Home
Log in / Sign Up
    Private Messages   Advanced Search   Rules   New User Guide   FAQ   Advertise   Contact Us  
Forum -> Interesting Discussions
All Who Go Do Not Return
  Previous  1  2  3 24  25  26  Next



Post new topic   Reply to topic View latest: 24h 48h 72h

MagentaYenta




 
 
    
 

Post Fri, Jun 12 2015, 2:49 pm
gp2.0 wrote:
Yes marina that is the reason. They are afraid if their children see that their father can be non-observant and happy and still a good man, they will drop religion like a hot potato and follow in his footsteps. It's very hard to teach children that the world is full of good and bad people, and some people choose to be religious while others don't, because you take the risk that your child will make the choice not to be religious and who wants to deal with that? Rolling Eyes Much much easier to tell the kids that all non Jews are bad including their father who is no longer frum, and not have to deal with questions and doubts.


I think this is a critical point. I don't think that this is a value that is/was taught in the culture that the author lived in. I firmly feel that many of these cases of parental alienation (within the frum community) are firmly based on fear. Women like Gitty are tools of their religion, and I don't mean that in a good way.

Yea if your husband is a child molester or an other wise amoral individual it's possible that a woman would consider eliminating parental contact with the father. But this was not the case.

I had an acrimonious divorce with my DDs father, it was not something we exposed her to. I cannot comprehend eliminating him from her life or what pain she could experience by being denied her father. I could not imagine not coparenting with her father or his contributions to the wonderful adult she is today.

What the heck is so wrong with people making choices and following their path? It may not be my path, but certainly less damaging than refusing a father access to his children (or a mother in the converse situation). Call me an Apikoros, but I can think and feel and as a mother I cannot imagine myself in his position.
Back to top

happybeingamom




 
 
    
 

Post Fri, Jun 12 2015, 2:56 pm
marina wrote:
In short, you are defending her because according to her beliefs, her children's father was a negative influence. And so she had every right to alienate them from him? Really? There is no more objectivity in this at all?

If an ex husband gives the kids sugary snacks and lets them watch tv, is the wife justified in alienating them from their father? Even if she wholeheartedly believes this is a negative influence?

What if dad decides to become a religious Jew and mom wholeheartedly believes this is a cult and a negative influence? Does that justify alienating her children from their father?

What if dad decides to let baby cry it out when he cares for her, and the mom thinks that's a terrible horrible negative influence?

What if dad decides to put the kids in daycare on his days while he goes to work and mom thinks daycare is a negative influence?

Are all these valid justifications for depriving a child of his father and vice versa?

At what point do you say- geez, lady what is wrong with you? You didn't sign up for this, but none of us get what we signed up for. It's worse for your kids to lose their dad and think him an evil person than for them to eventually figure out that when they are not there, he goes out to eat nonkosher food. At what point does common sense take over?


I am not agreeing with her I am understanding what led her to her actions.

My point from reading the book Deen does not see how his actions and treatment of his wife led to this result.
Back to top

a jewish woman




 
 
    
 

Post Fri, Jun 12 2015, 3:13 pm
marina wrote:
In short, you are defending her because according to her beliefs, her children's father was a negative influence. And so she had every right to alienate them from him? Really? There is no more objectivity in this at all?

If an ex husband gives the kids sugary snacks and lets them watch tv, is the wife justified in alienating them from their father? Even if she wholeheartedly believes this is a negative influence?

What if dad decides to become a religious Jew and mom wholeheartedly believes this is a cult and a negative influence? Does that justify alienating her children from their father?

What if dad decides to let baby cry it out when he cares for her, and the mom thinks that's a terrible horrible negative influence?

What if dad decides to put the kids in daycare on his days while he goes to work and mom thinks daycare is a negative influence?

Are all these valid justifications for depriving a child of his father and vice versa?

At what point do you say- geez, lady what is wrong with you? You didn't sign up for this, but none of us get what we signed up for. It's worse for your kids to lose their dad and think him an evil person than for them to eventually figure out that when they are not there, he goes out to eat nonkosher food. At what point does common sense take over?

