Why do so many couples divorce?

[Vort]

I always have to wonder when people talk about using sex as punishment. If I'm mad at someone, why should I be forced to have sex when I'm not feeling loving?

A marriage involves give-and-take compromise. Ideally, a couple eventually becomes one and makes decisions together as a team, always. But even this often involves one person giving in to the other. Only in the most unhealthy of relationships will the same person always or usually "win".

The problem with using sex as punishment is when one party (typically the wife) gives in on some decision, but then "gets back at" the other party by withholding sex. The person will never say, "I don't want to have sex with you because I don't want you getting any pleasure or satisfaction, seeing as how we're spending the weekend camping like you've been wanting to do for a year instead of spending it at my mother's house so I could go shopping with her." Instead the person will say, "I just don't feel well." The funny thing is, the person's "not feeling well" so often coincides with the times when the partner's way gets chosen that, eventually, the partner figures things out.

Again, I am fortunate not to have been in this position, but I have heard many people talk about and dance around this topic, and even come right out and say things sometimes. I am embarrassed and appalled by the idea. In my opinion, this is nothing short of sexual abuse. I would certainly consider it grounds for divorce if the offending spouse did not take positive and drastic steps to change her/his behavior. If nothing else, it is virtual prostitution and should have no part in a marriage.

[LDSJewess]

Thank you Pam,

After his last anti-semitic remark about Jews, I decided rather than fan his fire it would be best to call it a night and pray for him and his family or future family. This is indeed the internet and people come on message boards to create contention for the entertainment of it.

I have very serious doubts that a young man who has a profile age of one who could be feasibly a returned missionary, claims to be a member of the LDS church and then selects the user ID "Facism" and then comes to a message board spouting totalarian facist ideas, anti semetic remarks, and derrogatory names to women, hardly fits the profile of an LDS man with a focus on following the Gospel.

But well, this is the internet and people can be whomever they propose to be.

In the real world, had a young man in our ward carried on the same conversation and expressed the same sentiments, I would pay a visit to my bishop with concerns and hope that the bishop would give the young man appropriate counsel so that perhaps contention among other members and his family or future family could be avoided or resolved.

As for the internet, many people visit message boards, and I sincerely hope that any young or easily impressionable person seeking out information about the church will not be turned off or swayed by remarks made by the likes of "Facism." It is most important for those looking into the church to speak with missionaries and people that will guide them into the direction of Heavenly Fathers plan for us.

[KrazyKay]

I have avoided commenting on this thread because I don't have anything useful to offer the topic. But I'm curious about KrazyKay's comment above. Not sure whether or not I agree with it -- I may -- but I wonder if KrazyKay considers the refusal to engage in sex, or only in extreme and uncommon circumstances (e.g. once a month, lights out, under covers, no talking, five minutes max), to be a form of sexual abuse and thus a legitimate reason for divorce.

(Thankfully, I am not in any such position, but I know people, including members of my own extended family, who have been.)

This would be a case by case situation. If it is something that both the husband and wife agree on, then I wouldn't see it as abuse. If both partners don't agree, it can eventually lead to abuse. We have to remember for something to be considered abuse it has to be continuous over a period of time - unless there is a physical component that can easily be documented.

Some things I would consider weird, deviant (such as using those "toys" found at those adult stores)... but not abuse if both partners agree to it. As for refusing sex, it would depend on why. Every individual is different, so is every couple.

But sexual abuse would be where the victim does not want/agree to what is being done and the abuser doesn't care - just continues it.

As I said in my last post, my ex-husband engaged in sexual abuse. I really don't want to go into details... All I will say he was into using ropes and I was not. I have completely forgiven him, I still love him. But I will never go back to him - I do not want to experience that abuse again.

[Vort]

This would be a case by case situation. If it is something that both the husband and wife agree on, then I wouldn't see it as abuse.

Of course. But what of the case when (for example) the wife simply refuses sex? She doesn't have an infection or anything; the couple engaged in normal sex for a period of some years; and then the wife says, "No more." Or perhaps she agrees to sex once or twice per month, but even then, only in very strict, controlled conditions (and we're not talking "no whips or chains", more like "no light or talking").

