Surrender control of the household over to an addict?
Sure, great plan that is...
I've thought on this for a while now. I will maintain control of the finances and not invite him to learn about them unless he seeks me out. (one of the issues in our M has been his total and complete lack of input into our finances.) I won't chase him on it, but I will teach him if he wants to know.
Right now, I do the grocery shopping, cook three meals a day (or give the kids lunch money), they call me after school to tell me about their day, we discuss their homework, I check up on their homework and keep track of their projects and make sure they're done when due. I take SD to her doctor appts twice a week for scoliosis treatment. H takes SS to his two activities weekly, but we split the pickup of SS20 from work (if H is not around, I fill in) I also take SD to her orthodontist appointments.
I just feel as if most of this is taking care of his kids, while he gets to do the fun things with them - shows up for fishing with SS and leaves me to make the dinner-etc. I want to flip it around and do the fun things with them while he takes care of them. They're old enough now that if Daddy doesn't show up and make them dinner, they can make their own or give it to him for not doing it. If he doesn't have lunch money for them, it should be his failing, not that they come to me to make up for his detriment.
I agree that leaving the household to an addict is a bad idea, but leaving the almost grown children to the care of their father, maybe a good idea? I'll still keep the chores I do like cleaning up after myself, but give up on picking up after the kids. It seems like a good balance of power to me.
Also, we put our paychecks into the same account and pay the bills from there. It just seems to me that he should be paying for himself and the kids and I should pay for myself. For instance, half the mortgage is mine, but the doctor bills for SD should be his... if he wants a D, it's how it would be anyway. He should be paying 4/5 of the food bills since they eat most of the food. That sort of thing.
Am I shooting myself in the foot with this thinking?
Of course not. It's great to have a wife to keep one's house in order. But when someone says he doesn't want a wife, then it would seem necessary to let him do for himself.
And this addict stuff, ...come on. He may have natural "love" feelings that feel good going around in his system, but that is not the same thing as being addicted to heroin or cocaine. One can still function as a member of society while in love! Now, the possibility that he is an alcoholic may be a different story.
And this addict stuff, ...come on. He may have natural "love" feelings that feel good going around in his system, but that is not the same thing as being addicted to heroin or cocaine. One can still function as a member of society while in love!
Lotus, that may be one of the most single-misinformed things I've ever read on this forum.
Google "PEA love lust addiction", and do some basic research before you pooh-pooh the concept of affairs being HIGHLY addictive.
Did you know that the infatuated brain even shows up differently on CAT scans?
This is the same powerful addiction that made an otherwise sane female astronaut drive from TX to FL, wearing an adult diaper, rather than stopping at rest stops, so she could get there sooner to avenge her man.
Now, if by "not the same thing as being addicted to heroine or cocaine," you meant that it's actually WORSE . . . then I agree with you, and my apologies.
LOL, I just read some of a book on brain chemicals in a bookstore. Should have picked it up, wasn't sure if it would teach me anything useful that I didn't already know.
Puppy is right, the addiction to the A is real, can be measured with medical devices, and is HIGHLY addictive. God knew what he was doing there for sure. He wanted to see the continuation of the species and man is more likely to stick around with that PEA floating around, and later the oxytocin and vasopressin.
Part of why I feel the A is not over, just interrupted if anything at all is that I don't see signs of withdrawal. Sulking, anger, outbursts, withdrawing. He is joking with kids, running around the house with them, feeling pretty good about himself. When caught on FB I asked if he was emailing her and he said "of course not, I told you I'd tell you if I decided to do that again." This means nothing to me, it's his behavior that says either he's still in contact or else plans to be in the near future b/c those chemicals are still floating around and maintaining his high.
you don't need to be insulting. Here is a definition of drug addiction.
Drug addiction is a pathological or abnormal condition which arises due to frequent drug use. The disorder of addiction involves the progression of acute drug use to the development of drug-seeking behavior, the vulnerability to relapse, and the decreased, slowed ability to respond to naturally rewarding stimuli. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) has categorized three stages of addiction: preoccupation/anticipation, binge/intoxication, and withdrawal/negative affect. These stages are characterized, respectively, everywhere by constant cravings and preoccupation with obtaining the substance; using more of the substance than necessary to experience the intoxicating effects; and experiencing tolerance, withdrawal symptoms, and decreased motivation for normal life activities.[2] By the American Society of Addiction Medicine definition, drug addiction differs from drug dependence and drug tolerance.[3]
It is a pathological or abnormal condition. Love is not a pathological or abnormal condition. It is OK to say that a person in love acts LIKE a drug addict, but that is not same as BEING a drug addict. That is why we have so many words, so that people can use them precisely.
