Can't quite put my finger on it—Part 4

[Enabler]

This is a continuation of a previous thread: https://bpdfamily.com/message_board/index.php?topic=340788.30

Home environment: It would seem to me that the biggest issue is how damaging the home environment is (or is growing to be). My understanding is that the negative tension in the home is far greater evil than a cooperative co-parenting divorce - more damaging than a divorce per se' .

- where conflict between the 2 adults cannot be contained to appropriate times (small outbursts permitted), I'm talking extended rows with kids around.
- where practical cooperation between the adults reaches a point where not only do the adult not co-operate but they attempt to sabotage each other
- where it is physically abusive
- where children are witnessing the destruction of property and/or wilful damage of stuff where they might be scared
- where it is net net emotionally draining for an individual to stay in the situation (they have deteriorating mental health)

Age of the children The age of the children is a factor. I've heard that divorces when children are 11 and under is more damaging to the child than for teens - teens aren't solely and fully dependent on parents for all their needs - the are starting to branch out.

I've also seen where the reaction from teens is often harder on the parents than the reaction of a pre-teen.

- Where both parents are unable to either parent effectively in their own home such that no effective parenting is done.
- Overt parental alienation in the home (although that in itself might be a good reason to stay given it would likely escalate post departure)
- No quality time is achieved with children independently from dysfunctional partner.
- Children are being physically or emotionally harmed in which case primary custody should be sought and professional service involved.

Likelihood of recovery I think the length of the disconnect of the parents is a significant indicator of the likelihood the parents can recover the marriage. I think this also factors is how long it will take the non-affair parent to recover, and recondition themselves to be an eligible/attractive single person and start the second household.

That's such a personal decision for the individual. Some people can recover quicker than others. Some people may choose not to get involved with another partner so likely less focused on getting back in the saddle (personally I am petrified of my ability to spot red flags!).

Enabler

[Notwendy]

 she has money to move out the home, she doesn't seem to do that.

I think this fits with Skip's statement about not choosing between two situations ( and men).

When she doesn't leave, she gets the best of both worlds. You as live in sitter/housekeeper while she does what she wants. OM for her fantasy.

Even if things aren't good between you, there's still value in what you provide for her. So not moving out has benefits.

Without going into reasons/motives, I think people continue a behavior when the payoff for them personally is greater than the cost. That also goes with behaviors that have a high cost. For you, there's a high emotional cost to staying, but the benefit of staying for you are still greater, so you choose to stay.

For her, there's an emotional cost to staying but the benefits of not choosing are still greater for her, so she stays.

We each have our own abilities to tolerate emotional costs and our own investment in the payoff. I think this is why it is hard for one person to advise another what to do. Someone else might leave. I also don't think there's a right or wrong way - people have managed both- divorce and staying. I think both divorce and staying when there is conflict will have some effect on the kids. How the kids manage depends a lot on how the parents deal with this as well as their own resilience/vulnerabilities and what supports are there.

[Enabler]

Anyone else have any thoughts on where the lines are?

There's been a few days of weirdness in our house. W has lots of stomach issues this week, I can't help but suspect mental issues are having physical symptoms again.

Enabler

[formflier]

What I see in this thread is "chalk talk" about how conversations might go and how those conversations relate to strategic goals you have.  (strategic goals tied to your values)

I would suggest you take a long hard look at how you rank your strategic goals.

The two goals below are going to always be in conflict.  You control 100% of 1 and you "influence" 2.

1. Being truthful and example to your children

2. Less drama in your children's life/children's feelings of security (might want to tweak this wording)

My take is that some people put #2 first and their advice flows from that.  I put #1 first and let my advice flow from that.

Both stances seem valid to me and have positive long term outcomes and have short time "costs".

So really I think the important think is for you to be clear about your strategic priorities and let your "tactics" flow from there.

switching gears

Has your wife proposed a move out plan/childcare plan post filing or post move out?

