RecordProducer Posted March 1, 2008 Posted March 1, 2008 I do not understand why so many people are always saying it's the H who hurt you not the OW. Lila Bell, I would certainly hate the OW if my partner cheated on me, but HE would be the one who decided to hurt ME - MEEEEEEEEE. She just decided to have him, but she would have never achieved her goal without HIM - MY partner. He is responsible in my eyes 100%. There can be millions of men who may want me - should my partner hate them? No. Not until I spread my legs for one of them. Then he becomes an accomplice, but I am the cheater. The thing is: these women who decide to forgive their husbands act as if everything else is guilty after the forgiveness and the husband gets immunity. If she forgave him, she should forgive everyone and accept all the consequences. if you can't accept the consequences (I wouldn't), you did not forgive and you're not ready to move on as if you have forgiven. Imagine that your child's friend ruined your car. You would forgive him, cuz the insurance will pay for the car damage. But if he killed your child while driving, you could never forgive that - even though the circumstances (e.g. DUI) were exactly the same in both cases. So it's all about the consequences. That's even how the legal system works. As a matter of fact, driving while intoxicated wouldn't be a problem if the potential consequences weren't tragic. Same with cheating: if the consequences involve birth of another child, the cheater should be held more responsible. This woman should forgive the consequences and accept them OR refuse to forgive anything. I commend her willingness to accept the child, that's certainly way more than I would do. But if she forgives only partially, she is setting herself up for a lot of pain in the future.
TMCM Posted March 1, 2008 Posted March 1, 2008 It seems that sometimes it is more difficult to recover from an affair where the cheating husband fathered a child with his lover as opposed to a cheating wife who has given birth to her lover's child. For starters, the BW cannot make the legal claim, like a BH can, that the OC is a "child of the marriage" and thus recognized as the child's mother. And unlike most OM who usually tend to fade away once a cheating wife has chosen to reconcile with her BH, many OW are extremely bitter when the cheating husband has chosen to reconcile with his BW and become hellbent in using the OC to make life miserable to her former lover and his BW. Not to mention the financial strain that occurs when the cheating husband has to pay child support to the OW which is never the case when the OC is from a cheating wife. But no matter whether the OC is from a cheating husband or a cheating wife, the devastation reaches across generations.
RecordProducer Posted March 1, 2008 Posted March 1, 2008 But no matter whether the OC is from a cheating husband or a cheating wife, the devastation reaches across generations.Seeing all these women who have MM's babies, I am thinking about the babies growing up in unhealthy emotional circumstances. Poor kids.
Trialbyfire Posted March 1, 2008 Posted March 1, 2008 Lila Bell, I would certainly hate the OW if my partner cheated on me, but HE would be the one who decided to hurt ME - MEEEEEEEEE. She just decided to have him, but she would have never achieved her goal without HIM - MY partner. He is responsible in my eyes 100%. There can be millions of men who may want me - should my partner hate them? No. Not until I spread my legs for one of them. Then he becomes an accomplice, but I am the cheater.In applying your logic to cheaters, the cheater also shouldn't be considered responsible. Most have no intention of hurting anyone. They're not thinking along those lines. They're thinking about themselves and their sole needs. In essence, the betrayed wife or husband fails to be factored into the affair equation. It's like saying, being selfish is okay, if you have no intention of hurting anyone in the process, which I vehemently disagree with. Both the cheater and the OW/OM are being selfish for their personal needs. Both are equally responsible for their actions, thus consequences. The thing is: these women who decide to forgive their husbands act as if everything else is guilty after the forgiveness and the husband gets immunity. If she forgave him, she should forgive everyone and accept all the consequences. if you can't accept the consequences (I wouldn't), you did not forgive and you're not ready to move on as if you have forgiven. Imagine that your child's friend ruined your car. You would forgive him, cuz the insurance will pay for the car damage. But if he killed your child while driving, you could never forgive that - even though the circumstances (e.g. DUI) were exactly the same in both cases. So it's all about the consequences. That's even how the legal system works. As a matter of fact, driving while intoxicated wouldn't be a problem if the potential consequences weren't tragic. Same with cheating: if the consequences involve birth of another child, the cheater should be held more responsible. This woman should forgive the consequences and accept them OR refuse to forgive anything. I commend her willingness to accept the child, that's certainly way more than I would do. But if she forgives only partially, she is setting herself up for a lot of pain in the future. Forgiveness doesn't mean she has to have anything to do with the child or the OW. I have forgiven my ex-H but I'll be damned if I ever take him back. Apply this to the OP. The slate is wiped clean upon forgiveness but regardless, she has the right to decide who she wants in her life. If I were her, I would drop her cheating husband like a hot rock. Not only will he continue to be an emotional burden, if the child is his, there's potential for him being a financial drain for her own children and herself. I would be merciless in ensuring that my own children were taken care of so if it caused a financial drain to the cheater, tough... Divorce would wipe the financial slate clean, in that the cheater would be responsible for helping to or fully supporting the OPs children.
