I've always worked under the assumption that a marriage ends when the divorce is final.

No dating until then, no starting relationships until the divorce is FINAL.

And I've always had the belief that this is when the marriage is OVER. And its the point where the two former spouses are exactly that...EX-whatevers...with no allegiance or committments or responsibilities to each other beyond whatever legally is determined by the courts.

Once the divorce is final, neither 'owe' each other anything further...emotionally, physically, whatever. Financially perhaps, determined by the courts. But relationship-wise...nothing.

That's my take...but I've seen other posters that appear to believe differently, so I'm curious...

...At what point DO they become "ex's" in every sense of the word?

I agree with you. Until the divorce is final, you are still husband and wife whether separated or in the process of getting divorced. If spouses are dating or sleeping with other people during the course of the divorce, they are committing adultery. Period.

Is it adultery if they're in a relationship with someone after they're divorced? If they start a relationship with someone that they didn't know in any fashion when they were married?

It depends on who's definition.

According to the christian definition, an affair-marriage is adultery, but you are pre-forgiven so it isn't.

On this board, which is probably a reflection of legalities in most of the US states, you are an EX upon divorce. In Canada, the division of property, wealth, child custody and visitation etc., is done in the separation agreement, which can take place before, during or after the divorce. The divorce is merely a certificate that says you can get remarried. So here, most people consider legally separated the same as people on this BB consider divorced. In fact, many people never divorce and live for decades legally separated. In this regard, my former spouse is an EX.

For the purposes of not getting everybody's knickers in a twist on this BB I refer to him as Wstbx, even though how soon he actually files for divorce is a crap shoot (I don't need a D as I'm not getting married any time soon).

As for your second question, if you are divorced, you can't be committing adultery since you have no spouse. Unless whoever you are having a relationship with is married, then it's adultery.

I can also add that WstbxH and OW are legally recognized as commonlaw spouses, though neither are divorces from their "stbx's". They filed their taxes this way, they claim each other's benefits this way, they apply for loans this way, they are on each other's life insurance this way and they are legally considered each other's next of kin. So if I'm not an ex, then what am I?

An inconvenience?

Owl, I generally agree with you. I will only date women who are divorced, widowed or never married. I don't want to wander into the grey area of "going through divorce and my marriage is dead". Maybe it is dead or on life support, but I don't want to be the guy who helps push it into the grave.

However, I can see one exception to this rule. This is what happened to an acquaintance of mine, and I know it has also happened to other people on MB. His wife left him for another man. The OM had a lot of money and was able to finance a brutal legal fight against the betrayed husband. The goal was to get as much as possible and show him NO MERCY WHATSOVEVER! The WW was living with her wealthy OM and having a great time. Her lawyer was using every trick in the book to ruin the betrayed husband. False accusations of spousal abuse, false accusations of child abuse, witch hunts for 'hidden' assets, unnecessary disruptions at his workplace, etc.

He was in court three times to prove that he did not molest his kids and he should be allowed to see them unsupervised. That alone took over six months. My point is that his divorce went on for almost three years. During that time WW was with her wealthy OM, living well, traveling, etc. In that case I can cut the poor betrayed husband some slack and allow him to see other women. (What woman would want to be involved in that mess is another story. Either a fool or a saint.) The entire goal of WW was to stretch the divorce out as long as possible, get as much as she could, and make him suffer, suffer, suffer.

And please don't tell me that this will catch up with her. It has been over four years. She and the OM are still living together, still having a great time, and still firing the occasional legal potshot at the ex husband.

It's not even that simple here in the States, Tabby. It really depends on the state (if we're talking about legality). Here in Texas, there is no such thing as a legal separation. Once a spouse files for D and the other spouse is served, both people fall under the jurisdiction of the court and temporary orders are put into place, but these orders are not an LSA. They merely outline and address what both parties can and cannot do w/re to the children and assets. The D can take months or even years to occur depending on the docket.

My attorney informed me (I did not ask) that I wanted to, I could pursue another relationship without legal jeopardy. However, he did advise against it on a personal level.

