Gee guys, have you been hanging around the sessions with my Parenting Coordinator? She is of the firm opinion that we should wait until DD is 18 years old to tell her anything about what happened to her parents' marriage and why her adoption didn't go through.

I have said repeatedly that DD needs to know, in an age appropriate way, the truth. I've gotten nowhere with that argument.

So.

Aphelion, would you please e-mail me (address in the signature line) the name of your child psychologist? I know you're up there in the frozen north somewhere and I'm in the DC suburbs, but maybe there's someone your CP can recommend. Oh, and WAT, if you know anyone in this area, I'd appreciate a reference from there, too. I get tired of saying something that seems obvious to me over and over and over and being told that I'm wrong.

Oh, and a couple of other thoughts to add about the question of honesty and what you tell a child.

There is a big difference between a parent who has an affair and, though it does significant damage to the marriage, continues to be an involved and active parent. There are variations and degrees here, from a parent who takes care to make sure that there is no direct effect on his or her relationship with the kids (yes, there is -always- a huge impact because of the damage to the marriage) and a parent who completely abandons his or her children in favor of the affair partner.

They're all yucky. However, there are different things you tell a kid in those different situations. In my own situation, my ex's complete insanity lasted for roughly six months. There was another 18 months after that when she was pretty freaky (and so was I). In the last year, she's improved quite a bit.

All of that is part of the truth. To speak only of the insanity omits a whole lot of the reality. To omit the insanity also falsifies reality. The story I told DD when she was six months old (yes, I talked to her about it -- she already knew things were insane. I figured that even if she didn't understand the words, she would understand the emotions and the tones) is different from what I would tell her today. All of it is complicated.

And at the point of the story where I have to say that my ex tried to sever our daughter's relationship with me, I really struggle. How do we approach that truth in an age-appropriate way that doesn't destroy DD's relationship with her other mom? How do we teach her compassion and right and wrong at the same time? It's so dang hard. And yet. I know all the way to my bones that her finding it out at 15 or 16 or 18 or 25 will be worse. Because then we will have kept it a "secret" and that ... has its own set of bigbig problems.

So. Honesty is tough. A parent who goes insane -- and I think that and an addiction are the best analogies here -- doesn't necessarily stay insane. A parent who neglects/abandons/abuses a child can learn and change. And it seems to me that the important thing is not whether the parent loves the child.

To the child's inner self-esteem, it's the child's inevitable love for his or her parents that's important. And then the child has the very difficult task of accepting their love for someone who is unable or unwilling to interact with the child in a healthy way.

That sucks a lot. But it's something the kids -do- have to address.

Edited to add a whole other line of thought that I forgot the first time.

ML,


Outside of the "purpose" (which is absolutely central and different) it is similar BUT not the SAME!! If it has two different purposes ML....it's different even though it possesses SOME similarities. The difference is that one way the children feel a responsibility to intervene and protect the BS....and in the other...they just the learn the awful truth without the burden of being expected to intervene at a time when their world is falling apart TOO. That distinctive difference is important I think! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />

Honesty to children about the affair should not be included in the "MB exposure process"....it's a separate and completely different kind of exposure where honesty, timing, sensitivity, age appropriateness, and compassion are as important as the information. So when we're advising folks about the list of people that need to called and exposed to....minor children should not be on that list....that kind of exposure should be talked about and handled differently.

I have NEVER, EVER on any thread, in any way....said children should be lied to or not told THE TRUTH about the infidelity. But they aren't crusaders to battle infidelity either...that's for adults.

A BS has more than just timing to consider when it comes to exposure in general (especially to children...but not exclusively children). As an example...recently, you might recall that a man told you You replied
Even after you found out she had brain cancer and was dying in a nursing home....you never told him not to burden his MIL with exposure. So tell me now....do you think exposing to his MIL was a good idea?

THEN....come to find out the guy is an alcoholic with an anger problem whose wife left him because he was an abusive drunk and is now having an affair..... and exposure should have waited until he could demonstrate his sincerity about addressing those issues....because without that....it just looks like more abuse....and didn't help him at all. None of the details were discovered until AFTER exposure was advised and accomplished...but it should have been.

I think we need to ask more questions. I had the same opportunity you did ML....and neither me, you or anybody else found out the crucial information about this poster before the cry to "expose, expose" went out.