I know of a satmar family where the parents are divorced and the children refuse to have anything to do with the father. The married children didn't invite the father to their weddings or other simchas such as bris, kiddush, etc. They chose not to have anything with him without their mothers input. The father did not go otd, he is still religious and even wears a shtreimel on shabbat so sometimes these things happen even if no one goes otd.
In Deens case, we only have Deens version of the story so we don't know for sure what transpired after the divorce when Gitty moved back to New Square with the kids. Is it possible that the kids decided on their own to exclude him from their lives? After all, they were not happy in Monsey so perhaps they decided that they wanted nothing with the outside world and that included Deen himself? Again, this is something I would love to hear about from Gitty and/or the kids themselves.
Back to top

Chayalle




 
 
    
 

Post Fri, Jun 12 2015, 3:24 pm
marina wrote:
I know. He wanted to listen to the radio news after everyone was in bed and she had to give away a piece of her soul for that. He wanted her not to go through his credit cards receipts spying on where he ate what. She had to give away a piece of her soul for that. He wanted not to have more children than he could afford. She had to give away a piece of her soul for that.

It's a wonder, Chayalle, that she had any soul left after all that generosity.


Yes Marina. I am not Chassidish, and I don't live a life as sheltered as Skver...but if I had to live with a spouse who was so far removed from being on the same page religiously as I am, it would tear my soul apart.
Back to top

Chayalle




 
 
    
 

Post Fri, Jun 12 2015, 3:31 pm
a jewish woman wrote:
I know of a satmar family where the parents are divorced and the children refuse to have anything to do with the father. The married children didn't invite the father to their weddings or other simchas such as bris, kiddush, etc. They chose not to have anything with him without their mothers input. The father did not go otd, he is still religious and even wears a shtreimel on shabbat so sometimes these things happen even if no one goes otd.


And I know of a family where the father became satmar after he married and had kids, and the couple divorced. The father disowned the kids, he remarried and raised another family who were not allowed to know that their father had a previous life - all in the name of shidduchim, etc.. for the new family. To this day, he does not allow his acknowledged grandchildren to know that they have other cousins, other aunts and uncles, etc....and he introduces them, on rare occasions that he sees them, as distant relatives. They are all religious, Shomrei Shabbos, but not Chassidish. So this happens in the reverse too - if the children/grandchildren are not chassidish, they also get "divorced" in some Chassidish societies.
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Fri, Jun 12 2015, 4:48 pm
happybeingamom wrote:
I am not agreeing with her I am understanding what led her to her actions.

My point from reading the book Deen does not see how his actions and treatment of his wife led to this result.


I think the book shows him to be pretty reflective. He's not hesitant to share his faults, for example.
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Fri, Jun 12 2015, 4:50 pm
Chayalle wrote:
Yes Marina. I am not Chassidish, and I don't live a life as sheltered as Skver...but if I had to live with a spouse who was so far removed from being on the same page religiously as I am, it would tear my soul apart.


I understand you are trying to see her subjective perspective and that's very dan lekaf zchus of you.

But look at this objectively. If you heard of a couple divorcing because he got an iphone and that was so far removed from the wife's religious page, wouldn't you think: OMG WHAT IS SHE THINKING? Or would you just say "hey, he's very far removed from her religiously, so she's gotta do what she's gotta do?"
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Fri, Jun 12 2015, 4:56 pm
Quote:
The paragraph that you cherrypicked that quote from was about Deen writing about their zex life, not about what you wrote above. I agree with many of your points in other posts, but I would personally be devastated and humiliated to have my most private and vulnerable moments publicized for all to see. Wouldn't you?


The poster asked me how it was respectful to Gitty to write about their private moments. I said, who cares, imagine if your husband kidnapped your kids, how worried would you be about respecting him?

She could care less about respecting him. She caved in to her community and he was also devastated. He became unwell as a result of realizing his kids were lost to him forever.

Why on earth do you think she deserves any consideration? I would be upset to see my private moments publicized, but I can't imagine myself refusing to let my kids see their dad once a week for a few hours. Completely implausible.

Seriously, if your husband did that, kidnapped your kids and whatever, and you eventually got through the trauma and decided to speak publically about your ordeal and how you made it through, how worried would you be about your husband's privacy? On a scale of 1-10?

And as we've said numerous times before, the book contains nothing graphic. It's just some bittersweet personal memories.
Back to top

PinkFridge




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Jun 14 2015, 8:49 am
marina wrote:

And why not do a poll asking how many women here on imamother had awkward stilted interactions 6 months into their marriages? You might be surprised.