Anyway, I started referring to the ex as "the ex" as soon as she moved out in July of 07. I determined at that point that there would be no reconciliation and that the M was nothing but a legal technicality. I look back now and regard the M as over in April of 07 since that's when she took off her ring and moved out of the bedroom.

Legally, in Louisiana and probably everywhere else, once the divorce is petitioned and the other party is served you are free to do whatever you want and it's not considered adultry. (My female attorney told me this)(not in those words)

Spiritually is a whole other story that could be debated till the EX's come home. I know in the Catholic Church any SF short of getting the marriage anulled and remarrying in the church is considered adultry. Basically any SF outside of church marriage is adultry. Technically, according to the church, I am still married so I can have all the SF I want with EXWW and I'm covered.

Do I believe this

He11 no! and I'm a church going Catholic

It costs money that I don't have to get my marriage anulled. So I'm stuck religiously. I disagree whole heartedly with the church on this.

I think most people have the same basic defenition of what is adultry, but if you got down to technicalities I think you'd be suprised at the difference in peoples beliefs

I've been split for a few years and divorced since May, I'm not currently dating, but am starting to put it out there, so this is actually in play for me right now.

It sucks, it really sucks. So I find myself playing golf more than looking for dates.

same here

If I met a woman tha was seperated I would probably just tell her to call me when the divorce was final and not a day before, which I'm sure would be the end of that.

Between legalities and religious differences, it's no wonder there's so much confusion. Personally, I think you know in your heart based on your own upbringing and beliefs and that's going to be different for everyone. One thing I have trouble understanding is the religious viewpoint that you are married by the church, yet you are not divorced until the state says you are, even if that takes years. I agree with Seabird - looking back I became an EX the day he asked for the divorce.

As far as being legally free to do whatever you want, marital status has nothing to do with that anyway. XH/wstbxH was legally free to have his A at any time, any place, in any capacity and it wouldn't have made a bit of difference. It's not against the law to commit adultery here.

Oh, that's a GOOD one!!!!!!

Charlotte

It's not against the law here either, no matter how arcane Texas family law is (from a father's rights perspective anyway). However, it can affect the outcome of a custody battle. I have a friend whose XW left him for an OM just after she had their first and only child. My friend had to spend some money, but he won primary conservator status largely based on her adulterous actions.

I think most courts recognize that WSs probably aren't going to be candidates for Parent of the Year.

Unfortunately, that's not the case here. Here they still strongly favour the woman regardless of whether she's an adulteress or not. In fact, you are not permitted to mention adultery in court when deciding custody. Not only that, they don't factor in the OM's income when determining CS. So for the example described above of the WW who moved in with a wealthy OM who financed an expensive and painful legal battle against the BH, the BH is STILL legally obliged to pay CS - even after the D and WW and OM get married.

(if you haven't noticed, I'm bitter about this)

OK, lets look at this from an infidelity perspective.

If a M has an affair. Ends the affair. Divorces his wife (or is divorced, either way) and moves on. Then begins dating someone else...is that person an OW?

And...where do the feelings of the BW come into that? Is it a new affair if the BW had no interest in rebuilding the marriage? Or would it be a second affair only if she still wanted to reconcile, regardless of the divorce?

To me, an affair involves betrayal of the vows of exclusivity. Once a marriage is dissolved, so are those vows. I don't see how it's "cheating" when you start a new relationship after divorce. Gawd, if it were, we are all cheaters on this board...

AGG

No. The relationship is post-D and didn't begin until after the D was final if I understand the scenario right.


Is this all hypothetical Owl? These scenarios are sounding awfully complex and intricate. Like, "If the moon is in it's 3rd phase, and it's an odd numbered year, and the D occurred on an even numbered day...".

LOL! Sorry, I'm not trying to make fun of you... Just trying to illustrate my point with a little tongue in cheek humor.

No. Other than the fact that she's just an"other woman" that he's dating. She's not an affair partner.


