• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

My wife is convinced she's a 16 year old.

bigvindaloo

Active Member
I had the misfortune of going through a marriage breakdown about one year ago. My wife is convinced she is a 16 year old in terms of her attitude to life at this stage. My own perspective is that at 40, she ought to consider her age more cautiously, and her childrens' welfare to boot. Any comments?
 

Mike182

Flaming Queer
i can't really make any comments, because i don't know your wife, or the depth of the situation.

may i ask, how have you been coping with this? :hug:
 

bigvindaloo

Active Member
Mike182 said:
i can't really make any comments, because i don't know your wife, or the depth of the situation.

may i ask, how have you been coping with this? :hug:
With as much equanimity as possible. Children do no need to relive garbage from parental discord in their adult life. I maintain direct care of children from the relationship at a substantial level. I am mostly concerned about how they are coping with the situation.

I owe you some elaboration in responding to your post. This might also clarify my intent in creating a thread with personal content.

My wife left me on Fathers Day 2005 with the two kids. I did not see them for 3 weeks. She went immediately to the Court to organise orders for their custody. Since then I have been involved in a legal process with its own timeline imposed on discussions over my children's welfare.

My personal position is guided by my Buddhist beliefs and studies in law. I am of the utmost opinion that family related disputes have no place in a legal context, considering the best interests of children.

However, the OP is about how one should respond to a situation where one partner involved in marriage breakdown involving children is perceived to be acting irresponsibly by the other party. Is a legal solution the only acceptable solution? Or should I conform simply to my Buddhist beliefs and remain equanimous irrespective of the outcome of the legal process?

How would a person with Christian faith deal with such a situation differently to a Buddhist?
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
bigvindaloo said:
With as much equanimity as possible. Children do no need to relive garbage from parental discord in their adult life. I maintain direct care of children from the relationship at a substantial level. I am mostly concerned about how they are coping with the situation.

I owe you some elaboration in responding to your post. This might also clarify my intent in creating a thread with personal content.

My wife left me on Fathers Day 2005 with the two kids. I did not see them for 3 weeks. She went immediately to the Court to organise orders for their custody. Since then I have been involved in a legal process with its own timeline imposed on discussions over my children's welfare.

My personal position is guided by my Buddhist beliefs and studies in law. I am of the utmost opinion that family related disputes have no place in a legal context, considering the best interests of children.

However, the OP is about how one should respond to a situation where one partner involved in marriage breakdown involving children is perceived to be acting irresponsibly by the other party. Is a legal solution the only acceptable solution? Or should I conform simply to my Buddhist beliefs and remain equanimous irrespective of the outcome of the legal process?

How would a person with Christian faith deal with such a situation differently to a Buddhist?

First of all, I am sorry for your loss.

The law is the lowest common denomenator for the morality or ethics of the community. If we are to be virtuous, religious, or people of good character, we develop a system of ethics far above what the law prevents or requires. If we have reputable businesses, our business works above and beyond the legal contract - giving services that are not required.

In your case, the law can actually prevent you from being equanimous irrespective of the outcome of the legal process because you can be derived of your proprety and visitation rights. While you might provide gifts and sustinance to your kids from your properties and allow her side of the family to see the kids in an equanimous manner, you may not be able to do so because your wife takes the least that you can do legally.

You should do everything in your power to protect your property and familial rights legally and then use your assets equanimously.
 

MysticSang'ha

Big Squishy Hugger
Premium Member
Dearest, my heart goes out to you. :flower2:


It's OK to be discerning as a Buddhist. Somehow the paradox of Buddha-realization-potential in everyone seems to be in direct conflict with telling it like it is - or "let's get real" according to Dr. Phil. In truth, there is no conflict. Right?



I've been through a divorce where children had been involved. It was painful and disgusting for me, and confusing for the kids. It still was the best action to take as a family because things were worse when we were together. I won custody of the kids because their father wanted to move 1000 miles away and act like he was single again. I am glad that I was awarded custody because he also suffered from alcoholism where his irresponsible behavior was exacerbated and caused much pain and sadness in the family.




