[Blarg]

I don't agree. It makes a presupposition that I don't think anybody can make, and that's that a married household will always be better than one where the parents have separated. This also writes off the idea that partners who go their separate ways might not construct a healthier, happier married household by finding new partners. That just seems to be the easy way out when it comes to thinking about this kind of thing, and clings too rigidly to ideas that aren't as solid as I think everyone would probably like them to be.

It also supports the idea very strongly that divorce is a somewhat isolated event in the family history, and that if you can prevent the event, you have prevented the problems. I'd argue that it's very common for problems to take a long time to build up, and that what happens as a family works its way towards the parents getting divorced is something people can feel and suffer from for a long time. And it will continue, if not worsen, if the couple decides to stay together despite things finally reaching the situation wherein one or both partners emotionally vacates their partner. Not divorcing, in that case, prevents only one small part of the continuum of family pain, but may result in a much greater sum total of pain. It doesn't neatly cut out a tumor from otherwise healthy tissue that will regenerate good as new.

I've known people who have made each other miserable, and even some who have been vengeful towards each other. These people were not healthy together, and it wasn't healthy for the kid. The trauma to the kid is inevitable in divorce. On the other hand, it's not unlikely the kid will be spared trauma if the parents stay together. So who's the winner here? That the kid wins is iffy at best, and the parents are worse off.

I've known people who had very good relationships with both parents after the parents divorced. It just takes more willpower on the part of the parents. The man, for instance, can't just slough off taking part in the kid's life to the wife. And the wife can't take out anger and disappointment on the father, and treat the kid like a pawn. At least not successfully forever. It is possible for kids to be secure in the love of both parents, and given the time and attention of them, whether the parents are together or not.

Also, I don't think parents owe their children a duty to deny the happiness of their own lives. Not on such a basic level as who you are going to come home to every day and whether you will find love of your own. Many parents are self-centered and emotionally greedy, but being with the right partners is a happiness everyone on the planet deserves to pursue. Is it right to want your parents to be unhappy for years, maybe decades, just so you don't have to deal with your own bad feelings about them separating? On the whole, I think most people would want their parents happy, too, even if they had to be apart to be happy.

Having our parents apart can be an odd way of thinking about the relationships and how they should work, but lots of life is like that, about opening up to new possibilities we may not like at all and may be uncomfortable with, and that make us feel we deserve more than we're getting. But lots of times life doesn't, and can't, work the way we think it does or should. And then we have to adapt with whatever goodwill and inner strength we can muster, and put one foot in front of the other. Which has an element of sucking. But you can't make the world what it's not. Life just isn't some as secure as we'd like it to be. You have to make allowances for that, have a little forgiveness, and keep going.