Update 3: Telling the children about the divorce and who wanted it

[VIDEO: "What is parental alienation?"]

This is a continuation of a previous thread: https://bpdfamily.com/message_board/index.php?topic=343001.0

Okay, here goes.

I have spent many many many years being the bad guy. Being the bad guy thinking that I’ve done bad things... let’s say that I was the villain. I can’t necessarily say that being the villain sat well with me and I really don’t believe that to my core I ever thought I was completely, I was just aware that I did ‘some’ things wrong and I was being blamed for more than my fair shares worth. We both walked through the metaphorical gate and neither of us shut the gate afterwards, and all the sheep escaped but maybe because I touch the gate, looked at the gate, or just because I’m a man and should have shut the gate it was all my fault that the sheep have escaped. The thing is, guilt and shame don’t really rot my soul, or my ego for that matter (maybe they’re the same thing). It became easier to just take all the guilt and squash it all away that try and force it upon someone whom genuinely can’t take it. I genuinely couldn’t care less if the world and his dog thought that I was abusive UNLESS they advise my W to take action based on those beliefs (discussed at length before). Similarly I don’t care for being the hero. I didn’t take the blame for stuff in the past because I wanted a reward, I certainly didn’t get that, BUT it made everything go away, it made the guilt and shame that prevented ‘normality’ from existing evaporate.

So what am I saying? I don’t want to be the hero, that’s not what I m about. I just don’t want to be the villain. I’ve been that guy for too many years. I’m not walking into the senate house court room, I’m standing still in my own home, a home that I shed blood sweat and tears for, a home that I have made into a place where our children love being, never ever want to leave and we all enjoy spending time here. My W is free to leave WHENEVER she likes, and that includes the marriage, but I will not come running to the rescue to adopt the guilt and shame that is rightfully hers.

My empathy and ability to be emotional. My lens is a lens partly moulded by my W. We’ve spent 23 years together so we’ve each adopted certain things from each other. I was thinking about this in respects of judgement, and how that lens can change depending on the person we are with. My lens of judgement tends to be based on the opposing persons lens of judgement towards me. Take for example a very non-judgemental person, let’s just say this person is a dark depraved man, he’s honest about his depravity, knows it and somewhat embraces it, what’s to judge, he wouldn’t judge me. Let’s take another man, he’s the epitome of #metoo advocate, he’s judge me for pointing out a nice behind, take the moral high ground and then pay €240 to have two prostitutes suck him off... I’ll judge that mans depravity by the values he protests to hold for 99.99% of the time. I have judged my W by her own standards. My lens is as narrow for her as it is for her view for me. My empathy for my W is limited to my W’s ability to empathise with me  (albeit far wider and greater now given my relatively new understanding of BPD).

This was spoken about at church today. John 3 v16... it was the latter part that got me. I want to bring this into the light, not to be a hero, a villain or a victim... but because I think evil lurks in the shadows and this is where this beast dwells.

16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

The kids know enough that they will not suffer foolish lies without scepticism. I can only manage what I say, my priority is managing my own integrity with the children as I believe this to be on their own long term interests. That doesn’t mean I wish to condemn my W with my own version of reality, but I will not be party to approving her version either. Really what does it say to the kids about them if it’s described as “just one of those things”.

Enabler

[Enabler]

This is a continuation of a previous thread: https://bpdfamily.com/message_board/index.php?topic=343001.0

Okay, here goes.

I have spent many many many years being the bad guy. Being the bad guy thinking that I’ve done bad things... let’s say that I was the villain. I can’t necessarily say that being the villain sat well with me and I really don’t believe that to my core I ever thought I was completely, I was just aware that I did ‘some’ things wrong and I was being blamed for more than my fair shares worth. We both walked through the metaphorical gate and neither of us shut the gate afterwards, and all the sheep escaped but maybe because I touch the gate, looked at the gate, or just because I’m a man and should have shut the gate it was all my fault that the sheep have escaped. The thing is, guilt and shame don’t really rot my soul, or my ego for that matter (maybe they’re the same thing). It became easier to just take all the guilt and squash it all away that try and force it upon someone whom genuinely can’t take it. I genuinely couldn’t care less if the world and his dog thought that I was abusive UNLESS they advise my W to take action based on those beliefs (discussed at length before). Similarly I don’t care for being the hero. I didn’t take the blame for stuff in the past because I wanted a reward, I certainly didn’t get that, BUT it made everything go away, it made the guilt and shame that prevented ‘normality’ from existing evaporate.

