SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

Neither spouse has the right to force or intimidate the other out.

True enough. However, I think a WS has a moral obligation to respect the wishes of a BS. If that means leaving, then so be it. To insist upon staying is only added abuse and abject cruelty.

Unhinged - even if both names are on the mortgage and it's setting the WS up for the BS to claim they abandoned the kids and used as grounds in later custody discussions? BS'es are often advised not to leave the marital home for those same reasons, so why should it be different for the WS?

I've never understood the advice that a WS should leave - or that a WS should quit their job right away because the BS wants them to. Why make a bad situation worse by adding financial difficulties to the mix?

Why should it be different for a WAYWARD spouse? Seriously?

^^^ I agree with needing_clarity. It just shovels more shit onto an already enormous shit pile.

If a WS gives up everything for a chance to reconcile and it works out, I’m always going to be happy for them. But I think they should at least hear the advice to protect themselves and then make their decision after weighing all the possibilities.

[This message edited by Darkness Falls at 1:38 PM, August 14th (Wednesday)]

Moral obligation and wayward spouse...

More of the double standard of infidelity....

BS should be concerned about their spouse when their spouse didn't do the same.

As if having an affair and destroying the stability for family isnt abandoning them. I guess the BS should be grateful the WS physically came home.

No wonder some people cheat...I mean there doesn't seem to be any consequence.

[This message edited by prissy4lyfe at 2:37 PM, August 14th (Wednesday)]

BS should be concerned about their spouse when their spouse didn't do the same.

Indeed, no. Quite the contrary. I believe clarity and Darkness Falls are pointing out that concern for the WS may be the last thing on a BS's mind. They are understandably wounded, reeling, furious, and unpredictable.

I think it’s perfectly understandable and rational and normal for the BS to not have that kind of concern for the WS after infidelity is discovered. That’s why the WS needs to have concern for their own welfare. I fully believe in both spouses being able to stand on their own two feet independently of each other before reconciliation can be successful. The WS does not (and should not) have any guarantee that the BS isn’t going to pull the rug out from under them at any moment—that’s why the stuff about moving out (and thus opening up a case for abandonment of home and kids), quitting job, alienating FOO, etc needs to be considered carefully by the WS. BSs, impose all the consequences you deem necessary to consider R—I’m just saying the WS should consider the ramifications from a measured mindset outside of the immediate desperation to R at any cost.

Unfortunately, I don't think if there are kids involved it's necessarily about WS versus BS. Who is the primary care provider of the children? The children should be able to stay in their home as much as possible and provided normalcy. And both parents have to put some of what is happening to the best interest of these kids.

I may be a WS but if I had small children there would be no way I would provide a case for abandonment of my children. AND IF he is enraged, I wouldn't leave my kids there with him until he calms down. He probably is in no state to look after them regardless after the stress he's been through even if he isn't enraged. It's been stated by the BH in this situation that they are financially not well. He used the term "poor". There aren't a lot of easy answers here because we haven't any information to go on. Does she go to a shelter and take the kids there? I don't know but the situation is complex with more assumptions than true facts. I read both threads closely and I am amazed as to how many things other posters said or suggested then became part of the narrative that neither he or she even said.

It's becoming a "she's must be lying about the DV because she is a WS and because I personally know of a case like that in my personal life".

WE DON'T KNOW! People under intense amounts of stress certainly can act in ways that are not in their normal character. And, in that same token she could be lying through her teeth about everything too...but all we have is a bunch of he said/she said and now this thread has devolved into what's fair and not fair based on WS/BS rather than what might make sense in the actual situation - that we truly know so little about.

Again, this is gasoline on a fire. If we wake up tomorrow and he's gone back to using drugs or has hurt himself, or her...any of these results is astoundingly tragic. Use responsibility. And for peets sake let's not fuel more BS versus WS stuff. Both are adults and responsible for their behavior. The focus needs to go to calming the situation more than adding fuel to it. And their focus needs to be on getting their kids to a place that is calm and safe and keeping their best interests in mind. Stabilizing the situation and disengaging with each other. You have to ask if we are really supporting either of them in a way that is helpful, instead there is just all this stoking of the fires going on.

1000% agree with the above.

Read your husband's thread.

Yeah, I am super questioning your motives for being here.

I agree with everything hikingout put forth. Well said.

I initially posted the exact same advice on both threads. For someone to leave and both of them to calm down and stop fighting before their child. The reason as I keep repeating is the allegations of violence from both of them.

I couldn't care less who is the wayward and who is the BS my concern was that this incident took place in front of the kids and by their retelling of fight both of them could have de-escalated the situation if they were not so focused on not letting the other 'win'.

carissima- I assure you that my post wasn’t directed at you or at bs folk in general. I think many people essentially said this same thing. I just saw it ramping back up over here and tried to bring things back down. I am very worried for both of them and their kids. Such a dangerous situation all around.