Best,

FF

[Enabler]

No discussions have taken place regarding a plan but she has shown willingness to facilitate as much access as I want. She would like me to move out yesterday so from her perspective any plan to move out would be my plan and I have stated that I will be the last person out of the family home.

I don't see how these 2 objectives conflict with each other:

1. Being truthful and example to your children

2. Less drama in your children's life/children's feelings of security (might want to tweak this wording)

There are certain priorities I have no control over therefore I can only seek to best influence them... in fact I wouldn't say I can positively influence them, more likely I can only guarantee they don't happen via behaviour that alienates her... such as not wanting a divorce. So in other words, the highest objective would be one to avoid giving my W a good reason to continue chewing through the sludge that is the divorce process... but yet she still may choose to do this for reasons completely out of my control.

Enabler

[Skip]

1. Being truthful and example to your children

2. Less drama in your children's life/children's feelings of security (might want to tweak this wording)

I don't have anything to add from my prior post, but I'm not sure this is an accurate synopsis of this long discussions.

It seems the three things were discussed.

1. Announce divorce and establish that this is mom's decision.
2. Announce divorce and focus on children's feelings of security and insulate the children from any adult issues (don't parentify with blame).
3. Don't got to the mat on every detail (15 minute discussion, document delivery dates, etc. ) but look at the big picture and negotiate/compromise to get the family into a healthier situation.

* And it was mentioned that part of the intent of #1 was to discourage the divorce.

the highest objective would be one to avoid giving my W a good reason to continue chewing through the sludge that is the divorce process... but yet she still may choose to do this for reasons completely out of my control.

It's good that you said this.

In other words (other possible words), your priority is to stonewall (passive aggressive) to maintain the status quo and delay the inevitable demise of a toxic marriage.

Just for discussion purposes - if you both had smaller houses located within walking distance and split the child 50% / 50% would that not be a better life?

Isn't negotiating the 50% a far higher priority than anything else?

[Enabler]

I’m confused, I thought the discussion was about the three headings you (Skip) directed me to use as a framework to think about  how staying or standing in some other way was working. Answering the question of when is the point to move from preserving the family to working on ways to best encourage flourishing for all in a broken family... and I suppose critically assessing whether or not my current stance is more damaging than taking a more proactive stance with the D.

Moving from #1 to #2 requires a change in priorities so FF might have been right to raise this as a line of questioning. Is the question “Would you cause your W &  children enormous amounts of damage in an attempt  to seek the truth, show the truth and preserve a legal marriage, causing a large amount of domestic chaos in the likelihood it would still result in a divorce?” ... how important is the value of being truthful?

Have I got that right albeit a little dramatically stated?

Enabler

[Skip]

Have I got that right albeit a little dramatically stated?

I'm not sure I can filter out what is "dramatically stated" vs "miscommunicated".

As written, that is not my intended message. Can you write it more neutrally for me to comment on?

[Cat Familiar]

I acknowledge that I’m biased, having been in your kids’ position, though my parents stayed together.

But why Enabler, would you put their interests in second place, after your own needs for integrity about communicating who initiated the divorce?

[formflier]

What is nuance to some is not to other people  (keeping this in mind)

1. Announce divorce and establish that this is mom's decision.
2. Announce divorce and focus on children's feelings of security and insulate the children from any adult issues (don't parentify with blame).

My understanding is Enabler does't want to do 1.  He does't want to announce divorce...therefore establishing responsibility for something that isn't going to happen due to Enabler's decisions is moot.

Enabler is also a realist and his wife is making plans (and somewhat successfully roping Enabler into discussing announcing something Enabler "would vote against") to make an announcement and she appears to be explicit this is a "we" thing.  Enabler is clear it's not a "we" thing. 

So..this (to me) appears to be a chalk talk about what Enabler should say depending on what comes out of his wife's mouth in "the talk". (which may be different than what she agrees or states she will say)

So...my input on what he should say in that conversation flows from the "strategy" that on some matters "truth" (or correcting untruth) is primary.  Other people would appear to put it secondary.

I'm all for the way Skip phrases #2 as long as a "untruth" is not left hanging.

