and jumped to the next step. I skimmed back over the thread and the prior thread this one was built on and came up with this...



I guess I just got caught up in a debate and ended up debating myself.

My intention is not to guilt anyone. I was just reaching for any point to try and bring my way of thinking home. Yes, I think that help should be offered to JJ... but I don't care if that help comes from you, the W's or any other great advisor I have found on here. I feel it is unfortunate that she won't receive the fantastic help that I was given... but that is not my place to decide.

'nuff said. I'll concede that I am debating in circles and will see if there are any other great debates that I can thoroughly confuse on here. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Shaden

Doesn't the original post on this thread discuss exaggerated moral equations... and "exceptional forgiveness"? Why is that story any different than examples I may have used?

Except...maybe... that the original story was posted as a general topic for discussion... not being used to bring a point of view home. But eventually, a point of view would be uncovered if the discussion kept going.

Shaden

huh? How does that answer my question? I am talking about YOUR moral equations. You equated walking away with leaving a bleeding patient on the floor. [an act of murder, actually] That is a pretty serious charge. If the goal was not to elicit some inappropriate guilt for walking away, then why? Does it help the discussion to exaggerate the point out of all recognition and attempt to ascribe guilt for a perfectly acceptable response?

Maybe I do feel this way. I do understand and respect their reasonings behind it... but I don't have to like it.

BTW, Mel... did you like my post 2 posts ago... looks like classic conflict avoidance and defensiveness to me. Atleast I'm getting quicker at recognizing it to try and change it. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

Pep... sorry for taking your thread to places you probably didn't intend for it to go... you would have kept it on the original JJ thread if you had. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Shaden

We need to nuke your silly country!! [but we will take the beer first! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />] **snort**

you are alright, Shaden! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

The original question on the post was about helping those who have hurt others. I was giving examples of situations in which people help who have hurt others. I'm not sure if asking a Doctor to help someone who has hurt others is exaggerated.
The baby in the car issue may have been exagerated (and I said after it wasn't a good example), but I was trying to discuss emotions felt rather than facts of a situation in that one. That emotions are real regardless of the situation.

Shaden

Sometimes I agree about nuking our country. I understand we are sending our bugs down your way... that's our scouts preparing for our attack.

Shaden

Our great beer is meant to numb your defenses.... keep drinking!

Shaden, the reason the analogy doesnt work is because a) we are not doctors here, we the patients on a self help board and b) this patient does not have physical mortal wounds. Even so, if an honest doctor had a moral dilemma with a patient, the ethical thing to do would be to hand him over to another doctor. Same with counselors. If we walk away from her, she will not die. Whereas, if a doctor DID in your scenario, she would die, making that doctor a MURDERER. Using your analogy we would have to condemn anyone who walked away as a murderer and that is just not logical. See what I mean?

uh noooooooooo You send down every SENIOR CITIZEN in a big car who can barely see over the dash who clogs up traffic because they don't know what a turn lane is!!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" /> We are not tricked by this, you tricky FOREIGN DEVILS!!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

I know I am very one-sided in my thinking on helping others... I am the type to run out and help. At one point about 15 years ago, I was working in a "tough" part of the city. A woman, obviously drugged up, was outside all bloodied trying to slash her wrists with a broken bottle. I didn't think about consequences (it was near the beginning when AIDS was really in the news), a co-worker held her down while I pried the bottle out of her hands... getting blood all over mine.

This was probably a really stupid thing to do... definitely I don't consider it courageous. My thinking has always been to help first, when it's needed, regardless of the consequences, and ask questions later... not always the best (especially if the person doesn't want help). When the ambulance arrived, the attendants took their time to don their gloves and make sure everything was safe. They knew what they were doing.

Shaden

Why are your senior citizens all 4'8"????? Can't ya grow em bigger?? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

For a OP seeking help with their affair marriage, the help that they truly need might not take the form of the help they were expecting.

It (to me) is more like someone coming in to the ER with a gash in their leg, and finding out that they have systemic cancer.

They thought all they needed was a few stitches, when what they really needed was extensive, all-over treatment to change every part of their body.

And any decent person would do the same thing in this situation. To walk away from her would have been tantamount to murder. But this situation is entirely different for the reasons I gave above. JJ does not have mortal wounds and we not doctors.

Lemonman, who is a trauma surgeon, experienced this very thing when his W and the OM were wheeled into the ER seriously injured in a car wreck. They were in the wreck TOGETHER. Lemonman operated on him and repaired his extensive injuries, SAVING HIS LIFE. If he had left the man to die, it would have been murder.

On the other hand, if a doctor or counselor feels there is a conflict of interest, whether it be a moral dilemma or whatever, they have an obligation to EXCUSE themselves. That is the ethical thing to do when one feels they cannot help the person. But that is very different from leaving someone to die like a dog on the floor. And that is the difference between your analogy and JJ's situation. She is not a patient who is mortally wounded.

Hello I am new here so forgive me if I am not fully up to speed on all that is happening.

I appreciate this is a forum of individuals with very personal belief's & values, 90% of which are to protect the primary relationship that is the couple's marriage.

I am entering this thread because I read this here

Perhaps I am being 'blind' I certainly do not think so, & that this is the place to learn & have my 'blinkers' removed if I am.

My husband is my first & only ever husband & I his first & only wife, we do have a family.