RecordProducer Posted March 1, 2008 Posted March 1, 2008 In applying your logic to cheaters, the cheater also shouldn't be considered responsible. Most have no intention of hurting anyone. They're not thinking along those lines. They're thinking about themselves and their sole needs. It's like saying, being selfish is okay, if you have no intention of hurting anyone in the process, which I vehemently disagree with. I agree with you, but I didn't say that being selfish is OK as long as you don't intend to hurt anyone. The OW is a bitch - bitches exist and will always exist. But it's your husband who betrayed you. When you married him you never thought that he wouldn't be able to find a bitch to screw; you hoped that HE wouldn't use the opportunity to do so. If you see a woman flirting with your husband, you conclude that she is a piece of crap, but she will have no power over your happiness and her intentions will bounce back if your husband says NO to her. The moment he brings her into your marriage, she becomes your problem. I know drug dealers exist and they are all scumbags, but they can only become my personal problem if my kids start buying drugs from them. I am not saying that the OW is not responsible in global terms; I am saying that in local terms (your marriage environment), the cheater is the one who willingly let the evil in. If my son ever brings a drug addict into my house who will steal all my valuable things, and my son knew he'd do this, I would hold my son completely responsible in my relationship with him, because scumbags do exist, but it was my son who decided to hurt me. It wouldn't hurt so much had the drug addict simply break into my house and stole those things. I'd feel betrayed by my own child. That's the whole point. The OW is______ (insert whatever names you want to attribute her), but your partner is the one who betrayed you. I have forgiven my ex-H but I'll be damned if I ever take him back. You're letting the word "forgiveness" switch in meaning. Not taking him back precisely means you haven't forgiven him. I believe that people are only able to genuinely forgive when they can understand the situation or if you don't care about their deeds anymore. I have forgiven my ex-H for dumping me, because I realized that he did ME a favor, that it was unavoidable, that it wasn't a bad thing, and finally, I don't care about him anymore, I am much happier because he dumped me. But I will never forgive him for not seeing (or even calling) the kids for 4.5 months. That's unforgivable. But I am not angry at him for this, we are good friends now. If I were her, I would drop her cheating husband like a hot rock. Me too, but she is not going to dump him. We don't know the circumstances. Maybe she gained 200 lbs and never wanted sex, maybe she didn't mind him having sex with another woman. I know a man whose wife is not interested in sex and she allowed him to have it on the side as long as he doesn't fall in love (but he did fall in love once which disturbed his marriage and luckily the OW dumped him for her ex-BF). Apparently the baby is the only problem that was presented by her, so let's not open other fields.
