Parents breaking up. Is it selfish or immature.

Bannasidhe · 27-07-2012 02:07PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I'm talking about mature parents, mature parents don't continually argue.

My parent's separated after 25 years of marriage weeks after my 18th birthday so I think they would qualify as mature parents. My mother told me in no uncertain terms that she had remained with my abusive, alcoholic father for 'my sake' - I am the youngest of 3.

Gee thanks Mam, for deciding it was better for me to grow in a house where we dreaded the sound of the gate opening sometime after the pubs closed as we never knew who was going to be the focus of my father's abuse that night - even the dog used to hide - and my brother (now in his mid-50s) talks about how the sound of a metal gate opening at night still causes him to wake up in a cold sweat.

The happiest time we had as kids was when my father lived in the US for 4 years - when he came back our childhoods ended - I was 7 years old.

How could it possibly have been in the best interests of my siblings and I to be subjected to nightly verbal and physical abuse, see our mother abused and bullied to the extent that she getting whacked out on Valium was her only way to cope as she and her children lived at the mercy of a bully from whom there was no place to hide?

Shane-KornSpace · 27-07-2012 02:14PM

I grew up in a household with two unhappy parents. They were so unhappy that they beat the piss out of eachother on several occasions and quite a few times, some anger was taken out on me.
Had they just broken up when they started having issues, my life would have worked out alot better and their's would have too.
They stayed together which was the selfish option in this case. They were too weak to admit they couldnt be together. Theyn thought they were doing it for me, but they werent. And I expect this is the case with so many other couples.

A child should never be between argueing parents and said child should never be used as a weapon to hurt each others' feelings.

If their relationship is badly strained - end it. before its too late. it will be tough at first, but much better in the long run.

Giselle · 27-07-2012 02:15PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

My parent's separated after 25 years of marriage weeks after my 18th birthday so I think they would qualify as mature parents. My mother told me in no uncertain terms that she had remained with my abusive, alcoholic father for 'my sake' - I am the youngest of 3.

Gee thanks Mam, for deciding it was better for me to grow in a house where we dreaded the sound of the gate opening sometime after the pubs closed as we never knew who was going to be the focus of my father's abuse that night - even the dog used to hide - and my brother (now in his mid-50s) talks about how the sound of a metal gate opening at night still causes him to wake up in a cold sweat.

The happiest time we had as kids was when my father lived in the US for 4 years - when he came back our childhoods ended - I was 7 years old.

How could it possibly have been in the best interests of my siblings and I to be subjected to nightly verbal and physical abuse, see our mother abused and bullied to the extent that she getting whacked out on Valium was her only way to cope as she and her children lived at the mercy of a bully from whom there was no place to hide?

People like the OP start threads to confirm their view of the world and to validate their bias.

Real life experiences to the contrary, like yours, will do nothing to change their view because its a black and white worldview they have. Almost everything in life is a shade of grey, something most of us understand.

I'm very sorry you experienced that childhood. I don't think any sensible person would suggest that parents are required to stay together under those circumstances.

If you don't mind my saying so, your mother was very cowardly to say she stayed with your father for you and your siblings. She absolved herself of all responsibility for exposing you to that horror in doing so, and made her children responsible instead.

stovelid · 27-07-2012 02:17PM

I dunno, Scanlas. I'm going to have to give this one some thought after I've clipped my toenails.

Scanlas The 2nd · 27-07-2012 02:17PM

fishy fishy wrote: »

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I think there are obviously situations where it's in a child's best interest that parents separate such as one parent being physically abusive to the other or the children.

However I think it's a parent's responsibility to stay together for the children. Now I can already hear the rebuttal, a children are better off in single parent household than an unhappy two parent household. I don't see why two mature adults can't stay together for their children and live in a happy household despite there reasons for breaking up. Assuming those reasons aren't extreme.

My aunt broke up with my uncle because she wasn't "in love" with him but she still "loved" him apparently. So she left and lived in an apartment for a year or so. I just think not being "in love" is a ridiculous reason not to stay living at home for your children. Really selfish. There should be no reason why two mature adults who aren't in love can't live happily together in the same house.

it's the difference between "living" and "existing" . It's the 21st century - why should people live in misery.

What does the date have to do with it?