So what am I saying? I don’t want to be the hero, that’s not what I m about. I just don’t want to be the villain. I’ve been that guy for too many years. I’m not walking into the senate house court room, I’m standing still in my own home, a home that I shed blood sweat and tears for, a home that I have made into a place where our children love being, never ever want to leave and we all enjoy spending time here. My W is free to leave WHENEVER she likes, and that includes the marriage, but I will not come running to the rescue to adopt the guilt and shame that is rightfully hers.

My empathy and ability to be emotional. My lens is a lens partly moulded by my W. We’ve spent 23 years together so we’ve each adopted certain things from each other. I was thinking about this in respects of judgement, and how that lens can change depending on the person we are with. My lens of judgement tends to be based on the opposing persons lens of judgement towards me. Take for example a very non-judgemental person, let’s just say this person is a dark depraved man, he’s honest about his depravity, knows it and somewhat embraces it, what’s to judge, he wouldn’t judge me. Let’s take another man, he’s the epitome of #metoo advocate, he’s judge me for pointing out a nice behind, take the moral high ground and then pay €240 to have two prostitutes suck him off... I’ll judge that mans depravity by the values he protests to hold for 99.99% of the time. I have judged my W by her own standards. My lens is as narrow for her as it is for her view for me. My empathy for my W is limited to my W’s ability to empathise with me  (albeit far wider and greater now given my relatively new understanding of BPD).

This was spoken about at church today. John 3 v16... it was the latter part that got me. I want to bring this into the light, not to be a hero, a villain or a victim... but because I think evil lurks in the shadows and this is where this beast dwells.

16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

The kids know enough that they will not suffer foolish lies without scepticism. I can only manage what I say, my priority is managing my own integrity with the children as I believe this to be on their own long term interests. That doesn’t mean I wish to condemn my W with my own version of reality, but I will not be party to approving her version either. Really what does it say to the kids about them if it’s described as “just one of those things”.

Enabler

[babyducks]

What if their retort is “Why?”

I am in agreement with Fian:

I do agree that parents want to keep the war between them (and not the children) as much as possible, .

The children should not be privy to the intimate details of the adult relationship of their parents.   regardless of what those intimate details are.   it's crossing boundaries to over share.    as has been mentioned before.

a generic answer

why?

because sometimes adults can't find a way forward that makes both happy.

because sometimes people change and grow apart.

the children should not have the specifics of the why...  

[Cat Familiar]

why?

because sometimes adults can't find a way forward that makes both happy.

because sometimes people change and grow apart.

the children should not have the specifics of the why...  

Totally agree.

Everyone would like to have a do-over in some context in their life, knowing what they now know. Certainly you contributed some element to you wife's dissatisfaction with the relationship. And she has contributed much to yours.

Though you're still honoring your marital vows and she isn't, had those initial dissatisfactions been addressed and remedied earlier, it is possible you might still be a functioning couple.

You're not and trying to lay the blame at the feet of the other is a path which can only lead to sorrow--for the children, for your wife, for you.

[Notwendy]

Enabler - still your reply sounds more about protecting your virtue in the eyes of the children.

I think you’ve heard plenty of discussions as to how this idea may cause harm along with the good it might do for your image .

Kids see things differently. There was a lot of reporting my BPD mothers accountability for things that were hurtful . . I believe it was true. She caused a lot of issues in the marriage.

I mostly perceived my mother as the evil one and my father as her innocent victim. As an adult I see them as humans who have both strengths and flaws and each responsible for the dynamics in their marriage.

Your kids will see things as they are capable of and good guy/ bad guy perspective might change.

I think you’ve heard enough about not implicating her to the children. I think you will do what you want to do and you have your reasons. I don’t think anyone goes through a divorce without some difficulty and that includes the children, even if we try to minimize that for them.

So what you do next and what happens will be up to you.

[Skip]

I do agree that parents want to keep the war between them (and not the children) as much as possible...

The choice of the word war is appropriate. The war is about her opinion of herself and her opinion of you. You are demanding this change. This is the number one priority.

This is often at the core of high conflict relationships. Holding out for the resolution of irreconcilable differences.

Those that war in divorce only stop when one is defeated or the damages for both are so significant, and the resources exhausted, that they can't go on.

My empathy for my W is limited to my W’s ability to empathise with me...

Unpack this. My emotional intelligence is limited by my wife's emotional intelligence, and she is mentally ill, and grossly inept in life (as you often say).

