If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#411
|
|||
|
|||
looking for other perspectives (very long)
dragonlady wrote in message ...
In article , (abacus) wrote: How long does one's spouse have to be incapacitated before you consider it reasonable to seek out someone else to meet your needs? Two years? Ten? Never? Please, give some thought to your answer. How many days of coming home to a place without a partner could you endure before seeking another? 1000? 10,000? How many lonely nights? How long would you choose to live the life of a widow without even the option of looking for another mate? I am not suggesting that you STAY in an untenable situation. I am suggesting, however, that until you get a divorce, relationships with others are inappropriate. Now, if your partner decides they'd accept you being polyamorous, then you are not cheating on them. If you AND YOUR PARTNER decide to chage the vows, than it's different -- under those conditions, you aren't cheating, you are just operating under differnt rules than most of us. However, I can never condone cheating. I can appreciate that sentiment. But what if your partner is incapacitated and you cannot consult with them? Say, for example, a spouse injured and in a coma for years? Is it really more ethical to divorce them and move on with your life? Maybe, but I'm not so sure. I'm not sure I would _condone_ an affair in such a situation, but I'm not going to condemn it either. Even if you are certain that you would remain faithful and celebate for the rest of your life if necessary, can you not understand that others might find the need to find another person to share their life with? The daily ups and downs, the joys and trials of life, these are things that most of us wish to have someone to share with....someone whom we love and who loves us back. Sure, some people are single forever, whether by choice or circumstance, but can you not understand that others might need to find someone else to fill the hole left by a partner that isn't there for them anymore? Personally, I don't consider divorcing a spouse who's been incapacited by illness for years to be any less a breaking of one's vows than an affair. After all, the oath was "in sickness and in health .... till death do you part". Except when your partner is refusing to get treatment for a mental illness, I would say THEY have broken their vows. This is something I watched up close many years ago. A couple that I was relatively close to seemed to have a good marriage, but the wife's manic-depressive illness began to get worse and worse. She flatly refused to get treatment for it. At first, I thought the "in sickness and health" line applied, and he should stay with her. What convinced me otherwise was realizing that it was no different from refusing to stay married to an alcoholic who refuses to stop drinking: the power to change things is there, and if they won't even TRY to get better, I'd say the healthy partner is under minimal obligation to try to stay. I think it's OK to say, "If you don't stop (drinking, using cocaine, gambling all our money away) I am going to leave you." Those are all types of illnesses. I think it's also OK to say, "If you refuse to get treatment for your (depression, schizophrenia, manic-depression) I am going to leave you." I do NOT think it's OK to decide that life is miserable with your partner, so you're going to cheat on them. If you feel that they have broken their vows and it's now acceptable for the other partner to break theirs, why is acceptable to break the "till death do you part" part, but not the "forsaking all others" part? I'm not talking about being lying or deceitful about it, just not requiring permission from the partner. If you don't need their agreement to divorce them in this situation, why do you feel that their agreement is needed to seek out solace from another party. A few years ago, I thought much as you did. This experience (and please remember that I have NOT broken any vows) has taught me that I should not rush to judgement of other's behavior. One doesn't really know what they might be experiencing. Still, as the OP demonstrates, affairs have consequences for everyone involved. Not something to be entered into lightly. I try (really hard) not to judge other people -- but that doesn't mean that I have to not have an opinion about what constitutes ethical behavior. If asked, I'm more than willing to share that opinion -- and here, I was asked. Yes, and I thank you for sharing. I hope you will consent to share your opinion in more depth. BTW, thanks for the story about your friends. My spouse is manic-depressive as well. I've been able to cope with it reasonably well for most of our marriage, but this last depressive episode, brought on by extremely stressful circumstances beyond our control has been the worst, including for the first time, some catatonic periods. |
#413
|
|||
|
|||
looking for other perspectives (very long)
In article ,
(abacus) wrote: dragonlady wrote in message ... In article , (abacus) wrote: How long does one's spouse have to be incapacitated before you consider it reasonable to seek out someone else to meet your needs? Two years? Ten? Never? Please, give some thought to your answer. How many days of coming home to a place without a partner could you endure before seeking another? 1000? 10,000? How many lonely nights? How long would you choose to live the life of a widow without even the option of looking for another mate? I am not suggesting that you STAY in an untenable situation. I am suggesting, however, that until you get a divorce, relationships with others are inappropriate. Now, if your partner decides they'd accept you being polyamorous, then you are not cheating on them. If you AND YOUR PARTNER decide to chage the vows, than it's different -- under those conditions, you aren't cheating, you are just operating under differnt rules than most of us. However, I can never condone cheating. I can appreciate that sentiment. But what if your partner is incapacitated and you cannot consult with them? Say, for example, a spouse injured and in a coma for years? Is it really more ethical to divorce them and move on with your life? Maybe, but I'm not so sure. I'm not sure I would _condone_ an affair in such a situation, but I'm not going to condemn it either. That is a special circumstance. The only person I ever knew in a situation like that (her spouse wasn't in a coma, but so severely brain injured that he had to