I would do everything you mentioned in your prior post about the running around, chores, lunch money, etc. APART from going into the stuff about splitting the paychecks etc....yet. That stage seems a bit final to me and as though YOU are getting ready for D. All the other consequences/ changes sound great and even if it doesn't bring him around to you quickly, it will sure lessen the amount of time and energy he has for OW!!!!
They are his children; let him shoulder the burden of dealing with them.
Saffie me 46 H 46 M in 1986 D20,D18,S16,D13 H's A 01/05 to 07/06 H recommitted to M 07/06 renewed vows 09/06 Going from strength to strength
you don't need to be insulting. Here is a definition of drug addiction.
Drug addiction is a pathological or abnormal condition which arises due to frequent drug use. The disorder of addiction involves the progression of acute drug use to the development of drug-seeking behavior, the vulnerability to relapse, and the decreased, slowed ability to respond to naturally rewarding stimuli. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) has categorized three stages of addiction: preoccupation/anticipation, binge/intoxication, and withdrawal/negative affect. These stages are characterized, respectively, everywhere by constant cravings and preoccupation with obtaining the substance; using more of the substance than necessary to experience the intoxicating effects; and experiencing tolerance, withdrawal symptoms, and decreased motivation for normal life activities.[2] By the American Society of Addiction Medicine definition, drug addiction differs from drug dependence and drug tolerance.[3]
It is a pathological or abnormal condition. Love is not a pathological or abnormal condition. It is OK to say that a person in love acts LIKE a drug addict, but that is not same as BEING a drug addict. That is why we have so many words, so that people can use them precisely.
Hmmmm. Addiction to neurotransmitters. Just intrinsic drug rather than extrinsic.......
Reality is that which, if you don't believe in it, doesn't go away.
And here is an excerpt... remember that the reason heroin is so hard to get over is because our brains have NATURAL receptors to opiates BECAUSE our brains manufacture opiate type substances. The chemicals manufactured during early A's or R's ARE opiates and highly addictive.
Scanning the brains of people in love is also helping to refine science's grasp of love's various forms. Helen Fisher, a researcher at Rutgers University, and the author of a new book on love*, suggests it comes in three flavours: lust, romantic love and long-term attachment. There is some overlap but, in essence, these are separate phenomena, with their own emotional and motivational systems, and accompanying chemicals. These systems have evolved to enable, respectively, mating, pair-bonding and parenting.
Lust, of course, involves a craving for sex. Jim Pfaus, a psychologist at Concordia University, in Montreal, says the aftermath of lustful sex is similar to the state induced by taking opiates. A heady mix of chemical changes occurs, including increases in the levels of serotonin, oxytocin, vasopressin and endogenous opioids (the body's natural equivalent of heroin). “This may serve many functions, to relax the body, induce pleasure and satiety, and perhaps induce bonding to the very features that one has just experienced all this with”, says Dr Pfaus.
Then there is attraction, or the state of being in love (what is sometimes known as romantic or obsessive love). This is a refinement of mere lust that allows people to home in on a particular mate. This state is characterised by feelings of exhilaration, and intrusive, obsessive thoughts about the object of one's affection. Some researchers suggest this mental state might share neurochemical characteristics with the manic phase of manic depression. Dr Fisher's work, however, suggests that the actual behavioural patterns of those in love — such as attempting to evoke reciprocal responses in one's loved one — resemble obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD).
That raises the question of whether it is possible to “treat” this romantic state clinically, as can be done with OCD. The parents of any love-besotted teenager might want to know the answer to that. Dr Fisher suggests it might, indeed, be possible to inhibit feelings of romantic love, but only at its early stages. OCD is characterised by low levels of a chemical called serotonin. Drugs such as Prozac work by keeping serotonin hanging around in the brain for longer than normal, so they might stave off romantic feelings. (This also means that people taking anti-depressants may be jeopardising their ability to fall in love.) But once romantic love begins in earnest, it is one of the strongest drives on Earth. Dr Fisher says it seems to be more powerful than hunger. A little serotonin would be unlikely to stifle it.