A sudden change like this might signify some weird psychological disorder. But what if the wife refuses all efforts to treat or otherwise ameliorate the situation? Would you consider this to be a form of sexual abuse?

We have to remember for something to be considered abuse it has to be continuous over a period of time - unless there is a physical component that can easily be documented.

Not being familiar with abuse, I find this an interesting distinction. Why ought physical mistreatment to be considered abusive the first time, but sexual or emotional mistreatment not be considered abusive until an ongoing pattern is established?

Some things I would consider weird, deviant (such as using those "toys" found at those adult stores)...

I know nothing of such things, but am very happy in my ignorance and don't care to be educated on such topics.

[Backroads]

We have to remember for something to be considered abuse it has to be continuous over a period of time - unless there is a physical component that can easily be documented.

I know that's a standard definiton of abuse/harrassment for your average workplace, but how does the definition apply in home settings? I don't know if I can call a one-time incident abuse. Not cool, but not necessarily abuse.

Of course. But what of the case when (for example) the wife simply refuses sex? She doesn't have an infection or anything; the couple engaged in normal sex for a period of some years; and then the wife says, "No more." Or perhaps she agrees to sex once or twice per month, but even then, only in very strict, controlled conditions (and we're not talking "no whips or chains", more like "no light or talking").

A sudden change like this might signify some weird psychological disorder. But what if the wife refuses all efforts to treat or otherwise ameliorate the situation? Would you consider this to be a form of sexual abuse?

Does it have to be intentionally mean to qualify as abuse? In the chance of a disorder, I doubt abuse. He/She might even be "just not interested anymore" and perhaps wants a little more say in what goes on (generally speaking, I see nothing wrong with that). But to refuse any discussion/help/etc when it is KNOWN the other partner is upset would fall under abuse, at least in my mind.

[LDSJewess]

Of course. But what of the case when (for example) the wife simply refuses sex? She doesn't have an infection or anything; the couple engaged in normal sex for a period of some years; and then the wife says, "No more." Or perhaps she agrees to sex once or twice per month, but even then, only in very strict, controlled conditions (and we're not talking "no whips or chains", more like "no light or talking").

A sudden change like this might signify some weird psychological disorder. But what if the wife refuses all efforts to treat or otherwise ameliorate the situation? Would you consider this to be a form of sexual abuse?

Not being familiar with abuse, I find this an interesting distinction. Why ought physical mistreatment to be considered abusive the first time, but sexual or emotional mistreatment not be considered abusive until an ongoing pattern is established?

I know nothing of such things, but am very happy in my ignorance and don't care to be educated on such topics.

Here are my thoughts on this.

I think there has to be intent for it to be considered abuse. In other words, withholding love, money, food, basic needs such as shelter etc: and yes, sex is abusive when the person withholding these needs from their spouse is doing it from sipte, anger or free will intention.

I do think though that if a couple previously had satisfying sexual relations throughout their marriage and then gradulaly or suddenly desire slowed down or stopped, then I don't see it as intentional abuse, rather some underlying problem that would need t be addressed and attempted to deal with.

This happens to some degree with many couples. In younger couples the issue can often be as simple as burn out and stress. Men get burned out when they are overwhelmed with supporting their families and spreading their energies so thin. But men can also have increased sexual needs at times like this because theact gives them a sense of calm and release. On the other hand, when women become over stretched in their time and energy bearing children and caring for their children, they often take a different approach to what calms their stress which can be a time out period. In other words men can destress by having sex. And women destress by having a pedicure, going to a spa or getting a baby sitter so they can chill out.

As the couple ages, other biological factors can come into play. For women post partum depression is a very real problem for some women. Some can get to the point that they not only withdraw from intimacy and love for their spopuse but even their extended friends and family and sadly even the child. And as the child bearing years wane, women experience peri menopause when it is like continous PMS for a very extended period of time butting stress and strain on a marriage. Then post menopause, some women regain a renewed higher sexual energy because of their new found sense of freedom. No pregnancy, no more babies, just time to enjoy their woman hood. Yet, some post manopausal women either slow down and although still have a sex life (albeit less frequent), they take on other interests. Older couples also have freedom from careers and with their more disposable income and disposeable time, sex can be put on the back burner and the couples interest is to travel, engage in other hobbies and things that they were too busy to do earlier in life. Yet, some post menopausal women take a been there done that attitide that they did their part in having children and now they want nothing to do with sex.