Trialbyfire Posted March 2, 2008 Posted March 2, 2008 I agree with you, but I didn't say that being selfish is OK as long as you don't intend to hurt anyone. The OW is a bitch - bitches exist and will always exist. But it's your husband who betrayed you. When you married him you never thought that he wouldn't be able to find a bitch to screw; you hoped that HE wouldn't use the opportunity to do so. If you see a woman flirting with your husband, you conclude that she is a piece of crap, but she will have no power over your happiness and her intentions will bounce back if your husband says NO to her. The moment he brings her into your marriage, she becomes your problem. I know drug dealers exist and they are all scumbags, but they can only become my personal problem if my kids start buying drugs from them. I am not saying that the OW is not responsible in global terms; I am saying that in local terms (your marriage environment), the cheater is the one who willingly let the evil in.I spread culpability with broader brush strokes. If you're involved in the affair, you're culpable. The OW/OM is just as responsible for being selfish, instead of being responsible to society's morality. I can easily despise anyone who has morals this low, that they need to stoop to predatory behaviours. If my son ever brings a drug addict into my house who will steal all my valuable things, and my son knew he'd do this, I would hold my son completely responsible in my relationship with him, because scumbags do exist, but it was my son who decided to hurt me. It wouldn't hurt so much had the drug addict simply break into my house and stole those things. I'd feel betrayed by my own child. That's the whole point. The OW is______ (insert whatever names you want to attribute her), but your partner is the one who betrayed you.Here's where we differ again. If I had a son who brought a drug addict into the home, who stole all my valuables, I would call the cops on the drug addict, while despising his lack of morality and integrity, AND I would hold my son responsible for bringing such a low-life into my home. You're letting the word "forgiveness" switch in meaning. Not taking him back precisely means you haven't forgiven him. I believe that people are only able to genuinely forgive when they can understand the situation or if you don't care about their deeds anymore. I have forgiven my ex-H for dumping me, because I realized that he did ME a favor, that it was unavoidable, that it wasn't a bad thing, and finally, I don't care about him anymore, I am much happier because he dumped me. But I will never forgive him for not seeing (or even calling) the kids for 4.5 months. That's unforgivable. But I am not angry at him for this, we are good friends now. Forgiveness can be in many forms. Semantics is what you're disputing. I have forgiven my ex-H, in that what happened opened my eyes wide, to what kind of person he is, including and especially his disorder. In forgiving someone, you don't have to take them back into your life. My ex and I are very civil, even friends and potentially more, if you look at the world according to the ex. The world according to Tbf, is that while I do pity him, I'm not terribly interested in who he is as a person, therefore, don't see him as good friend material. If I help him, it's solely out of pity. I'm no longer angry at him, at all. I'm just disinterested and see him, on an intellectual level, as someone not worthy of my friendship. Me too, but she is not going to dump him. We don't know the circumstances. Maybe she gained 200 lbs and never wanted sex, maybe she didn't mind him having sex with another woman. I know a man whose wife is not interested in sex and she allowed him to have it on the side as long as he doesn't fall in love (but he did fall in love once which disturbed his marriage and luckily the OW dumped him for her ex-BF). Apparently the baby is the only problem that was presented by her, so let's not open other fields. Why not open other fields for her to consider? She has every right to receive advice from all angles. Her options, regardless of her situation, don't need to be narrowed to one tiny avenue/perspective. Technically, if she frees herself, the world is her oyster.
RecordProducer Posted March 2, 2008 Posted March 2, 2008 This coming from someone who is "a child of divorce - give me a break"? It's OK for you to get a break, but not other kids who come from broken homes? Give me a break.Well, maybe Pyro thinks that HE TOO should have been aborted. OpenBook, nobody said that these kids from broken families would have been better off if they were aborted (). It's that such pregnancies cause problems for the adults. There were actual investigations, people, and the girl in question hadn't been sexually molested. It didn't happen. The OW lied. This OW lied. It didn't happen. Just because they didn't find anything doesn't mean it never happened. Remember, this person is retarded, maybe she is not even aware of what happened. OJ Simpson wasn't charged for murdering two people. Does that mean he was innocent? if you do get a signed statement from her about her false accusation, that may help ensure against future accusations if they're left alone. It sounds like somebody else suggested this, but I just wanted to say: no way will she get a statement from the OW admitting in a written form that she accused her H falsely. She could go to jail for signing something like that. Here's where we differ again. If I had a son who brought a drug addict into the home, who stole all my valuables, I would call the cops on the drug addict, while despising his lack of morality and integrity, AND I would hold my son responsible for bringing such a low-life into my home. We don't differ on that one. I didn't say I would let the criminal walk. It's just that there are things that hurt more from the ones we love than from strangers. Forgiveness can be in many forms. Semantics is what you're disputing. I have forgiven my ex-H, in that what happened opened my eyes wide, to what kind of person he is, including and especially his disorder. In forgiving someone, you don't have to take them back into your life. I see and I agree with you. (Starting to think more like you and less like me) Why not open other fields for her to consider? She has every right to receive advice from all angles. Her options, regardless of her situation, don't need to be narrowed to one tiny avenue/perspective. Technically, if she frees herself, the world is her oyster.Fair enough.