If a divorce is impending, courts most often award custody of minor children to the mother. So, if you believe that it is in the children's best interest to be in your custody, I think you ought to use the legal system for their best interest and fight for their well-being. Believing that equanimity is the answer while seeing your children suffer needlessly in the custody of their mother bears little to Buddhist ethics IMO.



The legal system should not be looked upon as the bad guy, or "big brother", in these instances, because divorces already have tones and shades of bitterness and revenge written all over them. In many cases, the court will have a better perspective on what is best for the entire family when a marriage dissolves. This is especially true when one parent in a divorce is currently suffering from alcoholism, drug addiction, or unchecked violent anger, or any other malady that they may or may not deny.




A court can protect the children from these untreated conditions and from undue suffering..........AND can enforce supervised visits until the parent volunteers to get treatment. This is where the courts are valuable and necessary.




I'm so sorry that you and your family are going through this. You're being thrown a situation where it would be difficult for anyone to maintain his or her emotions and to remain committed to personal ethics. This is no cozy atmosphere.




PM me if you wish.



Peace,
Mystic
 

Rejected

Under Reconstruction
First of all you have my condolences. Divorce is never a pleasant thing, especially when there are children involved. I hope everything works out for you.

I think that for the time being you should set your personal feelings aside and fight tooth and nail, without reserve or apology, for the wellbeing of your children. They are the priority here.

If your wife is truly reverting to an adolescent mindset then she is definitely not capable of providing the type of environment those children need.
 

Ciscokid

Well-Known Member
bigvindaloo said:
I had the misfortune of going through a marriage breakdown about one year ago. My wife is convinced she is a 16 year old in terms of her attitude to life at this stage. My own perspective is that at 40, she ought to consider her age more cautiously, and her childrens' welfare to boot. Any comments?


I have an idea what you may be going through. My ex repeatedly makes horrible decisions in life. I think she's allergic to living a normal sensible life.
 

Booko

Deviled Hen
I'm very sorry to hear your family is in such a difficult position as this. If you would find it of any use, I would be happy to offer what prayers I may for you and your family.

bigvindaloo said:
With as much equanimity as possible. Children do no need to relive garbage from parental discord in their adult life. I maintain direct care of children from the relationship at a substantial level. I am mostly concerned about how they are coping with the situation.
Is there any possibility of the family sitting down with a family counselor? Or just the kids, who will be needing help coping with this situation? Or just you and your wife? Heck, even if you're the only one willing, it may be of help. Often if we modify our behaviour so as not to "trigger" the other person, it helps the situation. You might be inadvertently doing something to make her act less rationally. It happens all the time in relationships. And it might have absolutely nothing to do with you.

My wife left me on Fathers Day 2005 with the two kids.
:confused: A tacky choice of days, at best.

I did not see them for 3 weeks. She went immediately to the Court to organise orders for their custody. Since then I have been involved in a legal process with its own timeline imposed on discussions over my children's welfare.
Uh...bigvindaloo, do you realize how odd it looks on my screen to read you talking about "my" children? They are still "our" children, and how we think of a situation does affect how we act. It will aid conversation between you and your wife if you keep thinking "our" children. Well, I don't mean to be picky or anything, but it's amazing what a difference words make in how we end up acting.

My personal position is guided by my Buddhist beliefs and studies in law. I am of the utmost opinion that family related disputes have no place in a legal context, considering the best interests of children.
Regrettably, in cases of marriages breaking up, often both parents are a bit unhinged, so it's best to put some decisions in the hands of an institution that is a bit more objective. And in a situation where only one parent is unhinged, it still requires some sort of authority to come to an equitable solution *and force the unhinged party to accept it*.

However, the OP is about how one should respond to a situation where one partner involved in marriage breakdown involving children is perceived to be acting irresponsibly by the other party. Is a legal solution the only acceptable solution? Or should I conform simply to my Buddhist beliefs and remain equanimous irrespective of the outcome of the legal process?
What other options do you have, other than legal ones?

It would be best to remain equanimous at any rate. Isn't it somewhat out of your hands? We Baha'is have several prayers for detachment, and there are certainly times when I use them.

Even if the outcome seems unjust to you, equanimity will aid the process of finding a reasonable outcome for your children.