be put in a nursing home) had to divorce him, because if she didn't, she had to stay on welfare -- if she got a job, she'd become responsible for his medical bills. It was hard -- but, yes, a divorce WAS the only option. She continued to visit him and have contact with him, but got on with her life. Even if you are certain that you would remain faithful and celebate for the rest of your life if necessary, can you not understand that others might find the need to find another person to share their life with? The daily ups and downs, the joys and trials of life, these are things that most of us wish to have someone to share with....someone whom we love and who loves us back. Sure, some people are single forever, whether by choice or circumstance, but can you not understand that others might need to find someone else to fill the hole left by a partner that isn't there for them anymore? Personally, I don't consider divorcing a spouse who's been incapacited by illness for years to be any less a breaking of one's vows than an affair. After all, the oath was "in sickness and in health .... till death do you part". Except when your partner is refusing to get treatment for a mental illness, I would say THEY have broken their vows. This is something I watched up close many years ago. A couple that I was relatively close to seemed to have a good marriage, but the wife's manic-depressive illness began to get worse and worse. She flatly refused to get treatment for it. At first, I thought the "in sickness and health" line applied, and he should stay with her. What convinced me otherwise was realizing that it was no different from refusing to stay married to an alcoholic who refuses to stop drinking: the power to change things is there, and if they won't even TRY to get better, I'd say the healthy partner is under minimal obligation to try to stay. I think it's OK to say, "If you don't stop (drinking, using cocaine, gambling all our money away) I am going to leave you." Those are all types of illnesses. I think it's also OK to say, "If you refuse to get treatment for your (depression, schizophrenia, manic-depression) I am going to leave you." I do NOT think it's OK to decide that life is miserable with your partner, so you're going to cheat on them. If you feel that they have broken their vows and it's now acceptable for the other partner to break theirs, why is acceptable to break the "till death do you part" part, but not the "forsaking all others" part? I'm not talking about being lying or deceitful about it, just not requiring permission from the partner. If you don't need their agreement to divorce them in this situation, why do you feel that their agreement is needed to seek out solace from another party. I don't think we included "til death parts us" in our vows; lots of weddings leave that line out these days. But even so -- I feel it is more honest to divorce first. A few years ago, I thought much as you did. This experience (and please remember that I have NOT broken any vows) has taught me that I should not rush to judgement of other's behavior. One doesn't really know what they might be experiencing. Still, as the OP demonstrates, affairs have consequences for everyone involved. Not something to be entered into lightly. I try (really hard) not to judge other people -- but that doesn't mean that I have to not have an opinion about what constitutes ethical behavior. If asked, I'm more than willing to share that opinion -- and here, I was asked. Yes, and I thank you for sharing. I hope you will consent to share your opinion in more depth. BTW, thanks for the story about your friends. My spouse is manic-depressive as well. I've been able to cope with it reasonably well for most of our marriage, but this last depressive episode, brought on by extremely stressful circumstances beyond our control has been the worst, including for the first time, some catatonic periods. My heartfelt sympathies. I know for my friend the last straw was having to have his wife involuntarily committed, because she stopped eating and was within a week or so of dying. When she got out of the hospital, and that particular depressive phase ended, she insisted she was fine, and continued to refuse treatment. He said he simply could no longer live like that, and never again wanted to deal with the courts, having to prove that his wife was crazy. She ended up going back to live with her parents. It was several years after the divorce before he started dating again; we moved away about then, and lost track of him (and her). I hope your wife gets the treatment she needs. Manic-depresives who get treatment may still have some problems, but they are MUCH easier to live with! -- Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care |
#414
|
|||
|
|||
looking for other perspectives (very long)
In article vJ%wc.17426$Sw.15444@attbi_s51,
Doug Anderson wrote: (abacus) writes: dragonlady wrote in message ... In article , (abacus) wrote: How long does one's spouse have to be incapacitated before you consider it reasonable to seek out someone else to meet your needs? Two years? Ten? Never? Please, give some thought to your answer. How many days of coming home to a place without a partner could you endure before seeking another? 1000? 10,000? How many lonely nights? How long would you choose to live the life of a widow without even the option of looking for another mate? I am not suggesting that you STAY in an untenable situation. I am suggesting, however, that until you get a divorce, relationships with others are inappropriate. Now, if your partner decides they'd accept you being polyamorous, then you are not cheating on them. If you AND YOUR PARTNER decide to chage the vows, than it's different -- under those conditions, you aren't cheating, you are just operating under differnt rules than most of us. However, I can never condone cheating. I can appreciate that sentiment. But what if your partner is incapacitated and you cannot consult with them? Say, for example, a spouse injured and in a coma for years? What if ... Eleanor Roosevelt could fly! No -- it's a legitimate question. Things like this happen -- people have brain injuries, or develop dementia, or develop a mental illness that requires long term (maybe forever) hospitalization -- asking what the ethical thing to do is at a time like that is legitimate, and, I think, helps define the ethical boundaries. -- Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care |
#415
|
|||
|
|||
