Anyone read the times article about how to save your marriage from divorce ?

[kittensinmydinner]

Very briefly, the long and short of it is ... Young children take their toll on a marriage. The 'modern' way of child centred parenting puts too much focus on the children, leading the main carer to stop putting effort into their relationship and the other spouse - working outside the home- to feel pushed out and unloved. (All the love and attention being focussed on the dcs) this leads to resentment from both parties, -Sahp feeling the other doesn't appreciate how hard child caring is, the other feeling they don't matter. Resentment builds until it goes bang - usually but not exclusively with the working parent seeking outside interests to fill the void. The solution. - a la 1950 to put the kids to bed at 7, brush your hair, have dinner ready, bit of lippy ( I'm guessing for the sahm - but who knows) and spend the evening being a spouse not a parent... The philosophy being that by putting your spouses needs before dcs you create a solid foundation for family and happier dcs. Thoughts ladies. Have we gone to far in child centred parenting or is this the holy grail of happy families. ?

Quire right demented!

My oldest is 16...can't see him wanting to go to bed at 7

dementedma hear hear
I've just divorced. Oh joy. It's me, me, me now. And the kids

We bathe the DC, get them to bed, together. DH reads them a story whilst I breastfeed DD2.

I have a quick bubble bath with a nice candle, and yes I do have a quick spritz of perfume and a blob of lippy (always do, even on a rare evening alone). Then I make dinner whilst DH has a bath then tidies up a bit. We have a glass of wine and a chat whilst pottering, then eat together. We might watch a bit of TV or a boxed set (I know, it's so bloody wild round ours).

It's not for everyone, but it suits us really well. We're very happy together. We share jobs, we have time to listen to each other. We usually have a couple of hours for us to eat and chat every evening. The DC are little though - it'll have to change as they get older and we eat together as a family (we always do at the weekend) and the like.

We always stay up too bloody late though. It's all the baths.

mrsdavidbowie

1.I think the point of the feature was that her mother told her to to work on her marriage and not throw the towel in so easily.
The lippie etc is optional.

1. I'd say The Times is neutral politically.

1. The writer is freelance (I think) not employed by the Times.

I read the article, well bits of it. I'd say the gist is that marriage is tough but rewarding and you're short-changing yourself if you don't fight for it. I didn't read it as sexist, neither side was blameless and both had equal responsibility to work at it, to make compromises, to listen and try, etc.

It was a marriage that was failing due to lack of commitment to work their problems out. Kind of a boring message I suppose.

I agree Ragged. The most important part was that her mother told her she couldn't rock up with the grandchildren and use them as a base.
The advice was try to hang on in there and make time to communicate.

The lippie etc was a wind up and meant to get a reaction. The critical part was make time for each other, not just DCs.

Dementedma are you me?
Why the actual fuck did I leave a big gap between DC2 and 3? I could have had my life baaaack!

"I'd say The Times is politically neutral" hahahahaha
I read the Times, the Guardian & The independent - the times is definitely not politically neutral, it's not quite as clearly right wing as the Torygraph but its definitely on that side of the fence.

Hahahaha- I read them all too- and more- and say the jury is always out when there is an election as to which 'side' the Times will take.

Re the article, that would mean putting 3 DCs needs and my DH's and the couple relationships before mine then? Fuck that for a game of soldiers. Most nights I was on my knees by 7 in the evening - and not for relationship saving reasons.

It doesn't take into account any time for women to recharge though. - You'd spend all day running around after your dc, then frantically sorting the house, yourself and your dh's tea out at then end of the day before he came home to then massage his ego by making him the focus of everything. What does he do by return?

I agree that many couples not only are parents first, but aren't a couple anymore other than in parenting.

Dh and I take our family time and us time very seriously. We often go out by ourselves, and time when he's home is divided between family time and our time.

I don't do makeup but when we get time together it's time for us. We are very close and our parenting is stronger because of it.

Actually I think people fetishise the Couple Relationship ridiculously, to the detriment of all the other friendships and relationships we need in our lives. It's much harder IMO to keep those going when you have kids.

But it's an idiotic assumption that modern households operate on a sole breadwinner/SAHP model anyway.

In Europe, children go to bed much later and spend the evening as part of the family. I don't see it makes much difference to their divorce rates.

Also, putting children to bed work til they are about school-age, but after that it's ridiculous to put them to bed in the summer when its light and they are wide awake. All you get is a 5.30 am start which isn't conducive to intimacy and happiness either.

The vast amount of media stories about mums and children are about little children, how children did/didn't change my life, my experience of breastfeeding, how to deal with tantrums, how I haven't been to the toilet on my own for decades etc.

It's boring.

The idea that some women live through their children and get emotional intimacy that way rather than with their husbands has been kicking around for about 30 years (Nancy Chodorow).

yawny I think we are soul sisters. Big gap between dc2 and unexpected dc3 here and its shit!
"I could have had my life back" oh, yes.......

It gets better demented! I have 10 years between DC1 and DC2 and then DC3. It was hard work when DC3 was a baby. Now she is 3 her big sisters get to prolong their childhood playing with her and DH and I operate a policy of benign neglect - defo not planning DC4 though!

There's a lot of truth in the premise of the article but I don't agree with their proposed solutions.

My view is this. Me and Dh are the foundation of our little family. If we are happy and pulling together, our children will be happy. The neontocratic focus of western society is tipping to the point where you have to sacrifice everything for the kids, or you're a bad parent. I don't think this is healthy. Kids need love, but they also need stability and rules and happy, cooperative parents are important for this (regardless of gender of parents, step families, single parents etc. All these set ups can be stable.) sometimes, you put yourselves first. I don't mean that you should be neglecting your kids, I mean you shouldn't forget you're a couple.

Now.... Here's where I disagree with the article. The solution to this is not to chain women back to the stove, 1950s style. It's to set aside child free time for YOU, as the parents. In France, it's oerfectly normal to send kindergarten age kids off to grannies or family/friends for a week while you have time together. It's also common for kindergarteners to have 'green weeks' where they stay on a farm or similar. It gives the kids independence and it allows the parents to spend time together.

I have always put my own emotional and physical welfare before both that of my kids and my husband

to me, the correct order of priority goes...

1. me
2. kids
3. dh

Well said AF.

I've always believed and lived by the family needs a very strong and bomb proof foundation, this foundation is the one you and your DH/DP create so why would you want to rock that by neglicting it?
Children come equal to all others, not before. If their needs are greater at that time then you put them first BUT never all the time and never to the detriment of the solid foundation you work so hard to create for them.

upseedaisies - yes but kids grow up and its when you have teens who are up all evening and need taking eveywhere that you DO become ( if not careful) like a couple of people who share a flat.

In some ways its easier when kids are tiny

I spent years putting my DH first. Spending early evening frantically tidying the house and getting a delicious meal ready. Children in bed by 7pm so he could home to a spotless peaceful house.

All it achieved was the fact he thought my life was a piece of cake and I'd done nothing all day, plus I barely got to spend any nice time with my kids because I was too busy tidying and rushing them into bed. It certainly didn't help our marriage.

I've just started divorce proceedings and heartily wish I had put my DC first for all those years.

I do think you need to cherish each other actively.
I am rather matter of fact in this way but have learned in twenty years that H needs far more of this than I would expect.

I think too many couples spend hours scoring points on' his turn/my turn' to do something and should just be more randomly kind.
KINDNESS and cherishing is way undervalued.