It is not uncommon to be asked, if I ever think that some marriages just aren’t worth saving. The question comes in a variety of forms. Maybe its the idea that, some people just aren’t the right match, or, wouldn’t the kids be better off if the parents divorced rather than continued with their pattern of conflict. Some have suggested that we’re just not happy and as such we should go our separate ways.

The fact is, research on these ideas, suggests that saving marriages is generally best for all involved. Couples who weather hard times and stay together, tend to be more satisfied five years later than those who divorce. This is true for them as a couple and as individuals. Kids tend to function better in intact families than divorced. Part of the reason is that, often, divorced couples don’t tend to give up the patterns of conflict they had while together. So now the kids have parents who continue their conflict, except, now they fight mostly about the kids and custody, and they use the kids to manipulate, coerce and punish their ex. I would suggest that this is the worse of two evils. Some of the best research on these things can be seen at sites like smartmarriages.com
and the research and reference portion of prepinc.com

All the above ways of thinking, tends to be based on an assumption that there are two choices. Continue our current pattern or go our separate ways. There is a third option, stay together and learn to deal with your problems in a better way. It takes work, usually hard work, but the results are worth it.

Back to the original question. As a general rule, I am pro marriage. I specifically got into the marriage therapy business in order to help people save and thrive in their marriages. I don’t think I’d be inclined to go to a therapist who has a truly neutral stance on the value of marriage. This isn’t to say that I make decisions for my clients. It is their decision to make. However, I am honest with them about my pro marriage stance.

I’ve been gleaning more information on marriage, and I have come to a new realization in the last year or so.  Previously I had thought that prevention of harmful communication was the holy grail of marital therapy.  Okay, that is a bit overstated.  However, I did tend to focus on communication, a bit excessively.  I still think that communication and problem solving in a healthy manner is a vital focus for many of the couples I see.  However, I’ve been paying attention to some of the things that John Gottman Ph.D. has been saying.  According to him, the quality of connection or friendship in a relationship is very important. It is vital in determining the receptiveness of one partner to efforts of the other, to stop and/or heal from episodes of caustic communication.  So now, while I will often begin with a focus on communication, I will usually also give some focus how to improve the friendship, playfulness and emotional connection.  I find it useful to enhance, even to enable the use of communication skills as stated above.  I also find that clients who come to therapy, typically don’t come for communications skill, even if they come in with that as the stated goal.  Couples come in because they are at risk of losing something very important to them, the friendship with their spouse.

In all the research I’ve seen about what are danger signs in relationships, the tendency of one or both partners to withdraw or avoid the other is a big one.  I think the guy in this article is displaying some avoidance tendancies.

I’ve never watched more than 5 minutes at a time.  However, it’s been impossible for me to avoid the hoopla over this show.  But Jon has apparently pulled the plug on the show. Check it out here.  Frankly, I think Jon is onto something.  I honestly don’t know if his motivation is concern for the kids (I truly hope so) or a way to hurt Kate.  Unfortunately, figuring out how to hurt your, soon to be ex, is way to common in divorces.  People who normally would be seen as decent, caring individuals will often do some of the most out of character, vicious things in the midst of a divorce.  In this situation, I have to think it is the best choice for these kids.  No matter what the motivation.

As a therapist who has a general practice, I’ve come to realize that, in some situations, medication can be a vital part of treatment for my clients.  This might include those dealing with depression, anxiety disorders, OCD, and a number of other mental health issues.  I would even argue that some mental health issues are essentially medical in nature and medication is vital tool, essential to their treatment.  I think of schizophrenia and bi-polar disorder.

Marital concerns are not among those issues.  Of course, if someones depression or other disorder is exaggerating the relationship issues, medication may be valuable in treating the disorder, but not the marriage.  This article suggests that this might be an option for the future.

As I understand it, the appropriately illegal drug, exstacy, was initially suggested as a love enhancing pill.  That apparently failed horribly, so any future such venture had better be pursued with great care.

Personally I think the author may be onto something when it comes to the Anti-Love pill.  Way to many relationship decisions are made in the throws of infatuation.  However, in general I think there has to be a limit, and in my opinion this idea is pushing it.

These social sites like Myspace, Facebook and others, are simply frightening to me.  I know I have a distorted perspective because of what I do.  I’ve seen too many marriages effected by Internet affairs and heard of too many stories of predators online. I actually signed up for one site about two months ago.  I got friend requests within a few hours.  I got spooked by the whole process almost immediately.  I was startled by the random and spontaneous nature of the “friendship” process.  So I withdrew from the site the same day.

I realize that this is part of the way people connect and participate in community now, but, I still urge caution.  I will probably get on such a site some day.  In the meantime I encourage my clients to be very careful about anything on the internet. I am probably too cautious, however, I certainly believe it is better to be safe than sorry.

It seems to me that the Christian world has been actively addressing the issue of sexual addiction, or Cybersex inappropriateness, for some time.  The secular world has been more sporadic in acknowledging the problem. Often the secular community will either react in the extreme to isolated stories or minimizing it’s significance.  As I recall, MANY years ago Michael Douglas admitted to sexual addiction issue.    I found this rather stale news of David Duchovny’s problems.  This article seems to be acknowledging that there is a real problem. Be warned, it certainly suggests some levels of cybersex dalliance may be acceptable, a statement with which most Christians would differ.

