@Kettricken: Well, you learned something. You learned absolutely not to take her at her word right now, and to apply the 48-hour rule to anything that comes out of her mouth and *then* reconfirm before you change your plans.
A sound rule.
In general.
In the politics of Spain between roughly 1849 to 1936 there was a concept known as the Pronuncamiento -- the Pronouncement. Some group of generals or another would get tired of "instability," oust the government, Pronounce a new government, and then go back to the barracks until the next Pronuncamiento.
That's the way she's "running" this divorce. I Pronounce... NO CUSTODY! I Pronounce...CUSTODY! I Pronounce...NO PICKUPS! I Pronounce...PICKUPS!
Ordinarily I would apply the Rule of 48. But recall that she made her NO PICKUPS! Pronouncement roughly 14 hours before I was supposed to start work. So a contingency plan was necessary.
I seriously think they should consider a DSM-IV category for midlife crisis (or whatever the h*ll this stuff is) because it's such a syndrome, so many predictable pathologies. With a diagnosis code, maybe it might be viewed as the devastating process that it is--and not the subject of jokes. And maybe even some treatment, if a medical model is used. Personally, I'd vote for electroconvulsive therapy.
Publication of the DSM V has been pushed back till 2013. That still gives you time to get a big pharma company in your back pocket and a few well-paid academics to make it happen. If you can't tell already, I'm seriously cynical of the writing process and even the value of the document itself.
Is mid-life crisis a "disorder", a "syndrome", or is it part of life? Sure we can identify common elements ("symptoms"?) but is it "wrong"? On the same thread, should teen-age angst be added too? How about bereavement? Homosexuality was listed as a "disorder" until 1973 when it was changed to "Sexual Disorders NOS" then 1986 it was removed entirely. Who decided it was "wrong"?
As a frequent psych customer (I wish I got frequent flyer miles) I ask myself the same question all the time - what's a normal part of life and what's over the edge? I've found the best psys are the ones who hold off on the labels.
I was only about 50% serious about that. I hear ya--it's not about the labels and all that. I think it stops being a "normal" part of life when it becomes destructive to innocent bystanders, and when the delusions are so huge they border on psychosis and being out of touch with reality. Yeah, I'd say that's "wrong." It's all a moot point, really. I'm jus' sayin'.
M60 H52 D20 M14 yrs OW-old gf from 1986 bomb-5/18/08 H filed for D-9/10/08 D final 4/24/09 xH remarried (not OW) 2012
@Kettricken: Well, you learned something. You learned absolutely not to take her at her word right now, and to apply the 48-hour rule to anything that comes out of her mouth and *then* reconfirm before you change your plans.
A sound rule.
In general.
In the politics of Spain between roughly 1849 to 1936 there was a concept known as the Pronuncamiento -- the Pronouncement. Some group of generals or another would get tired of "instability," oust the government, Pronounce a new government, and then go back to the barracks until the next Pronuncamiento.
That's the way she's "running" this divorce. I Pronounce... NO CUSTODY! I Pronounce...CUSTODY! I Pronounce...NO PICKUPS! I Pronounce...PICKUPS!
Ordinarily I would apply the Rule of 48. But recall that she made her NO PICKUPS! Pronouncement roughly 14 hours before I was supposed to start work. So a contingency plan was necessary.
... I hear in my head an echo of the infamous office poster, tweaked slightly ...
"An eleventh-hour Pronuncamiento on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine."
Snark aside, a contingency plan is never a bad idea, ever. However, I will dare to offend your unbelievin' sensibilities and pray for a short term for this particular species of toxicity.
"Show me a completely smooth operation and I'll show you someone who's covering mistakes. Real boats rock." -- Frank Herbert
Another thing, push for the 50/50 joint custody, don't let her get out of that, you don't care if she wants less child custody - why would you help her and enable her there.
She has kids, the responsibility of having kids is making time for them. You don't have to be nice and do the "co-parenty" thing, you know better than that.
This is one of the few areas in which I would disagree with Rob and Puppy. SP has questioned the quality of STBX's parenting. While he could force the issue on the quantity of time she is responsible for them, he will have very little to say about the quality of that time, barring physical abuse or outright neglect. While I think having both parents fully engaged in the lives of children is important, I don't see that with STBXMrsSP.
And here's one better -- a dollar will get you a donut that, when she tells the kids she'll be seeing them less, she'll frame it this way: Because I have to work so much to give your Dad money I won't be able to see you as often. That would be her M.O. these days.
Another thing, push for the 50/50 joint custody, don't let her get out of that, you don't care if she wants less child custody - why would you help her and enable her there.
She has kids, the responsibility of having kids is making time for them. You don't have to be nice and do the "co-parenty" thing, you know better than that.