Wonderful though it is, romantic love is unstable — not a good basis for child-rearing. But the final stage of love, long-term attachment, allows parents to co-operate in raising children. This state, says Dr Fisher, is characterised by feelings of calm, security, social comfort and emotional union.
Because they are independent, these three systems can work simultaneously — with dangerous results. As Dr Fisher explains, “you can feel deep attachment for a long-term spouse, while you feel romantic love for someone else, while you feel the sex drive in situations unrelated to either partner.” This independence means it is possible to love more than one person at a time, a situation that leads to jealousy, adultery and divorce — though also to the possibilities of promiscuity and polygamy, with the likelihood of extra children, and thus a bigger stake in the genetic future, that those behaviours bring. As Dr Fisher observes, “We were not built to be happy but to reproduce.”
The stages of love vary somewhat between the sexes. Lust, for example, is aroused more easily in men by visual stimuli than is the case for women. This is probably why visual pornography is more popular with men. And although both men and women express romantic love with the same intensity, and are attracted to partners who are dependable, kind, healthy, smart and educated, there are some notable differences in their choices. Men are more attracted to youth and beauty, while women are more attracted to money, education and position. When an older, ugly man is seen walking down the road arm-in-arm with a young and beautiful woman, most people assume the man is rich or powerful.
you don't need to be insulting. Here is a definition of drug addiction.
Drug addiction is a pathological or abnormal condition which arises due to frequent drug use. The disorder of addiction involves the progression of acute drug use to the development of drug-seeking behavior, the vulnerability to relapse, and the decreased, slowed ability to respond to naturally rewarding stimuli. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) has categorized three stages of addiction: preoccupation/anticipation, binge/intoxication, and withdrawal/negative affect. These stages are characterized, respectively, everywhere by constant cravings and preoccupation with obtaining the substance; using more of the substance than necessary to experience the intoxicating effects; and experiencing tolerance, withdrawal symptoms, and decreased motivation for normal life activities.[2] By the American Society of Addiction Medicine definition, drug addiction differs from drug dependence and drug tolerance.[3]
It is a pathological or abnormal condition. Love is not a pathological or abnormal condition. It is OK to say that a person in love acts LIKE a drug addict, but that is not same as BEING a drug addict. That is why we have so many words, so that people can use them precisely.
I stand by my original statements, Lotus. I wasn't insulting you; I was making the case that your blanket statement:
Quote:
And this addict stuff, ...come on. He may have natural "love" feelings that feel good going around in his system, but that is not the same thing as being addicted to heroin or cocaine. One can still function as a member of society while in love!
was ill-informed, and gravely understated the effects of the addictiveness of affairs.
That being said, I could take the above definition of drug addiction, and -- with nearly every single symptom -- point out how people caught up in affairs display PRECISELY those same behaviors, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to do so when so much research has already been done on the subject by those far more qualified than me.
One need look no further than the very stories on these DB forums to see the horrible, delusional things that people do when addicted to their affair. Depleting their families' bank accounts. Ignoring the needs of their own children. Telling their loved ones to "just get over it" when they try to intervene. Sudden, radical changes in tastes in music, clothes, and complete lifestyle.
In fact, I would content that it's ONLY once one begins to understand infidelity as an ADDICTION that it even begins to make any sense.
No, TRUE love is not a pathological or abnormal condition, but its early (lust/infatuation) stage is very much physiologically manifested, and HIGHLY ADDICTIVE. It is what Nature uses, as Passenger notes above, to replicate the species. When that same physiology presents itself in a relationship OUTSIDE of the marital one -- infidelity -- it is an intensely powerful, addictive, vehicle for the exact same abnormal behavior outlined in your definition.
I've thought on this for a while now. I will maintain control of the finances and not invite him to learn about them unless he seeks me out. (one of the issues in our M has been his total and complete lack of input into our finances.) I won't chase him on it, but I will teach him if he wants to know.