This is why the therapist is talking about boundaries. Why separation is necessary. Your emotional intelligence is yours and your alone.

Empathy, by the way, is the ability to understand someone - anyone who thinks differently than we do. Compassion is something else. Sympathy is something else. This has been said many time in your posts.

I have judged my W by her own standards. My lens is as narrow for her as it is for her view for me. My empathy for my W is limited to my W’s ability to empathise with me...

Yes. This is the mantra of high conflict.

She sent us a 'Stages of separation' document:

Holding on
Letting Go
Trying Out
Settling Down

I know some of you will chuckle if I suggest that in many respects I am more settling down that holding on, that's exactly where I am.

If you are in the fourth stage, you would be focused on getting the divorce settled and setting up your new life.

You are hyper-focused on her opinion of you... and for some reason, doing things that reinforce it.

[babyducks]

The kids know enough that they will not suffer foolish lies without skepticism.

The kids might be the smartest and brightest kids,... but they are still children.    They do not (yet) have advanced emotional maturity.    Nor have they experienced complicated romantic relationships.   Share in an age appropriate way.

More important they are the children of both of you.     they are going to have lifelong relationships with both of you.   which will change and develop over time.   Share in a way that respect the role of mother.     Not just the role of 'wife'.

[Skip]

Maybe a lack of empathy but I’m seriously thinking that’s magical thinking... and adult moves out and NOTHING is said!

Your wife is not suggesting the you move out and it be kept a secret from the children. You are extrapolating something she said for another purpose. Spin.

email the therapist. They will explain it.

[Enabler]

I don’t know that I am wrong here.I don’t know whether or not ‘telling the kids’ comes at the same time as ‘physical separation’. At least not “we are getting a divorce and your home will be sold.”  level of clarity.

My W has ALWAYS loved to keep her options open.

[Cat Familiar]

I don’t know you, Enabler, but I think it’s likely that I know something about you that really bothers your wife.

Some people are other-referenced. Those are the folks who are always asking for advice and tailoring their behavior based upon what they hear from trusted friends and advisors.

Then there are people who are self-referenced. They might be interested in others’ opinions, but they make their decisions based upon their own thoughts and feelings.

Both ways have their pluses and minuses.

You are self-referenced to an extreme degree. There have been perhaps over a thousand posts, maybe more, about your impending divorce. People who’ve been through high conflict divorces have tried to warn you about triggering emails and other behaviors that could ratchet up the conflict in your life.

You’ve chosen to ignore advice from professionals and have a dismissive attitude toward some of the counselors you’ve seen.

I can only imagine how that intractable resistance is manifested toward your wife.

I doubt if you see this in yourself. I hope you can.

[Skip]

I don’t know that I am wrong here.I don’t know whether or not ‘telling the kids’ comes at the same time as ‘physical separation’. At least not “we are getting a divorce and your home will be sold.”  level of clarity.

As an exercis, let's assume that this is a mutual and amicable divorce and you both plan to be cooperative co-parents on a 60%/40%.

When and what age appropriate to tell the kids...

1. Mom and dad are going to live separately 2. The house is selling 3. Mom and dad are getting a divorce. 4. Visitation schedule

Would would be best for the kids - give them the soft general picture and then tell them tactical details just before each event so that you can explain (or even show) future with clarity? Or would you lay it all out and say details to come?

Would you give them a menu of upcoming events without definition or would you package them - come see daddys new house - mommy and daddy are going to have separate house and you get to love in both.

Why is this happening. I like when we are all together? This will be asked many many time in the upcoming months - what answer would would be best for the kids?

Remove the lens of the injustices you feel and step into the world of how highly emotion intelligent families might proceed.

The injustice is real. It will never be resolved, though. All that is left is to try and not have new ones.

Everyone who faces divorce faces this... its why divorce is so hard and so painful.

[formflier]

I've purposefully sat this one out for a while.  Hoping that an important distinction would be answered directly and fully by those that seem to be indicating the children NOT be told.

I 100% agree that kids should be kids and not be told this stuff.  If a pathway can be found for this to happen I support them not being told

The problem is that Enabler w (by Enabler's account) intends to tell them this is a "we" thing or perhaps something unavoidable or something she is "being forced to do".

The question I would like people to directly answer is

When in a joint meeting with children Enabler is confronted with an untruth, should he lie or tell the truth.

I can't imagine anything good coming from untruth for such an important matter.  I do agree that hearing such things will hurt the children.

I think the children finding out that both parents have lied to them will hurt them MORE than finding out one has lied to them

Sadly, there may not be a way to avoid children being hurt or hurt more than they already are.

