Staying for the kids - explain why please

[dorky]

Why do couples stay together for the sake of the kids?

Isn't it poor role modelling to accept a relationship that you would not like for your kids?

Isn't it unfair on a partner to stay for finances, and convenience?

I really don't understand why people in a less than happy marriage think it's better than going it alone... please enlighten me

gosh i think there could be so many scenarios and reasons.

I guess people set off with a plan, a promise, if they married? They try and stick to it, and truly feel they will let their kids down. Perhaps they cannot imagine life without their family unit.

I wonder how many people do stick in a goddmaned awful situation as opposed to an alright we are plodding along situation.

They tell themselves it's for the kids but really it's fear of the unknown. did the other thread get deleted?

I wouldn't stay just for the children if my partner were abusive. But I know that DH and I would try to stay together, even if we fell out of love with eachother. Partly because I think the fallout of parents separating can be totally horrific (as I know from experience).

But also because neither DH or I could bear to live without the children. I can't understand how my dad could do it - how being married to my mum was worse than not living with me and my brother. He broke my heart.

If my mum had left, I think I'd have felt differently - he was violent towards her and very emotionally abusive.

So I think you have to take each situation separately on its own merit - unless there is a reason where you could not bear to live with that person one minute longer, then really, IMO, you and your partner ought to work together to create a way where you could stay together.

having said that, I would totally disagree with someone staying in an abusive relationship 'for the children' as, you are right, that models nothing good at all to them, and is just as, if not more, unstable than separating and creating a new, more stable and safe normal for the children.

I chose to leave, but that is because I could afford to. I don't think staying together for sake of financial convenience is so totally mad. The poor outcomes for children from single parent families seem to be move problems of poverty than just being bought up by one parent.

A bad relationship exists on an enormous spectrum. If you have lost the 'spark' but can still like and respect each other, that's one thing. If you are in a violent and abusive relationship I think you should definitely get out asap as that will really damage your children.

Plus some people are really, really scared at the idea of going it alone and I do think there is an enormous societal pressure to be part of a 'couple' and be considered somehow less worthy if you are not. It is not a given that these people will be happier on their own, even if the relationship is less than brilliant.

Because it's impossible to get by finacially without claiming benefits
if me and dh split up we'd have to sell a small house to buy two smaller houses and pay two sets of bills
there's no way we could afford it

I think convenience and finance play a huge part; also a genuine belief that it might be better for the children to have parents bring them up together than be in one parent families; also depends how 'bad' the marital relationship is - ie; my DH and I are not blissfully happy 100% of the time but we get along well enough; I believe we do a good enough job of bringing up our DS together. We do not fight/argue/shout etc at each other. To most of the outside world we probably do have a pretty OK marriage - perhaps even to ourselves we believe it is OK and the alternative is far, far worse. I think we are honest with each other - we don't pretend it is 'wonderful' and each of knows what our 'bargaining power' is, if you look at it that way.

It's for child care reasons too
if one of you work full time and the other is a sahp the one who works won't be able to leave because they won't have the childcare to ensure they cansee the kids as often as they'd like

Who on this small planet has a marriage that is 100% blissfully happy? Isn't it better for the children to see that parents may have a disagreement and can work things out amicably?

Quite, celtic. If you're splitting up with eachother because you're a bit bored with eachother is, IMO, irresponsible and childish and selfish. If you're kind to eachother, you'll manage perfectly happily to stay together by thinking creatively about how you do it.

I have a friend who chucked her husband out for no reason other than that she was bored of him, by her own admission. I've felt so awful about it I've tried giving her the benefit of the doubt...maybe he was abusive etc....but every time she's said 'nah! I just got bored of being married'. Now her children have to live with a mum who is stressed because she has no one to share the childcare with; stressed because she has no money; they have crap food because she's so poor (although I know she could a better job) etc. etc. They only see their dad once a fortnight and they're very angry with her for kicking him out. It's so sad .