There seems to be more issues regarding this with women, but men have issues as they age too. Natural biology can lower testerone levels. Drugs like viagra are huge sellers because of it.

None of these issues and changes in peoples lives are something we can predict. It is important to go into marriage with the best intentions and give it your all. But when either partner faces challenges in their lifes it is important to know that your spouse of all people in the world has your back no matter what. It is a time when you deal with the "for better or for worse part" and selflessly love the other person and sometimes yes you have to think about their needs over your own. Successfulm marriages must always think of them as a two person unit and never an "I" or "me."

The most important thing I have found is that marriage has to be looked upon as the creating of a family. I am not talking about having children now (although that is a part of it). In other words it is not just an "I want to feel good" and be in love purpose. It truly is all about those old wedding vows many of which are no longer used. Do you take ____ to be your lawful wedded spouse for richer, poorer, sickness, health, better or worse ......

I think we can so easily lose sight of when the tough things happen , bail out attitude happens.

I think divorce can become necessary when there is physical ause that is dangerous to the person or persons being abused. But when one leaves their spouse they are in essense leaving their family member just as surely as if they were to cut of a parent sibling, or child from their lives. It should always be a last resort.

Sorry as always for any typos.

[ruthiechan]

You can be sexually selfish by withholding sex or by demanding it.

Is selfishness abuse? Yeah, probably.

[Just_A_Guy]

The problem with using sex as punishment is when one party (typically the wife) gives in on some decision, but then "gets back at" the other party by withholding sex. The person will never say, "I don't want to have sex with you because I don't want you getting any pleasure or satisfaction, seeing as how we're spending the weekend camping like you've been wanting to do for a year instead of spending it at my mother's house so I could go shopping with her." Instead the person will say, "I just don't feel well." The funny thing is, the person's "not feeling well" so often coincides with the times when the partner's way gets chosen that, eventually, the partner figures things out.

Of course, sometimes it isn't intended as punishment per se. If a woman's arousal depends on feeling emotional intimacy with her partner, but recent marital decisions leave her feeling put-upon or otherwise dissatisfied . . . she's not going to feel emotional intimacy right then and there, and she isn't necessarily going to be "feeling well" just because her husband feels romantically inclined.

(Doesn't change the bottom line for the husband; but he can take cold comfort in knowing that she's not being intentionally vicious.)

[Just_A_Guy]

Child support court is a very corrupt business meant to squeeze every penny out of a mans pockets.

So corrupt, you can lose your temple recommend for not keeping current on it.

[slamjet]

Of course, sometimes it isn't intended as punishment per se. If a woman's arousal depends on feeling emotional intimacy with her partner, but recent marital decisions leave her feeling put-upon or otherwise dissatisfied . . . she's not going to feel emotional intimacy right then and there, and she isn't necessarily going to be "feeling well" just because her husband feels romantically inclined.

(Doesn't change the bottom line for the husband; but he can take cold comfort in knowing that she's not being intentionally vicious.)

I wonder if a majority of withholding is more a matter of not understanding the spouse? It took me a lot of years to learn that vacuuming, dishes and laundry was a sure bet. And for her, me coming home tired from school or work wasn't very conducive for romance and overtures of love until I was able to unwind.

[classylady]

I've been doing some more thinking on the original question of why there are so many divorces. One of the reasons would be that women have more options available to them. In the past, women pretty much were stuck. If they were in a bad marriage, they didn't have the options available to them that women now do. Women in the past weren't trained to work outside of the home--nor was it acceptable for women to work. They would not have been able to support themselves or their children. So, financial freedom for women has been a factor--which I believe is a good thing--not that I'm saying that divorce is a good thing, but it's good that women now have options. And with that financial freedom, the husband or wife may be more apt to leave a so-so marriage knowing that the woman can work and support herself.

Also, the stigma of divorce is no longer a factor like it was in the past.

[mrmarklin]

I think it's fair to say that if one enters marraige for the wrong reasons that the seeds of divorce have been sown, and will grow accordingly.