Especially when it comes to exposure to children....we need to gather even more information....not just include them in "general" exposure measures used to end affairs.

Exposure has just become this all encompassing steam rolling beast lately. Good exposure has class and finesse. It is calculated to do good and show a loving motive. It's not a revenge vehicle....it's a marriage saving tool. As you say....children should never be tools.

Hey that's MY line!

Regarding that incident though..

I don't think that the blanket "expose" policy is a problem..if anything I think that this BSs own deceit was the fly in the ointment.

If someone comes to the board and is dishonest then obviously their ommitted facts have the ability to nullify any advice we give.

As far as children go..I'd have to say that the purpose..if the result is the same..is unimportant.

Look to WATs example of what he WISHES he had done..that certainly does fit the exposure model WHILE also protecting the child from having to play pretend or believe a lie..but it does not leave them in a neutral position..

Is that what you were talking about..is that the heart of the matter for you..trying to create for the children a neutral position?

I'd have to disagree with that as well..the children have a great deal at stake both in the present tense and in the shaping of their adult lives. Nothing neutral about that. Allowing a child..especially an older child to fight the good fight or at least be heard and supported in their objections is a good thing imo..what chills me to the bone is allowing a child to be used to normalize and legitimize an affair..the damage done in that case I would expect to follow them into their own marriages.

This seems like hair splitting to me, SF.. Isn't exposure exposure? And doesn't Dr Harley advocate exposure to children? Therefore, although the purposes are different, it would be part of the "MB process," as you put it. Even though it's intended purpose is not to bust up the affair [although it will often put pressure on the affair], it is still exposure and is still a response to the affair. Exposure is exposure.


Excuse me?? You seem to have LEFT OFF my comment after he explained to me that his MIL had brain cancer:


The man is not an idiot and all he had to do was tell me that. Had I felt he was going to go ahead with that exposure, I would have pursued it. But I didn't have to because when he told me this he said he wasn't going to. It is a little unrealistic to expect me to drill him about the health conditions of his exposure targets. That is a ridiculous expectation.

Nor do I agree that exposure was the wrong thing to do just because he is an alcholic. Says who? And of course it looks like "abuse," exposure is never WELCOMED. Just because the man is an alcoholic, does not mean he is precluded from trying to bust up the affair. The only practical difference is that he needs to get help for his drinking before he can ever hope to enter a stage of recovery.

No one has ever said that exposure is a "revenge vehicle," starfish, that is you ascribing your own feelings to others, regardless of whether it fits or not. It is certainly not my motive, but rather a tried and true MB tool that Dr. Harley recommends daily.

sorry noodle! LOL

Aph



... just letting you know ... your words have not gone out into thin cyberspace .... I read this ... it touched me

thank you

Pep

I hate secrets.

The problem with waiting to tell secrets is that memories distort, history is revised, the people involved die... the time to find the TRUTH, the REAL TRUTH has passed.

I agree that exposure to children must be age appropriate... and must be DONE... as soon as possible.

I believe that even if the affair has ended, there are certain people, especially those living in the home, that need to know what happened - again in an age appropriate way. Don't you think that kids will at the VERY LEAST, sense that something is wrong? Kids often (almost always) blame themselves for problems in the home... why take that chance? Let them know what's going on in THEIR WORLD.

Finally, I'm feeling the inkling of an underlying issue here, which is that the focus is being taken off of the actual catalyst for exposure (the affair itself and the parent who cheated) and is being put on the shoulders of the person exposing (the betrayed spouse). Something doesn't feel quite right about that (at least to me).

WAT is absolutely right.

Far too many people grow up never realizing why their parents divorced, often blaming themselves, or believing that there is nothing wrong with destroying your family because you are not "happy" - and equally harmfully, believing that divorce is usually a mutual decision, made by parents who apparently care more about their happiness than that of their children.

For kids who later discover the truth, the betrayal is worse than it would have been had they known from the beginning. If they have put the WS up on a pedestal, supported by a BS who lies by omission, the betrayal can be particularly awful, and can completely destroy their relationship with the WS and their chances for a successful marriage. Far better for them to know the whole truth from the beginning - and if they chose to continue a relationship with the WS, do so with their eyes wide open. It does no one any good for the child to love someone who does not really exist.

Nellie, this is EXACTLY what happened to me. My father had multiple affairs, multiple marriages and NEVER PAID A CENT of child support. Since my mother never wanted to "criticise" my father, I put the man on an undeserved pedestal.