So...if the house can be split up without an announcement either way of who is to "blame"...I would recommend that.  That being said, it's not something Enabler controls, so he needs to be ready.


Switching gears.

I would take exception with categorizing what Enabler is doing as stonewalling (passive aggressive).

Stonewalling (pejorative)

principled  (approbatory)

Best,

FF

[Skip]

I would take exception with categorizing what Enabler is doing as stonewalling (passive aggressive).

Stonewalling (pejorative) principled  (approbatory)

I think it will be helpful for all of us to get out of the truth/untruth, approbatory/pejorative, white/black characterizations. I personally think this is complicating the matter and obfuscating the real issues. Not blaming anyone - we have al contributed to the evolution of this discussion.

This is a broken household for many years and it is easy for anyone living in it to get lost and triggered in the tens of thousands of transactions that have occurred.

We (as supporters) want to help with as much perspective as possible. I know that when I'm in the middle of something this complex, my perspective skews and I run for help with it.

There are two justification's floating in this thread for telling 6-11 year old children that mom wants a divorce, dad doesn't.

A. Truth
B. Leveraging mom's image before her children to discourage her to from moving forward with a divorce.

We (as a group) talked mostly about "A". In reality, "B" is the driving factor. I've hinted at this, but Enabler has come out and said, "B", in the grand scheme of things is the motivating factor.

This is progress.

By definition, "B" is classic passive resistance. It is not approbatory or pejorative, it is a human reaction to feeling powerless. We see passive resistance when there is a bully, or an over-bearing boss, or a parent vetoing a child's request.

Wife says she is going shopping. Husband says no. Wife says I have every right. Husband knows she is right.  Husband decides to clean the garage and piles a bunch of boxes behind her car. Sorry honey, just cleaning the garage.

As we discussed earlier, the martial relationship has been dead for a while and the home environment is increasingly toxic - maybe not code red yet, but deep in the yellow. The only thing that is delaying the divorce is inertia and a compromise on access to kids, finances -- not love or hope of rehabilitating the marriage.

Why expend all the goodwill in this wording debate where there can only be a winner and a loser (and most likely a retaliation)? Why not prioritize a bigger solution? Why not explore options that would feel better for everyone - rather than continue the status quo? There are so many options... like keeping the house and each parent stays away 50% of the time. Maybe do that for a year and then 2 houses/apartments in the same neighborhood for 3 years.

[formflier]

There are two justification's floating in this thread for telling 6-11 year old children that mom wants a divorce, dad doesn't.
 

Perhaps I'm mistaken about what we are talking about.

Is Enabler suggesting that it doesn't matter what will be said...he is going to "clarify" that Mom wants the divorce and he doesn't?

In the situation that I'm writing about, where the wife says "we" have decided (or otherwise ropes Enabler in) the justification is about about both parties speaking truthfully.

Leveraging Moms image to get her to speak truthfully (about whatever the subject may be...this is obviously not a "white lie")

and certainly to get Mom to not go through with the underlying issue covered by the lie (in this case divorce).

If I considered it a bit, I could likely come up with more justifications.  Saying this because I think this isn't a dichotomous issue and I think truth telling and leaving the marriage are being conflated.

For instance.  Enabler isn't piling boxes behind her car.  She is free to "go shopping" (leave the marriage)...he just isn't going with her.  

As far as driving factors go.

Enabler...if you could tell a public lie (about something substantial that would likely eventually be found out) to your family...yet there would be healing in your family.

Would you do it?

This is hard one because I could see some people (perhaps Enabler) saying "it depends on the lie".

Saying this because if we are going to try and identify the "real issue", there are some among us that use a decision tree to make decisions.

Step 1  (is it the truth?)  If not do not proceed to step 2
Step 2  Am I leveraging Mom's image.

In my case I suspect Enabler is the kind of guy that would be consistent and follow this for this example.

Step 1  (is it the truth?)  If not do no proceed to step 2
Step 2  Marriage is saved.

