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. ?

DH and I both rolled our eyes after reading yesterday's article!

She's obviously desperately trying to regain her journalistic career and her current schtick is 'my difficult marriage'.

Well, yes, it will be difficult since both she and her DH are self obsessed idiots without any analytical skills whatsoever.

Looking at it briefly, it is obvious that this pair have never spent any time building a relationship, let alone preserving it.

They married in haste, late in life, whilst still embroiled in an extended period of teendom. They had a baby immediately, then another immediately (despite not enjoying having one).

They're a pair of toddlers!

There are elements that are useful

One of the key differences I think is that people work later/longer. Shops never used to be open all sodding hours, ditto factories.

I agree that we have become over child centred. There's an awful lot of pandering that didn't exist when I were a lass. The great outdoors, come back at tea time. Not sat playing various electronics for hours on end. Appreciate though that, sadly, it's not as safe to do that now which is a great pity.

It also doesn't or shouldn't take much to make a partner feel appreciated.

What really pisses me off about this is it seems focussed on the mum making sure she is meeting the needs of the children and the man. The emphasis is on her to spread herself out and ensure everyone is happy. That pisses me right off.

Things change when you have kids but so what, if your partner is a decent person who shares your values and not an entitled asshole then it will all work out.

stopeatingbiscuits if your husband wants home cooked food on the table could he not do the cooking? Especially if his hours are more predictable and he doesn't work weekends.

Lumpy - seconded!

Dare I say it, he could even spend some of his freer weekend time batch cooking so you can have quick home-cooked meals in the week. Although something tells me the chances of this happening are low to nil...

Neither of us have much free time. And is no reason I couldn't batch cook at the weekend - if I could be arsed!

I may think about stopping work in the future as we are hoping to have another and my job is not really compatible with family life a lot of the time (!) though does have its advantages. However that's a whole they question - giving up work etc, I think then he would def expect more in the way of cooking - and I am not sure I am cut out to be a full time mother without going nuts!

All children should be in bed by 7. All husbands want food cooked for them. All wives want flowers and diamonds. All children thrive better if left to their own devices in the great outdoors.

This is somehow not helpful.

When we had our kids we were already in our 30s and had been together for 14 years. We knew each other inside out and back to front. As a result, we are totally confident in our relationship and more than willing to put the needs of our children first for the few short years we have the joy of them being at home.
I don't go with this separate meals business either. In our house, dinner is a family meal during which we natter about our days and talk about the next. We don't have a two tier system of food- where the kids get fish fingers while we dine on lobster!! We are a family!!

It would probably appall some posters to hear that we have never had a night out as a couple since the oldest child was born (she's 9) and celebrate anniversaries and valentines day as a family. We waited long and painful years for our children to come along and we make the most of our time with them,

Same here, singsongsung (apart from the long painful bit ((hugs)))

Lumpy that's what concerns me too. It seems to be down to the woman to ensure children are happy, that's she's putting enough effort into how she looks and has things 'nice' for her husband, meals cooked, house cleaned, trying to make sure she's holding all the relationships in the family together.

Singsong I totally agree with what you've said about 'willing to put the needs of our children first for the few short years we have the joy of them being at home. Me and DH were together for 8 years before kids came on the scene and we are a good strong compatible couple.

While the kids are young they come first before us as individuals. I think if a man can't accept that he is not the center of attention for his partner then that throws up serious problems. Each adult should be doing all they can for the family, some men don't realize that if a woman is tired and ground down by doing all the menial household chores, cooking and childcare it can make a woman go off sex.

I prefer to put myself first - yes, our DS was always in bed at 7pm but not so that DH and I could sit and spend the evening together, we would go out (separately) to meetings/activities/voluntary work etc to ensure we maintained a semblance of an interesting lifestyle - not just centred around home, work and family.

I know of couples who go on holidays without the kids. I actually find that quite sad.

