joybean72 Posted November 23, 2008 Posted November 23, 2008 Hi there ladies, This is just a question that's been on my mind for quite some time, so I thought I'd throw it out here to get your take on things... I've seen it mentioned quite a few times on the boards..."He doesn't have kids with her (The BS)." Now, let me just say...I'm not here to judge anyone, it just bugs me when I read that. Little background on my situation: I never married my daughter's father, he hasn't been in her life for 12 years (His choice)...I was a single working mom until I met my stbx who had been married before and had three kids with his ex-wife. We became a family, my daughter knew & loved them for seven years of her life as her brothers and sister as I myself knew & loved them as my step children. I guess every time I read that, it makes me feel like it was less of a family or something. I suppose yeah...it makes it easier FOR HIM to leave. But for me it doesn't lessen the heartache, life changes, and financial strain his decision has made on me & on my daughter. I am not looking for sympathy....I am just trying to understand that statement. Any input would be appreciated. Thanks.
Author joybean72 Posted November 23, 2008 Author Posted November 23, 2008 Oh crap...I didn't even ask the question! (DUH!) Do you think if there are no biological children involved it is less than a "regular" marriage? I dunno...
2sure Posted November 23, 2008 Posted November 23, 2008 My daughter from a previous marriage is as much mine as my new husbands. If our marriage ended, it would be twice that her life has experienced the tragedy of a failed relationship. If anyone ever ever said my now husband did not have children...I hope he would be as insulted as I. For the most part, OW just repeat what MM tells them. Excuses in the form of justification. For the life of me I wish no one would bother with them, just get on with it.
norajane Posted November 23, 2008 Posted November 23, 2008 Oh crap...I didn't even ask the question! (DUH!) Do you think if there are no biological children involved it is less than a "regular" marriage? I dunno... If the couple doesn't have any kids, that means MM can't use "staying for the kids" as an excuse not to leave his marriage. That's usually why OW bring that up. I don't know if they see it the same way in the case of blended families.
Cliche Posted November 23, 2008 Posted November 23, 2008 My partner had no children with his exW--biological or other--so when I said he had no children, I meant none. FWIW, I believe stepchildren are just as much "children of a marriage" as bio children. Can't speak for others.
sadintexas Posted November 23, 2008 Posted November 23, 2008 A marriage is a marriage with or without children, biological to both parties or otherwise. It's just that children are often a big consideration in one spouse leaving another which is why it's mentioned.
LittleDove Posted November 23, 2008 Posted November 23, 2008 Even when your not married, kids mean alot... I never got around to getting married to my X thank god- as I left I threw his engagement ring back at him. He has two boys 6&7 now, from his previous marrige. we had 100& custody, then after 1 year 50%. It was full on, I love those kids and still think of them as 'my boys'. Even though I refuse to speak with them, as their father makes them lie for him, and I wont put kids through his BS. I lost my boys when I left....and that SUCKS. sorry if i missed the point altogether.
OWoman Posted November 23, 2008 Posted November 23, 2008 Oh crap...I didn't even ask the question! (DUH!) Do you think if there are no biological children involved it is less than a "regular" marriage? I dunno... Well as someone who has had both biological and stepkids, I'd agree with you that having squeezed them out or not makes very little difference in the long run! Family is family. But I would guess that the comment is used more where there are no kids at all, to nullify the "excuse" that he my be staying "for the kids"... though, as we've seen, relationships to pets can be just as traumatic to disrupt, and of course the rest of the "package deal" of house, security, financial comfort, social circle etc can be very powerful factors in some cases (and completely negligible in others - situations vary). The thing is, few people IME are fully "self-actualised" and most carry some form or other of hurt or scarring from their pasts into their Ms (or any other R) both in terms of who they choose to be with, and how the M plays out. So expecting full-on mental health when they need to step away from the M towards their "soulmate" OW (as an example) is naively optimistic. Some can do it. Others can, with a struggle and some costs. Still others simply can't.
FeelLikeScreaming Posted November 23, 2008 Posted November 23, 2008 For me, the lack of children in a marriage is important in two ways: 1. I would never engage in an affair with a man who has children with his wife or step-children with whom he and his wife both have a relationship. The risk of hurting another adult is one thing, but the possibility of hurting a child is a responsibility I simply would not undertake. I'm not criticizing those who do, merely saying it's more than I could overlook. 2. While children do not make a marriage "more" or the lack of same make a marriage "less," they certainly factor into a man's (or woman's, of course) ability and willingness to leave a marriage. They also impact the relative difficulty of the new relationship in instances where the married person leaves.
Lizzie60 Posted November 23, 2008 Posted November 23, 2008 Oh crap...I didn't even ask the question! (DUH!) Do you think if there are no biological children involved it is less than a "regular" marriage? I dunno... No I don't think so.. it all depends on the amount of time you are a family.. I lived the same situation you're in.. I had a daughter when I was in college (with one of the directors), he wasn't part of our life.. (as soon as he heard I was pregnant, he kicked me out).. I was a single mom for 2.5 yrs until my X (my long time MM) was kicked out of his home.. then he moved in with me.. It took a little while for my daughter to get used to him.. we all took it slow (for her sake).. then he became her 'dad' .. we lived 18 years together.. to this day .. he's still her dad.. He never made any difference among the children.. (he had 3 girls with his W).. then we had a son.. All the children were welcomed in our home.. and they all grew up as a big family.. The girls are still very close together.. So.. to answer your question.. NO.. it doesn't make it a 'lesser' marriage or relationship (in my case we never married)..