Best,

FF

[formflier]

To what end?  Tell the 'truth' to what end?  

Isn't "truth" it's own end?  

Best,

FF

[Notwendy]

I don’t think anyone is advocating lying but instead finding a way to a comment that is still true but not blaming “ we are going to live separately “ is true and not blaming.

[Enabler]

I would say that we tell the children what we know, which is that we’re going to live separately with the intention to divorce, and that means selling the home and buying two new homes. Which would be the soft general picture way.

I would then encourage them to see new opportunities in what is a disastrous situation for them. At the moment there is no conversation about this weirdness... it’s in the shadows.  I want that conversation and I want to breed new hope for them.

A step by step process may well have worked some years back where they had not lived in this weirdness for a protracted period of time. Many people separate not knowing what the ultimate plan is, we do and we have seemingly known for some time.

Cat, you are very right, I am self referencing. I’d describe myself as non-conformist. I regularly have controversial views which typically don’t slip nicely into societies niches. I’m a frustrating contrarian. People assume I’m bigoted because I question their popularist views... their assumption that I’m bigoted typically comes because they are so insulted by my stance they fail to listen to much more... because pop culture lends itself to being either one way or another, you’re either with us or against us. All people who voted for Brexit are racist is a good one. I don’t like it when someone says one thing and behaves in another way... the village eco warrior preachers who fly to Silicon Valley twice a month... my Christian wife who’s out drinking most nights and who’s having an affair. To say that I haven’t absorbed anything anyone has written here in the last 3 years, or changed my approach, or even change my outlook is a bit brutal. Similarly to say that I didn’t get anything meaningful or reflect on anything the child T said is incorrect as well. For example, the T said that we needed to be physically separated to co-parent, I completely agree, and we’re in a process which leads to that. Universally across the other people away from the board I have discussed this with, they have plainly exclaimed “well why isn’t she pushing ahead with the divorce?”. Not content with just that I come to the boards and reflect on high conflict divorce experiences and BPDness and people tell me to think about the kids and doing what’s right for them... oh and then I speak to work associates who have just started to speak to their kids after 3-4 years (3 chaps) and they tell me their horror stories about that and financial settlements. I feel like I’m threading a needle attempting to avoid a lot of pretty nasty outcomes. People tell me on the one hand to see a lawyer then I’m the next breath say “oh when lawyers get involved things really spiral out of the control and they really rack up the bills, often just to end up at the same result”... “move out, give her the space she wants”... “if you move out you’ll never get her out of the house and the divorce will stall”... “push the divorce on”... “if you push the divorce she won’t trust that and assume you’re trying to trick her”...”be honest with the kids, preserve your integrity with them as that will be precious in the coming years, it only takes one positive highly validating parent whom the children to trust to avoid continuing the multi-generational cycle of child trauma”... “lie to the kids, agree to a neutral message they won’t believe anyway”.

There are no winners in this... NONE. If I’ve given anyone the impression that I want to be the winner here then I’m sorry, that’s not my intention. Yes, I am standing firm, I am standing my ground but I’m not standing in an unreasonable position, nor EVER have. I’m not asking for more than I deserve, and if I finally have the confidence to say that loudly and clearly and with my actions then I’m enormously unapologetic for that. I do not want my W to suffer any more than the natural consequences of her own actions would demand. My children will suffer, I know that, but I know they will suffer a lot more in the future should I make a pigs ear of this. For every definitive that says one way, there’s another who says the other way.

Enabler

[Fian]

As you probably know, I am on the side of erring on telling the truth.  But there are also wrong motivations for telling the truth.  You can use truth as a weapon, and then telling yourself it is ok because it is true.  The classic example is walking up to someone and telling them they are fat.  It may be true, but there was no reason to tell them.  Keeping your mouth shut would have been the more godly thing to do.

I like your verse about coming into the light, and there is another verse we shared earlier that talks about exposing the deeds of darkness.  So you are on firm Biblical ground.  However, I do find it odd that you are more prepared to expose the deeds to your children than you are to the church.  You might want to examine yourself to determine why that is.

If you want to take the honest, but low conflict approach, here are some things that have been suggested:
"Mommy and Daddy are getting a divorce." - you are getting it whether you want it or not

In answer to why - "Well if you asked Mom, she would probably say the blame is with me, and if you asked me, I would say that the blame is with your mother.  However, this really is something that your mom and I need to keep between us.  We don't want to involve you with our issues, or try and get you to pick a side.  We both love you, and even though this will be painful, we are going to try and make the best of this situation as we can."

