In 1995 I became a "weekend dad." I was on recruiting duty for the Marine Corps, on an unforgiving assignment that required working fourteen hour days, six days a week. Sundays I'd make the trek from Olympia, WA up to Everett where my soon-to-be-ex-wife had moved. I'd strap my two-year-old daughter into the car seat and we'd set out on our weekend routine: to the park, if it was sunny and warm; to the playland at McDonald's, if it was rainy and cold. (Everett is always rainy and always cold.)
I was returning home one Sunday evening when I stopped off at a bookstore in Seattle. I stumbled upon David Blankenhorn's new book Fatherless America and started reading the chapter on "The Visiting Father." After a few pages I put the book down and left the store before anyone saw a Marine start to cry.
Over a decade later, I've once again stumbled upon Blankenhorn's book and found the passage that pierced my heart:
The evidence shows that the great majority of visiting fathers are not--indeed, cannot be--good-enough fathers to their children. The deck is stacked against them. Too much has changed, too fast; too much will continue to change. In theory, it may be possible to restructure everything else about a family while maintain fatherhood as a constant. In practice, it is hardly ever possible. Visiting fathers have lost the bases of fatherhood. As Bronislaw Malinowski put it in his classic cross-cultural analysis of parenthood, "the child is linked to both its parents by the unity of the household and by the intimacy of daily contacts." But for the Visiting Father, both aspects of this linkage are irrevocably shattered.
Tonight Mr. Blankenhorn will be in D.C. and I have the pleasure of joining him for dinner. I want to tell him how much I appreciate his book, and how he is absolutely wrong. I want to tell him that the base isn't always lost and that the linkage is not always shattered. I want to tell him that it is possible to be a "good-enough father" because I am one, I am good-enough.
But it isn't true. As much as I would like to believe otherwise, his book was devastatingly prescient about my own experience as a "visiting father." Over the past twelve years I've learned being a part-time dad is not enough. Our children always need more.
That is why I want to address a specific, narrow audience with the rest of this post. I want to address those fathers who are on the verge of leaving their families.
I want to start with a basic premise: When your first child is born, your life stops being about what you want and starts being about what they need. If you disagree, then you can stop reading now. The rest of what I say will only make sense to those who understand that this is the foundation of fatherhood.
The problem, of course, is not with your kids but with your wife. You may be having a tough time in your marriage. You may be thinking that you no longer love or can live with your wife. You may believe that divorce is the only remaining option. I don’t know your situation. I won't pretend to be able to understand what you are going through. I only know this: you're children need you at home. Your sons and your daughters need your presence. Real fathers don’t leave their children
I'm fully aware of how unpopular such a claim will be. Our society tells us that you shouldn't "stay together just for the kids." Our culture tells us that progress has made fatherhood a vestigial artifact. Our hearts tell us that we deserve to pursue our own bliss.
Such an unpopular sentiment bears repeating: When your first child is born, you're life stops being about what you want and starts being about what they need. They need you at home. If you're a man and aspire to being a dad, that is all you need to know.
If your wife is physically abusive to you and the children then you need to get out -- and take them with you. Otherwise you stick it out. If you have to stay in your marriage for one year or for eighteen, you stick it out.
What do you do if you're wife wants a divorce? You beg her to stay. You change what you have to change. You use guilt if necessary to get her to "think about what is best for the kids." If nothing else works, then you ask her to commit to six months of marital counseling before she files for divorce. If at the end of the six months she's still resolved to end the marriage you ask for another six months. You keep asking for as long as it takes. You may lose the fight eventually but if you're a man you will not give up on your family until you are bloodied and broken.
Don't kid yourself that your divorce will be different because you have a good relationship with your children's mother. My ex-wife has become a dear friend and a superb partner in parenting. Despite the peculiar circumstance which ended our marriage, I couldn't ask for a more thoughtful, accommodating woman to be my former spouse. But as hard as we work to make it easier on our daughter, everything we can do is not enough. At the end of the day, my child lives in a house where one of her parents is missing. Divorce doesn't just end a marriage, it ends a family.
By now I've lost almost everyone who has followed me this far. Most people will roll their eyes at my naiveté or skulk off to write about my idiocy. So be it. My hope is that there is at least one father left--just one--who will seriously consider what I'm saying. I hope that he will go into his child's room tonight and watch them while they sleep. I hope that he will think about what it means to his babies that he is there for them when they go to bed and that he is there for them when they wake up. Finally, I hope he'll realize he has the power to retain a precious gift that we visiting fathers have lost and that we can never get back. He still has the the opportunity to be a good father.
It is tremendously better to be part of the family in the home than to be a visiting dad. My family is very fortunate that we live together and enjoy the casual intimacy of the traditional nucleus. There are way too many visiting fathers out there.
Thank you for sharing your family's hard experience this with us. There is no greater authority than the voice of personal experience. Thank you for reminding us what is truly important.
I wish you all the best in your relationship with your daughter.
Amen.
Your advice is equally applicable to women.