My husband has had several affairs throughout our marriage.
All came to light when our marriage crashed recently.
He was a reckless driver! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

My point is that when we get the car/marriage treated by a Master Mechanic & Husband learns understands, accepts & willingly changes his driving style because he wants to - there would be no reason to hope for reliablility as long as we service it & drive it well, it would actually once the thorough work done would be more reliable & much more comfortable than ever before, provided we respected it's limits & didn't over rev it, or forget to top up the oil & water. Once fully serviced & proven reliable, regualar maintainence not hope would keep it going very well.

My belief there is no such thing as a bad car just a badly maintained car. It's up to the drivers to handle it & treat it as they wish or know how or hand it over to professionals for diagnostics if it's not working well, not drive it to the ground till it stops going, intelligently we should stop & get it fixed when the early warning light shines.

I believe my husband has room for a decent Master Driver & Mechanic 'servicing' & will hum like a dream machine if he maintains the improved standards he desires.

Of course he may skid on severe tracks, but then he would be knowledgeable in how to handle the skid & protect himself & his passengers.

Preference & this is my best wished for outcome of learning that he would see the danger before it even occurs. That will come with deep inner knowledge from those master driving classes.


_____________________

On the major topic being discussed here:

I agree wholeheartedly it has to be a profound change in ones belief system.

Preferably not as a result of consequences that became too painful for the individual to continue in the system they were in but from deep understanding of what they value in themselves.

However unfortunately the more common reason for change in individuals is when the pain of continuing becomes worse than the pain of changing. - it can feel like forced changed which may not be lasting - & that is why preferance is on the PROFOUND DEEP PERSONAL CHANGE IN BELIEF.

For my Husband his own personal pain was the catalyst.

The outcomes brought by change are helping him RE-evaluate his personal beliefs about himself & adultery & a host of other life's meanings.

This to me is good, not as I would have liked, but good to see the spurts of personal growth even if it came as a result of his sudden misery rather than the misery he caused others.

_____________

Thank you
Shiela.

When I came here to this forum, I think the wounds I had were far worse than any physical mortal wound (atleast they felt that way at the time). I was closer to attempting suicide than I can imagine in any other situation.



I don't think I am condemning the doctor or the counsellor... it is their choice to help or not. Their choice is a reflection of their beliefs or issues within themselves. I don't believe it changes whether or not the injured party deserves to be helped.

As for being volunteers... that doesn't cut it in my books. Whether we are paid to help or volunteer doesn't change whether a person should be helped. It may change your own personal decision, again based upon your beliefs and your own issues. I found much of the advice on this forum from volunteers to be far more helpful, insightful, and real than what I received from a "trained" professional. A profession is built upon knowledge. Those on this board have knowledge through personal experience and sharing that knowledge here. Which is more valuable?

I realize what I'm saying here does not change whether or not anyone chooses to help a situation like JJ's... but that is everyone's personal decision.

Shaden

I believe this is correct in far more than just A marriages. When I came here, I was looking at all that my FWW had to do to change. I never imagined all that I would have to do and needed to do. I thought I had things pretty much together... and was a "great" husband. I had to (and still am) go through my own extensive reconstruction.

Shaden

But your "wounds" were psychic, not physical. That is my point. JJ's "wounds" are not physical so this cannot logically be equated to a doctor leaving a dying patient on the ground. That would be murder. Walking away frm JJ's situtation becuase of a moral dilemma is NOT murder, making the analogy illegitimate.

Any decent counselor would excuse themselves in a case where there was a known conflict. That does not make them MURDERERS. However, if a doctor leaves a patient to bleed to death on the floor, he is a murderer.




Well, yes you are. If you equate walking away to leaving a bleeding patient to die on the floor, you have condemned that person as murderer.


Well, it has to "cut it," because folks here help whom they choose. We are all in the same boat here. I help who I can relate to and I expect everyone else does. No one here is obligated or forced to help anyone. Just as a counselor must excuse themselves from a case with a moral dilemma, so can we. And so SHOULD WE. I don't imagine that I can help everyone and I don't think others do either.

I realize this is a question that cannot be answered by anyone other than Lemonman... but did Lemonman help the OM simply because of his oath...(out of fear) or because of his beliefs. If someone takes such an oath, do they believe that all people are worth saving... regardless of the situation.

Is there a difference in what is right if the person has the time to study their beliefs and thoughts and prepare a decision on whether to help or not? I think the only difference would be within the person's beliefs... not whether it is intrinsically right or wrong to help.

I know, I know... I am contradicting myself again. I say that I respect each person's personal decision to help or not... and then argue that there is a fundamental value of right or wrong present, regardless of the person's individual decision.

Maybe I am trying to sort this one out in my own mind. I believe the mind control contraption that is put on all of us Canucks is not working again.

Shaden

"If I marry someone who commits infidelity with me, I should not be surprised if he if unfaithful TO ME, because I knew he did not believe in fidelity."

That's perfect logic, Mel.
Unfortunately someone who is still living in the fog doesn't think logically.
They think "BS was a horrible person/unsuitable partner, this must be true because OP told me so. I must be a much better person because OP wants to be with me. And if I ever see/hear any evidence that this is not true.. I will go into 'ignore' mode because otherwise I will hate myself for what I have done."
And there we go.. down the hatch.
Putting two people together that didn't have the correct coping mechanisms to work things out in a M.. and who never realised this.. a time bomb.