One area that I disagree with this board is they keep trying to get you to own the divorce through some moral equivalence.  It is ok to realize that you have made some mistakes in marriage (as has everyone else), but that the true fault for the marriage failing lies with your wife.  Now, of course, I don't know the full story, and if I did, I might be blaming you, but depending on the facts of the case it is conceivably possible that your wife is the one to blame, and you shouldn't take blame for her.

[Enabler]

I also want to make it very very very clear that I am not advocating for my W to disclose the affair. I don’t believe I have ever indicated that. I have indicated that I would like her to own the choice and be truthful about that. But we’re going over ground from Sep/Oct last year.

[GaGrl]

"We are going to live separately."

 " Why? "

 "We have spent several years now trying to figure out some areas that we disagree on. We haven't been able to do this. It isn't the way either of us thought our life would turn out, and we know it doesn't feel good to any of us that this is happening now. If I could have changed it at any point the past few years, I would have, but I could not."

What part of this is untruthful? Is it blaming? Is there a part of it you can work with, Enabler?

 I believe you and your wife can find a way to talk to your daughters that is better than what you keep circling around to, which sounds more like "We are going to live separately and eventually will get a divorce. I am sorry, because I didn't want this, but your mother insists."

[Notwendy]

Fian, as to moral equivalency, I would have also thought the same until a friend disclosed that she and her husband were repairing their marriage after he cheated.

I would have seen him as the one who had broken a major transgression - not her.

First, to repair the marriage- he had to want to and he did. He also had to completely own his part in it, and take steps to repair the situation. As you imagine this was a long and difficult process that took much work on his part, but he was willing to do it.

They had a wise counselor who then required the wife to look into her part in how the marriage deteriorated. She was not responsible for her husband's choice to cheat, but she also wasn't the innocent victim either. The marriage had been breaking down. She played a part in it, on the co-dependent side.  

Co-dependent traits can be destructive to a marriage, but aren't always as obvious. The co-depedent spouse may appear to be the "long suffering martyr" in a marriage while enabling the other spouse's behavior. If someone is enabling destructive behavior, one can perceive this as being an accomplice to it.

I am not trying to lay blame here, but in a marriage, it would be very rare for one person to be soley responsible for a breakdown in the marriage. Usually both people are to some degree. As to arguing whether or not it is moral equivalency, it depends on the goal. If one is a murderer, then they should go to trial and likely to jail but most people aren't operating on that level of morality thankfully.

Often it can be a juggle of morality. Exposing one spouse might cause considerable damage to them, and is that a decent thing to do? I don't think anyone is saying "moral equivalent" but trying to take that idea out of whatever is said to the children altogether.

[Enabler]

GaGrl, That’s certainly getting there although I’d question the truth behind “several years trying to figure out” there hasn’t been a lot of attempts to figure out, there’s been a lot of me talking about personal changes and figuring stuff out, and a lot of my W not sharing anything.

[formflier]

Fian, as to moral equivalency, I would have also thought the same until a friend disclosed that she and her husband were repairing their marriage after he cheated.
 

So, let's be clear.

Is there a moral equivalency in breaking a wedding vow and sexually going outside the marriage and what Enabler did for "his part"?

Notwendy,

If there was NOT a moral equivalency, why did the husband in your situation have to "go first"?  

I'm not at all suggesting Enabler is without responsibility, I AM suggesting that as the situation as has been reported here, there is NO MORAL EQUIVALENCY WHATSOEVER to those actions.

I DO agree with you and your example 100%, that it's unlikely the marriage (any marriage) could be repaired unless each party own their part totally.

I see each of those as separate thoughts/issues, yet they are related (and that's hard to describe)

Look, there may be some that believe the issues at play ARE MORALLY EQUIVALENT.  That's ok.  Differences of opinion/values/religion and all that are completely OK.

The issue here is we are trying to help/advise Enabler, who by his own assertion is trying to follow the Christian value system and whose wife is a pastor in that system, apparently teaching people to not do what she is reported to be actually doing.

The Christian value system places responsibilities on the parties involved and one of those responsibilities is accurately telling "the church" what is going on.  

I do think it is worthy of note and letting the question hang out there that there is more focus (apparently) on telling the children than on telling "the church".  


Best,

FF

[Notwendy]

I should have written it clearer- I think they both had to do the work together at the same time. I think "first" was that I discussed it first.  