My mother worked her fingers to the bone supporting us when my father left us. My dad would come floating into town every few years to play Santa Claus to my mother's "disciplinarian". But..I was always told he "loved me."

It never ocurred to me until I was in my 40's that he NEVER loved me at all. The one who loved me was that woman who sacrificed and took care of me no matter what. She was ALWAYS there. She was the one who really loved me and I gave her no credit for it, because she was not honest with me about my dad. I developed some very bitter feelings toward my dad in his later years because of this. I didn't have a SHRED of respect for him when I buried him last January. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

ML,

He told you upfront that she was sick and not mentally "there." After you asked if she was retarded, he told you that she was in a nursing home with brain cancer. Still....you said...let's talk about it....is she "dying in the nursing home?" OMG Do you think anyone in a nursing home, even if they aren't actually dying in the next few days should be exposure targets?

SF,

I'm suprised at you. People do not lose their validity because they require long term care.

Many people in nursing homes...probably MOST in my experience are quite capable of being exposure vehicles.

Why would you make this assumption?

Does anybody have a recommendation for what I should tell my almost-6-year-old?

She thinks I did something bad when I divorced her Mom.

I haven't tried to correct her, because DD and I have a pretty good relationship in spite of her holding that opinion.

What say?

-AD

SF, here is what I said to him when he told me she was "not mentally there" after he told me he had not even exposed to his MIL:


I said "IF SHE IS NOT!" as you can plainly see.

He then came back and told me she WAS in a nursing home with brain cancer. To which I responded [WHOA!] "LET'S DISCUSS THIS FIRST!" Which was my attempt to put the brakes on that. HOWEVER, the discussion did not need to go any further because he told me he would not talk to her. No need for further discussion.

Sorry to take the wind out of your sails, but there is no "there" there, Starfish. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

I am wondering if anybody who is "recovered" regrets having told their children, adult or otherwise, about the A.

noodle....I spend every day visiting a nursing home....my sister lives in one and I'm her nearest relative. I'm NOT infering that EVERYONE in a nursing home has lost their mental facilities (though this MIL dying of brain cancer certainly had!)....however....even the ones who are mentally sharp (like my sister who has MS) already have alot on their plate. They are too frail to live alone....that's why they're THERE!!. Most have many many health issues. I shop for about three or four whose families don't give them the time of day. Frankly....their quality of life sucks, noodle! My sister is in one of the best homes I could find....most are alot worse....and the last thing she or the other folks there need to hear about are other people's problems. They need visitors! not conflict and heartbreak. You surprise me!!

I worked in one for close to 15 years so I am pretty familiar with both the quality of living issues and the quality of care issues and I have to say that I just don't agree.

The primary complaint among most who are lucid is that they feel they have been removed from their lives and the lives of their families as though they no longer count or have any validity.



This can go on for many years..even decades as the nature of the care can vary quite a lot.

Just BEING in a nursing home does not automatically disqualify a person as a willing and effective exposure.

http://www.marriagebuilders.com/ubbt/sho...rue#Post3073211

Here's the thread ML.....anyone interested in seeing the uncut version can clearly see that even AFTER he said she had brain cancer you wanted to talk about "if" was terminal and dying. So if she was just getting radiation and chemo but not dying....he should tell her? Your "retarded" comment and your persistence even after you found out the MIL had brain cancer was shocking to me. Sorry....I think you dropped the ball on that one.

SF,

As an afterthought..I realize that your MIL having brain cancer must affect your experience..but I have known a lot of individuals whose brain cancer[s] were more akin to a chronic condition than an immediate crisis.

It depends on the type, aggressiveness, and location of the tumor[s].

If a person is mentally capable..what does their nursing home status have to do with their ability to act as an exposure option?

Starfish, and anyone can clearly see that I wrote: "Is she in an old folks home and not coherent anymore? If she is not, I would suggest you call her."

And that you are trying to mischaracterize my position - which I clarified above - for some reason.

I am sure you simply misunderstood my meaning and didn't mean to intentionally mischaracterize it by extrapolating that I wanted a guy to expose to his dying MIL. Let me assure you that I did not want that to happen, nor did I encourage him to do any such thing once I found this out. And who better understands my meaning than ME?

I hope this clarifies my intention for you and puts this to rest.