Great post, Joe. I hope this reaches some fathers out there who may be on the edge of leaving and makes a difference for them and their families.
I feel I must add that there is at least 1 "visiting father" who Is good enough. And I say this from the point of view of having had one and potentially being one: The Military Father. The one where you might not see him for weeks or months or even a year or 2 on end but know that no matter where in the world he is, he is there for you. The one that just by being gone, reminds you constantly of what a man must often do because he is a man and what a father must do because there are things out there greater than himself or even his family. The father that will come home to you one day and either hug you or be hugged by you, but that in returning will teach you of the costs of being a man and a father in this world. The father who is always there even when he is not.
That "Visiting Father" is enough.
Provided neither of you has moved to another relationship, divorce does not mean you cannot reconcile and remarry. Consider that. Consider this also if neither of you has - http://www.retrouvaille.org/. It is a good program. I know from experience. It saved my own marriage when I was ready to walk away after my children were finally grown. There is no such thing as a good divorce.
Many years ago, before I became a Christian, I went out to lunch with a bunch of my coworkers. There were five of us in the car. I realized that I was not only the only one who had never been married, but I was also the only one who had never been divorced. At some point I also realized that every one of these guys had an "issue" with their ex-wives. And I mean "ISSUE." They were all angry and bitter about something or other. In fact, it appeared to me that much of their unhappiness was related to divorce. Now you may say that's too much of a leap, to say that their unhappiness was because of the divorce. I can live with that--I don't believe it--but I can give you that for the sake of argument. But what was blindingly obvious was that the divorce not only didn't make their lives happy, it also made their lives miserable in many ways. I was under the impression that people sought divorce for selfish reasons, so that the divorcee could go on to self-fulfillment and a better life. Nope. Not so much. It appeared to be the same misery, with complications.
Their are certainly biblical grounds for divorce, and I believe divorce is necessary sometimes. But, like abortion, 99 percent are NOT necessary. I agree with Joe wholeheartedly: if there are children involved, do every thing possible to keep the family together. It might be miserable, but it's better than the alternative.
I would add one PS. I had another co-worker, who was not in the car that day. He was in the process of divorce. He was miserable and he was angry and bitter and just plain ugly. But then I noticed that his whole attitude changed and that he had decided to work it out with his wife. I don't happen to believe it was coincidence. Apparently, he made a recommitment to his family, and rejoined the rest of us in ordinary misery. He was a changed man. I also happen to think there was some spiritual, Christian kind of stuff going on, but it was a long time ago, so my memory might be embellishing ;)
I'd add, if this
Such an unpopular sentiment bears repeating: When your first child is born, you're life stops being about what you want and starts being about what they need. They need you at home. If you're a man and aspire to being a dad, that is all you need to know.
seems like too much for you in your marriage, and you don't have kids yet. Don't have kids yet.
Joe,
I am sure that you know about the "four loves" that C.S. Lewis wrote about. Eros, Philia, Storge and Agape. I think our society lacks an understanding of what Agape love is.
I also think that in general, we all feel that we have the right to "pursue happiness" that we have no idea what that means. We have no idea what true freedom is and what true happiness and joy is.
What you wrote is quite the opposite of naiveté or idiocy! What I am about to say is not in disagreement about absenteeism regarding your daughter. It is just that all you can do is provide the Agape (other-oriented, self-sacrificial, choice-based love) and trust in God that it is enough!
My hope is that there is at least one father left--just one--who will seriously consider what I'm saying.
Just one who will trap his wife into a marriage that's ruining her life, then beg, lie to her, and fight her in court to keep her chained to him against her will.
Just one who will trap his own kids into an entire childhood of watching their parents hurt each other every day.
Just one who will spend "as long as it takes" to teach his children that Mommy being unhappy because of Daddy is what makes a real family.
Just one who will force his kids to grow up seeing 100% of the marriages they've ever known as a seething prison of hatred, lovelessness, manipulation, and masculine selfishness.
Just one who will teach his children that "making them a priority" means playing out male fantasies of "being a man" with their and their mother's lives.
Just one who will dedicate his life to making sure his ex-wife can never get married in her "peculiar circumstance" while telling his daughter that the parents she lives with aren't really a "family".
Just one who wants his kids to grow up secretly wishing their Dad would cut out the crap and just calm down.
Good luck with that.
Women initiate about 70% of the divorces today which makes it an uphill battle for men today. I think that this is the sort of thing that is exacerbated by the fact that secular law, not religious law, governs marriage. If marriage were a private institution, regulated only by the church, synagogue, mosque or temple, it'd be a lot harder for people to enter and leave it lightly. That social pressure might do wonders to help the spouse that is trying hard to keep the marriage going, keep it going.
Kevin,
As usual you confirm what a truly heartless and miserable human being you are. You can't just knock it off and move past without being a jerk.
Raven:
There's truth in what you're saying. I never thought I would say that to you.
Kevin T. Keith:
Yes, you have no clue about what marriage is, and you have no clue about what is going on in Joe's head either. Brian is right about you.