In both of those examples the "Real issue" is that you can't proceed beyond Step 1 (no matter what is in step 2).

I realize people use other processes to make their decisions and that's great and fine.  

To the question of "why continue the debate".

1.  The proposed talk that is on the table contains a proposed untruth (proposal made by Enabler wife)
2.  For Enabler to suggest the 50/50 sharing of the house (nesting is great idea) would require him to start going down the path of actively doing things and suggesting things to dissolve the marriage, which are contrary to his long held values.

Reality is they are at a stalemate.  She doesn't want to "pay the cost" to get out (She likely wants Enabler to do it for her) and Enabler doesn't want out.

Hmmm...is there a way for Enabler to break the stalemate, without setting aside his values?

Best,

FF

[Skip]

FF, it's hard to respond to what you are saying as you are (in good faith, no doubt) representing Enabler's motivation and thought process. I would be uncomfortable commenting on what Enabler might be thinking...

If I attribute your comments to you speaking about how you would look at doing this with your wife and your marriage...

She doesn't want to "pay the cost" to get out

Is this thinking not dangerously similar to the behavior identified in the Duluth power and control wheel? Trapping.

It's one thing to be highly principled, and quite another to put the other parent in a compromising situation before the children to keep them in a marriage.

If Ms FF had an affair and wanted to leave the relationship.  If Ms FF decided she was lesbian and wanted to leave the relationship. Should this be disclosed to a 6 year old and a condition as divorce?

If there as a custody dispute, and the evaluator found out that this was a threat on the table prior to announcing divorce to the children, or FF leaked it to the children once the divorce was announced, it would not serve FF well.

Step 1  (is it the truth?)  If not do no proceed to step 2
Step 2  Marriage is saved.

Is this a "marriage saved" - even in the most liberal definition of the term?  

Back to Enabler... my post # 5 is not assessing blame or judgement or criticism. I'm only trying to broaden the perspective and say that the real decision that looms is custody and visitation. Don't lose sight of that.

Sure, you may be able to delay the inevitable to drag out the divorce by a year or maybe even three, but sooner or later the judge is going to make a determination on visitation and it if there is petty squabbling and trapping and other evidence that the couple "can't work and play well together", 50%/50% custody/visitation will be out the window and Enabler will be seeing his kids every other weekend.

Enabler may hold all the cards is the divorce announcement competition (or stalemate) before the babies. He can play hard ball or softball (passive aggressive). It's a choice as notwendy rightfully points out, its his choice and we should all respect it.

But if there are stalemates and squabbling, Ms. Enabler will hold all the cards before the Judge. Family court has that bias.

If it was me (and it is not). I would be saying to Ms. Enabler "Look, I fine to do this 50% all the way." Lets agree to 50% visitation schedule, nesting for __ years, and a mutual and respectful front before the children. Let's do everything we can to make this seem like we are all going to work together - its just mommy and daddy are go to be good friends, just not married any more.

I know this is a painful conversation to have right now, it it hurts me to be saying all this. I know it is hitting our brother Enable like a heavy on his chest. I feel it needs to be said now while he has choice and before things heat up and break down. If they do, it will not play well - whether its 2020 or 2023.

Just an aside... I had a employee years ago who worked for progressive car insurance. Her job was to drive to accident scenes and write insurance checks on the spot. Right there on the side of the road before the tow truck showed up.

Why did they do that. Because they no the earlier you settle the big issues in a lawsuit the more favorable settlement the insurance company would get.

If you can agree to and ink a custody plan before the lawsuit gets bogged down into splitting things and lawyers get their hands into everything, you will be a winner.

There is an opportunity to be proactive.

I just want to be sure that perspective is spelled out really clear so that you have the ability to choose it.

[formflier]

  and quite another to put the other parent in a compromising situation before the children to keep them in a marriage.

It's also quite another matter to make Enabler (or me in this notional example) responsible for a spouse putting themselves in a compromising position.

Said another way, neither he nor I should be responsible for saving our spouse from their choices.

  Should this be disclosed to a 6 year old and a condition as divorce?