Why is it necessarily misery for two parents who aren't "in love" to live together and look after their children. Everything you do on a day to day basis is pretty much the same, you go to work come home, look after kids, do whatever you do for fun etc. it just so happens you aren't "in love" with the other parent. Why should two parents who aren't "in love" be miserable?

Scanlas The 2nd · 27-07-2012 02:18PM

grindle wrote: »

kincsem wrote: »

We broke up because it was best for the children. Clever.

We stayed together and fought every night, while the children went to sleep to a screaming, shouting, objects breaking against the wall-style lullaby - because it was best for the children.
Clever.

Any parent like that shouldn't have children in the first place, that's insanity, they need to see a counsellor ASAP.

Scanlas The 2nd · 27-07-2012 02:20PM

Giselle wrote: »

Bannasidhe wrote: »

My parent's separated after 25 years of marriage weeks after my 18th birthday so I think they would qualify as mature parents. My mother told me in no uncertain terms that she had remained with my abusive, alcoholic father for 'my sake' - I am the youngest of 3.

Gee thanks Mam, for deciding it was better for me to grow in a house where we dreaded the sound of the gate opening sometime after the pubs closed as we never knew who was going to be the focus of my father's abuse that night - even the dog used to hide - and my brother (now in his mid-50s) talks about how the sound of a metal gate opening at night still causes him to wake up in a cold sweat.

The happiest time we had as kids was when my father lived in the US for 4 years - when he came back our childhoods ended - I was 7 years old.

How could it possibly have been in the best interests of my siblings and I to be subjected to nightly verbal and physical abuse, see our mother abused and bullied to the extent that she getting whacked out on Valium was her only way to cope as she and her children lived at the mercy of a bully from whom there was no place to hide?

People like the OP start threads to confirm their view of the world and to validate their bias.

Real life experiences to the contrary, like yours, will do nothing to change their view because its a black and white worldview they have. Almost everything in life is a shade of grey, something most of us understand.

I'm very sorry you experienced that childhood. I don't think any sensible person would suggest that parents are required to stay together under those circumstances.

If you don't mind my saying so, your mother was very cowardly to say she stayed with your father for you and your siblings. She absolved herself of all responsibility for exposing you to that horror in doing so, and made her children responsible instead.

What is black and white about my argument?

I think people are far too quick to use the " unhappy parents are worse line" because they are inconvenienced. I stated that from the beginning, hardly black and white.

Any household with violence and constant arguing needs to split up. They weren't mature enough to have children in the first place, that crap ruins children lives. I'd guess that there are many households in Ireland where the parents aren't really in love, they'd both prefer to be with different people but it makes no difference to the children as they get on well.

SocSocPol · 27-07-2012 02:21PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Any parent like that shouldn't have children in the first place, that's insanity, they need to see a counsellor ASAP.

Only a very narrow minded person could agree with that!
When my and my ex seperated it was for the best, including the best fot our kids.
But I wouldn't expect the pr department of Opus Dei to understand that:pac:

krudler · 27-07-2012 02:24PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I think there are obviously situations where it's in a child's best interest that parents separate such as one parent being physically abusive to the other or the children.

However I think it's a parent's responsibility to stay together for the children. Now I can already hear the rebuttal, a children are better off in single parent household than an unhappy two parent household. I don't see why two mature adults can't stay together for their children and live in a happy household despite there reasons for breaking up. Assuming those reasons aren't extreme.

My aunt broke up with my uncle because she wasn't "in love" with him but she still "loved" him apparently. So she left and lived in an apartment for a year or so. I just think not being "in love" is a ridiculous reason not to stay living at home for your children. Really selfish. There should be no reason why two mature adults who aren't in love can't live happily together in the same house.

thats retarded. people should just be miserable for the sake of their children?

Cat Melodeon · 27-07-2012 02:24PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

If one parent wasn't happy because of their job and there was an opportunity to go for a job that would make them happy in a foreign country leaving behind their family, Should they take that job or stay in the job they don't like for their children?

By the logic I've been reading on this thread I'd assume many here think the parent should work abroad away fro their family for their happiness. After all unhappy parents aren't good for children.