I personally believe that this is the case in the vast majority of divorces. The seeds (of divorce) are there at the outset.

[mrmarklin]

I've been doing some more thinking on the original question of why there are so many divorces. One of the reasons would be that women have more options available to them. In the past, women pretty much were stuck. If they were in a bad marriage, they didn't have the options available to them that women now do. Women in the past weren't trained to work outside of the home--nor was it acceptable for women to work. They would not have been able to support themselves or their children. So, financial freedom for women has been a factor--which I believe is a good thing--not that I'm saying that divorce is a good thing, but it's good that women now have options. And with that financial freedom, the husband or wife may be more apt to leave a so-so marriage knowing that the woman can work and support herself.

Also, the stigma of divorce is no longer a factor like it was in the past.

Women having more options is probably a big contributor to the situation. Not necessarily a bad thing.

[Jennarator]

I think it's fair to say that if one enters marraige for the wrong reasons that the seeds of divorce have been sown, and will grow accordingly.

I personally believe that this is the case in the vast majority of divorces. The seeds (of divorce) are there at the outset.

Age & pressure to marry often cause people to "settle." Convience, and other things cause people to "settle." I agree with this.

[estradling75]

I wonder how many people make the subject of 'if they should marry a particular someone' a matter of prayer and fasting? I am thinking that not nearly enough do. It is one of the most impactful and serious choices we will ever make, and too many make it without the amount of care it deserves.

[Jennarator]

I wonder how many people make the subject of 'if they should marry a particular someone' a matter of prayer and fasting? I am thinking that not nearly enough do. It is one of the most impactful and serious choices we will ever make, and too many make it without the amount of care it deserves.

I have been a little....hmmm...can't think of the right word. I guess I have thought about this a lot. Anyways. When I married the first time. I prayed hard. I didn't fast, however I thought I got a good answer. Now, I had got good answers to prayers before, & I know how to follow the spirit. I just wonder how when I was so sure of my answer, how everything went wrong. Some people say that this was part of the plan, others say I mixed up my answer since love is blind. Some say he would have been the right one, had he kept his covenants.

Now that I am very happily remarried. I feel such a difference in out marrige. I feel like part of a team and I wonder even more what the heck I was thinking the first time. I still have no answer.

My point is, I think people do fast & pray, but there are so many other things that could happen. CHoices that are made after the fact and such.

Sure there are those that don't pray and fast, but I think many do and one or both decided no to stay on the path they were on when their marrige started.

[mrmarklin]

Jennarator,

I think it is a common misconception in the church that "fasting and prayer' is a panacea for all problems, and that once an "answer" is received then the prospective activity will prosper forever.

As you have discovered, sometimes the activities of others interferes with this process. It would seem that "prayer and fasting" is not a one shot solution that many regard it, but an activity that should be continued throughout life. In addition, our own actions should also be held into account.

[Jennarator]

Jennarator,

I think it is a common misconception in the church that "fasting and prayer' is a panacea for all problems, and that once an "answer" is received then the prospective activity will prosper forever.

As you have discovered, sometimes the activities of others interferes with this process. It would seem that "prayer and fasting" is not a one shot solution that many regard it, but an activity that should be continued throughout life. In addition, our own actions should also be held into account.

My point, exactly. :)

[bcguy]

I cannot explain it but, what I do know, if every one of my relatives except mabey one, had divorsed at least once. By the second or third marrige, its forever.

I am wondering if maybe they had married for the wrong reason and did not know it? Maybe mistakes were made in the first marriage and were not repeated in the second or third marriage?

In my old neighborhood in the 1980s, EVERYONE got divorced.

Now my wises family quarrel like Tasmanian devils for the last 40 years, I wonder why they never got divorced?

[LDSJewess]

Those of you hwo are on this forum that are older (as in old enough to be the parents of teenagers), can perhaps relate to this. I once heard a speaker ask when addressing a middle age adult audience: "Would you choose a young person right out of high school to plan your career for you." Would you choose a young person right out of high school to select a person or make a decision that would effect the rest of your entire life?" And of course just about every one in the room nodded in understanding and agreement of what the speaker was trying to convey.