Kevin, sounds like you have some serious unresolved issues with your dad. I'm not saying that to mock you. Your post literally sounds like you've taken your hate for your father and projected it onto Joe's post.
The father you [Kevin] have described is just as damaging as no father. But not all fathers are like yours.
My divorce was final Jan 2 of this year. My ex-wife is bi-polar and abuses drugs. I toughed it out for 5 years. I've lost count of how many hospitalizations she cycled through. I told her a year ago she had one more chance--use again and I'm done. She did. I followed through. There was no way I was going to have CPS taking my kids away from me (her psychotic episodes endangered their lives on more than one occasion). Almost six months later and she's still lost to us.
I say all that as background to this: Joe, you're right. Divorce is horrible. I hate it. We were miserable for a long time, but I think we're more miserable now. A dark tunnel that so far has no light at the end of it.
I dismiss the venom in Kevin's post, but some of it hit home for me. At what point is the evil of divorce a lesser evil than the torture of staying married? Did I wait too long? Did I not wait long enough? If (when?) my ex-wife finally makes good on her suicide threats, do I have blood on my hands?
Apologies--not trying to divert the conversation. But I've said the very things Joe has. I told my wife long ago, "If we have to be miserable every day forever, then so be it. But we brought these boys into the world and we have an obligation to them." When she's lucid she throws that in my face. I don't have any answers. I just know that divorce is not a solution. It's just a new set of problems.
Joe,
I'm a divorced father. I stuck it out, hard; suffice it to say that my divorce, while ugly and painful and boundlessly detrimental to my kids, was both biblically-justified and unavoidable; I'll save the details. I fought like a pit pull to get joint custody; my kids live with me more than half of the time.
But Joe, you buy - inadvertently, I'm sure - into a couple of caustic myths about men that mainstream culture has been pretty casual about spreading.
Women DO initiate most of the divorces, today. Statistically, men are 40% less likely to regard divorce as an acceptable resolution for marital difficulties. That is a HUGE difference! Part of it - as I suspect you are painfully aware - is that men tend to get gang-raped by the "family" court system, of course; the financial, legal, social, emotional and personal costs of divorce are much more real and immediate for men.
So while "deadbeat dads" and the urban "babydaddy" culture get a TON of media, we need to note that men, usually, statistically, do the right thing, and try VERY hard to keep it that way. Proportionally, twice as many women leave as do men; twice as many women default on child support.
Men DO get bad advice on divorce; too many guys are gold that if things are unmanageable, it's best to leave and let things cool down. This IS held against men in court (advice to guys in dicey marriages; hold on, and stay with the kids, for all you're worth. As a bit of legal rather than moral advice, let her be the one to leave, if there is any way to swing it).
Good post, Joe, but there's much more to the situation than that.
Giggling: Is there another Raven who posts here regularly? This was my first trip to this site, thanks to my friends who run RS posting a link to this story. I'll be coming back more regularly, btw.
Bryan Mills: The lives of your children take precedence. You could not allow your Exs drug use to endanger them any longer. If she carries through on her threats, SHE has blood on her hands, whereas you have probably saved your children from being taken with her. In your situation, divorce certainly wasn't the solution, but it got you and yours away from a terrible situation so that you could Find the answer. I am sorry that your love for your wife was not good enough for her and that her love for you and your kids was not strong enough to save her...
It's nice to agree with you for a change, Joe. As parents we must be committed to serving the interests of the children first. Marriage can have its rough spots, but if grownups can't resolve things, what kind of example does that set for the children? My wife and I married for better or for worse, and we've had some of both. One thing we are steadfastly united on, though, and that is that we will raise our children together.
Of course, the minute they are gone, it's on, baby! ;-)
I discovered this post via another blog I regularly read. Joe, I have so much respect for you and your advice. My parents divorced in 1995 as well. My mother got custody and my father moved back to the Seattle-area. I saw him twice a year initially, and spoke to him on the phone maybe once a month. At the same time, there was an abusive step-father involved. Most days I just wanted my dad. And then when I had him, it felt as if it was unreality.
Fortunately, we now have a strong relationship, made the better by his wonderful wife. And yet I know I missed out and I know that I bear many scars from the experience. It made me petrified of relationships because almost all of the marriages I ever saw crumbled and people were hurt. At the same time, I struggle with the fact that both of my parents re-married and I've no idea how to handle that biblically. All I can count on is God's grace and I live knowing that it sufficient for me.
Daughters desperately need their fathers. Even when things get terrible, they need their fathers. Families are a lot stronger with them around.
That is incredibly moving. Really appreciated reading that.
http://www.americanlegends.blogspot.com/
Good post Joe,
Sometimes I feel like such a Dad and then I read posts like this and realize just how great I have it.
Right now I work shift work and usually when i'm at work i'm gone all day. It feels like a day off whenever I get to come home after working only 10 hours. And this has been bothering me a lot, that I only get my days off with my children and my wife, or sick days, or leave days. Otherwise, I dont' really see them.
And I always dreamt of being the dad who helps coach baseball, or football and gets to go to all of the plays and performances. Yet, it is turning out that i'm the dad who makes the money and provides but doesn't really get consistent quality time with his children.