When DH and I agreed to have children, we made a committment to them that was stronger even that the committment we made to eachother when we got married (when we promised to stay together 'for better or worse') and if we fell out of love with eachother, we'd just find a way of staying together peaceably.

Hmmmm Lacking. Ever give any thought to maybe your friend was trying to save face and didn't want to go into the horrible details about why her relationship ended? For eg he was verbally/physically abusive, wouldn't have sex with her, wouldn't help around the house or with the children etc, etc.

If she really did kick him out because 'she was bored' it sounds as though she will have, many, many opportunities to reap what she has sowed.

But frankly, I don't believe anyone with children would be that stupid. I don't believe any woman with children ends a relationship with a live in partner without a LOT of thought because it is bleeding obvious how difficult, stressful and expensive it is to parent on your own.

A man has to be pretty crap before most women will leave him.

so while I agree wholeheartedly with you that ending a relationship because you are 'bored' is ludicrous and morally bankrupt behaviour, I just don't believe many or any mothers would do that.

Spero, this friend is exactly like you describe I don't even know why I'm friends with her, we're so different. We just move in similar circles and have similar aged children who like each other. And I couldn't believe it either, hence why I kept trying to make excuses for her. Another mutual friend is very, very close to her, and also says she finds it very difficult to be at peace with her decision.

Sometimes one or both parents fear losing custody, and/or feel that the parent most likely to get custody shouldn't get it. I have known couples who literally stay together to be with the children, not because they think they're doing their children a favour by staying together as a couple, but because they feel they're protecting the children from sole custody of the other parent by staying there. I'm not even talking about abusive scenarios here, though I'm sure it happens in those scenarios too.

It's a tough call, because it's very hard on children to live in a house of tension, and be puzzled at why their parents keep living together when they so clearly dislike each other. I think if it's got to the point where the parents openly have no respect for each other, they should split while there's just enough civility remaining to work out a fair custody/access plan.

My brother stayed with his ex far longer then he should have, and I truly believe that it was becuase neither of them could bear to see the other one be happy and move on.

They hated each other so much that they wanted to continue inflicting themselves on each other iyswim, and to stop the other from having a happy life.

They did split up eventually of course and it was by far the best outcome for the kids.

It is bizarre, but the unhappier you are with somebody, the more fearful it can make you about the future, even when any future would obviously be better.

I have my own theory MorrisZapp, it's that you anaethetise your 'soul' so that you can tolerate the atmosphere, and each other, and in the short term it makes 'life' bearable, but that paralysis makes it impossible to plan anything, or to even visualise anything else.

watching with interst. read the posts so far, but haven't really seen an explanation that i get/understand/accept/'washes with me'. some are possibel, but i can not see thta they justify the negatives that staying when you don't really want to, brings. i mean the children must know deep down, or it will dawn on them later, as adults they will examine their childhood and would be saddened by the realisation of what their parents had chosen to do, supposedly, for 'them'. so what good does it do ?

There's a guy who shows up on mn every so often, steve somebody (or Paul perhaps) and he has written a book about the 'virtue' of staying for the kids. He thinks he is only great for doing this. He got all shirty when people asked how his wife felt, is she embarrassed? what would happen to her financially when the kids were older..... will he be sharing the proceeds of his crappy little pamphlet book with her??

I think it is possible to believe that your situation is not "bad enough" to leave. I still feel like that year or two down the line.

My ex was:

Unfaithful repeatedly
Used drugs and alcohol excessively (mainly alcohol)
Did Nothing around the house, ever
Would disppear for days at a time leaving me with the dc
Had face ache everytime I wanted to go out and do something
Was verbally and sometimes physically abusive
Basically believed that I was a piece of the furniture and would be furious if I did not just keep quiet and accept his behaviour.

And still now I feel guilty for making him leave, as though I took the easy way out, marriage being for life and all that. I feel I have let my kids down because I couldn't make it work. I actually feel guilty for being happier now and as though I am selfish for feeling that way. I should have tried harder and just put up and shut up so my kids could stay living with their father. It is very, very hard to know when to call time.

