Thinking of divorce but holding back?

SeaRaven said:
I'm FINALLY separated after 40+ years. This should have happened years ago and not after retirement but I can't change that.
I'm truly happy now that he lives an hour away and I don't see him or deal with him. When we went to counseling, he refused to talk and just stared at the floor. I knew it was over.
How many of you are out there and you want OUT of a long- standing marriage? How many of you have had these thoughts for YEARS but have only confided in a few people or no one at all?
"Gray divorce" will only continue to climb; the last of the Boomers turn 65 in 2030. In other words, there are lots of us out there and this type of divorce will become normal.
( no offense to those of you with awesome marriages but please don't reply here, start your own thread of "Best.Marriage.Ever.")
Click to expand...
I can relate to this in a way. My husband recently told me he wants to move to Italy ( he has some family relatives there.) He has talked about this on and off for several years.) We have been married for almost 40 years. H told me he wasn't happy living here (in the USA. I agreed with him--if he is not happy here, he should find a place to be happy. We only get one chance to live a happy life.
Our marriage has been stale for many years, so time to move on.
 

glofran said:
I can relate to this in a way. My husband recently told me he wants to move to Italy ( he has some family relatives there.) He has talked about this on and off for several years.) We have been married for almost 40 years. H told me he wasn't happy living here (in the USA. I agreed with him--if he is not happy here, he should find a place to be happy. We only get one chance to live a happy life.
Our marriage has been stale for many years, so time to move on.
Click to expand...
do you think if you moved to Italy with him, it would add some sparkle back into your marriage ?
 
Before divorcing, I do think couples should give it one last shot in couples counseling. See if that makes a difference. Just a short delay before that final decision.

Sorry for all the problems and heartache folks endure.

Wishing the best for everyone.
 

Some professional help here, (albeit religious too):
https://www.focusonthefamily.com/marriage/cherish-your-spouse-videos-588501/

Quote:
"What does it mean to cherish your spouse?

God created everyone different – this includes you and your spouse. He created each of us to have unique characteristics as part of his grand design and plan. When we cherish our spouse, we appreciate and treasure those unique characteristics and can love them and our Creator in a more meaningful way."
 
I can say while married I lost sight of myself, I was stressed, frustrated, angry all the time, basically very unhappy.

I swear to you, the very day my then wife moved out it was as if someone flipped a switch in me and let the old me back. I knew I was unhappy but truly didn't realize the level of despair I was in, until I wasn't. It's just awful to think how another person can end up making us miserable.

Bless those of us who can find peace and happiness in our later years
 
Blessed said:
These days it seems our younger generation just throw in the towel if a problem comes up.
Click to expand...
That was said about our generation by our parents and grandparents. Although I've never needed to be divorced myself, I've observed numerous cases where divorce was a far bigger blessing to the two parties than marriage ever was.

Marriage shouldn't be considered a lifetime sentence with no chance for parole.
 
Blessed said:
Marriage, I was married for 31 years with and we dated for 5 years prior. Even at a young age I knew being madly in love did not always count. We had many challenges, ups and downs, I did not expect us to be silly teenagers all our lives. I think we got through the hard times because we both had the same values, taught to us by our parents. You have to work at it, make decisions together. Be committed to the vows you made. These days it seems our younger generation just throw in the towel if a problem comes up. You have to be prepared to work through things. Most of us have had to do that at work, with relatives and friends, even our children. Why we would think we don't have to work to have a good relationship with our spouse.
Click to expand...
Just to be clear, attitudes to divorce have undoubtedly changed enormously in our lifetime, no one can argue against that fact, (no matter whether someone thinks this a good thing or not!).
No fault divorce today means the state no longer sees the behaviour of either parent relevant, and no one can be guilty of anything, (adultery, mental cruelty, abandonment, none of these things are thought important!).
However, in my experience those people observing infidelity in someones partner, especially someone cheating on a friend of theirs, do not think them small matters at all, (all good grounds for divorce under laws going back a few generations too!).
Listening to someone who can present an opinion based upon winning through even difficult times, to enjoy a long and happy marriage should be taken notice of and lauded therefore, (not criticised because they have views differing from what you believe is an infallible position you hold).
 
grahamg said:
No fault divorce today means the state no longer sees the behaviour of either parent relevant, and no one can be guilty of anything, (adultery, mental cruelty, abandonment, none of these things are thought important!).
Click to expand...
I don't know that the state considers these issues unimportant. More likely they've learned that it's none of their business why people want to split. Court cases that require finger pointing and blame laying doesn't work to anyone's benefit, particularly not children and and other parties close to the couple.

One of my sons and a deeply beloved DIL broke up after 9 years of dating and less than 2 years of marriage. I still don't know the details but the split was amicable and wanted by both parties. It's neither my business nor my right to know any more than that.

They've remarried to spouses who I now realize suit each of them far better.

When a marriage is a poor match, there doesn't need to be a victim and a villain. Each partner has usually played both roles more than once anyway.
 
StarSong said:
I don't know that the state considers these issues unimportant. More likely they've learned that it's none of their business why people want to split. Court cases that require finger pointing and blame laying doesn't work to anyone's benefit, particularly not children and and other parties close to the couple.