BSs, impose all the consequences you deem necessary to consider R—I’m just saying the WS should consider the ramifications from a measured mindset outside of the immediate desperation to R at any cost.

Didn't the (hypothetical) WS consider the ramifications of their actions and decide that an A was a valid life choice? Isn't expecting a WS that had an affair with a COW to quit their job ASAP to get away from their affair partner a reasonable consequence of having an affair? And if they liked their job and/or quality of life so much, wouldn't it have made more sense to not (as the saying goes) "shit where you eat?"

"There's not much humility in believing that you know the truth." Kim Scott, Radical Candor

ibonnie, I absolutely agree with you. Some WSs didn’t consider consequences but should have. Other WSs considered them and either deemed the A worth it or decided in advance that they wouldn’t comply with the hypothetical requirements. I am definitely not saying that a WS should be entitled to get away scot free or that the BS shouldn’t do what they need by way of R requirements.

The fact is that a WS who quits a job without having another equivalent one is not only shooting themselves in the foot as far as their self-supporting livelihood is concerned but they are making themselves a liability to their BS. If the BS decides to divorce, and the WS is un- or under-employed, that’s extra spousal support in some jurisdictions. If the BS decides to R, then they are supporting the household on their own or carrying more of the weight than before for as long as it takes the WS to make the equivalent amount of $ they had been making before. Plus, I simply just don’t agree in principle with putting themselves at the mercy of the good graces of the person they fucked over. That makes no sense to me.

OP, keep in mind that all you have done is create an enemy of someone that loved and trusted you, and there is nothing worse you could do than that.

You have crossed a line that can’t be uncrossed.

It would also be incredibly foolish to think that the way your child sees you some day would not be tainted by the knowledge of what you have done...it will happen.

[This message edited by OrdinaryDude at 10:13 PM, August 14th (Wednesday)]

*** Posting as a Member ***

AND IF he is enraged, I wouldn't leave my kids there with him until he calms down. He probably is in no state to look after them regardless after the stress he's been through even if he isn't enraged.

This is offensive in ways that are difficult to comprehend, let alone respond to. I'm sure I could have done a better job of taking care of my 4yo son in those early months, but I did just fine, thankyouverylittle.

What's best for the kids is always going to be a consideration. Personally, I'm more apt to believe that a BS in a world of pain, doubt and fear is far more capable of being a good parent than the WS who willfully self-destructs, blowing up their own lives and the lives of everyone around them.

Unhinged -

I can understand why you are offended by this, but honestly you are taking a post where I was throwing out hypotheticals in order to illustrate all that we really don't know what's happening in their given situation

I am not here to solve custody battles or to say who should get kids, who can care better, or whatever. All I was doing was throwing out different scenarios that we really don't know about this particular situation.

I don't know if my H would have been able to take care of kids one month out. He couldn't take care of himself very well, I did a lot of heavy lifting in those early months AS I SHOULD HAVE. Honestly, though, I can feel just as offended if I extrapolate what you are saying to mean a WW can't be a good mother. I was and am an excellent mother - thankYOUverylittle. My BS was an is an excellent father - but early out I would honestly have a hard time imagining he could care for someone else in the state he was in, but that is very sad and my fault. I am glad you were able to do that, you don't get those years back.

But this is not really about your situation or mine. And, for what it's worth - I think both of these parents have made some questionable decisions in the well being of the children. I doubt that was your situation at all. I feel horrible for both of these people in different ways. If he did any of the things that she is saying, I can see it's probably very out of character for him, and fueled by unimaginable pain - and some of the consequences I see he and his children may be having to the entire situation - that is absolutely heartbreaking all around. I am not here to villainize anyone. All I was really trying to do was to get folks to see that a) we don't know the full picture b) we could do a better job of calming the situation and c) to try and get folks not to make sweeping generalizations about BS and WS because that's where it was going.

Honestly, I am very sorry that's what you thought I was doing - making the same sweeping generalizations - because I did not mean to say a BS was incapable of anything. There are many, many bs people here that are stronger than I can ever imagine being and probably were their kids hero during the dimmest moments of their life.

[This message edited by hikingout at 8:24 AM, August 15th (Thursday)]

Honestly, though, I can feel just as offended if I extrapolate what you are saying to mean a WW can't be a good mother.

Extrapolate? I thought I was being rather clear. Considering what my FWW did and the way she behaved after d-day, I honestly didn't trust her to raise my son.

I'm sure that hurts. I'm sure you're offended by it. That doesn't change that fact that my FWW betrayed herself, me, my son, truth, justice and the American Way goddamnit!

Kids need stable, healthy parents. To me, people who willing self-destruct and blow up their own lives are not stable, healthy people.