One of my favorite references for this kind of thing is Les Mis. Yes it's a story, but one one hand there is Javert who condemns Jean Val Jean for stealing and also escaping from prison, and he's a condemned man with no exceptions. The Bishop on the other hand, flat out lies to the police about the candlesticks, gives Jean Val Jean a pass. Collectively, he goes on to do many good things as well. So, yes he's a thief, and he's a saint and the Bishop is either a man of grace or a liar, and some may say one thing and some another.

Then there's the famous - whoever is without sin can throw the first stone at the adulteress. Yes, she committed adultery but whoever gets to condemn her better be squeaky clean first- even if they themselves didn't comit adultery.

If nothing else, I would want to say that maybe making a moral equivalency of what the wife has done vs what E has done isn't a good approach here when it comes to the family as a whole.

Then there's the famous " now I see through a glass darkly" that can be interpreted as we don't know the whole picture and I think that's realistic in this case. Yes, the wife cheated and E didn't  but maybe making a judgement isn't going to help the family in this situation.

But I understand there are different ways to see this and even different ways to interpret the Bible, but I think some of us are trying to shift the focus not on who did what but what to say to the children.

[babyducks]

When in a joint meeting with children Enabler is confronted with an untruth, should he lie or tell the truth.

ahhh formflier,... wouldn't it be wonderful if life was this delightfully simple.   Always tell the truth.    Never lie.     But as Fian has already pointed out, truth isn't always that simple.

so if Enable is confronted with an untruth... should he lie or tell the truth?

it depends... what's the lie?    how well are the children coping with the information coming at them?     how well are the adults doing in conveying the information?    will the decision to confront escalate the conflict or help lessen it?  what's the more immediate priority Enabler's Integrity or the Emotional Care and Comfort of the family?   what's more important laying the ground work for successful co-parenting or successfully ascribing blame?    

I see a lot of replies that say it depends, but a majority of answers that say prioritize the children first.   Do not attempt to take responsibility for the shame or organize the blame (in any way).    Gently deflect shame and blame for now.  

Isn't "truth" it's own end?  

If I take a 1Mhz electronic signal  and slap it up on an oscilloscope, I am going to have a picture that looks like a balanced wave undulating across the screen.

If I take the very same 1Mhz signal  and slap it up on a spectrum analyzer,  I am going to have a sharp narrow peak rising abruptly out of the noise floor like a spike.

which one is the true representation of my 1Mhz signal?    both are.    and neither are.    one is true in the time domain.   one is true in the frequency domain.    both are just representations of what my signal could look like.    are they equivalent?      of course.  nope.   not to me.    

we are (supposedly) mature adults who are able to hold complex and sometimes conflicting information simultaneously while making emotionally healthy decisions about it.    My 1Mhz signal is both a spike and a wave, at the same time.    in other words.  No, it's not black and white.    No, it's not simple.    Yes, its difficult.

Is truth it's own end?    In Fian's example do I tell the overweight person they are fat?   Why?    because it's true?    because truth is it's own end?    who am I to judge, how do I get to set myself up as arbiter of information?

I am certainly no expert on Christian tradition,  but I am sure there is something about those without sin casting the first stone...


 'ducks

[Gemsforeyes]

With all due respect to FF’s comment, is Enabler’s focus on trying to come up with acceptable wording to present to his children?  Or how to present what’s happening to the church?

I’m also confused (please forgive me)... although I HAVE been following these threads, I don’t recall if there is certainty that Enabler’s W actually engaged in a physical affair?

I truly am sorry for your struggles, E.  The face of separations, most separations and ensuing divorces, is that they’re generally NOT a mutual decision.  One partner usually has had one foot out (or their mind has checked out) for quite a while before the topic arises with their spouse.  No matter the vows taken.

And getting back to Gagrl’s suggested wording, if you take out the “several years” part, and maybe just start with ...”it isn’t the way either of us thought...”, would that be closer to a comfortable truth?

Warmly,
Gemsforeyes

[Cat Familiar]

I am self referencing. I’d describe myself as non-conformist. I regularly have controversial views which typically don’t slip nicely into societies niches. I’m a frustrating contrarian.

Me too. It takes one to see one.   I'm well acquainted with being called stubborn, opinionated, contrary, and iconoclastic.

To say that I haven’t absorbed anything anyone has written here in the last 3 years, or changed my approach, or even change my outlook is a bit brutal. Similarly to say that I didn’t get anything meaningful or reflect on anything the child T said is incorrect as well.