And yet, ive still got at least two days a week with them. Me and my wife are very happy together and our children are great.
Not sure if this is what was meant by writing your post, Joe, most likely wasn't. But you've helped me to realize just how great ive got it.
Need to learn to appreciate what I have.
Brian,
As usual you confirm what a truly heartless and miserable human being you are. You can't just knock it off and move past without being a jerk.
and Giggling,
Yes, you have no clue about what marriage is, and you have no clue about what is going on in Joe's head either. Brian is right about you.
Kevin is not heartless and miserable.
You want to know what is heartless and miserable: being too apathetic to share your personal wisdom with others. If Kevin had been unwilling to share his strongly-held and perfectly valid beliefs with us, then that would have been a shame.
Kevin's remarks are absolutely appropriate in two important ways:
First, they illustrate one of the pitfalls of toughing it out in a loveless marriage: years of pain, bitterness, and dysfunctionality. Depending on how you look at it, this pain is either a risk you run by staying married, or a price you may have to be willing to pay. Hopefully someone stuck in such a desperate situation would be able to ameliorate it without getting divorced, but it is not clear that that would always be true.
Second, Kevin's remarks are a deeply true counter-argument to Joe's position. For someone like myself who agrees with Joe, I can't just ignore what Kevin is saying. I have to come to terms with it and formulate some kind of counter-argument (for example, I could say that there are almost always ways to turn such a bad situation around so that it is no longer so toxic).
But to pretend that Kevin's argument does not even exist is silly. There is not just one side to what Joe is talking about, and discussing other points of view can only advance Joe's goal of being persuasive to the father who is contemplating divorce.
Both of you owe Kevin an apology.
Baggi,
But you've helped me to realize just how great I've got it.
Joe's post is great because he highlights for us that our two-parent families are too easy to take for granted. Our two-parent families are probably working a lot better than we think they are when we're focusing on the problems and the stresses of everyday life.
If Joe manages to inspire some dads to reconsider their inclination to get a divorce, then that is just gravy on top.
Matthew, the problem with KTK post is that any valid points it may contain are drowned out by anger and bitterness. There are valid reasons to end a marriage, even when children are involved; adultery, physical abuse, or substance abuse spring to mind, but far too many marriages fall apart because one person or the other decides they need to "find their happiness", completely ignoring their children's happiness, need for stability, or the damage they are doing to their children's future ability to form and maintain marital relationships.
I'm a grandma of two little ones. Our daughter married and divorced a much older, Christian man who was financially irresponsible; but he was/is a very loving, tender and devoted father. Her decision to divorce her husband, while understandable at the time, (we supported her decision to separate not divorce) has been the worse choice she has ever made. It breaks my heart to see the children (6 & 8) valiantly try to cope with the instability, the ever-changing routines of their lives. I see them emotionally more attached to their Dad because they are the center of his life. Their mother, on the other hand, must focus most of her attention on her job as she seeks to financially meet the needs that result from divorce. And the anger and bitterness, on both of their parts, while they attempt to surpress it, is huge. Unless there is danger and/or personal safety involved, the problems created by divorce far exceed the original ones.
While I know that both of the parents have suffered from this divorce and our daughter continues to make bad choices trying to "fix" the mess she's made, the effects of this has and will shape the personalities of their children and even cripples their opportunities for inner stability and happiness. I *see* it happening.
Matthew,
I hear what ou are saying about Kevin. I just don't know why they guy has to act like such a jerk all the time. Although given the tone and bitterness of his posts and the position he has on this issue, perhaps he was raised by his parents in such a way he turned out nearly feral in his treatment of others. Maybe he can enlighten us.
"If your wife is physically abusive to you and the children then you need to get out -- and take them with you."
That was my situation. I toughed it out for about 18 years, buy my wife's bipolar disorder, alcoholism, and other issues got her to the point where she was abusive to the kids and to me. I have 100% custody. You know that when a liberal, female judge prohibits the mother from having contact, there are significant issues. The biggest mistake I made, in hindsight, is that I did not end the marriage sooner. I did a real disservice to my kids by not protecting them adequately from a mother who was abusive to them, drove drunk with them in the car, etc. I have to answer to God for that.
There are many, many, children who would be extremely grateful for even a part-time father.
http://dcfs.co.la.ca.us/adoptions/index.html
Ucfengr and Brian,
I acknowledge that Kevin could have been a lot more diplomatic in his remarks. Perhaps he even should have been more diplomatic.
But in his defense, I say, "Joe started it".
Joe didn't do anything rude, but he poked open the lid of Pandora's box just a crack by tackling such an important subject with brutal honesty.
If we can't tolerate a little bitterness and confrontation on such an emotionally-fraught topic, then how can we turn around and demand that fathers submit to a much more demanding course of action? If Kevin doesn't have our permission to be arguably a little rude in order to make his points with adequate force, then why are we asking fathers to commit themselves to relationships that are infinitely more challenging?
