[Tiresias]

Do you think unhappily married couples should stay married for the sake of their children?

[Railroader]

I voted "it depends".

There are far too many factors to even list.

This poll is flawed for that very reason.

Why are they unhappy?

Why did they get married?

Are they Christian?

[Nicko]

No, life is short enough without making other people miserable.

[lpkmckenna]

I loved "no." I would expect that an unhappy couple make a serious attempt to rekindle, but if it become clear that they are not compatible, they are better to divorce.

You only live once. A loveless marriage is a terrible way to live.

[Tiresias]

This poll is flawed for that very reason.

Hm. Okay. On your recommendation, I'll add the conditions I actually had in mind.

Let's say the couple are incompatible. Their fundamental outlooks on life clash. And they have come to realise that they are not in love. If they did not have children, they would seperate without hesitation. However, they are generally amicable to each other, and there is no great stress on the children as a result of their incompatibility. They do not argue violently with each other, since, to do that, there would need to be passion, and there is none. They're just two hapless people who—because of their improvidence and recklessness—are now living lives of quiet desperation and domestic misery. Their children are 2 and 3, and love both their mother and father deeply.

This is actually a question someone posed to me, looking for advice. I didn't know what to tell him.

What do you think?

[Dark Helmet]

No they shouldn't because all the kids see is two people who don't like one another and put them in the middle of disputes.

I have NEVER seen an unhappy couple stick together for the kids and the kids come out for the better because of it.

[Doofy]

Meh. I wish folks would take more time to find out if they're compatible before getting hitched.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Meh. I wish folks would take more time to find out if they're compatible before getting hitched.

Yea, but then less people would visit Vegas.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Yea, but then less people would visit Vegas.

There's always the boobie shows and the gambling and the boobie shows and the Elvises and the boobie shows.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

There's always the boobie shows and the gambling and the boobie shows and the Elvises and the boobie shows.

Ah, yes. I had some good times at Sapphires.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Meh. I wish folks would take more time to find out if they're compatible before getting hitched.

Well, a lot of people get married for the sake of getting married... or they get married before their partner 'gets away'

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Meh. I wish folks would take more time to find out if they're compatible before getting hitched.

I do too, but, alas, life doesn't always work that way. Love is often blind, and when decisions are made on emotions the results aren't always great. Thankfully, society is putting less pressure on young people to marry just for the sake of marrying before they reach a certain age, so it's possible that those who do marry may do so because they are compatible, and not just marrying because they're "in love," or because they "had to." What's really scaring some is that the institution of marriage is undergoing another of its changes, as people are marrying, or not, for different reasons, and the "Christian" "family values" people feel threatened by the changes. Social values and norms change over time, and there are always those who are uncomfortable with change and feel threatened by it.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Tiresias 

Do you think unhappily married couples should stay married for the sake of their children?

No; I think they should try and rebuild their relationship for the sake of their children.

[Spliffdaddy]

I think the wife should do whatever the hell the husband wants her to do. And she should keep her piehole shut while doing it.

There would be no marital problems if the wife would simply comply with her husband's demands.

[Dark Helmet]

I couldn't wait for my parents to separate.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Millennium 

No; I think they should try and rebuild their relationship for the sake of their children.

I realized that this probably needs some clarification.

Staying together in a dead relationship "for the sake of the children" is probably, on average, only slightly better than separation, and often it's worse. What children need to see in a relationship is love, affection, and mutual respect, and a dead relationship cannot provide that. Worse still is what happens when a dead relationship turns abusive, but I don't think that situation needs to be explained to anybody here. Rebuilding the relationship, however, is another matter entirely. A rebuilt relationship can, pretty much by definition, provide the love and respect that children need to see. Indeed, some might even say that it can go a step further, because it can show kids how to rebuild a relationship that has run aground.

That's not to say that couples should go and seek out trouble just to show their kids how to patch things up. It's a painful process for everyone involved, and not everyone can make it through certain types of trouble, and so aside from the hurt involved in finding trouble there's also a lot of risk. But if trouble comes, it can be turned into an opportunity.

I understand, of course, that "just rebuilding the relationship" is no easy task. Believe me; I understand this only too well. It can be a long and even painful process. It can be too painful for some, perhaps many; a lot of couples who try to rebuild things still don't make it. But if rebuilding is successful, it doesn't come without rewards for the people involved, and when children come into the matter it becomes more important.

