Need your opinion... Does this wife owe him more?

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
What she owes him is being satisfied with his happiness, regardless of his paycheck. The same as he owes her.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep.

Is it any wonder why there's a 60% divorce rate?

b

[fyodor]

I think the wife owes him a kick in the nuts.

[piradical]

Colt,
I agree with everything you say except-
yes, give support that is unconditional or get out of the relationship.
If you are living with a compromised and sacrificial attitude, then wrong partner.
Isn’t he proud and happy to have put her through school and that she is smart enough not to want to work for these corporate demons? Does he regret his sacrifices?
Was she doing nothing but eating chocolate and drinking champagne while he was working, or was she also contributing?
How has financial score keeping replaced the values that brought them together?
And most of all, any attempts to make decisions for the future that negate the importance of the moment are doomed.
To explain my taking an extreme position, I guess that I am too much a student of Baba Ram Das and “Be Here Now”.
Is this really just a question of who will submit to the other, and now he feels that it is her turn to do so?

[diebitter]

This is a lousy situation, and really this is not what marriage is about. Sacrifice should not be about expecting rewards. However, there does need to be some give and take, and if she sold him on getting her through law school so she could get a great job, it's a bit much she's changed her mind. Howver, he does need to get over it.

And Katy, while I know you have a good heart and probably will try not to, there's never, ever, EVER a good time to take sides in a couple's problems. Offer sympathy, comfort and kind words, but NEVER take sides or say a bad thing about one to the other. This can only lead to one, other or both resenting you in the end at some point.

But I think you're wise enough to know all this already.

[madnak]

My statement wasn't intended to be universal or literal. I thought that was clear, but I have a personal hatred of platitudes so it's fair to be called on it.

So I'll clarify. I don't think marriage can ever be about love and money. It's not more your wife's responsibility to pay you than it is your boss's responsibility to sleep with you (God help you if your wife is your boss). Obviously if there's some agreed-upon arrangement (like, the husband will cover all expenses) and then significant financial problems arise as a result of one partner's actions (say, the husband decides he doesn't feel like working), then even the most loving relationship will be strained.

However, this is clearly not the situation here. We have a double income, no kids pairing in which each partner apparently makes considerably more than the median household income for the wealthiest nation on earth. Also I assume that this wasn't a marriage of convenience. These two people supposedly care more about each other than anyone (if not anything) else, and have decided to express a life-long commitment to one another in the strongest possible terms. And he's rocking the boat because she won't buy him a bigger television set?

I think that's out of line, any way you look at it.

[inside??]

The husband is a tool. It isn't all about the check. Happiness is a big part. He should be happy she isn't just sitting home on her ass.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a lousy situation, and really this is not what marriage is about. Sacrifice should not be about expecting rewards. However, there does need to be some give and take, and if she sold him on getting her through law school so she could get a great job, it's a bit much she's changed her mind. Howver, he does need to get over it.

And Katy, while I know you have a good heart and probably will try not to, there's never, ever, EVER a good time to take sides in a couple's problems. Offer sympathy, comfort and kind words, but NEVER take sides or say a bad thing about one to the other. This can only lead to one, other or both resenting you in the end at some point.

But I think you're wise enough to know all this already.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
as a couple they agreed

[/ QUOTE ]

This strikes me as the real crux of the problem, which isn't the first impression one might get on hearing this story. Everybody can understand doing what you love, etc., so it's hard not to root for the wife doing what she wants to do.

But I'm sure the husband would much rather have had the time and effort back he plowed into her law career, and that both were sacrifices that were undertaken because, well, "as a couple they agreed," which is exactly what couples at their best with each other should do. The two of them undertook a long mutual effort together, the husband even going into debt over it, and then one of them, after reaping the benefit, renegs on the deal.

Ouch, that smarts! Law school is EXPENSIVE!, and the husband going into debt for it is doing all that someone reasonably can for a mate. That's serious debt, at least for most people.

Going back on the agreement is a terrible idea. I think the husband is right that this decision making reflects exceptionally poorly on his wife.

First of all, it's a violation of what both agreed to and what was sacrificed for by them as a couple. And it sounds like, since it's the hubby that went into debt for it, one half of the couple sacrified more than the other -- one was basically the giver, the other the exceedingly lucky recipient.

Second, taking the road less challenging and remunerative is not a temporary thing. It is going to mess up her resume big time. The good law jobs are quite competitive, and someone graduating law school and then deciding to immediately take the chance to make the least of it is going to make future employers very leery of hiring her. It's not even like she's being a poverty lawyer or something that doesn't necessarily pay well but has some kind of other benefit -- she's becoming a glorified clerk! Wow!

Third, if she went into corporate law for a while, she could at least pay off the debt of law school so the couple came back to some semblance, though it would never really be there, of breaking even on her law school debt.

A job doesn't have to be a lifetime commitment. Fulfilling her promise to her partner should matter VERY MUCH to her. She could do that, set the couple's future up much better financially, and still go off tilting at windmills or taking the mommy track later on. It would be far from a terrible or permanent outcome for her to be responsible for a few years before making a change.

It's also a lot easier to move down than up. If she got going in a real law career, her ability to find great jobs in the future, even if she has no interest in corporate law, would be vastly greater than it is now. She could surely do better for her heart and soul after five or seven years of real lawyering will give her experience and perspective people will find valuable.

Anyway, all these reasons work for me, but the center of it is still that they made an agreement as a couple and then one side backed out of it after getting what she wanted. That is just dirty pool and shows terrible character. I feel terrible for the husband, and only hope at the pathetic chance that the wife is merely obliviously selfish and not studiedly so.

If this relationship lasts, I'd bet it could be really rough on the husband. After all, the precedent has just been set -- his wife's word is no good, and even years of sacrifice and doing the right thing on his part don't matter to her. It can only get worse from here, since she knows the respect and honesty only has to go one way. I predict affairs on both their parts -- the only question is, who first? And how long does this relationship last? Maybe she already got what she wants. Oh well, at least somebody did.

[katyseagull]

[ QUOTE ]
What spouses owe each other is unconditional support. There might be trade offs in the gov. job- better hours, pension, medical benefits, vacation time. How does she become his slave once she graduates?

[/ QUOTE ]

Piradical,

Obviously she doesn't become his slave. The question is, how obligated is a spouse to stick to an agreement she made at the beginning of her law studies? Sounds like people are pretty split. Some are saying that she's not obligated at all and the husband is a tool, other people are saying that the husband has a valid gripe.

Anyway, I agree with you about the better hours, medical benefits and pension, etc. I'm sure those things were a consideration.


I'm not sure I understand your statement of "unconditional support" though. I think I'm with Colt on this issue. Are couples always supposed to give each other unconditional support? I mean in an ideal world this would be awesome. I just don't know too many people who can live up to it, especially when finances are at risk and personalities clash.

I don't know, I just think unconditional support is probably unrealistic. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] Oh God, look what a cynic I've become.


By the way, I think my friend was very supportive for years and I've no doubt he will continue to try to be supportive. Right now he is just a little pissed. He’ll come around.

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
He’ll come around.

[/ QUOTE ]

Undoubtedly. That is the saddest part.

What choice does he have, after all? Plenty of people wouldn't take any of them.

But hearts have memories. A smooth surface doesn't mean there has been any healing. Sometimes it just means things are waiting.