One of my sons and a deeply beloved DIL broke up after 9 years of dating and less than 2 years of marriage. I still don't know the details but the split was amicable and wanted by both parties. It's neither my business nor my right to know any more than that.

They've remarried to spouses who I now realize suit each of them far better.

When a marriage is a poor match, there doesn't need to be a victim and a villain. Each partner has usually played both roles more than once anyway.
Click to expand...
You suggest our government has decided its no business of theirs to make a judgement as to where fault lay when a marriage fails, whilst at the very same time our governments have laws denying privacy to anyone between them and their children, (so quite a contrast there!).
It doesn't matter how cruel a husband might have been let's say, but the most innocent mother or father, "and we've got to enquire into everything", (and according to Goldwater, a lady from Canada who is a leading lawyer, "privacy is necessary in close personal relationships"!).
 
grahamg said:
You suggest our government has decided its no business of theirs to make a judgement as to where fault lay when a marriage fails, whilst at the very same time our governments have laws denying privacy to anyone between them and their children, (so quite a contrast there!).
It doesn't matter how cruel a husband might have been let's say, but the most innocent mother or father, "and we've got to enquire into everything", (and according to Goldwater, a lady from Canada who is a leading lawyer, "privacy is necessary in close personal relationships"!).
Click to expand...
These are separate matters despite the fact that minor children are often part of marital and divorce landscapes.

Children are essentially powerless and therefore need protection. If credible allegations of cruelty, abuse, other crimes or dereliction against minors are reported it is appropriate that they are investigated.

If two adults change their minds about spending the rest of their lives together, the government shouldn't waste time or resources on the who-shot-John saga of a marriage's deterioration.

I don't know how it works in the UK, but joint custody is the gold standard in the US unless there are the types of problems I described above, or the child vehemently objects, or the parents work out a different arrangement that the courts approve.
 
StarSong said:
These are separate matters despite the fact that minor children are often part of marital and divorce landscapes.
Children are essentially powerless and therefore need protection. If credible allegations of cruelty, abuse, other crimes or dereliction against minors are reported it is appropriate that they are investigated.
If two adults change their minds about spending the rest of their lives together, the government shouldn't waste time or resources on the who-shot-John saga of a marriage's deterioration.
I don't know how it works in the UK, but joint custody is the gold standard in the US unless there are the types of problems I described above, or the child vehemently objects, or the parents work out a different arrangement that the courts approve.
Click to expand...
You state the issues are different, but if the Canadian lady lawyer Goldwater is correct, there is a need for privacy in close personal relationships regardless of anything else, (where there are no child protection issues being raised by anyone at least).
I agree our UK system is different than what happens in the USA, and your individual states have their own statures or rules, (some states including statements about the need for "love" to be shown - a word non existent in any UK legislation of rules, and Sir Bob Geldof when going through his divorce many years ago now was told by his legal tea not to mention the word for fear the judge would interpret what he said in a negative way, and of course \Bob completely ignored him and stated both he and Paula Yates loved their children!).
 
I can't comment further because I successfully evaded that particular adventure in this lifetime. My second hand experience comes from friends and relatives who are divorced. For the most part, their child custody arrangements went smoothly. Yes, a few hiccups, but not too bad. It sometimes got rough when one of the parents developed new love interests.

By my observations, the most successful co-parents broke up their marriages well before reaching the point of detesting the sight of one another. They're more likely to remain civil (and sometimes friendly) and aren't strongly focused on punishing each other.

Bad or deteriorating matches - whether marriages, jobs, houses, neighborhoods, home decor, autos, clothing, shoes, whatever, almost never improve over time. Our resentment only increases.
 
StarSong said:
I can't comment further because I successfully evaded that particular adventure in this lifetime. My second hand experience comes from friends and relatives who are divorced. For the most part, their child custody arrangements went smoothly. Yes, a few hiccups, but not too bad. It sometimes got rough when one of the parents developed new love interests.

By my observations, the most successful co-parents broke up their marriages well before reaching the point of detesting the sight of one another. They're more likely to remain civil (and sometimes friendly) and aren't strongly focused on punishing each other.

Bad or deteriorating matches - whether marriages, jobs, houses, neighborhoods, home decor, autos, clothing, shoes, whatever, almost never improve over time. Our resentment only increases.
Click to expand...
The woman running the creche or Sunday school at our local church told me she would feel threatened if she saw her child hugging the dad, after she had divorced or split from him.
If she right, and I've no reason to doubt her word, then my argument in favour oof giving decent parents in the UK some legal tights, (as in statute rights), becomes stronger in my view.
It staggers me that we look very in a modern, sophisticated country, and yet deny all parental rights and no one seems to think they or their neighbours deserve them! :(
 
I have spoke and observed many older long term married couples and most IMO are not happy but institutionalized....
They know they could file for divorce but with freedom comes maybe financial difficulty and other items they may not see right away when thinking of divorce.
So they stay the course........ smile for the family photos and play the part .... It is a miserable existence....
 