looking for other perspectives (very long)
"Paula" wrote in message
I am prepared to walk away from him (and take our child with me) if I/we/he decide(s) that's what's best for everyone. The best advise is to break away from this relationship. Your two year mark seems reasonable and logical... that is about the time it takes for many people to get over a "breakup" and start to move on. You may be quite surprised at what a real love means when you enter into a sincere healthy relationship with a man who has no strings attached. Please consider in the meantime it is possible that things may turn bad and he will want his daughter, but not you in the picture. I was with my newborn at the checkout line when I met a young woman in front of me. She blurted out "I just had a baby". Then she went on to tell me that she and the baby's father were never married, and that shortly after the baby was born, the man and his mother took legal action to gain custody of the child and was somehow able to convince the court that the woman was unfit. She said as soon as she had her baby, she had to turn the baby over to them. I couldn't believe what I heard. But things like this do happen. So please be careful, don't promise anything, or sign anything without a lawyer. Don't leave your daughter with them for any extended period of time.... this would be construed as abandonment. |
#416
|
|||
|
|||
looking for other perspectives (very long)
dragonlady wrote:
However, I can never condone cheating. I can appreciate that sentiment. But what if your partner is incapacitated and you cannot consult with them? Say, for example, a spouse injured and in a coma for years? What if ... Eleanor Roosevelt could fly! No -- it's a legitimate question. Things like this happen -- people have brain injuries, or develop dementia, or develop a mental illness that requires long term (maybe forever) hospitalization -- asking what the ethical thing to do is at a time like that is legitimate, and, I think, helps define the ethical boundaries. It may be a legitimate question, but it distorts what is really being talked about with the original situation. It may be something to discuss in theory, but I would think a new thread to discuss that would be a more appropriate place. Personally I don't see any of the above as reasons for abandoning my commitment to my spouse. Putting the discussion here in this thread dilutes the fact that none of the scenarios above come even close to the situation that started this thread. Cal~ |
#417
|
|||
|
|||
looking for other perspectives (very long)
In article ,
"_calinda_" wrote: dragonlady wrote: However, I can never condone cheating. I can appreciate that sentiment. But what if your partner is incapacitated and you cannot consult with them? Say, for example, a spouse injured and in a coma for years? What if ... Eleanor Roosevelt could fly! No -- it's a legitimate question. Things like this happen -- people have brain injuries, or develop dementia, or develop a mental illness that requires long term (maybe forever) hospitalization -- asking what the ethical thing to do is at a time like that is legitimate, and, I think, helps define the ethical boundaries. It may be a legitimate question, but it distorts what is really being talked about with the original situation. It may be something to discuss in theory, but I would think a new thread to discuss that would be a more appropriate place. Personally I don't see any of the above as reasons for abandoning my commitment to my spouse. Putting the discussion here in this thread dilutes the fact that none of the scenarios above come even close to the situation that started this thread. Cal~ Ah, but I'm a big fan of thread drift . . . . -- Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care |
#418
|
|||
|
|||
looking for other perspectives (very long)
|
#419
|
|||
|
|||
looking for other perspectives (very long)
In article , dragonlady
says... In article , "_calinda_" wrote: dragonlady wrote: However, I can never condone cheating. I can appreciate that sentiment. But what if your partner is incapacitated and you cannot consult with them? Say, for example, a spouse injured and in a coma for years? What if ... Eleanor Roosevelt could fly! No -- it's a legitimate question. Things like this happen -- people have brain injuries, or develop dementia, or develop a mental illness that requires long term (maybe forever) hospitalization -- asking what the ethical thing to do is at a time like that is legitimate, and, I think, helps define the ethical boundaries. It may be a legitimate question, but it distorts what is really being talked about with the original situation. It may be something to discuss in theory, but I would think a new thread to discuss that would be a more appropriate place. Personally I don't see any of the above as reasons for abandoning my commitment to my spouse. Putting the discussion here in this thread dilutes the fact that none of the scenarios above come even close to the situation that started this thread. Cal~ Ah, but I'm a big fan of thread drift . . . . Thread drift is a Good Thing - as long as it does not fold back with a conclusions like: well, if it's OK to abandon one's committment to one's spouse in an extreme situation like permanent profound brain damage, then it's not so bad to be having an affair. Not that such a conclusion is *explicitly* drawn - and if it were, it would be challenged I'm sure. It's that so often this kind of drift leaves an impression like that, where people reading conclude: well, it's not all so clear cut anyway. So I guess what I'm saying is that thread drift is a fine thing (else USENET wouldn't be much fun ;-), but also there's a place for folks like Cal to remind us that we've drifted beyond the bounds of applicability. But we can discuss all the other cases at the same time. Cheers, Banty |
#420
|
|||
|
|||
looking for other perspectives (very long)
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Difficult Move Cross County (long) | risa bernstein | General | 2 | March 11th 04 11:08 PM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | General | 13 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
Kids should work. | LaVonne Carlson | General | 22 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |
ER visit -- part vent, should I complain? Long, as usual | Tina | General | 40 | September 23rd 03 01:36 PM |
(MA.) Murderer's rep as rat preceded long rap sheet | [email protected] | General | 0 | August 28th 03 05:36 PM |