That's crazy EsmeDiamond. Your x's behaviour was definitely bad enough that you did the right thing, not a selfish thing. NOT even close to a selfish thing.

I left my children's dad and that makes me feel responsible. You are a happy mother now and that will positively shape your children's personalities and their success in life a lot more than being able to tick some notional box '2.4 family'.

Give yourself a break girl. I'm Irish, I know about guilt and strangely, I don't feel any for leaving my children's father. Feel guilty if I have a glass of wine on a Monday night, or waste an evening watching crappy tv, but ....... this? NO. cut yourself some slack!

Hi Valium, ShimmerySilverGlitter here actually, name changed for something else and couldn't be bothered to change back.

You talk sense I know but he is still very much in the children's lives and everytime I am "cold" towards him he looks at me and says things like "I feel like I never knew you at all the way you have treated me this past year", WTF??! I know he is a total doughnut but I still question myself. I know I did the right thing, I KNOW IT but still I feel bad. AAAARGHHHHH!!!!

So in answer to the OP I think that is a lot of the reason that people stay together. Their reality has been normalised by the idiot they are with so they don't have the confidence to end things.

I do worry about the future as well and it makes me fume to see him going off on big holidays and swanning around in his flash car when he was so awful to us, i just seems so unfair.

oh yeah! the 'you're cold' chesnut! my x has come out with that too! I was cold because I had the tiniest bit of backbone and wouldn't tolerate (indefinitely) being treated like an incompetent employee!

It's true though, in your ground down mindset, you have a new normal, it's a distorted normal though, and you lose the confidence to start again.

My x is in a great place financially too. Owns an expensive house, has several motorbikes as well as an expensive car. He hasn't contributed a cent in 3 years........

Maybe some people just mean that if they didn't have a family with that person, it would be better to leave, but as they do, they have something worth working on?

and did you get "I can't believe the way you have "turned on me"? So refusal to live like a total doormat/punchbag/having face rubbed in infidelity is now classed as being spiteful/cold and turning on someone?

It does make me almost sick with rage to think of this fab life he will be leading. Just seems to unfair. But I know I have to get over it, I have lots more, I get to live with my gorgeous kids and be with them all the time and I wouldn't swap that for anything. How does your ex get away with not contributing anything? the arse.

Nutters, absolute nutters they are.

Esme - I think that you should have left. I don't see how staying in a relationship like that can be good for children to see.

But this statement: "i can not see thta they justify the negatives that staying when you don't really want to, brings" just sums it up for me, in that there is a huge difference being 'staying when you don't really want to' and 'staying when you really don't want to'.

If you're just out of love with your partner, but you're both respectful and kind to eachother, then I think you should stay together. And I think you would probably find yourselves falling back in love with eachother eventually. This is what happens in the good arranged marriages - where both partners treat eachother with respect and care; a deeper sort of love can grow.

But if one partner doesn't treat the other with respect or kindness, and you fall out of love with them, then I don't think that would be good for the children to see you staying with that person.

I think the danger is, with making generalised statements like 'you should always stay for the sake of the children' or 'you should never stay for the sake of the children' is that you get the worst of both worlds. People who think that just because they're no longer ecstatic to be with their partner, they should jack it all in because their happiness is paramount and the children will just have to manage; and people who stick with someone abusive and violent because they think it's better for children to see that behaviour than to have their parents split up.

I think there is a middle ground - a point at which it's better to stay together and work hard together to make it work somehow. But of course that's not going to be the case for all couples who are having problems.

Esme - I have just booted out my addict husband for the second time. He was nothing like as bad as your H (this time) - and I feel extremely guilty about it. NO-ONE - and this includes his parents and brother blames me, everyone has told me what I did was right for the kids.... but I still feel GUILTY and responsible for breaking my marriage vows.

I am considering some counseling to understand WHY i still feel guilty....