I don't see the difference.Nothing wrong with Arranged Marriages in and of themselves. It's Forced Marriages which are the problem.
I guess this would depend on whether she really was happy; content with her lot and in love with her husband, or just making the best of it because she loved her children and didn't want them to suffer from a discordant home.I know this happened years ago, but I couldn't believe it -
My Mum worked with a young woman, her family was from Poland, and she was seeing a Hungarian man and wanted to marry him.
Her father had a young man come over from Poland and arranged for her to marry this stranger. She was completely distraught, being very much in love with her Hungarian boyfriend, but she had to relent, my Mum and I went to the church wedding.
She was inconsolable for three months, then suddenly was pregnant, and went on to have three more children and was happy.
I suppose arranged marriages can work out, even though they seem archaic.
I don't see the difference.
It's worth recalling that all the data on the subject of discordant family homes and the resulting problems with children, overwhelmingly show that children from settled two parent families have a far lower chance of mental health issues, getting in trouble with the law, teenage pregnancy and also have better chances of good life outcomes.I guess this would depend on whether she really was happy; content with her lot and in love with her husband, or just making the best of it because she loved her children and didn't want them to suffer from a discordant home.
https://www.familylaw.co.uk/news_and_comment/the-impact-of-divorce-on-children-s-mental-well-being
University College London’s Institute of Education recently conducted the first British study to analyse the emotional impact of splitting up on 6,245 children aged 3 – 14.
The study showed that those children who experience parental separation aged between 7 and 14 are 16% more likely to experience behavioural issues and emotional problems such as anxiety and depression, than those whose parents stay together.
Parental divorce or separation and children's mental health
Brian D'Onofrio 1 , 2 and Robert Emery 3
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6313686/
Research has documented that parental divorce/separation is associated with an increased risk for child and adolescent adjustment problems, including academic difficulties (e.g., lower grades and school dropout), disruptive behaviors (e.g., conduct and substance use problems), and depressed mood2.
Offspring of divorced/separated parents are also more likely to engage in risky sexual behavior, live in poverty, and experience their own family instability. Risk typically increases by a factor between 1.5 and 2.
I think those reports are applicable in marriages where parents are happily settled rather than marriages where parents are in permanent conflict. Living in conflict filled relationships will worsen the mental health of the children and both the marriage partners.It's worth recalling that all the data on the subject of discordant family homes and the resulting problems with children, overwhelmingly show that children from settled two parent families have a far lower chance of mental health issues, getting in trouble with the law, teenage pregnancy and also have better chances of good life outcomes.
Two examples plucked from dozens...
Also:
It may be that despite marriages being arranged or indeed a lack of perfect match some parents really do (and perhaps might consider more carefully) working it out for their children - making things work doesn't mean you have to be, or are, miserable or abused.
It depends. If the adults are adults, then perhaps it's worth their sacrifice.I think those reports are applicable in marriages where parents are happily settled rather than marriages where parents are in permanent conflict. Living in conflict filled relationships will worsen the mental health of the children and both the marriage partners.
I am firmly against 'staying together for the children'. The children end up messed up, the partners end up messed up - it just looks pretty from the outside, that's all.
I'm saying that in some cases the adults might consider growing up, stop being self-absorbed, and take their responsibility to their children more seriously. I've seen quite a few breakups that were not due to a fundamental incompatibility, but rather, immaturity.What if a rubbish dad is still better than no dad?
What if two sniping parents is still better than one parent? What then?
It isn't, and they aren't. I'm sorry but nobody will ever persuade me that adults should stay miserably together because 'it's better for the children.'
You're both assuming that continuing in a dysfunctional family (but one that falls short of physcial abuse or the like) is de facto worse that the trauma of separating children from their natural parents or having to live some kind of hybrid existence between two separated parents and possibily with step-parents.Totally agree. You don’t want your kids patterning themselves after and learning to have poisonous relationships.
Unfortunately it takes a lot more than 'telling people to grow up for the sake of the children' to actually have any effect.I'm saying that in some cases the adults might consider growing up, stop being self-absorbed, and take their responsibility to their children more seriously. I've seen quite a few breakups that were not due to a fundamental incompatibility, but rather, immaturity.
I'm also suggesting that in some cases, the parents 'grow up fast' and work it out for the benefit of all parties. This inevitably requires compromise and some self-sacrifice.
There are many sorts of abuse that aren't physical. And I would never endorse anyone continuing to suffer from them, for the sake of the children. Aren't the adults entitled to any happiness?You're both assuming that continuing in a dysfunctional family (but one that falls short of physcial abuse or the like) is de facto worse that the trauma of separating children from their natural parents or having to live some kind of hybrid existence between two separated parents and possibily with step-parents.
That's true. I didn't say that was all it took, but that perhaps 'growing up' was required.Unfortunately it takes a lot more than 'telling people to grow up for the sake of the children' to actually have any effect.
