Who told him not to be annoyed? Of course that is not a MB principle. The solution to annoying him is to stop annoying him.

Yet she was saying with her defense of the child's behavior, deal with it.

Saying that he will not longer tolerate being subjected to behavior that he finds unacceptable is a REASONABLE boundary.

So the choice is hers, validate that her husband is annoyed by the behavior and work towards a solution that is mutually acceptable, or continue to defend and invalidate and watch her marriage end up in divorce.

Perhaps the reason the OP thinks the current arrangement works is because it minimizes his exposure to what he finds unacceptable.

I don't disagree, they need the time together. Since he's said stepson's behavior is a deal breaker to him, perhaps part of the negotiated 15 hours is validation that that behavior is unacceptable and a plan to deal with it if he should be subjected to that behavior.

My thought is if she doesn't think of her husband enough to listen and act on what he's clearly and strongly said bothers him, what is his motivation for seeking to spend more time with her?

The 15+ hours of UA time have to be something he views in a positive fashion. From what I've read, the behavior of the stepson is so annoying that it seems unlikely he would enjoy that time as long as he's subjected to that behavior and told by his wife that his feelings come second to her defending the child.

I'm not asking her to consider sending the child away. Yet I do think she should send the annoying behavior away. After all, isn't that as well as the defense of the child by the mother the source of irritation?

Could he have said it better? Perhaps. Yet, if we take his account as true, and we have no reason not to, his requests to address the behavior were dismissed and the child defended.

It appears that he's tried the MB approved approach with respect to bringing the problem to the attention of his wife, and he's been dismissed. So he gave an over the top ultimatum.

That's certainly not MB behavior. However, I think he is well within his rights and well within MB principles to go to her and say this bothers him, and if she continues to dismiss his concerns, he will not continue to be part of a marriage where he comes after the step child. Make it clear that he is willing to work with her to find a solution that is mutually agreeable, but he's not willing to sacrifice his feelings. Either he comes first with her and his concerns are validated, not dismissed, or he's not in her life at all.

He pledges to put her first in his life, before any other family member, boss, whatever, and she does the same. That's marriage, and that's MB. Anything less is simply playing house.

You say that. But others are saying he needs to grow up, stop making the mother choose, which basically says, stop being annoyed and suck it up.

If some told me to grow up, stop being childish, or what have you, I certainly would believe I was being heard or validated.

My wife told me that once. I made it clear that I would not be part of a relationship where she thought of me as a child. Now she can disagree with me, and she is free to do so. But to call someone a child, or to say they are being childish or immature does nothing to solve the problem and only serves to attack the person.

Attack the problem, not the person, and the problem is not that the OP is annoyed. The problem is the annoyance.

From the account, it appears the OP's wife is unwilling to address the problem, and the OP is very (rightly) frustrated.

He doesn't spend his 15+ hours with the stepson, but alone with the WIFE. And part of the program is that they eliminate annoying behavior and make the time together pleasant.

That is why this program needs to be implemented in its entirety.

No arguments here. I'm simply speaking to human nature. He's unlikely to be enthusiastic about UA time if there is even the threat of being exposed to the behavior he finds unacceptable.

I think he's saying in his words and actions both that the behavior is unacceptable.

We all agree they need the 15 hours of UA time.

His wife is saying that HE is the one who has to change, and she is saying in both word and deed that she will not address the step son's behavior. (Another example of him being told to just suck it up and accept the behavior at the expense of his feelings, by his own wife no less!)

The question between the lines is how can he effectively communicate that he needs her to validate that the behavior is unacceptable to him and address it in order to save her marriage?

He is saying in his words, in the very title of this post that the marriage is at risk as long as she continues to invalidate how he feels and defends the child instead of the marriage?

One can prescribe 15 hours, POJA, and all the other tenets. Yet it appears she has already rejected that by telling him that he needs to change, that she hasn't nor has she presented any credible evidence that she will address the stepson's annoying behaviors.

