Midlife Crisis: Support for Left Behind Spouses
Archives => Archived Topics => Topic started by: Thundarr on December 13, 2012, 03:48:37 AM
-
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/12/11/dont-get-divorce-get-consorce/?intcmp=obnetwork
Very interesting article by someone who I have agreed with on many points in the past, but I have to say I couldn't do it. I cannot imagine sharing the house (and maybe even bedroom) with my W if we weren't going to be living as H and W any more. I don't think I could settle for being "just friends," but from my discussion with my W last night it appears that is exactly what she has in mind and said several times "we'll talk and decide what's best for the kids still" meaning that she would still have input and influence without commitment or responsibility. So she gets the best of both worlds and I get stuck with all the responsibility and having to be the adult, and I have no choice in the matter because it's the only way that's anywhere near healthy for the kids. They need someone they can count on and right now they have only one in the world. Living with this juvenile behavior from W while still letting her have her cake and eat it too would be unfathomable, especially knowing the end result would not be R. Thoughts, feelings on this? I think this is different than a live-in MLCer as some might be thinking, as both parties supposedly accept the romantic part of the marriage is over and both are free to do as they please with whomever they please. Not. Happening.
-
Thundarr, you know that what was in that article is VERY different than living with an MLCer. Now I don't think I could do that either, but what that article is talking about is BOTH partners taking full responsibility. It says nothing about juvenile behaviour, and it also says that BOTH are in agreement on it. You said it yourself -- our MLCers want input and influence with out commitment or responsibility. A VERY different thing.
-
Exactly, T & L. I said this was not the same as a live-in MLCer, but where I was going with this was would this be a consideration for those looking to stay married rather than separate or divorce. My supposition is that the parties could always change their minds and decide that the romantic energy is still there in the future but I don't know. This seems to be a platonic living arrangement that keeps both parents in the kids' lives while freeing the parents up to do whatever. Morally not right in my book, but I don't set others' morals.
-
For you Thundarr I do not think this is a good choice.
Keep your heard earned victories and your children safe.
Your MLC'er is not ready for this, let her go.
-
Agree with the above. The thing about an MLC'er is they effectively become a stranger to us. Would you move in with a stranger or let them move in with your kids. No, I wouldn't.
-
I don't spend my time reading things that are not applicable to MLC. Anything that refers to something "agreed" or "mutual" in regard to the marital relationship will be irrelevant to MLC. If someone is in MLC, they are going to abandon the marriage and the spouse, and will shed varying degrees of responsibility with the kids.
I expect my MLCer to behave like someone in MLC.
Here are two things RCR wrote which are brief but excellent, and directly relevant to MLC.
Stop expecting him to be something other than an MLCer.
Of course he doesn’t have it in him—that’s MLC 101.
-
I think this has a lot more to do with finance than romance. I have a friend who has one of these sorts of arrangements, but not for kids - for lifestyle. She said she and her H (who have been together a comparable length of time to most of us on the site - 20 or so years), between property and insurance they own in common and the lifestyle they've become accustomed to living, would rather stay legally married roomies than give any of that up. They've both had long term relationships within this arrangement, but they usually end when either my friend or her H won't agree to divorce for the other person. Can't blame the OP...most normal people don't want to date married people.
It was a very MLC-like affair on her H's part that started all of this, but other than being "friends with benefits" at times, my friend seems happy to keep things status quo and not rebuild their marriage in a more traditional way. She thinks I should be partying. So even with physical contact, they don't always 'change back' to the old R. The old R is gone, and they have made something new that they both want - even if it's not traditional.
-
I agree with R2T about it being a financial arrangement. Ablow says it's not an open marriage. I disagree. All open marriages have rules to make that lifestyle work for both people. The traditional open marriage includes intimacy between the married couple. Just because one of the rules is we won't be intimate with each other doesn't make it anything different than an open marriage.
They've both had long term relationships within this arrangement, but they usually end when either my friend or her H won't agree to divorce for the other person.
Because the OP wants something more. I guess I just don't understand people that don't want that extra intimacy and emotional commitment to each other. That feeling of being special because you are the only one for them. My W's previous marriage was open and we've discussed it a bit in the past and why she wanted it that way. She said because even though she cared about her ex, she wasn't really in love with him and was looking for the right one. As for R2T's friends, I'm sure I don't want a M like that where I knew I never had a chance to live and grow old with the love of my life. It sounds like they are enjoying their freedom, but when life gets tough, will there be that special someone right beside you to fight through the tough times? I doubt it.
-
Glad to see this spurred some discussion, but just to clarify there's no way in Hell I would live like that. To me it is a sinful and adulterous relationship and I cannot imagine how screwed up the kids must be once it's all said and done. Let's see, Mommy and Daddy live together and sleep in the same room but Mommy is going out with OM and Daddy is going out with OW and sometimes they stay over here. It sounds like some sort of big orgy or something. I don't think if I won the lottery I could stand living with or even near W and seeing her with other people. That may work for some but I just cannot fathom it.
-
There is now way I could live with my h and see him with other people. Just the thought if him with ow drives me crazy, I couldn't imagine watching him hug, kiss and walk into the bedroom with another woman. I don't think its normal and I believe its sinful too. Marriage and comittment are about more than getting your own needs met. I truly believe they are about meeting the needs of another person self-lessly. I admit I wasn't great about doing that in the couple of years pre-bomb drop but it didn't give him the right to go out and find someone else.
Its bad enought that Mommy and Daddy don't live together and Daddy has brought his "friend" along while having time with his s9. To have that going on under the same roof is just wrong.
-
For myself i do not beleive that I would not be battling jealous feelings while I was "pretending" to be evolved and accepting.
Just prior to BD#2 my H waid he had resigned himself to the fact that we were more like roommates then husband and wife. I didn't feel that way but he did. If I had not discovered the OW relationship I believe he might have stayed with me and been somewhat happy to juggle his two worlds. I do not believe I could do that.
But then again, this article is about two people who agree they no longer "love" each other as a spouse should.