That's a bad analogy. If someone were happier being away from their family that would suggest that they weren't very happy living with their family in the first place. My husband and I both know he would be happier working abroad as there are better job prospects for him there. However, in terms of all the things that make him happy in life, job satisfaction ranks fairly low when you consider how miserable we would be separated and how traumatic it would be for our kids going from a very happy family to a broken up family without warning or reason other than 'Daddy wants a new job'. So he is 'sacrificing' the potential for greater job satisfaction for the greater good of us all being happy together. Job satisfaction isn't really a 'happiness' in any case, it's what you do to pay the bills.

Parents who deal with relationship break-ups responsibly ensure that whatever hurt and disappointments they experience are not dumped on their kids. They share access fairly, ensure their children are loved and do their best to provide them with stability. Stability does not necessitate both parents living under the one roof. Separated parents deserve the freedom to find new love. As long as they continue to love their children and to parent responsibly, there is no reason why they should have to stay together. That's like a prison sentence, forced to remain with someone you no longer love (and possibly even hate/fear/dislike) and is no environment for children to grow up in. They would learn to deny their feelings, suppress emotions and be dishonest about their desires. Not a healthy upbringing.

Scanlas The 2nd · 27-07-2012 02:28PM

krudler wrote: »

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I think there are obviously situations where it's in a child's best interest that parents separate such as one parent being physically abusive to the other or the children.

However I think it's a parent's responsibility to stay together for the children. Now I can already hear the rebuttal, a children are better off in single parent household than an unhappy two parent household. I don't see why two mature adults can't stay together for their children and live in a happy household despite there reasons for breaking up. Assuming those reasons aren't extreme.

My aunt broke up with my uncle because she wasn't "in love" with him but she still "loved" him apparently. So she left and lived in an apartment for a year or so. I just think not being "in love" is a ridiculous reason not to stay living at home for your children. Really selfish. There should be no reason why two mature adults who aren't in love can't live happily together in the same house.

thats retarded. people should just be miserable for the sake of their children?

Why would you assume they're miserable?

There's more to life than being with your perfect match, you don't need that to be happy.

krudler · 27-07-2012 02:30PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Why would you assume they're miserable?

There's more to life than being with your perfect match, you don't need that to be happy.

why would anyone stay in a situation where they're not happy? "dont love your husband? well tough you gotta stay together" thats ridiculous. many a family has been made infinitely better by separated parents.

Shane-KornSpace · 27-07-2012 02:30PM

Sorry, OP.
But no. just no.

if a couple are not happy with being together, they should end it. It will be hard on the child at first, but theyll get over it quickly. Trust me. My sister got over it quickly. As long as the child can see both parents regularly, it will be fine.

They child will understand when they grow up and will respect their parents for not bringing them up in a home where the parents destained eachother.

hooradiation · 27-07-2012 02:31PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

My aunt broke up with my uncle

It's ok.
One day, when you're older, you'll understand.

Scanlas The 2nd · 27-07-2012 02:33PM

Cat Melodeon wrote: »

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

If one parent wasn't happy because of their job and there was an opportunity to go for a job that would make them happy in a foreign country leaving behind their family, Should they take that job or stay in the job they don't like for their children?

By the logic I've been reading on this thread I'd assume many here think the parent should work abroad away fro their family for their happiness. After all unhappy parents aren't good for children.

That's a bad analogy. If someone were happier being away from their family that would suggest that they weren't very happy living with their family in the first place. My husband and I both know he would be happier working abroad as there are better job prospects for him there. However, in terms of all the things that make him happy in life, job satisfaction ranks fairly low when you consider how miserable we would be separated and how traumatic it would be for our kids going from a very happy family to a broken up family without warning or reason other than 'Daddy wants a new job'. So he is 'sacrificing' the potential for greater job satisfaction for the greater good of us all being happy together. Job satisfaction isn't really a 'happiness' in any case, it's what you do to pay the bills.

Parents who deal with relationship break-ups responsibly ensure that whatever hurt and disappointments they experience are not dumped on their kids. They share access fairly, ensure their children are loved and do their best to provide them with stability. Stability does not necessitate both parents living under the one roof. Separated parents deserve the freedom to find new love. As long as they continue to love their children and to parent responsibly, there is no reason why they should have to stay together. That's like a prison sentence, forced to remain with someone you no longer love (and possibly even hate/fear/dislike) and is no environment for children to grow up in. They would learn to deny their feelings, suppress emotions and be dishonest about their desires. Not a healthy upbringing.