As long as she's doing that, she's rejecting any attempt at MB.

So the question is, how does he present MB in a fashion that she will not go defensive and reject it out of hand?

Agree. This is the solution. And once they learn how to skillfully negotiate, this will not come between them. But he needs to get the book Lovebusters as I suggested and jump to the chapter I recommended above. It gives instructions on how to resolve step family problems.

Ex, this is the childish behavior I was referring to, and handling his annoyance in this way IS childish and unproductive. Stamping his foot and saying "this is just how I am and I'm not going to change that" is childish. He is going to have to change his attitude if he wants his marriage to succeed. I'm not saying the wife doesn't need to change hers as well, but she isn't the one who came here for advice. Neuschwanstein is, and he's the one we're trying to help.

I am thinking. It will have to be in way that does not bring out her motherly instinct claws.

However, all of our advise will be for naught if he doesn't make plans to get a job where he is home every night.

So he needs to call it a boundary and then it's "mature" behavior?

You can focus on his delivery and pick it apart if you want, or you can validate that he finds this troubling and provide him with a means to share his boundary in a fashion that you find acceptable.

If the child's behavior is unacceptable, it's unlikely he'll suddenly find it acceptable. So what is there for him to change? Is he supposed to change his moral code and let a child run the show?

He may not have said it in the most thoughful fashion. However, I think his expectations are largely reasonable and very mature.

Parents raise children. It's not the role of children to change parents, but the role of parents to change the children into mature, responsible adults.

Ex, if his expectations are simply that his wife needs to accept the way he is, because he is that way and he isn't going to change, so either the kid goes or he goes, then no, I respectfully disagree that his expectations are neither reasonable nor mature.

His wife has already told him she expects him to change, and that she will not address the child's behavior.

Given that is her stand in both word and deed, his behavior is logical and to be expected. She is saying he should change, and that she will not even discuss addressing the child's behavior.


Now we can argue if he can really know the boy will or won't change. However, if he's seen that she continually refuses to even consider his complaint as valid, then he has little hope that he can reach a solution that he even remotely likes.

He finds the child's behavior unacceptable, and he says very clearly he's not going to change. In other words, he's not going to suddenly find that behavior acceptable.

That's radical honesty! If she's trying to change him, then she's doomed to failure. If she's angry with him and then saying he is not allowed to be angry, then that's doomed to failure too.

He shouldn't change to find the behavior acceptable. Nor should he find his wife's continual invalidation acceptable.

His expectations are very mature. He wants a wife to work with him, not tell him his expectations are unreasonable and that he should not be angry.

If she's displaying anger, she's sending the message anger is acceptable.

Anger is acceptable. One cannot say you cannot be angry. They can negotiate acceptable ways to express that anger. But one cannot say anger is not acceptable. Otherwise, one could say you can't be sad and cry, or be happy and laugh, or whatever other emotions one unilaterally claims are unacceptable.

You keep leaving off this part. This IS immature. He is calling her son stupid. This is a grown man calling a 10-year-old child stupid and then telling his wife that the only solution to the problem is to keep her "stupid" kid away from him.

Ex, I'm not trying to fight with you here. I agree with a lot of what you are saying. But Neuschawanstein does need to handle his emotions and anger in a mature and reasonable way, and calling the kid stupid and telling his wife she needs to keep the boy away from him if she wants any peace isn't the answer. The way she's been handling it, expecting him to make all the changes and just deal with the behavior, isn't the answer either, and I never said that it was.

So what is your suggestion for him to pitch MB in a fashion that his will will not shoot it down like she's already shot down his complaints?

How does he approach her in a fashion that will not be shot down, given she's already demonstrated by her actions that she's not willing to negotiate in good faith, a key requirement of MB?

So far, I don't see any evidence that she's willing to even listen to him, so what good is it for him to present MB if she is unwilling to even accept that he has a valid complaint?

Until she is willing to treat his complaint as valid, everything here is an academic exercise.