I was going to totally agree with you on this a few pages back when you first said this. Then I saw a post that mentioned something about it not being normal, maybe due to his dysfunctional background, and not having read the book or anything else yet I decided not to say anything. Did you notice the rebuttal there? Don't have time to track it down now.
Back to top

amother
Saddlebrown


 

Post Sun, Jun 14 2015, 8:55 am
marina wrote:
I understand you are trying to see her subjective perspective and that's very dan lekaf zchus of you.

But look at this objectively. If you heard of a couple divorcing because he got an iphone and that was so far removed from the wife's religious page, wouldn't you think: OMG WHAT IS SHE THINKING? Or would you just say "hey, he's very far removed from her religiously, so she's gotta do what she's gotta do?"


As per the book that is completely not what happened. She was trying to bend and and bend with him to make the marriage work as he became less and less observant. He was also the one who ultimately ended things. She seemed to want to make things work until the end. And then it's clear as well that she certainly didn't kidnap the kids. On their own accord they didn't want to see him due to the changes he made. He just seemed so shocked that his desire for freedom would have repercussions but it did.
Back to top

ora_43




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Jun 14 2015, 9:25 am
In my experience, every divorced parent whose children don't want to see them claims parental alienation, but it's only sometimes true.

I am not saying this as something personally against Deen. I don't know him or his ex. I have no idea what his ex said about him to their kids.

But I do think that while it's important to warn against parental alienation in general, it's wrong for those of us here who don't know either parent to assume it's all the ex-wife's fault in this specific case. Maybe it is. Or maybe it's the kids' own choice to not contact their father (at least one is already an adult). Or maybe they were encouraged by someone other than their mother not to contact their father. There are all kinds of possibilities.

The way to fight parental alienation is to spread awareness, and to do what we can to stop it in cases where we do know all the details. Not to take sides in every case we hear about. JMHO.
Quote:
Seriously, if your husband did that, kidnapped your kids and whatever, and you eventually got through the trauma and decided to speak publically about your ordeal and how you made it through, how worried would you be about your husband's privacy? On a scale of 1-10?

Even if it were 100% her fault, it still wouldn't be smart to publish personal information about her, or criticism of her. Nothing - but nothing - will keep alienated children alienated like a personal attack on the parent they're still close to. I'm not saying I don't completely understand why someone wouldn't care about their ex's feelings in that situation; just saying it's unlikely to have good results.
Back to top

saw50st8




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Jun 15 2015, 7:48 am
ora_43 wrote:
In my experience, every divorced parent whose children don't want to see them claims parental alienation, but it's only sometimes true.



There is definitely a HUGE problem with custody for parents who go OTD. Sure, there are often custody battles in regular divorces, but in religious/non-religious custody battles, it seems to be much worse. Footsteps is really starting to step up their game to help/support OTD people in custody battles because a parent shouldn't lose his child just because they are no longer religious.
Back to top

Chayalle




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Jun 15 2015, 10:00 am
ora_43 wrote:
In my experience, every divorced parent whose children don't want to see them claims parental alienation, but it's only sometimes true.


But I do think that while it's important to warn against parental alienation in general, it's wrong for those of us here who don't know either parent to assume it's all the ex-wife's fault in this specific case. Maybe it is. Or maybe it's the kids' own choice to not contact their father (at least one is already an adult). Or maybe they were encouraged by someone other than their mother not to contact their father. There are all kinds of possibilities.

The way to fight parental alienation is to spread awareness, and to do what we can to stop it in cases where we do know all the details. Not to take sides in every case we hear about. JMHO.
Quote:
Seriously, if your husband did that, kidnapped your kids and whatever, and you eventually got through the trauma and decided to speak publically about your ordeal and how you made it through, how worried would you be about your husband's privacy? On a scale of 1-10?

Even if it were 100% her fault, it still wouldn't be smart to publish personal information about her, or criticism of her. Nothing - but nothing - will keep alienated children alienated like a personal attack on the parent they're still close to. I'm not saying I don't completely understand why someone wouldn't care about their ex's feelings in that situation; just saying it's unlikely to have good results.


Excellent post Ora - ITA with every word.

A little OT - but I have a good childhood friend whose parents divorced when she was quite young. Several years ago she sat Shiva for her father, and she told me then something really, really incredible about him: She said he never, ever made her choose between himself and her Mom. He did his very best to get along under the circumstances - and this is not to say her Mom made it easy for him - but he did this out of love for her, and the strong feeling that it was in her best interest.