I can tell you that the internet has created problems for a number of men who would’ve never been tempted by another form of pornography.  The semblance of anonymity, false as it may be, has allowed many men to satisfy their curiosity and much more.  I know exactly when I had a dramatic increase of men dealing with porn addiction/abuse.  It was in 1996 when AOL went from pay by the hour to $19.99 for all you can view.   Within six months I had a boatload of men dealing with cybersex issue and marriages in trouble since the wife discovered her husbands viewing of internet porn.

The women aren’t completely innocent either.  Although, they were more often struggling with inappropriate cyber relationships.  I’ve had a number of men insist on marital therapy after discovering a cyberaffair.

Unfortunately, Christian’s struggle with these issues almost as frequently as Non-Christians.  On some levels it might even seem to be a worse problem for the Christian.  Christian’s may realize they have a problem far earlier than the Non-Christian, simply due to a difference in values.  As such, Christian’s tend to see a problem and seek help at levels Non-Christians are not usually concernd about.

I got this article in an email from a Pro Marriage organization I highly respect, Smart Marriages.  While I can’t say that Divorce is automatically child abuse, I have seen a few cases that made me wonder.

DIVORCE AS CHILD ABUSE

November 8, 2008
Divorcing couple face prosecution for psychological abuse
Richard Owen, Rome

In a case believed to be the first of its kind in Europe an Italian couple
face prosecution for causing their 12-year-old child “psychological
suffering” by going through an acromonious divorce in which they allegedly
argued in front of him and fought for his affection.

Milan prosecutors have asked a judge to charge the couple - who have not
been named under Italian privacy laws - with “ill treatment of a minor”
because of “the psychological suffering inflicted”. The charge carries a
prison sentence of up to five years. Legal experts said they could recall no
such previous prosecution in Britain or Europe.

The case was authorised by Marco Ghezzi, the Milan prosecutor for cases
involving minors, after a health visitor reported that the child was
“disturbed”.

Antonio Sangermano, the magistrate who is conducting the prosecution case,
said the mother and father had blamed each other for their break up in
arguments carried out in front of the child.

The prosecution report states that: “Each blamed the other for shortcomings
and educational errors in bringing up the child”, with each parent trying to
“discredit, devalue and undermine the other” in front of him and “project
their emotions onto him, above all anger”.

The couple had not physically mistreated the child. But this “parental
hyper-conflict” had induced “a syndrome of anxiety and depression” over his
“conflicting loyalties and emotions”, which in turn had led to “problems of
concentration”, with the child falling behind in his school work, the
prosecutors said.

The result had been to “confuse” the child and instil in him “the conviction
that his parents hated each other”. The prosecutors alleged that both
parents had persisted in arguing in front of the child even though he told
them it was “making him feel ill”.

They had “manipulated” the child in an attempt to “make him decide between
them”, using him as a tool in their divorce battle, the prosecutors said.

Cesare Tacconi, a Milan judge, will decide early next month whether to go
ahead with a trial. To protect the identity of the child, judges have
refused to divulge the name of the town near Milan where the family lives.

Piero Caprera, a lawyer for the wife in the case, said it was “undeniable”
there there had been “arguments within the family”. But he said the
prosecutors would be unable to prove the parents had intended to harm the
child, as the charge of “maltreatment” requires, and predicted that the
judge would dismiss the charges.

Corriere della Sera, the Milan newspaper, said if the case went ahead it
could have implications for “untold numbers of other cases” in which
divorcing or separating couples had rows in front of their children.

Cesare Rimini, an Italian divorce and family lawyer, said the Milan case was
“a sign of growing social alarm over the effects of divorce on children”. Mr
Rimini said that all too often children were “the indirect victims of a
fight between their parents”. The law was designed to “protect minors
against abuse within the family and physical or moral harm.” but had not
previously been used in this way.

Frances Hughes, Senior Partner of Hughes Fowler Carruthers and a leading
family lawyer, said: “I am certain that no such prosecution has ever been
brought in the United Kingdom.”

But she said that in parts of Europe it was “now widely accepted that
conflict between parents jeopardises children’s mental health and stability.
For example, in the Netherlands it is now standard practice for interim
orders to be made to ensure that the parents do not live in the same
property while the divorce is going on if there is a child living with them.

“In England we would only make such an order if one of the parties had
behaved violently or threatened violence. It may well be that this area of
law is rather more highly developed throughout the European Union that it is
in England.”

This article suggests that the “Love Dare” book, which was written after it was conceived as an element of the movie “Fireproof”, is light on interventions that can make significant change in relationships.

Personally, I respect the research and insights these men bring to the field I practice in.  However, I have determined that real change is an attitude or even a heart issue.  Often I believe that the specific intervention, an individual or couple use to make change in their relationship, is much much less important than the degree of heart change that accompanies the intervention.

I have heard about this movie for about four months now.  I have every intention of seeing it with my wife.  Everything I’ve heard is positive, and not just from the faith community.  As I understand it, “Fireproof” deals directly with a number of issues that are very real.  The issues I’ve heard mentioned are regularly discussed in my office.

Article