Tomcat33 Posted March 2, 2008 Posted March 2, 2008 Here's where we differ again. If I had a son who brought a drug addict into the home, who stole all my valuables, I would call the cops on the drug addict, while despising his lack of morality and integrity, AND I would hold my son responsible for bringing such a low-life into my home. That's a terrible example because the OW didn't steal anything from this woman's home, sleeping with her more than willing husband is hardly stealing. Not to mention people don't own people. Had this woman gone in and tried to kidnap her children or try to get the woman in question taken hostage so that she could move in to their house, then that example might actually be fitting. Another reason it is a terrible example is because you can't compare the feelings of love you hold for a child to that of a romantic partner, ie. a H. Clearly you are not so accepting of a H's follies otherwise you would have unconditionally taken him back and would now not be D. A child could very easily be the one who HE himself takes things from your home, steals your money, decieves you, becomes a crack head and a general menace to you and your home, you will still love that child like no other human being on earth no matter how angry or dissapointed you are in him. Bad example all around.
Tomcat33 Posted March 2, 2008 Posted March 2, 2008 OpenBook, nobody said that these kids from broken families would have been better off if they were aborted (). Actually yes that was said: An abortion would probably have been the most practical tactic to have taken.
RecordProducer Posted March 4, 2008 Posted March 4, 2008 Bad example all around.The example was actually mine. Actually yes that was said:You didn't understand the joke I was attempting to make. The kids would have been better off if THEY were aborted - dontcha think that's funny? Cuz they would be dead, so how could they be better off? I added that adults would have been better off, maybe.
Author jenniferc1114 Posted March 4, 2008 Author Posted March 4, 2008 Wow, first of all I want to thank everyone who's responded. More than anything I really wanted some of you to see your situation isn't that bad. It could be worse, you could be me. Everyday I feel someone's looking down on me because I'm still with my H. It is not easy, but I guess the reason why any of us forgives our spouses so easily is because of the love we do have for the spouse. None of us will ever claim we love the OW or OM. I definatly know where the blame is, my H is the only one who took vows to me. I'm still very undecided about my personal choices. I do feel like I must be the one to leave, and I'm very emotional over it. (my H will never go willingly) It makes it so much harder when I really feel his remorse, and for the 1st time in about 5 years I really feel that unconditional love back between us. I guess I wished I still hated him, but I don't. I am in the process of supporting him 100% with full custody. That doesn't mean I'm staying, it just means I support his decision. We know it's a long shot (courts always favor the women) but he does have a few things going for him...her house just went into foreclosure which leads to an unsteady home setting and the false accusation which she does not know the officer has been asked to be a witness. As far as her lies, yes she'll never admit the truth, in fact she just swore on the baby's life she was never involved. I'm almost more sad over that. The county sherrif officer is about to be a witness in her case against her own husband as how she lied to him with my husbands case. For my H's situation (which I guess happens often) it's a he says, she says. But our lawyer knew what questions to ask her that prooved she was lying. For example, she was asked if she & my H were ever romatically involved. She said no. Of course there was more proof than that, but it just goes to show she really didn't think twice about lying. (on a side note, the baby isn't gaining any weight, 3 weeks old and still under birth weight-we believe she's not eating herself therefore while nursing the baby isn't getting any nutrients-this is tough, I'm a strong supporter of breastfeeding, but I have to wonder if this can be considerred neglect) She is still refusing her part in requesting the paternity test. My H goes back for more paperwork Wed with the state, and hopefully he'll be given a closer time frame as to when this can be done. As for now, without paternity, he has no rights.