Words are cheap. The best argument against divorce in this context is to set a good personal example. That would include embracing someone who challenges us in good faith, such as Kevin.
Can we be so sure that it IS in good faith as you suggest it is? Would he be as quick to level such allegations of selfishness, and cruelty if this were written to women by a woman?
I have a serious issue with leveling such a blame storm at only one side of a two-sided problem. Is it really ruining the life of the spouse by insisting that he or she live up to the commitment they made? Is being 'unhappy' a valid reason for walking out of such a solemn commitment? And why is there the assumption that it will only lead to a toxic situation? There are alternatives to remaining miserable in the marriage. That is why I mentioned Retrouvaille.
Smmtheory,
Can we be so sure that it [Kevin's challenge] IS in good faith as you suggest it is?
I put this comment-thread-friction in the larger context of how to deal with frustrating relationships, since that is what Joe is posting about.
If a husband and wife are going to try read each other's minds in an attempt to determine when each is acting/speaking in good faith as opposed to bad faith, then that has the potential to turn very ugly very quickly, often for no sound reason.
[Originally submitted yesterday, but got caught in Joe's moderation filter, which I can't seem to figure out. Edited and re-submitted. - KTK]
Matthew:
Thanks for your words of understanding.
I have to say I don't understand the reaction to my comment. I'm not surprised that this audience doesn't agree with it, but the comment seems to have struck a nerve here in a way that makes it hard for many readers to grasp its substance.
To make it clearer, perhaps I should explain what seemed to me would be obvious at the time: each of the characterizations or predictions I offered is essentially a direct reflection of Joe's own post. (And to clarify further, for the Bill Frist™ Long-Distance Diagnosticians in the room: Joe is not my father.)
What does Joe tell us, in his own words?
You should "beg" your wife not to divorce you, then ask for a 6-month trial period and then another trial period, etc., "for as long as it takes". (Note that the marital counseling is only for the purpose of blocking her quest for a divorce; you do it not to find ways for you to make your wife happier, but only as a stalling tactic "if nothing else works".) You should "use guilt if necessary".
One commenter adds the usual "men's rights" self-pity and the advice that making your wife miserable enough to flee is a good legal tactic. Joe puts it in perspective: The problem, of course, is . . . with your wife. The rest of the post is given over to ways to manipulate your wife into (remaining in) a marriage she doesn't want to be in. The explanation is that "this is the foundation of fatherhood"; it's what "Real fathers" do; "If you're a man and aspire to being a dad, that is all you need to know"; "if you're a man you will not give up". The "bloodied and broken" metaphor adds just that thrilling touch of Thermopylae fantasy to it. (Do you scream "This . . . is . . . SPARTA!! at your wife while you turn down her seventh request for a divorce after 36 months of faking it in "counseling"?)
This obsessive insistence on what real manhood is, and the no-holds-barred treatment of women, designed to trap them for life into lives they hate, seem . . . suggestive, to me.
Throughout all this, two things are notably (to me, at least) missing: any notion whatsoever of what this means for the woman who is chained into marriage to a man she doesn't want to be married to, and any recognition that this horror show of male domination and manipulation is not going to be lost on the kids.
The idea that you can ruin a woman's life because "if you're a man you will not give up" needs no comment; I suspect it would be wasted effort here. But don't kid yourselves that children - of any age - won't know that their parents hate each other; that one is trapped and one is the jailer; that their relationship with one parent is defined by his need not to have his religious/partiarchal self-aggrandizement threatened. They'll spend their entire childhoods knowing that, and seeing with that weird clarity that children have exactly what kind of role-playing is going on between them and you.
My comment merely pointed out what Joe himself was recommending. I may have been more personal than I intended in making reference to "his daughter"; I didn't mean the comment to be a remark on Joe's own family or parenting. I'm sorry for wording that part in a too-personal way. But the rest is simply the obvious consequence of the behavior he endorses.
Joe's post seems to assume that you can beg, lie to, manipulate, trap, and disregard the rights or needs of your children's mother in her own home and her own relationship with her children without them noticing. It assumes that if she is desperately unhappy but you manage to keep her in your home by a never-ending campaign of guilt, begging, lies, phony promises, and continual obstruction, then you can just go on with your relationship with the children who are living in that same home watching you do this and there will be no consequences to them or their perspective on you. It assumea that if you not only make your wife so unhappy she wants a divorce, but then bend all your efforts to actively trapping her in that situation including by dishonesty and manipulation, your children won't know that you're doing it, won't draw any conclusions about you because of it, and won't react to you in light of how you treat their mother. And it seems to assume you can do all these things to your children's mother, on the grounds that "children need two parents", and that won't have any effect on her relationship with those kids or her ability to give them what they need.
It seems unmistakably obvious to me (by which I don't mean I expect anyone here to acknowledge it) that none of that is true. The kids are going to see. They're going to know. It's going to affect them, and they're going to draw their own conclusions from it. And because of that, Joe's plan for fatherhood by siege warfare is going to be counterproductive no matter what your intentions are. By treating your children's mother as a prisoner and their home as her jail, you simply are going to be affecting your children in the ways I describe (as well as destroying their mother's life, if that matters).