The fact is we live in a society that often pushes people into marriage long before they are mature enough to understand what marriage really entails, no less parenting.

Girls before they are out of high school or college are encouraged to marry and the carrots are beautiful white dresses, flowers, celebrations, gifts, bridesmaids to give the bride special attention. Mnay young brides are caught up in the wedding part but not the marriage part.

The same happens with pregnancy. Baby showers, gifts, celebrations, and loads of attention. So the mommy to be is caught up in the carrying the baby and having the baby and all the attention that goes with it, rather than all the trials and work raising the baby will take.

They we have the young man. Often does not finish college so has to struggle in work and careers that are less than his highest potential. Instead often these very young men who often have not even supported themselves completely are faced with supporting a wife and children.

Also the young couple (and I even have read it here on this forum as well) make statements about how their husband or wife does not give them the "attention" they need. But if you have a young man having to support a family and a young women needing to care for children, all this attention is more romantic fantasy than reality. And then there is the lack of maturity regarding the intimacy of their relationship. Having little to often no experience, they have no idea what to expect and what they even want to expect. For the sake of chastity, parents and older adults say you will know what to do when you are married. Sheeesh. Animals instinctly know what to do too but animals do not attatch emotional and life long relationships to mating either. And since the could lacks education and maturity, they become frustrated and too often think about the grass being greener on the other side.

My suggestion for a happy marriage that really lasts for a lifetime and beyond is to focus on education first. I hear a lot about how people can make a good living without a college degree. That is true but a higher education is not all about career training and money (although that is a perk to college education). A minumum four year degree after high school will allow a teenager to gain a sense of maturity and have a clearer understaning of the world and what it takes to be successful in ones livelihood as well as in the home and family (it is all one package).

It also givs young peopl;e the time to think about what they want in life and it allows them to get past the teen age hormone rushes and dramatic emotions and take the time to decide what they want in life so they can make better choices in a spouse and find some one who wants what they want and what goals they want to pursue together.

51 percent of marriages end in divorce. The younger the marriage the more likely they join the statistics.

It is often said and I believe it to be very true: "You cannot meet the needs of others until you have met your own needs." If you are going from Mom and Dads home to your own with your spouse, and if you are hoping that your spouse will "take care" of you, then sorry to say you are heading for disaster.

I know this will not be a popular post to the young because hormones and emotions drive you to impulsive choices. But if you spend your money or your parents money on a good education so that you can take the time to gain maturity and the skills you will need to become a mature and responsibile, self assurred adult, then you will be able to have a much better chance at being one of those couples that lasts.

The poster above said that often the second or third marriage is the one that lasts. That is beacause they are mature and experienced and have learned what it takes to make a marriage last.

[MrShorty]

The poster above said that often the second or third marriage is the one that lasts. That is beacause they are mature and experienced and have learned what it takes to make a marriage last.

Statistics I've seen actually say that 2nd and 3rd marriages have a higher divorce rate than 1st marriages. While I'm sure there is anecdotal evidence like bcguy's that show a better 2nd marriage than 1st marriage, it seems against the statistical norm.

For that matter, while marrying young is statistically significant in predicting divorce, there are certainly many anecdotes of people marrying young who don't divorce.

I once heard a speaker ask when addressing a middle age adult audience: "Would you choose a young person right out of high school to plan your career for you." Would you choose a young person right out of high school to select a person or make a decision that would effect the rest of your entire life?"

I can see the logic behind this. I, too, wouldn't let some kid fresh out of high school make such a decision for me. At the same time, I wouldn't let some kid fresh out of college make such a defining decision for me either. I guess the idea then becomes, how do you tell when someone is mature enough to make that kind of decision?

I haven't been through the statistics/studies in detail, but it seems like age at marriage is a statistically significant predictor of divorce, but I don't think it was the most significant predictor of divorce.

On a completely unrelated train of thought. I remember being intrigued by Dr. John Gottman's claim that he could predict to a high accuracy (like 80% or something) whether a couple would divorce based on observing them. As a scientist, he would naturally focus less on unobservable "feelings" like selfishness and more on observable behaviors, but he identified several patterns that contribute to divorce. I'm not going to remember all he wrote about, but I remember things like turning away from each other when difficult times come. Or arguing with "harsh startups" (he identified "four horsemen" that are bad when arguing). Some reading this thread might find his books interesting.