Once divorced, the BW's feelings have nothing to do with whether the above scenario is defined as an affair because she is no longer a BW, but an XW.

Thanks for the replies.

I asked the question based on my previous experience on this board.

An old poster (who was here as an FWW at the time) returned to this forum recently asking questions about issues she was having dating a man she'd met after the divorce was final with her FBH.

She was accused of being in a new affair, and told to go back to her divorced husband. No mention had been made by her at any point as to whether or not her FBH had any desire to reconcile with her or not in her posts.

I'm trying to understand the mindset behind that advice. I've always been of the same opinion as others on this thread have provided...once the d is final...that's the end of the marriage.

I've found (and have little patience for) many people on this board who are VERY dogmatic in their approach to marriage and relationships. They frame everything around their singular experience and will go to great lengths to make sure that everyone else does what they think their own WS should have done.

I think I know which thread you are talking about though, and there was also something about that FWW that didn't pass the smell test IMO.

BetrayedCajun, you sure have that right. I had several divorcing (but my marriage is dead) women contact me after I placed an online ad. I very politely declined to continue the conversation but invited them to contact me when the divorce was final. Never heard a thing, not even an acknowledgment of my reply. And I thought is was we men who were supposed to be the ones messing around while the little woman was at home with the kids. Wait a minute! My ex was shagging her OM, while I stayed home with the kids!

Same here. The times they are a changin

My opinion is once the marriage vows/covenant is broken, a decision is made to either:

Require restitution
Reconcile with your spouse
Disolve the marriage

Once the firm decision is made in the BS heart to dissolve the marriage, I think the marriage is done at that point. The marriage covenant was already broken and to me, what matters is in your heart and not on a piece of govt paper

Saying you are married until the divorce is final is admirable, but not required, I believe. Most of don't owe that respect for our ex spouses anyhow since they violated us like no one else could...

sorry I am repling to your post, but I m unable to find the way to post an original one without repling to someone. sorry!!
my husand just told me he wants to separate next june when our son will graduate from high school. he said he plans to move to another country then and find a job there. he will be faithful to me for this remaining year and will support me financially for the year. he said we are not compatible and that he cares for me however he can't think of spending the rest of his life with me. he stayed in the relationship only for our son.
he now went camping on his own for 4 days. he says he looks forward to some time for himself and to meet other people. of course this means other women as well, maybe a one night stand..or similar. I think this is a mid-life crisis. i am willing to give him all the space, i love him and he is my husband for better or worse, however i am very sad now and welcome some words of support
thank you

Agreed.

In Canada, we are not able to file for divorce until after living alone and separate lives for a minimum of ONE year. Even then, once divorce is filed (let's say you do it exactly one year from being separated) it takes 30 days for an answer to be filed, and then on top of that, three or more months for the courts to hear the case. I have not been in close contact with my STBXWH in about 17 months. He filed for divorce after the one year separation in March of this year, and I am still waiting for the divorce to be final.

I do not think it is unreasonable for me to have moved on in this time. We had no children to fight for custody of, and had no reason to even contact one another. I have not seen him in a year and have no idea where he is even living. (it had been with OW)

I am involved in a very loving relationship with the most wonderful man I have ever known. I am in no way an adulteress. My marriage ended in June of 2007 when I decided that no matter what the outcome, I would not take me WH back. I deserved better, and could never be with a man who would go out of his way to hurt me.

Flame me all you will, but I have never been so happy in my life, and yes, as far as the courts are concerned, there is a piece of paper out there that says I am still married (and still waiting for divorce to be finalized)

I agree so long as the decision if FIRM & FINAL.

No flames from me. I think you are right.

I also think that it has a double standard too.

Rules are different for the BS than they are for the WS.

For instance...

A BS files for separation...and starts divorce proceedings because their spouse is wayward.

The STBX-WS dumps the OP...or the affair simply ends.

The BS is adamant that there is NO recovery...wouldn't have 'em back for all the tea in China....no way...no how...yada yada yada. They proceed with everything needed for the divorce to be granted.

