Welcome to the
Marriage Builders® Discussion Forum

This is a community where people come in search of marriage related support, answers, or encouragement. Also, information about the Marriage Builders principles can be found in the books available for sale in the Marriage Builders® Bookstore.
If you would like to join our guidance forum, please read the Announcement Forum for instructions, rules, & guidelines.
The members of this community are peers and not professionals. Professional coaching is available by clicking on the link titled Coaching Center at the top of this page.
We trust that you will find the Marriage Builders® Discussion Forum to be a helpful resource for you. We look forward to your participation.
Once you have reviewed all the FAQ, tech support and announcement information, if you still have problems that are not addressed, please e-mail the administrators at mbrestored@gmail.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,912
_
Member
Member
_ Offline
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,912
Steve,<P>I agree that picking and chosing from incompatible things is a risky enterprise. I don't find a huge incompatibility between most of the books that I have read. I do think that Dobson is onto something when he says that the real root is lack of respect. That is what I feel in my situation. I have been so "nice" and accomodating to my W during our entire marriage, that she doesn't respect me. She came to believe that she can do whatever she wants and it doesn't make any difference to me. She has even said "You treat me the same no matter what I do". This was a complaint! I think the concept of respect per-se is not emphasized by the Harleys, and I think it IS vital. Since I was already doing pretty much everything my W asked of me - that is, trying vigorously to meet her needs without paying attention to mine, Plan A basicly meant "no change". As has been so often noted, if you keep doing the same thing, you keep getting the same result. In my case, and perhaps in the case of other overly-compliant husbands, the change required NOT trying to please my W all the time. This seems counter-intuitive, but stragely enough it seems to work for me. The other key thing about the Dobson approach is the freedom of the withdrawing spouse. The betrayed or abandoned spouse has to give up all activities designed to entrap or hold the withdrawing spouse. These techniques include guilt, blame, begging, etc. I don't have the whole answer - even for myself, but in my case, Plan A was no plan at all - since it was essentially what I have always done. You might say, that maybe I really wasn't doing plan a - and maybe you are right - but I was trying to - and if trying as hard as I could I wasn't doing it, I needed to try something else.<P>I don't think the Dobson approach is incompatible with Plan A. Giving freedom is not the same as rejecting. Plan B rejects the betraying or withdrawn spouse (more or less). That is not what Dobson advocates - at least as I understand it. The letter that he recommends (which I didn't use) plainly says "I love you and want to save our marriage" amongst other things. It leaves the door open.<P>I didn't use the Dobson concept of "precipitating a crisis". I thought about it and couldn't really find what crisis would be appropriate in our case. Maybe some other people have done that and can comment on it.<P>Although, I think I mostly have applied the Harlys' approach. I have some philisophical/practical problems with POJA - which I could detail in another post if you are interested.<P>Again, I appologize to the originator of this thread - who had real, personal issues to discuss - which I have now forgotten and am probably not helping. Maybe we should go make our own thread, but I'm afraid this one is already ruined and we might as well continue here.<P>-AD

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,912
_
Member
Member
_ Offline
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,912
Steve,<P>I continue to post on Good Man's thread - since he has a new one anyway.<P>I am enjoying this discussion, and I hope you will be back to read and comment.<P>I have been thinking today about what you said about combining incompatible approaches. I don't think there are fundamental incompatibilities between the Harley's and Dobson - although there are some. In Plan A, Harleys say to try to meet your spouses needs. Period. But, that doesn't address the issue of respect. Now POJA is actually the "respect" part of the Harley's general theory. But, in Plan A, I'm guessing that most folks toss out POJA, because of the J - Joint - in the thing. In Plan A, it doesn't really seem that the two parties are doing anything "jointly" - so the offended spouse, the one who is applying the "plan A", having beeen told to not expect his needs to be met, does things which he does not enthusiasticly agree with - to try to please the withdrawn spouse - while at the same time, the withdrawn spouse does whatever he or she wants to do. So, POJA is out - and respect is out. The withdrawn spouse is acting without regard - without respect for the needs of the other, and the betrayed or abandoned spouse is doing everyting to please the withdrawn spouse without regard for his/her own needs. So, there is no respect being shown to the betrayed or abandoned spouse. This is bad.<P>What is POJA? (Policy of Joint Agreement) and how can we apply it when both spouses aren't playing by the rules? First of all, the policy when applied to itself may result in it not being applied at all. That is, if one spouse says "I don't agree to live by POJA", then according to the policy itself, the other spouse cannot apply it. The problem with POJA is the J - the Joint aspect of it. It can only be applied by COOPERATING spouses. If one spouse doesn't agree to live by POJA (as in my case - my W does not), you are apparently stuck. The spouse who wants to live by POJA ends up wanting to change his spouse - to change him or her so that he or she will agree to live by POJA. This may break down the whole process.<P>But again: What is POJA? I think that POJA can simply be divided into two individual sets of boundaries. That is, it is the combination of two people applying their own boundaries. So, why try to use POJA - when we can simply choose to live within boundaries (as in "Boundaries in Marriage" - by Cloud and Townsend)? I think that the situation becomes much clearer when we simply look at one side of it - our side - and set and live within our boundaries. Boundaries are not something we set on others - but on ourselves. They determine what we will enthusiastically agree with. Two people, living within boundaries (with each other) is equivalent to one couple living with POJA. It is approximately the same. But, it is easier to apply - especially when one party does not subscribe to POJA.<P>In addition to being roughly equivalent to POJA, the boundaries approach makes decision making less situational. Trying to apply POJA, we might think "I agree to do this because I know it will please my wife." OR "I will agree to do this because I know my husband will blow up if I don't". We think we have enthusiastic agreement because we feel like we agreed - but we agreed for the wrong reasons - in a situational way. On the other hand, a boundary we set on ourself can be decided in advance - so no matter what the situation, we can simply apply it - saying "no" to things that we otherwise might have agreed to for the wrong reasons - that we would have said "yes" to, but still resented.<P>Now, POJA CAN BE applied unilaterally. One spouse, who subscribes to POJA, can say "I will not do anything to which my spouse does not enthusiasticly agree, and I will not do anything to which I do not enthusiasticly agree." This, I believe is the equivalent of one person setting boundaries. But, since we have the word "joint" in there, most people will not try this - though I believe it is still useful.<P>So, in summary, I find no discrepancy between the boundaries approach and the POJA approach - and I believe the boundaries approach serves us better in plan A, where there is not likely to be any cooperation - no "joint" agreement - and also serves us better when our spouse does not in general subscribe to POJA.<P>Enough for now...<P>Over to you, Steve - or to anyone else who wants to comment.<P>Appolgies again to "A Good Man" for taking over his thread.<P>-AD

Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 654
S
Member
Member
S Offline
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 654
AD,<P>I have relatives in town and have to get up early, so this may be a quick, but not too well thought out reply.<P>I suspect that most approaches that are fairly successful will have a lot of core similarities--in underlying philosophy if not in exact tactics. It won't solve every case, but I suspect that an approach that doesn't result in the BS meeting ENs and avoiding LBs is usually not going to work. Now sometimes the BS instinctively "Plan As"--I did. But even if two or more approaches are compatible, most BSs seem to be in shock and to have a great difficulty in following any plan with consistency. Since the WS is usually looking for change from the BS before they will commit to working on the marriage again, and is reluctant to believe in any changes in the BS, such waffling tends to be disastrous.<P>So my feeling is that most BSs are best served by finding one approach that makes sense to them, really learning it, and trying to apply it consistently for some time. Over time, if they add helpful aspects of other approaches this may be good. However, as I say, just implementing one plan under extreme stress is usually challenge enough in the short term. When I see people who come here and don't bother to read the materials, but just ask a bunch of anonymous strangers how to solve the greatest crisis of their lives I think that they are doing themselves a great disservice. OTOH, if they show that they've read and understood the basic materials and question their usefulness in their particular case, perhaps I can buy that.<P>Do you think that your spouse interpreted your willingness to let her do anything she wanted as a lack of caring (ie indifference) instead of love? Possibly there are cultural or FOO issues that cause her to feel that way. Also, women often admire strength in a man, and perhaps she interpreted it as weakness. I sometimes think that the EN of admiration can involve the need to both give and receive it...perhaps tying into your comments about respect.<P>You may be right in that Dobson's approach may not be that incompatible with Plan A. However, if blindly applied without an understanding of Plan A I suspect that the result would not be good unless the person was already doing Plan A type behaviors.<P>BTW, couldn't "opening the cage" just be interpreted by your wife as being just another case where you're letting her do whatever she wants?<P>Last, on POJA...while at times it may produce similar results as mutual boundaries, I think that it goes much further. Boundaries to me say that I'm in control of me and won't cede that to improper control from another. POJA says that I give up some control to my spouse and she to me, that we negotiate shared control over both our lives.<P>I've just read over what you wrote quickly...it's late and I don't have time to give it a lot of thought, so maybe I didn't address exactly what you said.<P>My day tomorrow is probably shot as far as MB forums time, but I'll try to check, maybe tomorrow night. Hopefully my reply hasn't been too rambling.<P>Gotta go,<P>Steve