I cannot speak for what you've absorbed, but rather how you reflect back or don't, on what people have contributed to your threads. I'm sensing that's where an issue might present itself to your wife. I'm mentioning this in hopes that it might bring awareness to how you communicate with her both during divorce proceedings and afterwards, in coparenting.

A little bit of reflective listening can go a long way in making people feel validated. "So you're saying...blah, blah, blah."

What I've noticed in your threads is that you often bring up nearly the identical issue that has been previously raised, and speak about it as if you haven't gotten any feedback about it. Thus it appears that you've blocked what people have said to you and are only listening to your own opinion.

I feel like I’m threading a needle attempting to avoid a lot of pretty nasty outcomes. People tell me on the one hand to see a lawyer then I’m the next breath say “oh when lawyers get involved things really spiral out of the control and they really rack up the bills, often just to end up at the same result”... “move out, give her the space she wants”... “if you move out you’ll never get her out of the house and the divorce will stall”... “push the divorce on”... “if you push the divorce she won’t trust that and assume you’re trying to trick her”...”be honest with the kids, preserve your integrity with them as that will be precious in the coming years, it only takes one positive highly validating parent whom the children to trust to avoid continuing the multi-generational cycle of child trauma”... “lie to the kids, agree to a neutral message they won’t believe anyway”.

Yes, it's damned if you do, damned if you don't. And I believe you are taking in this information and filtering it through your own lens and figuring out what is useful, what fits with your criteria, and what doesn't.

There are no winners in this... NONE. If I’ve given anyone the impression that I want to be the winner here then I’m sorry, that’s not my intention. Yes, I am standing firm, I am standing my ground but I’m not standing in an unreasonable position, nor EVER have.

Agreed. My comments were only directed at your communication style and I understand that myself since it's something I need to be mindful about.

[formflier]

Is truth it's own end?    In Fian's example do I tell the overweight person they are fat?   Why?    because it's true?    because truth is it's own end?    who am I to judge, how do I get to set myself up as arbiter of information?
 

In Enabler's example and in Fian's example I think we all agree that everyone staying silent is a good thing.  I don't think there is disagreement there, but I'm open that I may have that wrong.

What I think there is disagreement about is when people (not Enabler) choose to state a mistruth, potentially stating (or misstating Enabler's values/decisions).

So to properly analogize that to the "fat person", I think it would be accurate to present it this way.

You know the person is overweight and you know that a doctor has advised them to change eating patterns for their health.  For the sake of this particular argument, let's assume you know this.

Then in a future conversation (potentially with children present) the "fat person" announces the doctor has advised that they eat (what the doctor has actually said they shouldn't eat) and therefore what they are doing is OK.

Do you stay silent, do you suggest clarifying with the doctor, do you ask for a private conversation? 

At this point the children have heard and are processing in their minds untrue information with potentially harmful future effects.

To tie this into Enabler's story, should Enabler wife allege that Enabler "wants" or "agrees" or (fill in blanks) something with regards to the divorce, that Enabler doesn't actually "want" and most likely is "opposed" to the idea.  That "untruth" is now lodged in those children's heads and I have a hard time imagining that leaving it there "uncorrected" has any sort of a good outcome.

I also will be completely open that I have no idea how to correct that "untruth" without causing pain and even harm to the children. 

If I've given the impression that this choice is "easy",  please accept my apologies.  I'm not aware of any way to handle this that isn't "hard".

Best,

FF

[formflier]

With all due respect to FF’s comment, is Enabler’s focus on trying to come up with acceptable wording to present to his children?  Or how to present what’s happening to the church?

I don't think they are unrelated, although I can see arguments for separating them.  I come at this from a "consistency" point of view.

Enabler's wife's church became somewhat aware of the relationship and admonished everyone involved to "knock it off".  Essentially the relationship was taken more underground and Enabler has chosen to NOT clarify to the church that one of their pastors is continuing to engage in an affair the church has explicitly said to stop. 

There are Biblical examples that I would argue shows Enabler has a responsibility to "testify" accurately to what he knows and can prove about the conduct of one of the church's pastors, who happens to also be his wife. 

Yet Enabler has chose not to do this.

The majority of this thread is about what to tell or not tell Enabler's children about the affair/divorce and the Biblical examples suggesting he should tell them are far less clear in my opinion that those saying (I would say commanding) Enabler to accurately give the information he possesses to the church.

For clarity, if Enabler W said that Enabler is pushing for a divorce and she doesn't want one or has no choice (to the children) I do think there is solid Biblical ground for Enabler to correct that untruth.