Incredible, powerful testimony of love from a father to his child. As an adult she realized this, and loved him all the more for it.

I have a close relative who is still suffering and paying the price as the child of divorced parents, some 40 years later. They have not stopped fighting, and they have not ever considered their children's feelings and pain. It blows the mind. It's why the mizbeach cries over a divorce - because the children are the Karbanos - even when they are grown. And not just the parents - the grandparents, and some relatives, have continued to be incredibly "helpful" in this regard, continuing the nastiness.

I think people should be aware that it IS possible for a child to have a healthy relationship with both parents after a divorce (my friend is proof of that. I remember her father reminding her to call her mother on his visitation days, to make sure her mother knew she arrived safely, etc....and he raised a mentch as a result) and it's in the best interest of the child. If people were more AWARE of the benefits they would stop the poisoning and do this, if they really love their kids.
Back to top

PinkFridge




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Jun 15 2015, 11:32 am
Chayalle, the thing is, no one will disagree with this. Most of us know kids of divorce who grew up healthily and because of the model of shalom they had, shalom bayis in their own marriages was not an issue.
I hesitate to say this but it's possible that this paradigm is more difficult to achieve in some milieus. I don't want to belabor the conversation though.
Back to top

Chayalle




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Jun 15 2015, 11:38 am
PinkFridge wrote:
Chayalle, the thing is, no one will disagree with this. Most of us know kids of divorce who grew up healthily and because of the model of shalom they had, shalom bayis in their own marriages was not an issue.
I hesitate to say this but it's possible that this paradigm is more difficult to achieve in some milieus. I don't want to belabor the conversation though.


It could be. Perhaps in some circles they may feel that it's impossible to have Shalom, like in situations like Deen describes - because for them it's a choice between compromising on religious values and the children being raised as harmoniously as possible by both parents.

In my non-professional opinion, balanced parenting always leads to a more emotionally healthy person. And as one of my favorite sem teachers used to say, a happy child makes the best possible Oved Hashem.
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Jun 15 2015, 1:51 pm
Chayalle wrote:
Excellent post Ora - ITA with every word.

A little OT - but I have a good childhood friend whose parents divorced when she was quite young. Several years ago she sat Shiva for her father, and she told me then something really, really incredible about him: She said he never, ever made her choose between himself and her Mom. He did his very best to get along under the circumstances - and this is not to say her Mom made it easy for him - but he did this out of love for her, and the strong feeling that it was in her best interest.

Incredible, powerful testimony of love from a father to his child. As an adult she realized this, and loved him all the more for it.

I have a close relative who is still suffering and paying the price as the child of divorced parents, some 40 years later. They have not stopped fighting, and they have not ever considered their children's feelings and pain. It blows the mind. It's why the mizbeach cries over a divorce - because the children are the Karbanos - even when they are grown. And not just the parents - the grandparents, and some relatives, have continued to be incredibly "helpful" in this regard, continuing the nastiness.

I think people should be aware that it IS possible for a child to have a healthy relationship with both parents after a divorce (my friend is proof of that. I remember her father reminding her to call her mother on his visitation days, to make sure her mother knew she arrived safely, etc....and he raised a mentch as a result) and it's in the best interest of the child. If people were more AWARE of the benefits they would stop the poisoning and do this, if they really love their kids.


If you think this is a good ideal, I'm not sure why you're supporting Dean's wife - who clearly forced her kids to choose.
Back to top

youngishbear




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Jun 15 2015, 1:57 pm
The only exception to the rule (of encouraging children to have both parents in their lives) is when one parent is a danger to the child's welfare.

The problem begins when spouses begin to interpret "danger" subjectively.

Everyone agrees that a child molestor should not have unsupervised access to his kids, but what if someone is actively encouraging his kids to drop religion? That's a spiritual danger - according to the religious parent. And of course from there it's only a hop, skip, and a jump to interpreting every action by the ex-spouse as anti-religious even if it isn't.
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Jun 15 2015, 1:58 pm
ora_43 wrote:
In my experience, every divorced parent whose children don't want to see them claims parental alienation, but it's only sometimes true.

I am not saying this as something personally against Deen. I don't know him or his ex. I have no idea what his ex said about him to their kids.

But I do think that while it's important to warn against parental alienation in general, it's wrong for those of us here who don't know either parent to assume it's all the ex-wife's fault in this specific case. Maybe it is. Or maybe it's the kids' own choice to not contact their father (at least one is already an adult). Or maybe they were encouraged by someone other than their mother not to contact their father. There are all kinds of possibilities.

