"It doesn't matter if there is hope for reform. The damage was already done. The mother here has an obligation to protect her children from abuse, even if it is coming from her husband. If she wants to work on the marriage, fine. But kick the husband out until he gets help. The children shouldn't be subjected to his abuse while they are working on the marriage and his issues with dishing out abuse to innocent children."
Kick the husband out? That's working on the marriage? See how biased these statements are? You completely take the side of the poster and look past any other possible issues. It IS possible (just an example, not accusing WHID) that WHID is abusive too according to YOUR criteria. Read Saamrodi's post (directly above this one) and you'll see how she tries to interpret what was posted, knowing that she's only hearing the posters side of the story. I try to do the same but Saamrodi is more tactful about it than me.
"You've heard one side of the story only and very little of it at that.
My response: I tell myself that we are only hearing your side of the story every time you tell your story."
That's GREAT. That's what you're supposed to do. And I've taken the time to explain better a lot of aspects of my situation so that there isn't as much to doubt or wonder about, which is what I'm supposed to do.
-------------------- I didn't get married to pay CS later in life.
Previous
Index
Next
Flat
Re: he cannot tolerate my children
Edit
Reply
Quote