It depends. 

Ideally it wouldn't be discussed at all, but that is not a choice Enabler (or I) have control over.


 

Sure, you may be able to delay the inevitable to drag out the divorce by a year or maybe even three,

Is it really inevitable?

How many spouses look at a situation and say

1.  Ugg..the price of divorce is too high.  I'll continue.

The same spouse might realize that

2.  Yaayy... divorce just "went on sale" and push it through.

I put it this way because I'm guessing given Enabler's profession he gets the "cost analogy".  Simple economics.

Step back for a few minutes.

Right now Enabler has a certain amount of time with his kids.  It is true that things could go badly and he could end up with less than 50/50.

It's also true that she may not go through with it and he may keep status quo.  Or perhaps she starts spending even more time with OM and he gets even more time without her around.

I'm sure there could be several other options.

Best,

FF

[Skip]

I just want to be sure that perspective is spelled out really clear so that you have the ability to choose it.

I just want to be sure that perspective is spelled out really clear and early so that Enabler has the ability to choose it or to choose to stay the course and try to continue the status quo.

You would probably choose different that I. There is no right way or wrong way. But clearly, if you look at the discussion participants, there are members who feel as strongly about an alternate path as your feel about stay the course.

I think we all did a good job in comparing and contrasting the options.   

[Notwendy]

I think it comes down to what I posted in the cost/benefit-payoff of a choice. It's hard to measure that for any one person from the outside. This is a choice that has potential gains and also consequences. Enabler is the only one who can "measure" these and decide- he's the one to experience them. This is a tough situation for all involved.

[sweetheart]

I have read all your recent posts Enabler, but don’t respond because I often find myself getting overwhelmed by the sheer amount of words that have been written.

So I thought about the purpose the volume of words might be serving you emotionally. Both on this forum and in your real life.

I decided to go back and read your introductory post from when you first joined in 2017.
 It was a very difficult read.

What is very clear through the post is the issue of your co-dependency which you identify early on, but this is where you stop. A definition of something is not an understanding of what is actually going on for you emotionally. You talk about your co-dependency only in relation to your wife’s ‘issues,’ but you were a young immature ‘innocent boy’ when you met. Your wife was also in another relationship when you began having a relationship with her. This must have been very unsettling, leaving you feeling insecure and needy hoping always that she would choose you. She did, but I am in no doubt that the beginnings of your relationship would have triggered massive insecurities in you that it would happen again. It did. This time though she isn’t choosing you, and from what I can hear in between the lines of your posts your co-dependency is stopping you from moving forward with your life. It is keeping you well and truly stuck in an obfuscating mire of more and more words as a defence IMHO against a deep seated terror of being left on your own.

Co-dependency is about a fear of letting go, it’s about a really deep seated fear of what a person might be left with dealing with emotionally when on their own. Co-dependents work really hard at keeping dysfunctional relationships going, really, really hard. The use of coercive, controlling, passive aggressive, manipulative behaviours are often evident, such is the fear of being left, feeling insecure and overwhelmed at the thought of being alone. These behaviours by your own admission have been part of your relationship dynamic right from the get go. Both you and your wife have used them.

I don’t know about you and your past, but I feel that loosing your wife even though she is with someone else, is too devastating for you to contemplate emotionally, so you continually protect yourself against this by creating these verbal mazes and conundrums.

Enabler where are you with a therapist or a really good 12 Steps Program, or both, to help you start looking at how and why your co-dependency is keeping you so stuck?

As a parent I get not wanting your children to think that you had any part in the divorce. The thing is though the dysfunctional dynamics and high conflict behaviour between you and your wife both contributed to her wanting a divorce. In your post you admit that your relentless anger drove her to extreme dysregulation and into the arms of a man who wanted to listen not shout and blame.

Owning our behaviours and the consequences of our actions can be hard when set against the crazy of a pwBPD, but we are dysfunctional too and bring our own crazy to the relationship table. I know I most definitely brought mine.