The STBX-WS starts seeing someone else...and a baby is conceived.

By this time, the divorce papers are simply a formality ...they are pending signature of the judge.


The BS wants to scream OTHER CHILD...of the relationship between the STBX and the OP.


Now..it just seems to me that it is used as a convenience in many cases.

Convenient to be a victim...

Convenient to be a BS...

Too subjective in my book.

committed

Genovffa
I would move your questions to the "General Questions II" forum as it gets much more traffic.

From my perspective of what you said below, you have 9 months or so to "Plan A" yourself to death and make the home the most inviting place for him. Going camping with him would have allowed you the opportunity to fill many EN (recreational companionship, SF, etc). Ignore what he says and concentrate on doings things to build love.

Good luck

I have been looking around a bit on how to fix my quite seriously ailed marriage and it appears that many christian based websites consider the best option to go back to your former spouse, and as someone else said the church or some people's beliefs regarding to religion can be debated foverver, but I am fairly sure that the beleif she is an adultrous is somehow based on someone's in my opinion misguided religious beliefs...

As for when a divorce is finial I think it becomes finial when you can say in your heart of hearts that you are emotionally and physically divorced from that person, for example my husband wants a divorce and if the papers were finial tomarrow I would not be divorced because I am not emotionally divorced from him.... And as some others have said paperwork can take a long time anyways...

Since mere mortals cannot see into the hearts of others we need something to show us when a person is truly single or still married. The completed divorce is that sign.

You're divorced = you are single as far as the world is concerned.

You are divorced when your spouse remarries. As a Christian, you are not divorced when things papers are filed and signed in your home state. That is a "legal divorce" and you are no longer legally married. Tax purposes really.

Spiritually and biblically, you are eternally married. That is until your spouse remarries. I know a couple who divorced and remarried, legally.

Hope this give you hope!

According to the christian rules, your bonds of marriage are broken when your spouse cheats on you and you are free to go.

And the cheating spouse is allowed to go and do it again because they are pre-forgiven.

Life, that is one of the silliest interpretations of divorce (christian or otherwise), I have ever heard.

You are telling us that if the Wayward spouse gets a divorce, then just 'messes' around with one person after another, the poor betrayed spouse is still married because the WS never remarried?

This reminds me of the time Jesus rebuked the Scribes and Pharisees for loading the people down with weighty little issues of the law and forgot the big picture.

I don't particularly care what mere mortals see or think with respect to my heart. Should I?

From a religous perspective, I was married in a church, why should some minimum wage clerk at city hall hold the power to divorce me? Because ultimately that's how it's finally accomplished. And waiting for the WS to remarry doesn't make sense according to some of the scriptures posted around here - at least in terms of the BS being free to remarry but not the WS.

From my own perspective which is not religious (no organized religion that is), I have legally signed off on an agreement that settled out our assets, debts and any other finances including tuition support for DS. Had DS been a minor, custody and visitation would have been part of that as well. I am no longer responsible for Wstbx's debts nor is he of mine. Should either one of us die suddenly, the other is no longer the next of kin. In fact, his next of kin is OW - legally in every way.

Again, this is my perspective but it's bad enough that I live in a society where one can abuse one's spouse - physically or through adultery, and still walk away with half of everything and in many cases, if you are the woman, all the custody leaving the BS feeling raped, violated and exposed for dead. I flat out refuse to wait for this same society to get around to handing that form to that high school drop out city hall clerk to tell me I'm single. Especially when the same society recognized WstbxH and OW to be married in common law anyway.

Jeez, people. Are we BS's really suckers for punishment or what?????

I couldn't agree more Tabby.

My XH left me in a heap, unable to eat, sleep, function, and at times breathe for months. I felt as though I was used, raped, and just plain ol' dirty. Knowing that he came home every night, and we were intimate (and at the same time, hours before he was with someone else)

My spouse took our marriage vows and drop kicked them. He tossed them aside for his own purposes, and didn't give a rat's [censored] how I felt.