Why would children learn to suppress their emotions and be dishonest about their desires. Their parents relationship situation is their own business.

If research conclusively pointed out that single parent households caused more harm to children than parents staying together just for the children would you still think parents should separate?

CodyJarrett · 27-07-2012 02:33PM

If they break up just so that the father can go play on his bmx all day and the mom with her skipping rope, then yes.

Scanlas The 2nd · 27-07-2012 02:34PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I'm talking about mature parents, mature parents don't continually argue.

My parent's separated after 25 years of marriage weeks after my 18th birthday so I think they would qualify as mature parents. My mother told me in no uncertain terms that she had remained with my abusive, alcoholic father for 'my sake' - I am the youngest of 3.

Gee thanks Mam, for deciding it was better for me to grow in a house where we dreaded the sound of the gate opening sometime after the pubs closed as we never knew who was going to be the focus of my father's abuse that night - even the dog used to hide - and my brother (now in his mid-50s) talks about how the sound of a metal gate opening at night still causes him to wake up in a cold sweat.

The happiest time we had as kids was when my father lived in the US for 4 years - when he came back our childhoods ended - I was 7 years old.

How could it possibly have been in the best interests of my siblings and I to be subjected to nightly verbal and physical abuse, see our mother abused and bullied to the extent that she getting whacked out on Valium was her only way to cope as she and her children lived at the mercy of a bully from whom there was no place to hide?

I agree that you were better off if you're parents split up, my original posts states abusive parents need to split up.

holystungun9 · 27-07-2012 02:35PM

Jake1 wrote: »

Dont have kids. Simples there, all solved now.

The most compelling reason for anal adventure! "Baby, just give it a go! Trust me I'm the last person you want to risk having kids with. I'm so dumb when my last girlfriend suggested doggy-style, I went out the back and started licking my balls!"

Shane-KornSpace · 27-07-2012 02:35PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Their parents relationship situation is their own business.

Wrong.
The child will be affected some way or another. It is the childs business to an extent.

fearcruach · 27-07-2012 02:37PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Why would children learn to suppress their emotions and be dishonest about their desires. Their parents relationship situation is their own business.

If research conclusively pointed out that single parent households caused more harm to children than parents staying together just for the children would you still think parents should separate?

How can you say that the parent's relationship is their own business? A family is a unit. Children are part of that relationship. Children pick up on unhappiness between parents. It is not possible to 100% hide that from the children. The children often end up blaming themselves for their parents unhappiness. Not a good situation.

My parents did the old staying together for the kids thing and I knew they were unhappy for years. It was miserable. We all would have been much better off if they had split before they eventually did.

Dave0301 · 27-07-2012 02:41PM

Ha I've figured it out, Scanlas The 2nd is actually a Vulcan!

It's the only explanation for your ability to control your emotions!

But seriously, it is impossible to just suppress human emotions and force them under just so you can tolerate a living relationship with another person.

Also none of this takes into account that most people like and want a caring and lovable relationship with a partner. Everything from companionship to a sexual relationship. Living in a situation that you describe sounds soul destroying from my point of view.

Children from separated parents should be able to have both mother and father roles fulfilled as much as required as long as both parents take those roles seriously regardless of the living arrangements. I say all this coming from separated parents.

Scanlas The 2nd · 27-07-2012 02:47PM

fearcruach wrote: »

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Why would children learn to suppress their emotions and be dishonest about their desires. Their parents relationship situation is their own business.

If research conclusively pointed out that single parent households caused more harm to children than parents staying together just for the children would you still think parents should separate?

How can you say that the parent's relationship is their own business? A family is a unit. Children are part of that relationship. Children pick up on unhappiness between parents. It is not possible to 100% hide that from the children. The children often end up blaming themselves for their parents unhappiness. Not a good situation.

My parents did the old staying together for the kids thing and I knew they were unhappy for years. It was miserable. We all would have been much better off if they had split before they eventually did.

Just because you don't love your spouse doesn't mean you will be unhappy. No one should put their happiness based on being in a relationship With someone you love.

fearcruach · 27-07-2012 02:50PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Just because you don't love your spouse doesn't mean you will be unhappy. No one should put their happiness based on being in a relationship With someone you love.