This is one of the few areas in which I would disagree with Rob and Puppy. SP has questioned the quality of STBX's parenting. While he could force the issue on the quantity of time she is responsible for them, he will have very little to say about the quality of that time, barring physical abuse or outright neglect. While I think having both parents fully engaged in the lives of children is important, I don't see that with STBXMrsSP.
Now that I think more about it, I agree with you.
Puppy
Are we saying that she is incapable of being their mother?
Or are we just giving in to an adult women's temper tantrums, "I don't want to do this, I just want to have fun, fun, fun!!!"
I'm assuming that since she's not an invalid, she's able to work and earn a living, that she's somewhat functional.
She's choosing not to have the kids as much because they're inconvenient, not because she can't be their mother and spend time with them. She isn't physically abusive with them from what I've read, does she neglect them when she has them, have the kids said this? If it's just about her "convenience" well then I wouldn't give a $hit, too bad, life isn't always convenient and why do you have to care about her convenience. Have you thought about how you're going to manage working full-time, travelling long distances to/from work/home/picking up kids and are you going to be able to maintain that pace for years? Just so your wife's life is more "convenient"?!
- I wouldn't enable that. - I wouldn't put up with her bull$hit. - She does what she does and acts with such crappy behavior because you do put up with her bull$hit.
Seriously if you go this route, why not cut off all visitation entirely! If you do go this route, what are you going to do with regards to explaining this to your kids? You can't leave it up to her because you're deciding she's not capable of anything.
Are you going to tell your kids that "mommy doesn't love you enough to want to spend time with you, mommy doesn't want you living with her, mommy is too busy for you, etc."
Nice!
Let her put on her big girl panties and discuss this with the kids herself, she's digging this hole, let her bury herself in it.
For what it's worth, I wouldn't put up with this bull$hit, I spent too much time doing this in my own situation and what turned it around was no longer putting up with her bull$hit, she's an adult, let her figure it out.
SP if your career requires extensive travel, maybe you need to consider moving to an area closer to work which also means having the kids attend new schools - it sucks but I don't see you pulling off your current career track, having the kids full-time and performing these commutes between home & work & picking up the kids for a long time, too much of your personal energy will be expended trying to accomplish this, you'll burn out become bitter and angry and that won't be a great environment for your kids either.
Are we saying that she is incapable of being their mother?
Or are we just giving in to an adult women's temper tantrums, "I don't want to do this, I just want to have fun, fun, fun!!!"
Basically, yes, I am saying that. I'm saying this because I believe it is in the children's best interests to be with SP more than they are with their mother, who I believe -- for the record -- is the "loon" option.
Quote:
Are you going to tell your kids that "mommy doesn't love you enough to want to spend time with you, mommy doesn't want you living with her, mommy is too busy for you, etc."
No, that would be MrsSP "telling" them that -- by her actions. And SP doesn't get to control those.
Rob, your whole argument can basically be boiled down to "don't let her get away with this crap behavior," and as you know, I normally agree with that and it was my default position here. But there are, simply, some times when there is an overriding factor, and "What's Best for The Kids" is inarguably one such factor.
1. Expecting a response from her side to the settlement proposal and, now, a new custody plan.
2. She capitulated on the Monday/Wednesday thing. Tried to pass it off as "I told you in that email I sent later that I was just angry," but of course there was no such email. "Oh well it must have got lost." Okay. Heeya. Whatevah.
3. I popped the "I think we should do 50/50" on her. At first she tried to do as-if: Great, wonderful! I can use the money I save on child support for sitters. I'm all for that. I told my attorney to demand as much custody as the courts will give me!
But see *** below.
4. After Decide-and-Do, I wrote a couple polite emails. Then she called and we had a sh*t-fling (I flung first, by the way -- off my meds, metaphorically speaking). I felt about calling her a "selfish b*tch," texted her that "I apologize for the b-word thing -- inappropriate," she phoned back from her commute, we wound up talking -- nicely, nearly almostly kinda-sortaly pleasantly -- for over an hour.
I learned some things -- some things "too much," as she managed to slip them in in her formerWAWly way --
- (example: "why won't you go to European City?" Well, look, I mean how could I not associate it with Signore il Secondo? That's where you decided to divorce me a year ago. That's where you met SiS this year. That city has bad mojo for me. I'd just soon avoid that kind of thing. "Well I spread my legs here in Coastal City, are you going to move away because of that?")
- (other example: "I hope we'll always be able to be flexible. I mean, what if Signore il Secondo flew in suddenly to surprise me? I'd hope you'd take the kids so I could have company.")