The way to fight parental alienation is to spread awareness, and to do what we can to stop it in cases where we do know all the details. Not to take sides in every case we hear about. JMHO.
Quote:
Seriously, if your husband did that, kidnapped your kids and whatever, and you eventually got through the trauma and decided to speak publically about your ordeal and how you made it through, how worried would you be about your husband's privacy? On a scale of 1-10?

Even if it were 100% her fault, it still wouldn't be smart to publish personal information about her, or criticism of her. Nothing - but nothing - will keep alienated children alienated like a personal attack on the parent they're still close to. I'm not saying I don't completely understand why someone wouldn't care about their ex's feelings in that situation; just saying it's unlikely to have good results.


1. We take sides in so many other situations- why not here? We take sides when we read imamother posts about husband, neighbors, sisters, friends, moms. We take sides when we read about accused criminals or mean teachers. Why shouldn't I take sides here?

What if an amother wrote the same thing about her ex-husband? He alienated my kids, his community told me I'd never see them again because I stopped shaving my head, etc, now they want nothing to do with me because they think I'm a gentile, blah, blah, blah.... most people, I think, would "hug" her or give her encouragement or advice. People would generally not say" hey, we don't know the real story here, so we're not going to take sides."

2. Did you read the book? He doesn't attack her.
Back to top

ora_43




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jun 16 2015, 4:18 pm
marina wrote:
1. We take sides in so many other situations- why not here? We take sides when we read imamother posts about husband, neighbors, sisters, friends, moms. We take sides when we read about accused criminals or mean teachers. Why shouldn't I take sides here?

What if an amother wrote the same thing about her ex-husband? He alienated my kids, his community told me I'd never see them again because I stopped shaving my head, etc, now they want nothing to do with me because they think I'm a gentile, blah, blah, blah.... most people, I think, would "hug" her or give her encouragement or advice. People would generally not say" hey, we don't know the real story here, so we're not going to take sides."

This site is different in some pretty important ways.

For one thing, because threads would go nowhere if people didn't assume the OP is telling the truth. Nobody can get useful advice without people being willing to treat the scenario as fact.

But more importantly, because if I say on a thread here that Plum Amother's husband is a jerk who's mistreating their kids, nobody knows who I'm talking about. If OTOH I give the guy's full name, now we're already talking potential slander of an innocent person, if I'm wrong.

Regarding taking sides in real life - I didn't say "nobody take sides, ever." Obvious if you have, say, a murderer and a victim, everyone should go ahead and side with the victim. I said it's not a good idea to take sides in a dispute between divorcing parents when you've only heard one person's side.

I'll add that I'm not talking about helping one person; I think that's fine. Like - if someone says her ex is cruel and horrible, it's fine to treat her like someone who needs help escaping a cruel and horrible ex; it's just not fine going online and talking about what a horrible guy he is if you've never met him.

Quote:
2. Did you read the book? He doesn't attack her.

I was responding to your post on attacking an ex in general.
Back to top

zaq




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jun 16 2015, 5:04 pm
ora_43 posted : ''"Obvious if you have, say, a murderer and a victim, everyone should go ahead and side with the victim. "

Not necessarily. Did you ever see the film "the Burning Bed"? woman pours gasoline on her sleeping ex-husband (who is still living in her house because he refuses to leave despite the divorce decree)and sets it afire, burning the house down and killing him. Not only did the jury refuse to side with the murder victim, they refused to convict the murderer. Why? because the man had been viciously abusing her for years and she had finally had enough. The jury concluded that this did not qualify as murder. Fiction? Nope. A true story.
Back to top
Page 25 of 26   Previous  1  2  3 24  25  26  Next Recent Topics




Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> Interesting Discussions

Related Topics Replies Last Post
Do you return calls from numbers you don't know?
by amother
24 Thu, Mar 14 2024, 3:27 am View last post
How much do accountants charge for tax return?
by amother
32 Sat, Feb 17 2024, 8:21 pm View last post
[ Poll ] Do you return shopping carts?
by mom923
47 Wed, Feb 14 2024, 11:14 am View last post
Vouchers using tax return help
by m987
1 Thu, Jan 18 2024, 3:27 pm View last post
I can't figure out how to return to AliExpress
by amother
5 Fri, Jan 05 2024, 9:04 am View last post