Ask yourself has the conversation you are having here helped you move forward at all with where you are at with your divorce?
If the answer is still no, then ask yourself what emotions, not words, are getting in the way of you moving on with your life, and with love and compassion, allowing your wife to move on with hers.

[formflier]

Is Enabler having trouble "letting go" or is he have trouble "helping her leave"?

Personally...I see a massive difference in those two things. 

Best,

FF

[Notwendy]

Sweetheart has articulated what I have been thinking too. There have been several threads on this board from posters for whom- the worst possible thing to them would be the end of the relationship. Because of this, they are willing to endure pretty much any kind of abuse, threats of divorce, and anything else because of their fears of the end of the relationship. These are long and numerous posts - each concluding the same way- as each difficult episode arises.

The "suffering" of the co-dependent often has a noble cause. "It's for the children", "its for financial survival" "God doesn't want us to discard a marriage". And "what example would I want for the children?"

But some things are not just "problems": abuse, addiction, long standing or serial adultery. These are soul crushing, hurtful, and possibly dangerous behaviors.

While the children may observe that marriage needs to be preserved, what they are seeing is that marriage needs to be preserved at all costs- no matter what. That you need to be the live in nanny and maid while your spouse does whatever they want.

I will second Sweetheart's advice to examine your own co-dependency. It may be what is keeping you in this relationship pattern.

[Notwendy]

Letting her leave?

She's a grown woman. Nobody wants to be trapped. Even if it isn't behavior one condones. If she wants to leave, not letting her leave could also be seen as controlling or abusive.

Letting go may not mean letting go of the marriage. It may mean letting go of the control of the situation. Letting go of the fears of the end of the marriage. Letting go by accepting other people have freedom of choice.

Letting someone go- they still have the choice to go or not.

[sweetheart]

Is Enabler having trouble "letting go" or is he have trouble "helping her leave"?

Personally...I see a massive difference in those two things. 

Best,

FF

Whether it’s helping his wife leave or letting her go, Enabler is doing neither. He is very firmly stuck at an impasse of his own making. What might help him move forward is if he examines what the impasse means to him emotionally and not the semantics or syntax of what is being written.

[formflier]

Whether it’s helping his wife leave or letting her go, Enabler is doing neither. 

My understanding is he has expressed "the cage door is open" for her for a long time.  He understands he can't prevent her from controlling her life and leaving.

It appears to me that she would rather him leave because she doesn't want to be married.

That's not a matter of nuance to me.

Whether or not he needs to "let go" of hope that they can reconcile is a different matter.

Best,

FF

[Notwendy]

I don't think we are discussing him leaving because she doesn't want to be married.

The dynamics in the relationship make it so she has the best of both worlds and this is keeping the situation stuck as it is. She isn't facing the consequences of her actions, in fact, it's easier for her to run off for a night with OM than it is for most parents to have any night off for themselves.

She has no consequences. Dishes not done? no problem, Enabler does them. Find a sitter for the kids? No problem, he's there to do that. By being the "nice guy", he's perpetuating the situation and by perpetuating the situation they stay in limbo.

[Cat Familiar]

...she has the best of both worlds and...isn't facing the consequences of her actions..in fact...has no consequences. Dishes not done? no problem, Enabler does them. Find a sitter for the kids? No problem, he's there to do that. By being the "nice guy", he's perpetuating the situation and by perpetuating the situation they stay in limbo.

And he is demonstrating to his children that he is OK with being treated unkindly, working really long hours and then having to do all the tasks his wife neglected, and having a spouse that dates a lover.

Frankly, I don't think clinging to the marriage is modeling healthy behavior for his daughters.

[Cat Familiar]

I feel that I, in particular, have been rather hard on Enabler. I acknowledge that he's in a very difficult position and is working really hard, both at his job and at home, basically being almost a single parent, since his wife appears to place her desires for the company of her lover over her responsibilities for home and family.

When we're in overwhelm phase, as likely Enabler is, it's hard to look at the big picture, because we're so busy running on the treadmill, trying to keep all systems going.