But go ahead if it makes you feel better about yourself as you "aspire to be a Dad".
Kevin,
I may not agree with what you just posted, however was it that much harder to civil in that post as opposed to your first post? I really don't get how you think that you can accomplish anything on this blog by adopting a jerky tone as you often do. Most of us aren't going to be won over by that style, especially since we are for the most part polite people.
Joe
That's a heartbreaking story. At first I thought it might have been the long hours as a recruiter that was the cause of the breakup, until I read your other post. I was also in the Marine Corps, and I remember how many divorced men I met there. Military life takes its toll on many families. At one point in the 1980s one Marine Commandant, I don't remember who, proposed that the Corps not accept any married people. It was shot down, of course, but it underscored how hard a commitment to the Corps was on families.
I can understand your grief. My wife and I separated two years ago. We tried to keep it together for our daughter, who graduated high school last year. She now lives with my wife in Phoenix, so I'm going through the whole bachelor learning curve as well.
Don't be too hard on yourself. Good luck!
Kevin,
Thank [you] for your words of understanding.
You're welcome.
I have to say I don't understand the reaction to my comment.
People can be very unpredictable.
One day you can disagree with a person and he will be happy that you are listening and engaging his thoughts.
Another day you can disagree with the very same person and he will resent it as an unprovoked and disrespectful attack on his beliefs, and even his personal identity.
Maybe one hundred people read your first comment and 80% thought, "Gee, that makes a lot of sense. Good points, Kevin." But they didn't bother to write anything. And maybe 20% read it and resented it, but less than a handful were roused enough to bother writing a comment in response. So I don't think it's so odd that you just got a couple of visceral responses.
By treating your children's mother as a prisoner and their home as her jail, you simply are going to be affecting your children in the ways I describe (as well as destroying their mother's life, if that matters).
I think you have done this comment thread a great service by nailing down one end of the father-behavior spectrum: obsessive/manipulative/angry abuse of the wife. And Joe has nailed down another end of the spectrum: indifferent abandonment of the family, with or without due cause. The challenge for a loveless couple is to steer a course between the two extremes, if for no other reason than to protect and nurture the children.
Thank you for helping to focus and sharpen the discussion.
It seems to me that Kevin missed one of the overall points of Joe's post: that divorce is horrible and should be avoided at all costs. Yeah, I know, there are times when it's necessary. But those are probably almost as rare as abortions to save the life of the mother.
The point is that once you become a parent, that's your reason for being. Your personal happiness can no longer be your purpose in life. Do you get that, Kevin? It's not apparent from your comments. Your comments belie an ignorance of the devastation that divorce has had on American culture. Or am I misreading you?
Perhaps my story will help your understanding. My mother divorced my father when I was a child. I remember what it was like before the divorce, going through several years listening to my parents screaming and yelling at each other behind a closed door as if it would insulate us from the pain. And it was painful, extremely painful and stressful and I often wished it would stop. But as they say, you should be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it. As painful and as stressful as it was living with my parents toxic relationship, I never ever would have preferred they divorce! When my mother divorce my father, I had to listen to the accusations against his character. I had to watch as she made it damn near impossible for my father to even be a part-time father. And I had to watch as it messed up my youngest brother of age 5 because he couldn't understand what was going on and thought that my father didn't love him when he had trouble getting the wherewithall to pick us up for visitations. Oh boy, how I wish my father had done the things Joe suggested to keep them together. And finally, I had to cope with my youngest brother's suicide twenty years after the divorce. I've seen BOTH sides, the toxic relationship and the divorce, and the divorce was by far the worst of the two.
But enough about you; let's talk about me . . .
however was it that much harder [to be] to civil in that post as opposed to your first post? I really don't get how you think that you can accomplish anything on this blog by adopting a jerky tone as you often do.
This is quite odd. First, my original post wasn't less civil than the second. My point in both posts was that Joe's recommended behavior is both abusive and almost certain to have really bad consequences. In my first post I stated what they were; in my second post I had to let Joe state them because you didn't seem to want to hear it from me. But I can't see any difference between the two except that you seem to be better able to overlook the implications of the things you believe when you hear them from people you agree with.
As for my being a "jerk" - the apparent ad hominem of the week - I am again puzzled. In fact, I'm a hell of a fellow and considerably charming and witty. I do my best to share it with you, but, as we are told, some seed falls on stony ground. Ah, well . . .
Most of us aren't going to be won over by that style, especially since we are for the most part polite people.
Yeah?
what a truly heartless and miserable human being you are. . . . You can't just [stop] being a jerk. . . . You can't just knock it off and move past without being a jerk. . . . you have no clue about marriage . . . you have no clue about [Joe] . . . Brian is right about you . . . serious unresolved issues . . . hate for your father . . . dismiss the venom . . . drowned out by anger and bitterness . . . act like such a jerk all the time . . . tone and bitterness . . . turned out nearly feral . . . Can we be so sure that it IS in good faith . . .