There are many sorts of abuse that aren't physical. And I would never endorse anyone continuing to suffer from them, for the sake of the children. Aren't the adults entitled to any happiness?
You are right to say that sometimes people take the easy way out and split up without any real cause other than it just being 'annoying' being together. But without heavy degrees of counselling, lots of therapy on both sides and expensive intervention in the relationship, it's going to happen.
For abuse, I'm talking about between partners. When a husband financially abuses his wife by withholding monies and making her account (with receipts) for every penny spent and then quizzing her for hours about spending she either can't identify or he doesn't agree with. Or psychological abuse, where he (or she) won't let partner sleep because they want them to account for every second of their day spend; who they spoke to, who they saw, what was talked about. In detail. All night. Or refusing to allow them out of the house alone, without having a tracker on their phone at all times and then facing questions about where they went. Or refusing any physical intimacy unless it is sexual. Or raping their partner because 'you're my wife, I'm entitled.'That's true. I didn't say that was all it took, but that perhaps 'growing up' was required.
No-one is entitled to 'happiness', especially at the expense of someone else. I'd argue that, as a goal in life it's no more real that the end of a rainbow.
The vast majority of parents absolutely have to sacrifice themselves to some degree to raise their children. While I'm sure that there are some perfect parents with access to sufficient funds and free time to be so, the majority have to survive day-to-day and provide for their children and in general this means making sacrifices for the most part.
Also, define 'abuse' in this context. I don't mean to be snide, but some people think 'spaghetti hoops three times a week' is abuse or 'not reading to their children' is abuse. Where's the line?
As I stated, just because a pair of parents isn't perfect, does not preclude more damage being done to children by removing them from their family or splitting them between two homes.
I personally think folk take the easy way far too often. I've seen one too many instances where the actual issue was one of reluctance to change pre-marriage/child lifestyles and/or refusal by either party to make the slightest change to their behaviours because 'why should I?'.
I can't help feeling there’s a simpler way to help prevent things getting to a self-centred divorce.
While I'd be the first to admit "Telling someone to grow up" doesn't do the job (...it’s about as effective as telling one’s daughter she can’t go out with that loser...) first stage counselling perhaps ought to encompass this broad strategy (for all I know it does, but it doesn't seem this way from the outside).
Yep, I'd agree with that.For abuse, I'm talking about between partners. When a husband financially abuses his wife by withholding monies and making her account (with receipts) for every penny spent and then quizzing her for hours about spending she either can't identify or he doesn't agree with. Or psychological abuse, where he (or she) won't let partner sleep because they want them to account for every second of their day spend; who they spoke to, who they saw, what was talked about. In detail. All night. Or refusing to allow them out of the house alone, without having a tracker on their phone at all times and then facing questions about where they went. Or refusing any physical intimacy unless it is sexual. Or raping their partner because 'you're my wife, I'm entitled.'
You only have to look at Reddit to see the truth of this. Statistically more US users of course, but an ASTONISHING number of people who seem to marry at 19 and then proceed to have three children before they are 24 - which is going to strain even the soundest of marriages.Not a debate I want to get in the middle of, but bear in mind some marriages break up precisely because they have children. Not everyone can cope, not every mother bonds.
The statistics of course do not guarantee a child brought up with two parents will get on better in life. They simply show that it is more likely that they will. That alas will still leave tens of thousands of children who have unfortunate, inept, manipulative or selfish parents and don't profit by them.
I wonder how much of that is due to the fundamentalist Christian ethos (using the term in its widest sense) that permeates so many US states.You only have to look at Reddit to see the truth of this. Statistically more US users of course, but an ASTONISHING number of people who seem to marry at 19 and then proceed to have three children before they are 24 - which is going to strain even the soundest of marriages.
And there is good reason for that, 'living off the system' has now become an ambition, a way of life.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...other-countries-to-live-with-just-one-parent/
“…report, funded by the Department of Health and published by the Office for National Statistics, investigated emotional disorders - ranked as those which cause considerable distress and interference with the way in which children perform at school and during play.
It also looked at conduct disorders which result in aggressive, violent or anti-social behaviour.
The researchers studied nearly 8,000 children aged between five and 16 in 2004 and found almost one in ten had disorders.
The report said that a child whose parents had split during this time was more than four and a half times more likely to have developed an emotional disorder than one whose parents stayed together.
They were nearly three times more likely to exhibit a conduct disorder.”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...er-mental-troubles-says-Government-study.html
“The Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency reports that the most reliable indicator of violent crime in a community is the proportion of fatherless families. Fathers typically offer economic stability, a role model for boys, greater household security, and reduced stress for mothers. This is especially true for families with adolescent boys, the most crime-prone cohort. Children from single-parent families are more prone than children from two-parent families to use drugs, be gang members, be expelled from school, be committed to reform institutions, and become juvenile murderers.”
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-l...-cause-juvenile-crime-juvenile-crime-opposing
maximus otter