In my opinion, the big picture is that there is a divorce on the horizon. So far, Mrs. Enabler shows no signs of changing course. To the young daughters, a divorce will be devastating. It's likely that they're quite aware that their family's home life is different from their peers who have parents with intact marriages.

Children love both of their parents and assigning blame (or responsibility) for the ending of a marriage only serves to make one parent look worse than the other. This is an unfair burden to give to children as they want the love of both parents and they don't want to think of their mother as "bad" for destroying the intact family structure.

And as others have said, it takes two to tango. Enabler acknowledges his anger in the past, though he has tried to make up for his lack of awareness then. That may have been the point where his wife's love died. He has held onto the hope that she will be able to see what a good man he is and give up what appears to be foolishness with the other man.

But no-one, outside of his wife, can really know what she feels. And from what he's been able to glean about her feelings, it seems she thinks this is a G-d given relationship that she is pursuing.

In an ideal world, love would never die. People wouldn't have BPD. Spouses wouldn't cheat. People would realize the love and good qualities in their mate. There wouldn't be anger. Communication would be easy.

But that's not what is in Enabler's life. What is is that his wife has been removing herself from him for a number of years and he has provided the structure to allow her to have a relationship with a lover without consequences. As Notwendy has pointed out, this is a comfy situation for her that could potentially endure for years.

All Enabler's good works have not brought back his wife into the fold. Maybe she'll tire of the other man. Maybe she won't. It seems that is completely out of his hands.

What is within his power is to protect his children from experiencing any more harmful consequences from this adult drama than necessary.

[ct21218]

Agree with the last 2 posts.  I can see a daughter choosing to stay with an abusive, cheating husband or boyfriend because that's what was modeled for her.  No matter how horrible his wife treats Enabler, he stays. If I saw that modeled I would think that I'm supposed to accept cheating. The wife doesn't have to leave, she comes and goes as she pleases.  I think Enabler and FF are drastically underestimating the damage that is being done in the current situation.

[Notwendy]

I don't want to be hard on him either. I observed my father in a similar situation. And yes, he did role model co-dependent behaviors and I also assumed I needed to tolerate being treated poorly in relationships and I was.

But that isn't the sum of the whole person. Children learn both desirable and undesirable behaviors from their parents. I learned positive traits and values from both my parents and even some that benefited my marriage - but there were also things I needed to unlearn as they were creating issues and that was my own co-dependent traits. Enabler is role modeling many traits for his children along with the co-dependent one. By dealing with the co-dependent traits, he can change this for himself and for them.

What was a game changer for me was a co-dependency 12 step sponsor who was tough on me.  She turned the mirror on me and exposed my co-dependent tendencies for what they were. Fear based and self serving, all wrapped up in the "nice person" package of wife in servitude along with a whole lot of resentment. Yes, my H was acting like a jerk and I was enabling that behavior.

I believe the toughness here is tough love, Enabler. People are posting because they care. And often for some of us, we see it because we had to see it in ourselves.. I didn't understand my father as well until I saw my own co-dependency- but seeing that he was co-dependent does not undo the good traits he had.

Your kids will see the whole of who you are, whether or not you divorce. Maybe not all now but eventually as long as you have an authentic relationship with them.

I don't know what your wife will choose, but here's the thing. She isn't choosing between two realities. One is daily life with you, the other is fantasy land with OM. No responsibilities, no kids to worry about or arrange sitters for. Without these stresses, she can act like Ms. Fantasy woman to him and he can act like Fantasy Man- because neither of them have anything to do but fawn over each other. Reality IF you allowed her to take on the responsibilities you take on would be different. "No, OM, I can't see you because I don't have a sitter"  She goes out but comes home to a messy kitchen and dishes in the sink. For OM- this is a woman with a disorder who has kids. Not Fantasy always available woman for fun and games. By being the housekeeper/sitter for her to go out ---- they get the fantasy.

