I meant the role model - of what is a good person. I think how people determine their own ethics can vary. Jesus is both an example of self sacrifice, and a person who could stand up to others. Self sacrifice can also err into co-dependency - giving up all that you are for the sake of another.
I sometimes make the comparison,
You can rightly make sacrifices in a relationship but don't sacrifice yourself. Can you see the difference as I do?
However, if ByFaith's wife chose to marry someone only as a means to support her and her son, and By Faith married assuming this would be a marriage, then the basis of this marriage isn't on a mutual agreement.
By taking his ethics with him, I believe that if he divorced, he would do this ethically, and if he stayed he would also act ethically. I don't think any of us is obligated to be a martyr in a relationship, however, people are free to make that choice as well.
Divorce attorneys have a reputation as being sharks and borderline unethical. Frankly, most aren't but there can be a fine line between proactive versus aggressive. We here don't know what her lawyer is like, but fact is her lawyer's obligation is to her alone, not you and not the two of you together. He/she may be better than that but you can't count on it. Therefore you, for your part, should have a capable family law attorney who will advise you on the optimal strategies and solutions,
including warning you when you're letting your emotions get in the way and sabotaging yourself. You lawyer won't be a 'meanie' but primarily keeping your interests to the fore and helping you avoid bad decisions that you could regret down the road once you pulled your head out of wherever.
Example 1, if you did proceed to divorce and you wanted to be "the Nice Guy" and gift her what she demanded, say, perhaps 60%, and then later after she'd run through the money and come back guilting you for more and you call your lawyer and ask why you even gifted her that much, he'll tell you, "I advised you against that much but your emotions were louder than my advice."
Example 2, if you did proceed to divorce and you wanted to be "the Nice Guy" but also listened to your lawyers practical advice and gifted her what was appropriate and not what she demanded, say, perhaps 10% (or whatever) and then later after she'd run through the money and come back guilting you for more and you call your lawyer he tell you, "I advised you to gift enough to satisfy the court and a normal outcome. If you want to give her some more, then that gift would be optional and up to you. You've been out of the relationship for a while and probably not buried so deep in the past emotions... .it's your choice to gift a little more if that's what you want."
Do you see the difference between examples 1 and 2? In the first, you're guilted in the moment and regret later being obligated to gift so much, perhaps even overextending yourself. In the second, You were reasonable and fair but not overly so and later on you could look back and decide whether or not to gift a little more... . not guilted, not obligated, but freely giving within your financial and emotional comfort zone. If you so decided.