NoIDidn't Posted March 4, 2008 Posted March 4, 2008 (on a side note, the baby isn't gaining any weight, 3 weeks old and still under birth weight-we believe she's not eating herself therefore while nursing the baby isn't getting any nutrients-this is tough, I'm a strong supporter of breastfeeding, but I have to wonder if this can be considerred neglect) She is still refusing her part in requesting the paternity test. My H goes back for more paperwork Wed with the state, and hopefully he'll be given a closer time frame as to when this can be done. As for now, without paternity, he has no rights. No paternity test, no fatherhood. Do nothing concerning child support until proof is gained of his fathering the child. And if he is indeed the father, sue her for filing a false report (the stating that they weren't romantically involved) and character defamation. The baby appears to be suffering because of her choices no matter what. Have you guys decided what you are going to do once the paternity results are known?
blind_otter Posted March 4, 2008 Posted March 4, 2008 The whole thing about refusing a patnerity test is reeeeeeally fishy, IMO.
norajane Posted March 4, 2008 Posted March 4, 2008 The whole thing about refusing a patnerity test is reeeeeeally fishy, IMO. Exactly. You would think she'd want him to at least provide child support payments since she's not in a good financial place with the foreclosure and all and would be more than willing to prove that he's the father. And if he were the father, you'd think the last thing she'd do is file false charges and try to get him fired so that he doesn't have a job and can't make those child support payments. Nor would she go on record saying they were never romantically involved. My guess...he's not the father.
LucreziaBorgia Posted March 4, 2008 Posted March 4, 2008 The fact that she refuses a DNA test sounds fishy to me too. Makes me think she may in fact be using this pregnancy for her own ends. In some ways I find myself hoping he is the father - otherwise, what will OW do with the child if he isn't the father? I shudder to think, actually. The baby apparently serves a purpose for OW - to get child support and form a bond with MM. If that falls through, will the child still have a purpose for her or will she resent the child (and G_d forbid end up abusing the child)?
NoIDidn't Posted March 4, 2008 Posted March 4, 2008 The fact that she refuses a DNA test sounds fishy to me too. Makes me think she may in fact be using this pregnancy for her own ends. In some ways I find myself hoping he is the father - otherwise, what will OW do with the child if he isn't the father? I shudder to think, actually. The baby apparently serves a purpose for OW - to get child support and form a bond with MM. If that falls through, will the child still have a purpose for her or will she resent the child (and G_d forbid end up abusing the child)? But, LB, the child is already being abused in a way. Not regaining the birth weight and its been three weeks?! That's not good for that baby. If she won't comply with CPS over getting the paternity test, she may well lose the baby temporarily anyway when they see how malnourished it is. This baby is innocent, but the poor thing is never going to feel that way with its psycho mom. Who refuses a paternity test, and lies about an intimate relationship with the person they claim is the child's father - unless they are lying all around? I could NOT deal with that. I still say, no paternity test, not my problem.
ladyintights Posted March 4, 2008 Posted March 4, 2008 How often did your husband have sex with this woman? How do you know the love-making won't continue if there is too much contact?
JustBreathe Posted March 4, 2008 Posted March 4, 2008 LIT, Jennifer says the psycho turned him in to the county for a sexual assault on one of his clients. A total falsehood which caused their family alot of grief. i doubt he harbors any romantic feelings for her! Jennifer, I'm agreeing with the rest of the clan that says don't agree to any child support, or go for custody or ANYTHING unless she submits to a paternity test. She's mentally unstable. The father could be anybody.
AlwaysTomorrow Posted March 5, 2008 Posted March 5, 2008 If the child is his, I think this is just her first step in making both of your lives a living hell. Good luck for the duration of the 18 years.
RecordProducer Posted March 5, 2008 Posted March 5, 2008 More than anything I really wanted some of you to see your situation isn't that bad. It could be worse, you could be me. That was really funny! On a more serious note, do you want to be you? If yes, then be you. If not, then change something. I am in the process of supporting him 100% with full custody. That doesn't mean I'm staying, it just means I support his decision. OMG! Please don't so this! You will have to take care of somebody else's baby; moreover, a baby that your husband made with another woman. The OW will always be present in your life and cause problems. Why do you need to get yourself into such deep sh*t, honey? Just let her have the baby. Your husband will visit him, bring him home on weekends, and pay child support. That's it. You don't have to bother with anything. I think if you get custody, that will be the end of your happiness and the revived romance with your husband. You want to change diapers and feed another woman's child instead of enjoying your time with your husband? Think about it, for your own sake, PLEASE.