Jeni said:
I have spoke and observed many older long term married couples and most IMO are not happy but institutionalized....
They know they could file for divorce but with freedom comes maybe financial difficulty and other items they may not see right away when thinking of divorce.
So they stay the course........ smile for the family photos and play the part .... It is a miserable existence....
Click to expand...
My guru on this subject is called Desmond Morris, the author of many books on the subject of human behaviour and he has always taken a very different view to the one you're promulgating.
 
Jeni said:
i am just noting observations both close family and many many friends .......
Click to expand...
Just in case it is of interest here is a link to an article mentioning Desmond Morris's views on divorce etc., (apologies this one is quite long).:
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/232565747.pdf

Here are some quotes taken from a website where Desmond Morris was being interviewed:
http://www.cosmoetica.com/DSI8.htm

"I was trained as a zoologist studying animal behaviour, so when I turned my attention to the human animal I used the same observational methods. I watched what people do rather than listened to what they say. The book was unusual because it was a zoology of human beings, rather than a psychology. I deliberately ignored the ways in which human beings are different from other animals and concentrated just on those aspects that we share with other animals- mating, feeding, aggression, play, sleep, etc., Darwin said humans were descended from animals, but I was saying, no, we are just animals, and no more than animals. But a very remarkable species, all the same.

Interviewer: That’s an excellent point, that we are not ‘descended from animals,’ but ARE ‘animals.’ Can you tell me how your subsequent fame from it affected later works? And what things in the book have held up the best against subsequent decades’ research, and what aspects of the book look hopelessly dated?

DM: When I was asked to revise the book, the only thing that I felt was dated was the population figure for the human species. When I wrote the book 40 years ago the world population stood at about 3000 million. Today it is over 6000 million. Apart from that, I thought that the book had stood the test of time remarkably well. In fact, since it was written, there has been a much greater acceptance of genetic factors influencing human behaviour. At the time I wrote the book that idea was revolutionary, but today it is not."

Break

I was unusually lucky with my mother who always encouraged me to do whatever I was passionate about. In this world there are ‘no’ mothers and ‘yes’ mothers. The ‘no’ mothers keep on saying ‘stop that,’ ‘don't do that,’ while the ‘yes’ mothers say (regardless of their true feelings) ‘how interesting, dear.’ During her entire 98 years of life, I don’t recall my own mother ever criticizing anything I had done, even when, occasionally, I suspect she was not entirely happy about something."
 
grahamg said:
Just in case it is of interest here is a link to an article mentioning Desmond Morris's views on divorce etc., (apologies this one is quite long).:
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/232565747.pdf

Here are some quotes taken from a website where Desmond Morris was being interviewed:
http://www.cosmoetica.com/DSI8.htm

"I was trained as a zoologist studying animal behaviour, so when I turned my attention to the human animal I used the same observational methods. I watched what people do rather than listened to what they say. The book was unusual because it was a zoology of human beings, rather than a psychology. I deliberately ignored the ways in which human beings are different from other animals and concentrated just on those aspects that we share with other animals- mating, feeding, aggression, play, sleep, etc., Darwin said humans were descended from animals, but I was saying, no, we are just animals, and no more than animals. But a very remarkable species, all the same.

Interviewer: That’s an excellent point, that we are not ‘descended from animals,’ but ARE ‘animals.’ Can you tell me how your subsequent fame from it affected later works? And what things in the book have held up the best against subsequent decades’ research, and what aspects of the book look hopelessly dated?

DM: When I was asked to revise the book, the only thing that I felt was dated was the population figure for the human species. When I wrote the book 40 years ago the world population stood at about 3000 million. Today it is over 6000 million. Apart from that, I thought that the book had stood the test of time remarkably well. In fact, since it was written, there has been a much greater acceptance of genetic factors influencing human behaviour. At the time I wrote the book that idea was revolutionary, but today it is not."

Break

I was unusually lucky with my mother who always encouraged me to do whatever I was passionate about. In this world there are ‘no’ mothers and ‘yes’ mothers. The ‘no’ mothers keep on saying ‘stop that,’ ‘don't do that,’ while the ‘yes’ mothers say (regardless of their true feelings) ‘how interesting, dear.’ During her entire 98 years of life, I don’t recall my own mother ever criticizing anything I had done, even when, occasionally, I suspect she was not entirely happy about something."
Click to expand...
BTW the relevance of Desmond Morris to the question of divorce, and the relaxation of divorce rules removing any questions about fault, even where there might have been unbelievable cruelty perpetrated by one or other spouses, is that Desmond Morris stated when all these laws were being relaxed was that it "would lead to a generation of heart broken people, because in evolutionary terms forming lifelong bonds had been essential to the survival of any off spring or children, due to their prolonged adolescence in the human species, and human nature is something that doesn't easily change over millennia", (or words to that effect!).
 
Jeni said:
i am just noting observations both close family and many many friends .......
Click to expand...
I totally agree Jeni as I have seen very few couples that are happy in their senior years. Many will even say that they can’t afford to split. On another retirement forum it was eye opening to read the responses of people to a similar thread that were in long term marriages.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top