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,912
_
Member
Member
_ Offline
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,912
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by StillHers:<BR><B><BR>I suspect that most approaches that are fairly successful will have a lot of core similarities--in underlying philosophy if not in exact tactics. It won't solve every case, but I suspect that an approach that doesn't result in the BS meeting ENs and avoiding LBs is usually not going to work.<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I agree completely. I think the Harleys have got that right.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B><BR>So my feeling is that most BSs are best served by finding one approach that makes sense to them, really learning it, and trying to apply it consistently for some time. Over time, if they add helpful aspects of other approaches this may be good. However, as I say, just implementing one plan under extreme stress is usually challenge enough in the short term.<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Again. I agree. It is better to have a simple aproach that is well understood and apply it consistently, than to every day read a new book and try to do that. On the other hand, after giving the system some time to work (*this, I realized is a breach of orthodoxy which I will address later), you might try another approach. Hence, plan a, then Plan B.<P>*The "breach of orthodoxy" is to admit that our goal is to save the marriage rather than to improve ourselves.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B><BR>When I see people who come here and don't bother to read the materials, but just ask a bunch of anonymous strangers how to solve the greatest crisis of their lives I think that they are doing themselves a great disservice.<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>AMEN BROTHER! It is amazing and scary (to me when posting) that people will take the advice of strangers with no particular qualifications on matter of the highest importance simple because they are not willing to SELL THEIR CAR if they have to to afford professional counseling. It's like they are inviting their brother-in-law, who's "pretty good with his hands", to do brain surgery.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B><BR>Do you think that your spouse interpreted your willingness to let her do anything she wanted as a lack of caring (ie indifference) instead of love?<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>No. I don't think so, but on the other hand, that may not be entirely bad - if respect is the issue. To say "I don't have to have you to live", is to say "I respect myself to know that there are some things I can't live with."<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B><BR>Possibly there are cultural or FOO issues that cause her to feel that way.<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>What is FOO?<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B>Also, women often admire strength in a man, and perhaps she interpreted it as weakness.<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Maybe. And maybe she was right. [Linked Image from marriagebuilders.com]<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B><BR>BTW, couldn't "opening the cage" just be interpreted by your wife as being just another case where you're letting her do whatever she wants?<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Not if it is coupled with the addition of boundaries where they have been absent. That is, I tell her, in effect, "you are free, but if you want to live with me, here is what I expect. You choose." This most likely increases respect. In the case of an affair, Dobson recommends a letter - and since I didn't use it, I can't remember - but I think that part of it is saying this. Basicly saying "choose between us."<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><B><BR>Last, on POJA...while at times it may produce similar results as mutual boundaries, I think that it goes much further. Boundaries to me say that I'm in control of me and won't cede that to improper control from another. POJA says that I give up some control to my spouse and she to me, that we negotiate shared control over both our lives.<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Can you give some examples of how this differs from boundaries?<P>Thanks Steve for this interesting discussion.<P>I too, will be out of pocket for a couple of days. Probably I'll be back on Tuesday night.<P>-AD<BR>

Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 654
S
Member
Member
S Offline
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 654
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AbandonedDad:<BR><B>What is FOO?<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Family of Origin, ie the family in which a person grew up.<P>You said re "opening the cage" being interpreted as weakness:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><BR><B>Not if it is coupled with the addition of boundaries where they have been absent. That is, I tell her, in effect, "you are free, but if you want to live with me, here is what I expect. You choose." This most likely increases respect. In the case of an affair, Dobson recommends a letter - and since I didn't use it, I can't remember - but I think that part of it is saying this. Basicly saying "choose between us."<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Sounds to me like Plan B, but without the no-contact aspect.<P>Your thoughts on trying to apply POJA in a unilateral situation (ie Plan A) are interesting and do make sense to me. However, in the true POJA, with both partners participating, I think it goes beyond boundaries. I can accept something that I was not enthusiastic about if I get something in return that makes me enthusiastic about the agreement as a whole.<P>Because of this I am happy and feel that my partner cares for me, and am more willing to do things for her that I wouldn't otherwise do because I become more in love with her. I don't see this process of negotiation as being entirely about boundaries, since I become more flexible about mine in order to get other things that I want.<P>Unilateral POJA, like Plan A, is good for a time, but fails eventually since it only takes care of the needs of one of the parties. Humans can only keep up unconditional love for so long, then their love disappears. It's good to try, but long term there must be both give and take by both parties.<P>The problem with trying to POJA in Plan A is that your spouse must want something from you badly enough to negotiate. In addition, if you can somehow force them to negotiate when they really don't want to it will create resentment.<P>So, I don't think that boundaries alone can fully describe POJA as described by Harley, but it seems like a way that might be helpful in trying to apply as much of POJA type behavior as possible to a Plan A situation.<P>Very thought provoking, AD.<P>Best to you,<P>Steve

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,912
_
Member
Member
_ Offline
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,912
Steve,<P>Thanks for the comments.<P>OK FOO - my W's FOO was quite complicated - since she is adopted and before that experienced rather extreme circumstances. She had at least 2 FOO's - not counting the orphanage experience.<P>Well. I'm about done on this topic.<BR>Thanks for the discussion.<P>-AD<P>

Page 3 of 3 1 2 3

Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Search
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 649 guests, and 84 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
litchming, scrushe, Carolina Wilson, Lokire, vivian alva
72,031 Registered Users
Latest Posts
Three Times A Charm
by Vallation - 07/24/25 11:54 PM
How important is it to get the whole story?
by still seeking - 07/24/25 01:29 AM
Annulment reconsideration help
by abrrba - 07/21/25 03:05 PM
Help: I Don't Like Being Around My Wife
by abrrba - 07/21/25 03:01 PM
Following Ex-Wifes Nursing Schedule?
by Roger Beach - 07/16/25 04:21 AM
My wife wants a separation
by Roger Beach - 07/16/25 04:20 AM
Forum Statistics
Forums67
Topics133,625
Posts2,323,524
Members72,031
Most Online6,102
Jul 3rd, 2025
Building Marriages That Last A Lifetime
Copyright © 2025, Marriage Builders, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Site Navigation
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 8.0.0