TMCM Posted March 5, 2008 Posted March 5, 2008 (edited) Wouldn't it be something if the law said that unless an OW was married, that the child born from her and her married man belonged to the man's betrayed wife? Sort of like a "child of the marriage" type of deal? I'd bet good money that a large number of OW would hide their pregnancies from their married lover and would simply high tail it out of Dodge for fear of losing their children to their lover's wife. Too bad that it's only a fantasy that has as much chance of becoming a reality as hell is of freezing over. Edited March 5, 2008 by TMCM
Tomcat33 Posted March 5, 2008 Posted March 5, 2008 Jennifer - what makes you so sure your H will get 100% custody of the child? I mean a woman has to be an extremely unfit parent in order to lose her child 100%. As per the babie's non weight gain it happens sometimes, my best friend's baby was breast feeding and baby actually losing weight, she then plateaued at the two month mark and on after that she upped the combination formula/breast milk and the baby started gaining weight fine at two months and a week. Now she is a little chubby chub, weeeell not exactly chubby but she is SUPER healthy. Wouldn't it be something if the law said that unless an OW was married, that the child born from her and her married man belonged to the man's betrayed wife? Sort of like a "child of the marriage" type of deal? I'd bet good money that a large number of OW would hide their pregnancies from their married lover and would simply high tail it out of Dodge for fear of losing their children to their lover's wife. Too bad that it's only a fantasy that has as much chance of becoming a reality as hell is of freezing over. first of all that is ABSOLUTELY absurd, why should an innocent woman (the BS) foot the bill for her idiot H's mistake? So the law would basically be punishing the BS by making her take on the work of bringing up a child she DIDN'T even want? That makes no sense at all and your right it would NEVER happen.
RecordProducer Posted March 5, 2008 Posted March 5, 2008 Wouldn't it be something if the law said that unless an OW was married, that the child born from her and her married man belonged to the man's betrayed wife? Sort of like a "child of the marriage" type of deal? I'd bet good money that a large number of OW would hide their pregnancies from their married lover and would simply high tail it out of Dodge for fear of losing their children to their lover's wife. Too bad that it's only a fantasy that has as much chance of becoming a reality as hell is of freezing over.Funny thought! If it were a real law though, people would use it to have the OW as a surogate mother. But, I know you were just being facetious to make a point. Nonetheless, the OW and her baby always end up thrown away to the side. If I were anti-abortion, I don't think I would dare screw any man whose child I wouldn't want. The possibility that she actually planned this baby is beyond my comprehension.
TMCM Posted March 6, 2008 Posted March 6, 2008 Originally Posted by TMCM] Wouldn't it be something if the law said that unless an OW was married, that the child born from her and her married man belonged to the man's betrayed wife? Sort of like a "child of the marriage" type of deal? I'd bet good money that a large number of OW would hide their pregnancies from their married lover and would simply high tail it out of Dodge for fear of losing their children to their lover's wife. Too bad that it's only a fantasy that has as much chance of becoming a reality as hell is of freezing over. first of all that is ABSOLUTELY absurd, why should an innocent woman (the BS) foot the bill for her idiot H's mistake? So the law would basically be punishing the BS by making her take on the work of bringing up a child she DIDN'T even want? That makes no sense at all and your right it would NEVER happen. TC this is the reality that WE men live with. Countless of betrayed husbands have been led to believe that a child is biologically theirs when it is not and when they find out it is too late to do anything about it. The laws are duplicitous for they allow women to perpetrate this fraud and punish innocent men without them fearing any reprisal once the truth comes out. My point is not to force any betrayed wife to raise another woman's child against her will but to give her first dibs in getting parental rights over the child IF she so chooses. This would put the OW on the same footing as the OM and like him, she would probably choose to avoid any contact with the married man and his betrayed wife. As it stands now, the OW has very little to lose by making the lives of her ex-lover and his betrayed wife a living hell via her child. If the tables could be turned on OW, it would go a long way towards helping couples to rebuild their marriage without having to deal with a psychotic witch and onerous child support payments to her.
Recommended Posts