OK. I can feel the love. Thanks.
Where you really offended so much by my questioning the good faith of your comment? Or was it more that I disagreed with you about what would be better for children and backed it up with my own life story?
Hi, I read the post and discussion while passing 'thru. I only want to say that I have survived - sort of - over 10 years of an abusive marriage in which nothing bad ever "really" happened: it was just a question of making fun of me in front of the children, daily, and never having anything nice or constructive to say about me or my work or my lifestyle or even appearance, and mocking me in company, and lying to me about small things (probably big ones too, just never got caught), and always expecting me to be there, do my job, fulfill expectations (even those unverbalized), be the perfect mother, perfect wife, and perfect, efficient breadwinner (did I mention I worked fulltime all through this?). I was so brainwashed that I thought all the fault was mine and that I needed to change, to be like the person he wanted. OK, I did finally wake up, it took me over 2 years to pick up the pieces of my shattered identity and finally walk out. My husband had made it abundantly clear that HE was going nowhere. I left him the children, the apartment, the car, everything I had worked and lived for. I literally started my life anew at 37. I have survived. Funnily, my relations with my children which had been terribly strained before, are now normal and we have lots of fun together, we talk for hours, we are mother and children at last. I have real, meaningful relations with them now. In the past, I used to come home from work and go to sleep on the couch. And they used to steal coins from my purse to buy sweets.
Magdalena,
Your post (to me) demonstrates the problem of approaching divorce from a legalistic standpoint. Nobody (I would hope) would blame you for obtaining a divorce.
The unfortunate part is again the lack of understanding of love on the part of your husband. Not that I know him, but he only understood love as a feeling and you were to fulfill that feeling! He does not understand agape love.
It is also unfortunate that this couldn't be discussed between two loving adults with the same outlook, understanding of love and work together to change your relationship. This is not blame that I am expressing, just sadness about the situation.
No marriage is perfect, in fact I am convinced that the meaning of marriage = imperfect. I also think that there are too many people that get a divorce because "they aren't happy" to find that they are even more miserable following a divorce. In addition to not understanding love, too many people don't understand what happiness is.
Good luck! Hopefully your kids learn that the behavior of your husband is unacceptable (but at the same time still love him).
Magdalena:
No one here who is against divorce on principle would fault you for getting out of that marriage. The man who was your husband didn't respect you, for no apparent fault of your own. To me, lack of respect is a type of infidelity, which is a biblical ground for divorce. I'm certainly not going to impugn the way you handled it.
But I wonder if you think that leaving your husband and kids could have made a dent in his thick skull and forced a change in his behavior. In other words, was there ever a chance, after a separation, that the marriage could have worked out?
On the other hand, Alec Baldwin.
Now there's an example of divorce being the best solution for everyone, right? Alec's obviously much happier; Kim's got to be happy because she only gets the occasional voice mail from Alec anymore. And, of course, their 12 year old daughter has learned one of the diverse ways parents behave in tough situations. It's a win-win situation for everyone; including the lawyers.
Jd,
Isn't there a clause granting permission for divorce in the event of marriage to Alec Baldwin? ;)
There are so many things here which deserve mention. I just want to talk right now about making the decision to leave, which is a very difficult one.
I had a huge amount of trouble with deciding what conditions amount to moral cause for divorce. As a catholic convert, raised evangelical, married in the anglican church, I did not want divorce. Adultery was the escape clause that Scripture gives, so it was the only reason I was willing to separate from my ex. I knew for example, that Catholic moral theologians say that if your spouse commits adultery, and you can not given "tacit moral condonation" by resuming marital intimacy after an affair, that you are morally justified in separating, and if the adultery persists, then you have moral cause for civil divorce. This is not the only justifiable moral cause.
I separated, knowing that I wanted to be divorced, but not knowing if that was morally acceptable to God. Since her affair has continued now for years, I became convinced that civil divorce was an acceptable moral decision for me.
However, upon further reflection I think there are other grounds for a man to separate from his wife, and divorce, other than the #1 Item which is Adultery. Considering these other points has given my conscience some comfort, as I am a guilt-ridden conservative guy, and I still feel that I should have found some way to save the marriage, even though at the same time, I know that I just did not (and do not) want to.
So, here's some more reasons why separation and eventual civil divorce may be morally acceptable:
#2. Credible threats to your life.
#3. Severe Violence (for which criminal charges can be pressed). Not a punch in the face. I mean, being stabbed, shot, poisoned, or otherwise severely hurt.
#4. Ongoing abusive situation. Emotional/Verbal/Psychological abuse is more common than physical abuse against husbands. A single "abusive" incident, whether the hurling of objects, or flailing of fists, does not make a pattern of abusive behaviour. However a years-long pattern of repeated abusive behaviours, or a credible threat to your physical safety (threatening to kill you, or actually trying) is definitely cause to get out.
#5. Severe mental illness which is not contained/improved by medication. How much any individual person can stand of being with someone who is bi-polar, suicidal, depressed, sociopathic, and who in combination with this may also have some of the emotionally abusive tendencies discussed in point #4 is reason enough to get out. You don't have to let someone destroy your life.