Well, I just went back and reread all of Neuschawanstein's posts, and I can't find anything indicating that he's actually attempted to introduce his wife to MB or MB concepts. The only book he mentions that they have read together is "The Five Love Languages." At this point, I have no reason to believe that his wife wouldn't be willing to take a look at the site or read some of Dr. Harley's books. So, I would suggest that he start there and give it a try. We've already given him several suggestions on which books to start with.

She has already rejected him when he brought the complaint. Bringing a complaint to your wife is part of MB. She attacked him instead of negotiating to resolve the issue. Therefore, she is already rejecting MB and expecting he get over his annoyance, rather than addressing that annoyance.

I predict that if he invites her to read this stuff, she'll still tell him he's the problem. I hope I'm wrong, but I think it's going to take more than an invitation given she already rejects the premise that his feelings of being annoyed are valid.

She went defensive, which certainly is not MB behavior, nor does it signal a willingness to POJA let alone even listen to his concerns.

You're expecting her to adhere to MB standards when she doesn't even know what those standards are? How is that possible? How can she be willing to POJA if she doesn't even know what POJA is? Of course she isn't willing right now. She doesn't have the tools to work with.

Also, we don't know how he is presenting these complaints. From what I've heard on here, his delivery seems to involve plenty of LB's and AO's, and few mothers would respond positively in a situation where they feel as though their child is being attacked. From his original post, I do not get the impression that the OP is following MB principles himself when he is presenting these complaints, and he has no excuse, since he has the tools to work with.

I attribute the LBs to being rejected when the issue was initially raised respectfully. The LB is the natural progression when respectful requests go ignored or rejected.

One cannot assume the initial approach was in error.

Yet none of that addresses the fact that he has a complaint that is still not even accepted as valid by his wife. MB or no MB, nothing will happen until she accepts his complaint as a valid complaint.

I've indicated what I think he should say, that he's not willing to tolerate additional invalidation of his complaints. She can choose to invalidate his complaints and risk ending the marriage by her unwillingness to work together, or she can accept that his complaint is valid and they will work together to find a solution that is mutually acceptable.

Further, tolerating this behavior is not on the list of acceptable solutions, so make it clear he will not ever find the behavior tolerable. So if she's expecting him to change his mind and find the behavior tolerable, then she's not negotiating in good faith.

If she wants a good marriage, she has to be his partner, put him before the child and address the issue in a fashion they both will agree upon and follow through.

Oh no, I agree with you 100% that he shouldn't tolerate it. If he does, their marriage is headed for disaster. But they need to find a more effective way of managing such conflicts that don't damage their marriage.

Believe me, the delivery is VERY IMPORTANT when a woman feels someone is going after her child. If she feels like her child is being attacked, she will go into KILL MODE rather than listening to his valid complaints. That is why they need to follow the guidelines in this program and become skilled at negotiating solutions that satisfy them BOTH.

I am not dismissing his valid complaints at all. But his delivery will never get what he wants. There is a much better way that would result in him getting what he wants in a way that restores the love in the marriage.

Let me tell ya, if he goes to her and says "you shape up that brat or I am out!" He will probably be out, because that will put her right in TIGER mode. When the mother goes into tiger mode, you are going to get killed.


But if it was presented to her in way that she stood to benefit and would not be forced to do something that harmed her child, it would go over much better.

If I were him, I would get phone coaching with the Harleys and let them sell both of them on the benefits of POJA. If they understand it correctly, they will be more willing to learn to negotiate in ways that make both happy.

But I suspect he's tried that and found it is ineffective. After all, who would START with the DJ or AO. Most folks start using a respectful request. But when that request is summarly dismissed as not being valid, one's taker resorts to Love Busters.

So if this was the sequence of events, why would he revert to actions that were ineffective before?

So if making a respectful request and inviting her into a discussion about the unacceptable behavior resulted in her defending the child, expecting him to change his expectations and so forth, then what reason does he have to believe that failed approach will now work?