It is possible that when OM actually sees what he is really getting, he might not want it anymore. It may also be that when she sees him as he really is, she might not want him, but she'll not ever see him for what he is as long as you are providing support and he doesn't. She gets to paint him white because she has you to paint black.

Until you are able to step back from enabling and let them deal with the reality of trying to date with children and financial limitations in the mix, and deal with the stresses of any relationship- the fantasy continues.

Or, the two of them might discover they were made for each other. In this case, there is nothing anyone can do about this. But the only chance of her not choosing to spend time with him is to bring reality and consequences in.

I understand you don't want to enable the divorce,  but is enabling the affair leading her choice towards staying married?

[sweetheart]

I watched my son, now 11 slowly learn to tolerate behaviours in his father and me that in a healthy functional family just would not be happening let alone tolerated.

I thought that by continuously rescuing my h and cleaning up after his dysregulations I was making everything ok. I was always measured and constant in my interactions with my husband’s behaviours, but I was also frantically running interference so that I could minimise the impact of any fall out on my son.
As my son got older he saw what I was doing, and he too began to excuse or ignore and normalise his fathers behaviours because they were now his normal. This absolutely scared the cr*p out of me. I didn’t think of myself as co-dependent, but my view of what was ok and acceptable had been skewed and distorted by trying for so long and so hard to make everything ok. To keep the marriage going at any cost.

I had unwittingly internalised  a great role-model, my co-dependent mother, who prioritised her needs over the impact of my fathers alcoholism on me and my siblings. I remember thinking as a child I will never let this happen to me, I will never be my mother. But heyho I was wrong, I married my father and spent 14 years behaving like my mother! It was my son (and here that brought me to my senses.

I suddenly realised I didn’t want these types of behaviours to be my son’s normal. So I sat him down and said Daddy will be moving out because I don’t want to and I don’t want you to be exposed to this type of dysfunction anymore. This is not how normal families carry on.

By living apart from my husband, my son and I get our version of normal. My husband’s behaviour hasn’t changed, but my son sees that it belongs to his father and not to both of us. He also sees his father suffer the unfortunate consequences of his behaviours, but I can support him with that now rather than try and excuse, ignore or cover it up.

It took me way longer than i would ever have thought possible to get to the point of living separately from my husband. I spent just so long and so much emotional energy trying to create normal, whilst my husband just carried on regardless because he knew that I didn’t want him to leave.

I feel ashamed of the things I tolerated and allowed my h to bring into our family’s  life without any consequences whatsoever.
And guess what there is still a part of me that wants him back and misses him so desperately. I still love him very much and so does our son.

 As my feelings of shame and guilt lessen, there are also feelings of relief and satisfaction that our son gets the chance to live his life differently. For me my job as a parent is to role model the very best version of what I can be and how I behave.

I forgot for too long that in choosing to have a child that their emotional well-being is my responsibility until they are ready to go off into the world and manage by himself.

And if in this post if you are hearing that I am prioritising my child’s needs over my husband’s you would be right. In the absence of dysfunction I would not need to be doing this.

 For me when there is identified dysfunction on an on-going basis, and children are present,, their emotional well-being has to take priority every time.

[formflier]

I suddenly realised I didn’t want these types of behaviours to be my son’s normal. So I sat him down and said Daddy will be moving out because I don’t want to and I don’t want you to be exposed to this type of dysfunction anymore. This is not how normal families carry on.

So what should we recommend Enabler say to his children when he informs them Mommy is moving out because this is not how normal families operate?

Best,

FF

[Notwendy]

How about as close to the facts (without blaming or giving much reason ) as possible ?

“Mummy and Daddy will not be living together but we will each have room for you. We love you very much and will always be your Mummy and Daddy”

Make it as reassuring to the kids as possible. They don’t need details - they probably can’t understand them . After this statement they will probably be upset and scared. They need reassurance that they are loved.

And whether it’s normal or not ? I’d say the normal train left the station a long time ago if it was there in the first place. Mom and Dad not spending time together, not speaking at the table , Mom going out all the time, having a boyfriend while Dad takes care of them ? None of that is a normal example of marriage.