Interesting. I agree with Lumpy to an extent, it's very much about what the woman should do for everyone else, which doesn't sit right.

I do think there's an important difference between saying that yes, in terms of the bigger picture kids come first. But that doesn't mean that in everyday scenarios the kids should always come first. I definitely believe that it is good for kids when the parents take time to nurture themselves individually and as a couple, in order to be happier, more stable, more complete human beings.

Balance is the thing - getting it all right so that everyones needs as individuals and as part of a family are equally balanced. I think that's the tricky part.

No need to feel sad singsong. My Ds goes on holidays with out me, so why shouldn't me and DH have a holiday without him every now and then?

Singsong you seem to be insinuating that couples who require some time away from their children are somehow not a strong couple?

My parents spent every waking minute with us and are now divorced. My auntie and uncle had regular evenings out and holidays away and thirty five years later are happier than ever. Everyone is different.

I agree that quality time together without the kids is important, it won't be coupled with cooked dinner and lippy though, unless DH does both of those.

I do not believe in the kids come first concept. Everyone in my family is equally important. I have been with DH for 25 years and our children will live with us for another 10/15 years. Then what? I want it to be spent with this man and I want it to be happy, that means I simply cannot ignore his needs (not talking about sex) for 25 years. And the same is true for him. It won't work.

Children should also see their parents spending time together, it should not only be after bedtime. This is how they learn about relationships. If you save all those hugs, smiles and kisses until after bedtime they would never get to see them . I want my kids to know what makes a happy relationship and I am lucky I can give them that.

I actually think that the kids come first concept is quite harmful, as they shouldn't and they shouldn't be given that impression either. Who comes first should be entirely based on needs at the time. Once the kids have what they 'need', their 'wants' can be put on hold. It's about balance.

Ja Wel my sentiments exactly!

pinningwobble

I think what happened with your parents was a symptom, not a cause. They probably spent most of their time with you because they didn't actually want to be alone together.

My parents are still happy together, even though they took some separate holidays with us to take advantage of cheaper rates.

As JaWellNoFine mentioned, we witnessed the smiles, the kisses, the cuddles, the good times, as well as the bad, and I think it gave us a measure of what a good relationship was.

Not that we were the centre by any rate.

I went away without any of them last year for nearly three weeks. Ok some of it was work related but some wasn't. And it was bloody marvellous and I can't wait to do it again.

I'm not really very good at this cherishing lark.

Lweji I wasn't saying that was the reason they got divorced, my point was that everyone is different.

OutsSelf
How is it that women are somehow both "abdicating all responsibility" AND "putting themselves in charge", Lying? Sounds a bit like they can't do right for doing wrong in that set up.

There are seemingly (on MN anyway), quite a lot of women who think their partners do very little. I've seen the disparity when a woman is a SAHP (NO, she is emphatically not expected to do housework, childcare is her job) and when a man is doing the SAHP role (completely the opposite and why doesn't he do things around the home)?

As far as 'putting themselves in charge' just look at the vomit-inducing thread on AIBU where a woman didn't get her shag last night... if a man had posted that. MN is indeed very heavily biased towards mothers and the lack of fairness, ie. OP essentially getting back-patted for her tantrum - and ongoing annoyance - that a man wouldn't be.

Equality or nothing... but NOT on MN. Not exactly for 'parents', is it, not unless you have a vagina.

The lovely thing about being a single parent is you don't have to worry about cherishing anyone, except yourself and your children. Much easier IME :).

I haven't read the article (it's Shona Sibary, right?) but the notion of the 1950s being some sort of parenting/marital 'ideal' to strive for is completely ludicrous and is entirely based on the authors fantasy of 1950s life rather than reality.

Reality being that life as a 'real' 1950s housewife was tough, unless you were well off and could afford help (and even then it was probably still hard going). It was time consuming and involved a lot of physical hard work - the labour saving devices we have now didn't exist and nor did ready meals. They didn't hover over their kids because they didn't have time and were exhausted.