In my religion, we are advised to obey the decisions of institutions wholeheartely. This is not done out of blind obedience, but out of a knowledge that, if the decision really is a bad one, it will be discovered to be poor earlier so that it can be remedied. If everyone supports the decision wholeheartedly, then there is no question that some effort did not work because it was undercut by some members. We maintain our spirit of unity in this way and avoid infighting that only does more harm than any bad decision could.

I have found this works in family relationships as well. If a relationship is breaking up but both parties are setting aside their egos and personal desires, then if the court or some other institution makes a bad decision, it will be seen to need adjustment sooner rather than later. And there can be no energy wasted in accusations and counter-accusations that one party is not holding up their end of the deal.

How would a person with Christian faith deal with such a situation differently to a Buddhist?

Christians I know would go to their pastor, priest, or the Marriage Tribunal or some other such body. But that only works if both parties are Christians of denomonations where they would both find that acceptable.

As a Baha'i, if I were in such a situation I would be seeking guidance from my Local Spiritual Assembly. The National Spiritual Assembly also has assisstance they can offer. Such things are not legally binding, but here if the parents can come to an agreement on their own, the courts will rubber stamp it. And that only works for me because my husband, even when he was still an agnostic, would agree to it.

The thing is, the institutions have no power to demand a party do anything, so it is again all dependent on both parties being willing to cooperate with the institution and abide by its recommendation.

Having served on LSAs before, I've certainly seen cases where one party in the marriage proved unwilling to do anything the LSA recommended, even as simple as meeting in a friendly way for prayers and just to read a passage or two from the Writings.

I've observed that such individuals usually encounter some very severe challenges in life later on, but that's another story for another thread on the nature of spiritual tests.

Do nothing, and think nothing, that will send out any bad energy. Focus only on the welfare of your children. And be patient and wait for events to work themselves out.

I am forever telling my best friend, who is sometimes very impatient in the face of injustice, that karma always works, but you just have to give it some time. :D

Be well,
Sharon
 

egroen

Member
I sympathize with men when it comes to divorce. In Michigan, there are 80 laws protecting womens' rights in a divorce. 8 protect a man's rights. Basically, men have a "right" to see their children, and that's about it.

A man cannot even sell a home in which he holds sole title for, without a wife's signature and a wife can sell a home of which she is not on the title. Men are automatically assumed to be "unfit" to care for their children and women are automatically assumed to be "fit" and to prove otherwise costs immense amounts of money and time. It just makes me sad.

-Erin
 

arthra

Baha'i
I support what Booko wrote...

Some jurisdictions require that the couple going through divorce have three counseling sessions before it is finalized..

It maybe though that your wife sees you as being too formalized (not much "fun") and rebelled by regressing or she maybe going through what some call a "mid life crisis".

The important thing to know though is that even in the divorce which is regretable indeed is that you will continue to have contact with the children and it's important to encourage your children and be positive through it all! Don't share any negativity with the children...support their mother and who knows..in time things could change again!

Finally you and her are vulnerable now to starting 'new" relationships. You need to beware of this I think and always have your children as your number one priority... A short lapse in your affections for another may have very untoward sequences so be very careful about that.

- Art
 

Ciscokid

Well-Known Member
egroen said:
I sympathize with men when it comes to divorce. In Michigan, there are 80 laws protecting womens' rights in a divorce. 8 protect a man's rights. Basically, men have a "right" to see their children, and that's about it.

A man cannot even sell a home in which he holds sole title for, without a wife's signature and a wife can sell a home of which she is not on the title. Men are automatically assumed to be "unfit" to care for their children and women are automatically assumed to be "fit" and to prove otherwise costs immense amounts of money and time. It just makes me sad.

-Erin


I was lucky in that my ex didn't care to get the kids. I have the kids 3/4's of the time. My lawyer said that the longer they live with me the more likely a judge would rule for me as the custodial parent in the event that I would end up in court.

I don't think that will happen in my case. I think more often than not, women tend to be more interested in the care of the children but I've also seen many times where it is the opposite.

I think the courts should take each case as an unknown and find out which parent is best rather than just assuming.
 
Top