[ghporter]

Generally, EVERYBODY IN THE WORLD can tell that a couple is unhappy, particularly the kids, so staying together is BAD for the kids. On the other hand, there is a potential for ADULTS who no longer belong together to manage their personal differences well enough to behave like adults and not like little brats anywhere that the kids can see. Only a tiny potential, but it's there. Almost all the divorced couples I know turned pre-school and didn't care who knew-one particularly bad case involved using the kids as pawns in a power play...

"It depends," but in most cases if the couple is so miserable, they should just split and stop screwing up their kids.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Tiresias 

This is actually a question someone posed to me, looking for advice. I didn't know what to tell him.

The kids are the most important factor, but breaking up isn't necessarily bad for them.

Since the parents seem rational, what's good for the kids will hinge on practical things like financial issues, and shuttling the kids around.

For example, if they break up and one picks up stakes and moves, that would be a big problem. This is only one of the myriad eventualities they should prepare for in advance.

How well off are they, and how well off would they be as individuals?

P.S. Why is this in Pol/War?

[BRussell]

Living with another person is always difficult. Every couple goes through tough times, at least in comparison to those first months and years. And having kids is the biggest stressor on a marriage. If every couple who becomes unhappy when they have kids got divorced, no one with kids would ever stay married.

The very idea that a marriage is about the couple's happiness, rather than about family, is the problem. It's this idea that leads to the high divorce rates. It's all me me me me.

[subego]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

The very idea that a marriage is about the couple's happiness, rather than about family, is the problem. It's this idea that leads to the high divorce rates. It's all me me me me.

Choosing to make a family is about one's happiness.

I think the problem is that people don't realize that their happiness is in fact dependent on an effective contract negotiation with your mate.

"I just got a job offer in Tuscaloosa, let's move!"

"You never cared about my career, did you?"

People need to figure this **** out before they get married.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by subego 

Choosing to make a family is about one's happiness.

That just makes no sense to me. "I want to be happy - hey, I think I'll have a family!" First, families rarely provide simple happiness. At best, they're a mixed bag. They're rewarding for reasons other than one's personal happiness. Second, families are by definition about other people, not oneself. Anyone who wants to get married and have kids for selfish personal reasons is not going in with the right motivation.

I love American/Western individualism for a lot of reasons, but it has led to dysfunctional views of marriage and family, IMO.

[subego]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

That just makes no sense to me. "I want to be happy - hey, I think I'll have a family!" First, families rarely provide simple happiness. At best, they're a mixed bag. They're rewarding for reasons other than one's personal happiness. Second, families are by definition about other people, not oneself. Anyone who wants to get married and have kids for selfish personal reasons is not going in with the right motivation.

I don't think kids are a prerequisite to making a family. A couple can be a family. Every family starts out as a couple.

You shouldn't make the choice to couple with someone permanently unless staying with them provides some measure of happiness.

If one has already blown past that to the infant part, well then yeah, something is screwy.

P.S. Being rewarded doesn't make you happy?

[OreoCookie]

Why is this in the PL? I think this is a personal rather than political issue …

[andi*pandi]

I think all avenues should be explored before they give up. People give up too easily, when they've made vows and commitments--and children.

Have they tried:

Couples counseling?
A vacation just them no kids?
Finding new activities to have in common?

And something they don't tell you in any parenting book is that kids change a marriage and infatuation/passion fades over time. What you replace it with defines a marriage I guess.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

I think all avenues should be explored before they give up. People give up too easily, when they've made vows and commitments--and children.

Have they tried:

Couples counseling?
A vacation just them no kids?
Finding new activities to have in common?

And something they don't tell you in any parenting book is that kids change a marriage and infatuation/passion fades over time. What you replace it with defines a marriage I guess.

That's why it's important to base a relationship on something that won't fade away over time. If it's based mostly on how great the sex is, and one day the sex is gone, what does that leave you with? Routine? That's a horrible reason to stay with someone.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

And something they don't tell you in any parenting book is that kids change a marriage and infatuation/passion fades over time. What you replace it with defines a marriage I guess.