Yet much of Enablers pathway is influenced or guided by his Christian faith, so I see (and I think others have pointed out) a place where things don't quite line up.  And I would hope Enabler can prayerfully work through that.

To the question of proof, Enabler's wife has been taking pregnancy tests during periods when Enabler hasn't been having sex with her.  Perhaps there is more proof that I'm not aware of.

Best,

FF

[ct21218]

It appears from what has been posted that Enabler wants to shine a light on his wife's bad behavior.  It is not his job to do this.  He can tell his own truth without getting into specific details.  The fact is that he is going along with the divorce even though that's not what he wants.

My exhusband did some atrocious things during our marriage.  I got comfortable being being the victim and had some self righteous anger when he didn't have to 'pay' for what he had done.  The fact is that there are consequences for everything.  It didn't happen in my time or in the way I thought it should.  It happened in God's time.

8 years later, my exhusband is dying at age 50 as a direct result of choices he made with his health.  His family doesn't want to be around him, he has very few friends.  He has run from state to state trying to get away from himself. This is all a result of how he treated himself and others throughout his life.  I can tell you that I get no satisfaction out of his condition. It is incredibly sad to me.  He has even shared with me that he hopes he's an example of how not to live.  I see him with compassion, there's no hate left. I will also never let him play an integral role in my life ever again.

[Enabler]

There is only one truth.

Myself and My W both have our own fantasy worlds. As a snippet, I know I have my blind spots, and it would appear I’m learning I have more and more each day. I know that I have a manner that abruptly challenges stuff... and abruptly typically meant invalidating. I believed myself to be a generally good bloke. My W on the other hand believed that she was a dutiful mother who spent every hour toiling for her family, took full financial responsibility and would only spend money on things she needed. She believed that I was abusive for asking her to be accountable, and would lie and deceive because she believed that was okay because I was being abusive. She thought she was a perfect mother and wife.

The reality is that I dealt with things badly and if I wasn’t so pig headed I could have stopped and taken check of what was happening. The reality was that my wife was self medicating with running and cycling to make herself feel better. She felt unrewarded by raising invalidating kids, abandoned by me who was working long hours to pay for a life she ‘needed’ and invalidated further when I ‘abruptly’ called her out on her choice to self medicate with exercise induced dopamine, rather than do the things for the family she was responsible for and take the load off of me (which she lied about because it was easier to do that than deal with the shame). The reality was that she met another man who was also having problems in his own marriage and they bonded, and my subsequent actions caused them to bond more and more and more, and they know what they were doing was wrong morally and religiously.

The truth is much much much much much bigger than anything I’ve written above. The truth is that my W and I both have a fantasy , we both made choices based on that fantasy and had we had a better handle of our reality and “the truth” (unknowable) we might have made completely different choices. Had I googled self harm, anorexia and paranoia in 2007, would my fantasy have been far closer to my reality when I thought I was being a good bloke yet I was invalidating the sh!t out of someone who was just trying to get by.

I can’t explain the whole truth to the kids nor do I want to try... frankly I don’t know it and I’ve had to patch most of it together as a best fit guess anyway.

That said, since we all have a responsibility to be accountable for the choices we make and when those are significant decisions we have a responsibility to make sure we’re dang certain they’re good choices before we stick our name to them. If my kids approach me when I’m older, after they’ve experienced the results of these choices by both myself and my W, will I be able to say that I made wise choices... and more’s the point, will I be able to be accountable for the choices I’ve made. Will I be accountable for my behaviour during the marriage, how I have ‘performed’ as a father? I really hope so... and thus, don’t want to be held accountable for a choice that I didn’t even make? No... and yes, that choice might be something I’d have to answer to at a later date as well.

[ct21218]

From the outside this appears very ego driven.  You are fighting to be seen as right at all costs, including the feelings of your young children.  By your own admission, you hold some responsibility in being inattentive. 

I see little point in fighting over who is more wrong.  You both hold some part.  Be there for your children and show your wife some grace.  Maybe she will find peace in her life.

[Enabler]

FF has summarised well.

He had rightfully pointed out my failure to be biblically obedient with regards to reporting this to the church. I would say it’s predominantly out of fear of things being made worse for ME and my future relationship with the kids.

Regarding ‘evidence’ there are more smoking guns and vapour trails over a long period of time. First pregnancy test was May17.  First emails with talk of ‘attraction’ May16. First claims by people in the village that they might be having an affair Jan16.

Enabler