But I almost forgave her for it. Not "forgave" forgave, but ignored-forgave. Like Miss Someone says, I treated her like I would any other mentally incapacitated unfortunate I happened across. And what I learned was just How Not Getting It she still doesn't get it. I mean, Waaaaayyy How Not Getting It. She doesn't "get" why I would still have any negative/sad/disappointed/regretful/pick your adjective-of-rue-of-choice feelings about the D.
She doesn't get that she hurt me -- she "knows" it intellectually ("I know I hurt you") but there is a conspicuous lack of empathy ("but really I don't know why any of it would matter to you").
I learned -- or perhaps verified what I suspected -- that she has become a middle-aged adolescent.
So I'm sort of trying to move from the don't-give-a-sh*t post-funeral-pyre mode into the feel-sorry-for-her-because-really-at-the-end-of-the-day-she's-kind-of-lame mode.
She really believes she's in love. She really believes she can live like this -- FREEDOM BAYBEE! -- for-evah! I'm a cougar! Yeehaw!
Yeah, that's going to be really attractive in about 10 years. Nothing like a mid-50s mother of 2 doing that woojie-woojie grindy-grindy dance you see with the kids on MTV spring break.
But what I really feel sorry for is just how completely out of it she is. She's like the elephant in the china shop -- she just doesn't see the damage she does. MLC, man. It's a real bee-yotch.
For my part, a friend -- who's kind of sassy -- asked me a question that was supposed to sort of cheer me up in a way, but when I got to my private place really, really shook me up in a "man, I need to get even MORE detached" kind of way. Or maybe not. I'm not sure this is so much a detachment thing as it is a "wow, there sure are lots of angles to this" thing.
It wasn't anything I'd thought about before, so the awareness -- both of the issue itself and the fact that I'd not thought of it -- was kind of like Melville's shock of recognition that sends the whole circle 'round.
She asked, "So? Spill it! Is Miss Someone totally better than STBXMRSSP [whom she knows] in the sack? Or completely totally better?" And I gave her the Aw, Shucks, c'mon, that's bitchy, be nice thing.
But when I got to my car, I actually had a little breakdown. Because in my own way I desperately -- DESPERATELY -- wanted the answer to be "yes." And, frankly, I know that in fact it is yes.
But I couldn't say it, not because modesty forbids, but because -- and this is what pushed me over for about 15 minutes -- I don't remember what being in bed with STBXMRSSP is like. I can't conjure up a sense memory of it at all. I know we did it -- we have 2 kids, I was there! But try as I might I couldn't produce even an image of a memory of a sensation. It was really quite disheartening in its way. I can't remember what her hands felt like -- I know I loved touching them, the way they felt -- but I don't know why I know that -- know what I mean?
It's like being a man who has lost his vision. I know I KNEW what "red" was, but for the life of me I can't actually get to red.
Maybe that's stupid. I don't know. It made me sad to think that even memory itself is a victim of divorce.
-------
*** So after trying to fake me out on the 50/50, by the long phone call it was "I sure did like the 55/45. I sure do think it's good for them to be around you. It sure would be great if it stayed that way." So I'll put that in the Win column (I think).
Wow--she's moving on toward full-tilt crazy. maybe even borderline personality disorder-ish. she's obviously really enmeshed with you. The focus on sexual stuff is interesting; weird as h*ll, but interesting. Asking to compare her to Miss Somebody in the sack, seriously...totally bizarre.
This:
Quote:
I don't remember what being in bed with STBXMRSSP is like. I can't conjure up a sense memory of it at all. I know we did it -- we have 2 kids, I was there! But try as I might I couldn't produce even an image of a memory of a sensation. It was really quite disheartening in its way. I can't remember what her hands felt like -- I know I loved touching them, the way they felt -- but I don't know why I know that -- know what I mean?
is protective. It'll come back to you when it isn't so excruciating to remember it. it's dissociative. and that's ok.
This:
Quote:
Nothing like a mid-50s mother of 2 doing that woojie-woojie grindy-grindy dance you see with the kids on MTV spring break.
is just creepy; speaking as a mid-50's mother and all. Hey, not that we don't have our own brand of mojo, but far classier than woojie-grindy.
M60 H52 D20 M14 yrs OW-old gf from 1986 bomb-5/18/08 H filed for D-9/10/08 D final 4/24/09 xH remarried (not OW) 2012
No, you have a real boundary problem. You are worth much more than how you let her treat you. She disrespects you. The boundary is for you, set by you, good for you and enforced by you. Detach for a minute and imagine if someone else wrote this post. What would you advise them to do? The best defense is a good offense.
Cheers
M22,H45,W45 S21/18D12 Retain faith that you will prevail in the end, regardless of the difficulties and at the same time confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be.