GreenEyedLady Posted November 23, 2008 Posted November 23, 2008 Oh crap...I didn't even ask the question! (DUH!) Do you think if there are no biological children involved it is less than a "regular" marriage? I dunno... It's not that it isn't a regular M, there's less people that are hurt. And then staying for the children isn't an excuse they can use. And it should be easier to leave in theory, because you have less tying you together.
wildsoul Posted November 24, 2008 Posted November 24, 2008 My partner had no children with his exW--biological or other--so when I said he had no children, I meant none. FWIW, I believe stepchildren are just as much "children of a marriage" as bio children. Can't speak for others. Ditto. When I said my guy and his wife have "no kids," I mean none at all. To me, a couple that lives together is just as serious as a marriage. Also, there's no difference whether the children are bio or steps.
mzdolphin Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 My MM (sorta. I broke it off, but he's still trying) has adult step kids with wife. He calls her daughters, his daughters. Even though they are adults he continues to stay in touch with them. I respect that. I would never undermine that relationship by saying "oh you don't have kids with her." Family is family. In fact, if you want to really turn off a guy, belittle his relationship with his kids (biological or not). I mean, would you really want a man who easily left his kids?
NoIDidn't Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 I don't think this is judgment, but I think its ridiculous to even say "they don't have kids" to make it seem like it should be easier for him to walk away. What about other relationships? In laws? Friends of the couple? Families come in many shapes and sizes. Is a single woman with a child not considered a family? How about two siblings that share a dwelling? Are they not a family? A married couple is family by virtue of their vows. There was a point in time that my husband and I didn't have kids. Were we not a family at the time? If no, try telling him that. Its my opinion that having this attitude as an OW will not help in "getting" your man. If I were a MM, I wouldn't want to leave my home and sever all my other relationship ties that I formed with my W just because I didn't have kids and my girlfriend thought it should be easy. It would say to me that she was clueless about what life was really about. But this is just my very humble opinion.
Author joybean72 Posted December 3, 2008 Author Posted December 3, 2008 Thank you everyone. I appreciate your responses. mzdolphin & NoIDidn't...I think you misunderstood me, I am a BS who's husband left to be with the OW. It was his second marriage, my first & we both have children from prior relationships...none together.
OWoman Posted December 3, 2008 Posted December 3, 2008 I don't think this is judgment, but I think its ridiculous to even say "they don't have kids" to make it seem like it should be easier for him to walk away. What about other relationships? In laws? Friends of the couple? NID IME the "other relationships" (friends, colleagues, extended family) are portable and go with him, so he doesn't have to lose those. In-laws perhaps, depending on the circumstances - I've stayed close to my outlaws post D - but sometimes that could be a blessing! In my MM's cse, all of BW's family are either dead or in institutions, and his BW's sister's xH sent a message on hearing of the D to congratulate MM on joiing the ranks of the survivors, so even those networks need not be lost!
NoIDidn't Posted December 4, 2008 Posted December 4, 2008 Thank you everyone. I appreciate your responses. mzdolphin & NoIDidn't...I think you misunderstood me, I am a BS who's husband left to be with the OW. It was his second marriage, my first & we both have children from prior relationships...none together. I didn't misunderstand you. You asked a question and I gave an answer. I also did it without regard to whether you were an OW or BS. It didn't matter in my answer. I think its a horrible thing to say as if the MP isn't leaving other important links behind just because they don't have biological kids with their spouse. Maybe you misunderstood me.
Angel1111 Posted December 4, 2008 Posted December 4, 2008 I doesn't matter if the kids are biological or step, the love and connection is usually very deep in both cases. I think when people make that comment, they mean that there are no children at all between the couple. I think most people recognize the connection of blended families. The marriage bond is hard enough to walk away from, so having no children just means that's one less thing to have to consider if he leaves. In your case, he did have children to think about.
NoIDidn't Posted December 5, 2008 Posted December 5, 2008 I doesn't matter if the kids are biological or step, the love and connection is usually very deep in both cases. I think when people make that comment, they mean that there are no children at all between the couple. I think most people recognize the connection of blended families. The marriage bond is hard enough to walk away from, so having no children just means that's one less thing to have to consider if he leaves. In your case, he did have children to think about. Is this response directed at me, Angel? In case it is, I am not focusing on the kids - biological or step or adopted or foster or whatever. I am talking about the futility of the thinking that without them that its one less thing to consider. It doesn't make the other relationships of any less importance to the individuals that make up the couple. To me, trying to calculate what the MP has to be concerned with in order to make that move and make things more comfortable (controlled in that the OP thinks they know what things to consider) for the OP, is inconsiderate and selfish. That is, if you were addressing this to me.
Angel1111 Posted December 5, 2008 Posted December 5, 2008 Is this response directed at me, Angel? In case it is, I am not focusing on the kids - biological or step or adopted or foster or whatever. I am talking about the futility of the thinking that without them that its one less thing to consider. It doesn't make the other relationships of any less importance to the individuals that make up the couple. To me, trying to calculate what the MP has to be concerned with in order to make that move and make things more comfortable (controlled in that the OP thinks they know what things to consider) for the OP, is inconsiderate and selfish. That is, if you were addressing this to me. Nah, it was directed to the OP. But I understand what you're saying.
NoIDidn't Posted December 5, 2008 Posted December 5, 2008 Nah, it was directed to the OP. But I understand what you're saying. Cool. Just thought I would ask as the OP felt I misunderstood her. Sorry for the dissertation.
Recommended Posts