That explains a lot.

Please make up your mind on whether we are talking about Waywards, or we are talking about women obsessed with their children.

Same thing, a woman obsessed with her children is an addicted wayward.

Dr Harley's program is born from his work with addicts. I don't have to listen to the radio show to be familiar with the program. After all, how did people become educated about his program before the radio show?

I was educated by his son, Steve Harley. So unless you are telling me Steve Harley is not familiar, nor qualified to present the program, I'd like the benefit of the doubt when it comes to knowing and understanding the program.

I believe you will be hard pressed to find many woman who are so "addicted" to their children that they will not respond to their husband following this program. I have yet to see Dr. Harley advise men to "break the addiction" in these cases.

His plan works. If a husband unilaterally follows this plan, he will more than likely win his wife over -- even a wife obsessed with her children over the husband.

[Wrong.

Dr. Harley talks about a lot of these things that he doesn't elsewhere. If you are not listening to the show, your education is lacking.


So, you talked to Steve Harley about whether or not wives obsessed with their children are the same as WW?

This is true, AFTER the addiction is broken. The betrayed husband, or the emotionally abandoned and shut out husband cannot win over a wife who refuses to allow him to make deposits.

Plan A, you meet needs, eliminate love busters and insist the affair is ended. You cannot expect to have your needs met during the phase. You cannot have any expectations. Just a condition, that the affair ends and no-contact is established.

If that isn't the case, then plan B. You stop meeting needs and separate from the spouse. They have to choose, the addiction or you. That's the case if it's drugs, alcohol, putting the kids first, or a lover. In all cases, if they don't respond to plan A, you move to plan B.

The betrayed spouse sets the standard, me or the addiction, there is not enough room in the marriage for both and you will not take a back seat to the object of her addictive behavior.

You then wait. She hits rock bottom with the addictions and wants you back, or she believes her life is better without you, and moves on.

Since society seems to enable WW (you go girl, you deserve better than being a stay at home mom, supported by some man) seems like more and more are choosing this option over their husbands.

Few men can make effective deposits in such an environment. Since these women are shielded from the consequences of their behavior, it continues. Unfaithful wives don't lose custody of their kids due to their infidelity. They are almost guaranteed custody if they were stay at home moms.

I'd agree men would have an easier time if WW's had to suffer the full consequences of their choices. But they don't. They get to keep the kids, and keep extracting money from the husband they betrayed, all supported by the courts who refuse to allow details of marital misconduct in the courtroom.

If a man is unfaithful, he loses half. If is wife is unfaithful, he also loses half.

The betrayed husband is treated just exactly like the unfaithful husband in family court.

There is something seriously wrong here.

That is *YOUR* assumption, not mine. I made no such statement or even implied such a thing.

Here's some actual snippets from that article (emphasis mine):

"in that state of mind, you were both willing to do whatever it took to meet each other's emotional needs."

"Aversions can be created in association with anything we do. Unpleasant classroom experiences can create "school phobia," something many children have great difficulty overcoming. An automobile accident can leave people with a fear of driving. Even shopping for groceries can raise anxiety in people who have had a bad grocery shopping experience."

One of the things I appreciate about this article is the fact that he only speaks in absolutes when necessary.

Notice that the word **both** indicates that it is not necessarily just one spouse doing this, it is two. Notice also in regards to aversion he uses the word *can*. It is a qualifier. It is not necessarily ALWAYS the case. It is true that life simply overwhelms us at times and due to responsibilities we re-prioritize. A wife may devote all her time to the kids and neglect her husband. If her EN for conversation shifts from them to the kids for instance, and his EN for conversation about *them* stays the same, there is a disjunct. She may have an aversion to sex because of the demands of children and maybe finances, etc... I don't think this is abnormal when couples are in those years. The trick is maintaining communication to mutually help each other and meet those needs.

Now a spouse may simply not receive what is being offered to them. We see that here all the time. The one could do everything right and the other just not want it.

CV

OK, I'd like a link to where husbands are more successful than wives at winning unfaithful spouses back to the marriage.

Steve Harley didn't say it. I simply pointed out the similarities. I have a mind as well, and can build on what Dr Harley has taught, that affairs are addictions. If that is the case, then it's reasonable that other behaviors can also be addictive.

Therefore, it stands to reason that some can be addicted to putting her children before her husband. She can be addicted to being a mother in such a way that she ignores everything else in her life.

Just as one can be addicted to drugs, alcohol, a job, power, sex, shopping, or any activity they take pleasure in, they can just as easily be addicted to their role as a parent.

You can accept that it CAN (not is in all cases, but can) be as addictive and destructive as any other behavior I've mentioned.

I don't have to hear it from Dr Harley or Steve Harley to put together the pieces and see the similar nature of the damage such behaviors can cause.

Dr Harley says that quite often on his radio show. I think he said it yesterday. Or maybe it was Friday, I can't remember. But it was very recent. And keep in mind, that Dr Harley is the mastermind behind Marriage Builders. He is the psychologist and he is the one with the insight who developed this program.

Maybe I should have done some googling myself! My apologies for lumping you guys in there!

CV

The aversion comes from emotional DETACHMENT, whatever the cause. And ofen, the couple is not even aware they are doing it. They don't UNDERSTAND what causes emotional detachment.

For example, I became very sexually averse in my last marriage because I created an emotional detachment. And how did I do that? I fostered a completely separate lifestyle. I had my own life and he had his. I thought it was healthy to live like this. My husband did not like it, but I insisted this was good for us so we "would be attached at the hip."

What it did was cause an emotional detachment that made me sexually averse.

If I remember right, Steve Harley was not aware of your wife's affair at the time, and might have advised you differently if he had known.

I find this comparison offensive.

No worries. It's a common mistake.

Yet my XWW to this day feels no guilt. In fact, even though she admitted to sleeping with the OM during questioning in preparation for the divorce trial, just weeks ago, when I suggested that the behavior that troubles her when presented by our child is the very same behavior she used when she had her affair, she denies it was an affair.

Not one bit of guilt, just blame shift. She had the affair, but somehow it was my fault. Or it wasn't an affair. The behavior was acceptable when she was doing it to me, but now that our daughter is doing the very same thing to her, all of the sudden it's a problem.

Marriage Builders may be the best option out there. But it only works if the wayward spouse ends the affair and opens up the love bank to the betrayed spouse trying to make deposits.

It's more dependent on the wayward behavior ending. Even Dr Harley says the first objective is to end the affair. If that doesn't happen, things don't get better. No amount of trying to make deposits matter if the addictive, wayward behavior doesn't end.

I find it nonsensical.

And I find it offensive to blame a BH for the choices his wife makes. Yet folks here have no problem with that.

I find it offensive that if a BH doesn't win his wife back, then he must have been doing the program wrong.

I find it offensive that if someone doesn't listen to the radio program, they can't possibly understand the MB program.

I find it offensive that WW's typically don't believe their affairs are their fault. Yet Dr Harley tells BH's not to expect their WW's to apologize.

An addict is an addict, be it addicted to video games, illicit sex, romance novels, porn, or parenting. It can be addiction. If someone is into anything to the exclusion of their spouse, it's likely an unhealthy addiction that will destroy their marriage. That includes being addicted to motherhood.

He said on Monday's show that he is harder on husbands than on wives! And I think he offered some explanation of why that is, but I'd have to go back and relisten.

I can testify he's definitely been hard on me!

Who in the world said any of that?