Oh thank you. First time I laughed today. Felt [email]d@mn[/email] good, too.

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Me too Weaver. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

What I am saying mere mere is that in some situations ( read my first post) and added SOME enviroments become so toxic-------THAT YES A BS SHOULD LEAVE---for them and for their children.. How hard is that to understand?

Tell me something====all of you ...if Harley generalised you lot.

Because I know and I will bet my bum dollar again-he may use similarities but he will and would approach every and each case of adultery independantly.

and if he doesn't ...somethings wrong

Max

And mere mere sorry I missed your post..I have no answers for happened to you as a child... as you have none for me...and sometimes I have nothing for the kids out there either...but I will always do my best and my best is all I can do. That I promise.

What if's.

Max

Type with ya mouth Mel?

MadMax:

The toxicity of the home environment when one parent is addicted to adultery is the very reason I believe the parent NOT addicted, NOT committing adultery should remain in the home with the children. The sick/scary/adulterous parent should leave IMHO BECAUSE of the toxicity that sick parent is causing.

IF the adulterous parent refuses to leave and the toxicity is intense then the faithful/sane parent should NOT leave without the chidlren.

Your POV, that the children and home should be abandoned by the sane parent to the insane parent is dangerous advice IMHO. I shudder to think that your employment gives you the opportunity to expose children to danger via your bad advice!

So is that your suggestion? Is that how you would like to see the other posters help? By taking each and every case independently and to make no generalized threads, even though they would apply in the majority of the cases, and then the remaining that didn't fit into that category could be dealt with uniquely?

Is that what you would like to see happen here?

Almost ALL adultery ridden situations are "toxic," MM. That does not mean the BS should leave. The BS SHOULD NOT LEAVE. If anyone leaves, it should be the WS, without the children. And if the WS won't leave voluntarily, a court order should be sought.

How hard is that to understand?

"And mere mere sorry I missed your post..I have no answers for happened to you as a child... as you have none for me...and sometimes I have nothing for the kids out there either...but I will always do my best and my best is all I can do. That I promise."

I can assure you that if you asked the children you think you are helping with your wrong advice THEY will tell you the same thing I said: they NEED to have the parent who is not addicted to adultery remain in the home with them! You are meddling in matters you apparently have no personal experience with and admit you can't comprehend the child's POV of.

In all honesty I find it hard to believe you really have the children's best interest as your motive even. All evidence I've seen so far from your postings in this thread points to you simply wanting to bash Melody's advice in this thread and cause dissension. IMHO you are clearly giving bad advice if you tell betrayed husbands to abandon their children to living in the home solely with their adulterous mother and whatever adultery partners she brings into their home and presence!

Again, I am SO THANKFUL that my father had enough sense to not take advice from somebody like you!!!! His presence in our home was required the MOST when the toxicity was the worst. He was our hero. And to think that somebody like you, for apparently no better reason than to start feuds on a message board, would object to telling other fathers to stay and protect their children is appalling IMHO!

This is more gobbledygook. YES, he approaches each situation individually. But YES, he publishes established PRINCIPLES and STANDARDS. The two are not mutually exclusive, but I think that is probably beyond your ability to comprehend.

MadMax:

I gave a very specific example, a REAL example, about as black and toxic as it can get, and it does NOT in any way support your claim, quite the contrary.

BTW, all the psycho-babble about black and white and shades in between... to the kid in the toxic situation that's all a bunch of hot air and even the very young kids realize that's just justification garbage that is employed to enable the adultery AND apparently according to your POV should also be exploited as an excuse to force the betrayed husband to move out?

I may be wrong but what I'm beginning to suspect is that you're one of those SO-CALLED 'women's rights' advocates that assumes that if there is ANY problem in a marriage that the husband is just supposed to concede everything to the wife, move out, or else he's being 'abusive'? I've pointed out before here at MB's that a lot of what is advised and effective for ending adultery is sometimes misconstrued by the people who volunteer at women's shelters as 'abusive' or 'controlling' male behavior... hmmm... So is THAT where you are coming from in this? Do you beleive that it is somehow wrong or abusive for the betrayed husband to stand his ground and to fight for his marriage and family in any way? Do you feel that the betrayed husband should just get out of the way and whatever the adulterous wife does it's OK? Do you feel that the betrayed husband refusing to be shoved out of his home and his children's lives is somehow an example of a male being 'pushy' or 'controlling'?

Just wondering...

Woohooo, Meremortal. You have a great way with words.

Welcome back, chica!

Mere , under no circumstances would I ever work in a DV shelter, volunteer or otherwise. I simply could not. Most of my work involves young people that stem from destructive relationships. I do not work for anyone you would associate with or for Protective services (including DoCs) My opinion is not based on a whim.

Mel,. You are a well respected member here. I do not agree with your post, whether it be a generalization or principle-each and every ‘event of adultery’ is unique-no matter the similarities.

Justuss-I am definitely pro –marriage-just careful on the personal (emotional) expenses

Max

MM, and we don't agree with you. Sorry you couldn't make your case.

"Most of my work involves young people that stem from destructive relationships."

And somehow you fail to see that if a betrayed husband moves out of the home, abandoning his children to be left with his adulterous wife in her addicted state of mind, and increasing the risk that the children will be exposed to the adulterous wife's OM, is not a 'destructive' situation for the children?!?