He decided we were done and over for me, and in spite of that, thanks to the laws of my country, I am still "married" to him. Yay me! :RollieEyes:

I am glad I am not a religious soul, because some of you have me married to this guy for the rest of my life. (Which is funny because isn't adultery accepted by the RCC as a reason for divorce????)

Better than a few hours AFTER which was the deal I got double- !!!!! (I need a scratching icon - I feel itchy writing this!)

Auto,

It may sound silly to you but that is fact. I'm not taking sides, although I am pro-marriage, that is what the Bible says. There is nothing to interpret since it's in plain English and no poetic proverb. You are focusing more on the Laws under Moses where you give your wife a certificate of divorce for adultery. If you are a Christian, Jesus supercedes Moses. But anyway, I don't want to try to sound all religious since it doesn't seem to accepted here. Hosea could've gotten a divorce because his wife started prostituting but he had faith and stuck by his vows. They then reconciled and had a great life together.

Yes, adultery hurts, especially when the WS is doing it deliberatly and doesn't care. If a WS repents and is sincere about it, according to Christianity, the sin has been forgiven and the marriage can be healed. My wife and I both cheated on each other while we were separated and now fully repented. Hopefully, things will work out for us and we can reconcile. I'm staying the path even though we both cheated repeatedly.

I don't want to have a religious debate or be flamed for my beliefs please. Just accept the fact that I am pro-marriage and God has the main role in it.

Praying for you all.

Ok, I just reread the posts and need to rephrase one thing. I said "until your spouse remarries" you are still spiritually married. This is true but this goes for you too, "until you remarry someone else" you are still married.

I was assuming the poster wanted to reconcile his marriage and was asking when a divorce is a real divorce before God.

Yes, but Hosea was specifically commanded by God to stay married. That's not a general rule that all must follow, that was for the specific purpose of serving as an illustration of God's faithfulness to His people.

Lifeinshambles, I'm not attacking your religion but it has been said over and over on this board about the RCC permiting divorce of the BS upon adultery. I interpreted it to mean that when the WS commits adultery, the BS could divorce and was free to marry. I even recall a discussion about how the bible doesn't state the WS is free to marry. This seems a little different than your definition.

I believe everyone has their own personal definition of when they are an EX. Not everyone is trying to recover their M. Many are stuck in years of bureaucratic red tape. Many jurisdictions (such as mine) are different where the divorce certificate is meaningless. Many feel the WS made the decision for them. And many follow a some religious doctrine or another. So it is unfair to judge someone to your personal standards without knowing if theirs are exactly the same. Unfortunately, that's easily done on an anonymous BB.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!

Tabby,

Thank you for your kind post. I'm not knocking the RCC beliefs since I am one myself. However, most of their rules and judgements are based on the Catechism of the Catholic Church, a man made "rule book" per se. The Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit. I was baptized RC and worship at a Baptist church. I appreciate the tolerance. I was somewhat under the impression this was a BB with some Christian value since I came here from a link under a fellow Christian's article.

http://www.marriagebuilders.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/007869.html

Probably one of the most inspirational stories I've ever read on resurrecting a dead marriage.

I actually agree with the principals of CC in regards to Anullment. IMO the problem is that so many people abuse this process so the church has gotten tougher on the rules. Then there is also "human" factor of the priest. My sister was married in the church back in 1987. Her (bleeping) XH just came home one day and gave her the I don't love you, been trying for a year etc speech. That was it, done. She moved back home with us (I was still living at home with mom and dad) After the divorce she tried to get an annulment but both parties have to fill out the information. There is a way around it if the other party doesn't want to but the priest that married them said he wouldn't put the paperwork through. She ended up meeting and marrying someone else (that we all LOVE) outside the church. I don't think it was the actual church that was wrong in the procedure of annulment I think the priest was wrong. I think it was more of a personal issue because he married them and he was close with my family as we were active members for many years. (he was there from 1st communion through marriages for all of us)