#6. She insists you have to leave. You are always morally free to leave if she insists that you must. It is not morally right to try to work on rebuilding a strained relationship while living under the same roof.
#7. You are in bad mental health, becoming suicidal or self-damaging, and you feel you need to be on your own, to handle your own mental health issues on your own. If you are a danger to yourself or to others, maybe you need to be alone.
There are other considerations, chiefly the good of the children, and how they will be taken care of that impact any decision like this.
+Warren+
You know, I have no idea what to say to anybody. I am so dumbfounded by some of the ideas & responses. I thinking staying in a marriage just because of the kids is a horrible idea. When there is no love between two people, there is no happiness. I am currently in a relationship that has both sides. "Mike" was a heavy drug user (I mean HEAVY drug user) and put all of his drugs before his children and I. I was emotionally, physically, verbally, & financially abused. (I will admit that it went both ways sometimes.) Sometimes this was never hidden from the kids. I can't imagine what was going through their heads at the time. I had no desire to leave Mike, but I couldn't imagine bringing my children up in an environment like that. I always believe that actions speak louder than words. For Raven who wrote to Bryan about his wife that was an addict & stated that divorce certainily wasn't the option, I am just dumbfounded. Mike & I tried to kick his habits on our own, it just didn't work. Thats when things got really bad between us. We had already talked about a "rehab" center that seemed very promising to the both of us. I felt good about the situation, that was until he hit me with the kids present. I ended up calling the police & he was arrested for assualt on a female. An addict will never get better until they want to!!! If his wife had no desires to get better, his best option was divorce. Mike did end up going into the rehab center that we had discussed & it turned out to be the best thing for all of us. It was a Christian based program and changed BOTH of our lives. We both accepted Christ into our lives while he was up there. I couldn't be happier. I can tell you that if things hadn't changed quickly, Mike & I wouldn't be together just for the kids. I stayed longer because of the kids, but I was so worn & tired from all of the hurt he had put on us that if things didn't get better I would have had to leave. Mike has two children from a previous relationship and I see what the children go through, but he is also more than a "part time" dad. Custody is 1/2 & 1/2, but their mother is there when she wants to be which isn't very often. I've always heard the term, deadbeat dad, but what happened to deadbeat mom?? She never tried to help Mike with his addiction. Could you imagine the situation for those kids to grow up in?? Drugs, never being cared for, always being scared, wondering why your dad misses all of the fun things because he is to high to get out of bed!! I dealt with everybit of that, but there is no way that I would ever force my children to be a part of that because I thought we should be a family. I am lucky to see both sides of the situation. My parents have been together for 29 years and holding and then I see Mike and the situation he is in with his other children. I'm glad that my parents are together, but I wouldn't want them to be so unhappy just because of me. Children tend to think that parents seperate/divorce because of something that they did. I would be so heartbroken to know that my parents stayed in misery because of me. What type of message is that to send to your children?? By all means, I think people should work their problems out, but if everybody gives it a 100% and things still aren't better, end it!!
To repeat my rant in a smaller message: Put forth all the effort to make a marriage work, but if it will NOT work out, don't make everybody miserable. It isn't fair to the children. They may not understand now, but they will later in life.
Oh yeah...
I must say that I agree with Kevin. I don't understand why people have attacked him like they have either. They remind me of "Mike". I couldn't say anything without being attacked. He has an opinion & he can express it just like everybody else. He isn't beating ya'll with words because of what you have said.
And to smmtheory:
Don't you think that your lives were made miserable because your mother spoke down of your father all the time. You were in a no win situation. You could watch your parents fight all the time or your parents could have seperated & you would have to listen to your mother make accusations against your father & make it hard on him to be a participant in your lives. My heart goes out to you in what you had to deal with, but I really don't think staying together was the solution for your parents. If your mother had gotten counseling, things could have been a 100% better. Mike & I make a huge effort to never say negative things about his children's mother, even when she is completely worthless. We also give her every opportunity & push for her to see her kids more. She will end up digging her own grave. Neither one of us have any regrets about what has been done in the PAST!!
But I do think that if my parents had stayed together, their situation might have turned around like yours did. Because my Dad did not fight to stay married, there wasn't time to turn it around. There wasn't time for my Mom to get counseling, or my parents to see a marriage counselor. Your marriage wouldn't be together any longer if you didn't decide to try and try and try again. (And congratulations on renewing your relationship with Mike, BTW) In the Retrouvaille program there are many, many couples that have been on the very brink or even over the edge of divorce that have learned how to renew their marriages. And at least 30% of them have been abusive relationships, some in more ways than one. And at least that many have recovered from adultery too. I'm not recommending hanging around if the danger of death or disfigurement is imminent, but to let a spouse pack up and leave just because they aren't happy or just because they don't think they can love you any more or because it's just easier to let it happen? That kind of behavior needs to be taken to task like Joe has done. It is all too prevalent, and those people need to hear somebody telling them to grow up.