Listen, you've been given plenty of opportunity to give some specific examples of exactly WHAT you are vaguely referring to as a 'toxic' situation where it would supposeldy be better for the faithful/sane/non-addicted parent to leave the home and children to the adulterous/insane/addicted parent. But all you've posted are more general statements about Melody's advice being wrong or dangerous, and claims that you supposedly have some expertise in working with children who supposedly would have been better off without the faithful/sane parent's presence in the home...

"I am definitely pro –marriage-just careful on the personal (emotional) expenses"

huh? the personal/emotional expenses of marriage?

OK, I'm going to take another guess here (BECAUSE you persist in being so vague):

Are you saying that you believe that the betrayed spouse is supposed to pretend that the adultery is no big deal and that the best way to help the children deal with the adultery/divorce is for everyone to pretend that there is no problem? So in that case ANY arguments or tension between the parents over the adultery would be the betrayed parent's fault for not 'handling it right'? Do you therefore think it's best if the betrayed spouse would just move out if they can't pull off pretending all is well in front of the kids? Is that where you're coming from?

NO mere the personal expenses of staying in a marriage that cannot possibly survive, flogging a dead horse is flogging a dead horse. Some marriages will not survive...and some should not.

Lets say we have a partner involved in an EXIT AFFAIR ( for whatever reasons)----as some do...do we generalize ( especially when they (the BS) do not understand what an exit affair is) and advise the daft sucker reading to STAY=dammmm the expenses. Might cost ya , ya life and eff ya kids up for good- but it is the principle!!!!.

As I said in my first post. SOME should go. I will say it again , I do not agree with Mels post. Each and everyone is individual and should be treated as such.

Falling onto a sword (for a principle), does nobody any good...

Max

And there we have it. Call it what you want, exit affair, rebound affair, whatever. An affair is an affair. Period. The BS (or the daft sucker as you so kindly refer to them and clearly show your true colors) should most definitely stay in the home. It's the WS who should pay the price and leave the home.

We didn't say that a BS should stay in a marriage that can't survive. We said that the BS shouldn't LEAVE. The WW should be the one to leave since she is the one in the affair. She has to get out if anyone is going to leave. And it doesn't matter if it is an "exit" affair or not. Makes no difference.

After all this, you still can't come up with a legitimate reason that the BH should leave his own home.

Sorry you couldn't make your case.

"NO mere the personal expenses of staying in a marriage that cannot possibly survive, flogging a dead horse is flogging a dead horse. Some marriages will not survive...and some should not."

I agree that some marriages don't and shouldn't survive. For example in the case of an unrepentent adulterer, at some point the betrayed spouse is certainly justified in giving up and filing for divorce. HOWEVER, THAT was not what we were discussing and you know it. We were discussing whether or not a BH should leave his home (and children) as opposed to the adulterous wife leaving (if she really doesn't want to live with her BH).

"Lets say we have a partner involved in an EXIT AFFAIR ( for whatever reasons)----as some do...do we generalize ( especially when they (the BS) do not understand what an exit affair is) and advise the daft sucker reading to STAY=dammmm the expenses.

This reveals much about you... BTW, even in the case of an 'exit affair' the odds of marital recovery are still higher than the odds that the adultery will result in a successful marriage. I don't remember reading here at MB's that the principles won't work if it is an exit affair...

Your supposed concern about expenses makes no sense at all since two households are much more expensive to maintain than one - the betrayed spouse staying then would be less expensive... I'm beginning to think that maybe you're one of those females that thinks the BH is supposed to leave BUT STILL pay all the expenses at home for the adulterous wife? LOL

"Might cost ya , ya life and eff ya kids up for good- but it is the principle!!!!."

WOW! So are you saying that if the adulterous wife and/or her adultery partner OM murder the BH it would be justified because the BH refused to move out of his home (so OM could move in)?!?!?

And frankly I'm beginning to doubt seriously you have any genuine concern for the children. Because the presence of their betrayed father in their home and lives would not equate to 'eff'ing them up for good! On the other hand, being abandoned to the adulterous parent usually does a lot of damage to children. Even if the two parents can not live together peaceably (um BECAUSE one of them is an unrepentent adulteress) it does not mean the BH should be the one to move out - CLEARLY in that case the children would be better if their adulterous mother moved out and took her insanity/addiction/drama with her and away from the children!

"As I said in my first post. SOME should go. I will say it again , I do not agree with Mels post. Each and everyone is individual and should be treated as such.

Falling onto a sword (for a principle), does nobody any good...

Max"

You have still failed to come up with a single sound example of why a BH should move away from his home and children. The fact that many an adulterous wife would prefer to have her BH move out while still supporting her (and her OM), that WW's would rather have the BH be deprived of staying in their home and with their children, is not exactly proof that's what's best.

and may I say .....

7. Moving out of your home when this is a decision you do NOT enthusiastically agree with is [color:"red"] dishonest ! [/color]

The time to cease dishonesty is today.

Allowing your BH conflict-avoiding GIVER to make such a dishonest sacrifice on the alter of the WW's TAKER only makes for future unreasonable demands by the WW.