[Idora]

I definitely agree with the selfish part as well as pressure.

A friend of mine who attends college in Utah often expresses her views on marriage (she's LDS). She's only 23, but often feels depressed because she's "getting too old." Many of her friends who are her age or younger are already divorced. Why? Because these girls were waiting for the "perfect returned missionary" and didn't think of any other man on the side who was still a wonderful guy. Eventually he'd return, they'd have their dream temple wedding...then bam. Reality hit. She'd realize it wasn't so perfect after all and flee because "there must be someone better."

Clearly not all divorces are based off of this, but sadly it is common. I'm 25 and my husband is 26 (27 in a couple of weeks) and we don't have children yet. Many LDS people have asked, "So, where are the children?" Like it's expected of us to have 3 children by now (we've been married 4.5 years). There are many reasons why we don't currently have children, but this doesn't mean it won't ever happen. We're making our own choice on how our marriage goes.

My brother and sister-in-law got pregnant 3 months after their wedding and were fighting like none other. Threatening divorce, shouting and yelling, stress, etc. Luckily they sought help and are doing better than ever 7 years later, but you get my point. There seems to be so much pressure these days about biological clocks, the age expected to get married, etc. Especially in the LDS church. Outside of the church, it seems as though people treat marriage like a popular thing. They have their big wedding because every girl wants one, then divorce when things aren't perfect.

Anyway, I'm rambling, but those are my thoughts. I'm sure I've echoed many of the same thoughts as well on here.

[estradling75]

For that matter, while marrying young is statistically significant in predicting divorce, there are certainly many anecdotes of people marrying young who don't divorce.

I am one of the anecdotes... I hear alot of people saying age is a factor, but I think that is more of a mask for what really is the factor. I think the real factor is maturity. Maturity is not a factor of age but it does in many cases grow with it. But you can also have people that are really mature for their age and people that are really immature for their age.

[garryw]

To this day I'm not really sure what motivated my ex to divorce me after 12 years and 2 kids. She went on a vacation to her mom's house with the kids, and never came back. The closest thing she gave for an explanation was "you weren't there for me". Not very specific. Anybody could say that phrase about anybody. I did everything humanly and inhumanly possible to try to save the marriage.

Now in hindsight I'm so so so so so glad she did it! Glad my prayers were not answered. She got involved with another guy during the marriage (actually 2 other guys) but I didnt really care, I figured she would fall back in love with me.

Again thanks for unanswered prayers!!! Sometimes you don't know how bad you had it till she's gone. I'm currently remarried and waiting on a clearance.

So my conclusion is that divorce is the greatest thing that can ever happen to a person and I will always be grateful the Lord didn't listen to my prayers when I asked him to save the marriage.

[curiousheathen]

That's sort of depressing, Garryw, and I'm not even Mormon. Divorce sucks- and I've been through three-ish: my mother divorced my biological father for beating her and me, and threatening to kill us and bury us in the mountains (try explaining that to a too-smart six year old), then divorced my stepdad due to addiction (they later got back together still considering their marriage valid because they are Catholic and never had the church do anything about it, split up again, and got back together again and have been ever sense). Divorce is never good, and it's never easy, even if in some cases it is the right thing to do. Marriages break up for an infinite number of reasons, and they aren't limited to religion (I know as many divorced Mormons as Catholics and Wiccans). I'm no expert to comment on that. Someone is always hurt during the divorce process, no matter how healthy it may be. God did not not answer your prayers--he already knew what was best for you. Perhaps your negative mindset had some impact on your relationship, but it truly is not my place to comment.

In my opinion divorce happens because people grow and change over time, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. My religion's view on divorce is simply that we don't have one. Essentially, pagans seek harmony and reconciliation- for us too, marriage is a vow, an eternal thing, a serious thing that should not be terminated nor rushed into on a whim. If someone feels they need to part, let it be in peace and with good health, and no negativity or grudge holding.

I'm a child of divorce, and I've seen the good and the bad because of it.