I never said they were unhappy because they didn't love each other. Either way I do not think a relationship can survive without love.

Disregarding whether or not the parents are in love, it doesn't matter the cause of the unhappiness. If the parents are unhappy then it will poison the family.

Scanlas The 2nd · 27-07-2012 02:53PM

Dave0301 wrote: »

Ha I've figured it out, Scanlas The 2nd is actually a Vulcan!

It's the only explanation for your ability to control your emotions!

But seriously, it is impossible to just suppress human emotions and force them under just so you can tolerate a living relationship with another person.

Also none of this takes into account that most people like and want a caring and lovable relationship with a partner. Everything from companionship to a sexual relationship. Living in a situation that you describe sounds soul destroying from my point of view.

Children from separated parents should be able to have both mother and father roles fulfilled as much as required as long as both parents take those roles seriously regardless of the living arrangements. I say all this coming from separated parents.

The assumption seems to be you can only love or hate another human being, you can fall out of live with your spouse and still like them. People are using the extreme end of the spectrum as an argument, which I agree with. Constantly fighting parents should split up, but it is possible for two parents to not be in love and still like each other and enjoy their company.

My aunt left her house because she wasn't "in love" with her husband but still liked and loved him. I read that as she basically didn't fancy him and wanted to go off with another man at some stage. I just think that's a horrible thing to do for your selfish reasons at the expense of your children, especially when they my aunt and uncle got on well.

Dave0301 · 27-07-2012 03:02PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

The assumption seems to be you can only love or hate another human being, you can fall out of live with your spouse and still like them. People are using the extreme end of the spectrum as an argument, which I agree with. Constantly fighting parents should split up, but it is possible for two parents to not be in love and still like each other and enjoy their company.

My aunt left her house because she wasn't "in love" with her husband but still liked and loved him. I read that as she basically didn't fancy him and wanted to go off with another man at some stage. I just think that's a horrible thing to do for your selfish reasons at the expense of your children, especially when they my aunt and uncle got on well.

But you are taking it that it was at "the expense of the children." There is no reason why those children can't have a great relationship with both parents.

Vanderbilt · 27-07-2012 03:28PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I just think that's a horrible thing to do for your selfish reasons at the expense of your children, especially when they my aunt and uncle got on well.

At the expense of their nephew by the sounds of it:p

No, couples shouldn't live together if they're are unhappy. Their responsibilities towards their childers remain whether there under the same roof or not.

Borboletinha · 27-07-2012 03:37PM

My parents got divorced ten years ago. I still see my father as a selfish prick. Never respected him again, probably never will.

If you cant stand someone, dont have children with them. Actually, dont have children unless you are 100% sure you wanna spend the rest of your life with that person. :mad:

I have a daughter and plan on doing everything I can so she has both her parents together as long as she lives. Even if that means sacrificing my own happiness. Children dont ask to be born therefore they should be their parents priority!

mikemac1 · 27-07-2012 03:41PM

hello divorce, bye bye daddy

Famous slogan back in the nineties

A2LUE42 · 27-07-2012 03:48PM

antodeco wrote: »

The oul mistake of thinking your Aunties husband is your Uncle and vice versa!

What about the possibility that he isn't mistaken ?

Scanlas The 2nd · 27-07-2012 03:53PM

Dave0301 wrote: »

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

The assumption seems to be you can only love or hate another human being, you can fall out of live with your spouse and still like them. People are using the extreme end of the spectrum as an argument, which I agree with. Constantly fighting parents should split up, but it is possible for two parents to not be in love and still like each other and enjoy their company.

My aunt left her house because she wasn't "in love" with her husband but still liked and loved him. I read that as she basically didn't fancy him and wanted to go off with another man at some stage. I just think that's a horrible thing to do for your selfish reasons at the expense of your children, especially when they my aunt and uncle got on well.

But you are taking it that it was at "the expense of the children." There is no reason why those children can't have a great relationship with both parents.

It's my understanding that the research suggests children are better off in two parent households and suffer as a result of separated parents. If new research proves that's not true I'll amend my opinion.

Parents breaking up. Is it selfish or immature.

Comments