# What do divorced people know about commitment that others don't?



## ValAustin (Feb 28, 2015)

Hi everyone. This is my first post here and I'm hoping you can give me perspective on something that has been troubling to me. While I've had long-term, serious relationships, I've never married. I actually rejected a marriage proposal b/c I didn't believe I was mature enough for marriage and I didn't think marriage was right for that relationship. I was recently told, by someone who has been married and divorced 3x, and is currently single, that I don't know anything about commitment. 

How can someone who has broken a commitment three times claim superiority on this topic? I don't think ANYONE is superior - I believe that the decisions to marry those 3 people were not made lightly, nor the decisions to end those marriages. He believes all of those marriages were mistakes - it isn't like he remained committed and his wives left him. He was a willing participant in all three divorces. 

I'm in my early 40s and my relationships have not been casual flings. I lived with one person for years and I know that isn't the same thing as marriage, but I was traumatized when that relationship ended. I had to understand enough about commitment to make a decision NOT to marry the wrong person and to have enough self-awareness to realize I wasn't ready for marriage. I didn't enter a holy sacrament in my relationships but I was committed during the time I was with those people, just like my friend was committed to his wives during the time he was married to them AND he felt enough of a sense of commitment to propose marriage in the first place. In the end, though, those proposals turned out to be misplaced - he was unable to remain committed. (I am not criticizing that at all - I don't think his relationship history makes him any more flawed than me or anyone else, it is just the path he has taken. He's a wonderful person and I hate that he's had so much pain in his past.) 

Just b/c he FELT "til death do us part" committed to people in his past and I have not doesn't make him an expert in commitment and it doesn't make me clueless. We've had different experiences with commitment, that's all. I was really hurt by his comments b/c I take some pride in the fact that I didn't just get married when everyone thought I should b/c that's what society expects etc. I am a deeply spiritual person and I take the sacrament of marriage very seriously and I know it isn't just about who you pick, it is primarily about my own character and my own capacity and I knew my limits. I come from a family in which there were no marriage role models frankly, so I think the road to maturing in this area is a bit longer for me. Maybe if more people had that kind of self-awareness, there would be fewer divorces. 

I recently read an article about a couple who has been married for 82 years. They are both over 100 years old. I think THEY are in a position to lecture the rest of us about commitment and I would gladly listen.

Anyway, I just want to put this out there and get some perspective. I do not mean any offense to ANYONE, regardless of your relationship history. I'm just very troubled by his comments and I feel very insulted about my own history.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

Opinions don't have to have any relationship to rationality. I get to hear prisoners giving each other legal advise all the time. Social workers and teachers who have no kids aren't shy about telling you how you should raise your's. Wealthy politicians and celebrities live in mansions and fly private jets but chastise working folks for their carbon footprint.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

It takes TWO committed people to make a marriage work. Many divorces occur because only ONE person was committed to doing what the marriage required to succeed.


----------



## ValAustin (Feb 28, 2015)

Married but Happy said:


> It takes TWO committed people to make a marriage work. Many divorces occur because only ONE person was committed to doing what the marriage required to succeed.


That's true but the devil is in the details. Who decides what the relationship needs for success? Let's say a wife thinks more emotional intimacy is required and her husband isn't able or willing to participate in that, is the husband committed? Maybe he thinks spending more time on fun activities is needed but he doesn't share that with his wife - is he really committed to doing what the marriage requires if he isn't doing his part in the communication? I think there are cases where one person truly is committed and the other person isn't - and it takes just one person to end a marriage. However, I believe the majority of divorces are about unresolved conflicts and BOTH people being unwilling or unable to submit to the relationship.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

Everybody has limits. Some seem to have none but everyone has some limit to the abuse or unhappiness they will bear. Even if you believe your spouse is a saint and will just put up with whatever from you, there is some point where the Pope and Mother Mary would both leave you.


----------



## woundedwarrior (Dec 9, 2011)

ValAustin said:


> That's true but the devil is in the details. Who decides what the relationship needs for success? Let's say a wife thinks more emotional intimacy is required and her husband isn't able or willing to participate in that, is the husband committed? Maybe he thinks spending more time on fun activities is needed but he doesn't share that with his wife - is he really committed to doing what the marriage requires if he isn't doing his part in the communication? I think there are cases where one person truly is committed and the other person isn't - and it takes just one person to end a marriage. However, I believe the majority of divorces are about unresolved conflicts and BOTH people being unwilling or unable to submit to the relationship.


I'm probably in the minority when it comes to what it means to be committed, but to me, even though it takes two to have a healthy marriage, if your partner breaks their end, it doesn't free you up to break yours? This may be a "martyr" type attitude, but it's one I've always held.
My first marriage ended in divorce, after my wife cheated, but she still was the filer and ender, although she did me a huge favor. I do think the rules change if you have children, because if the parents are miserable, then so will the kids be and that isn't fair to them.
Marriage has always been a "roll of the dice" and you play the hand that was dealt to you the best you can.


----------



## ValAustin (Feb 28, 2015)

woundedwarrior said:


> I'm probably in the minority when it comes to what it means to be committed, but to me, even though it takes two to have a healthy marriage, if your partner breaks their end, it doesn't free you up to break yours? This may be a "martyr" type attitude, but it's one I've always held.
> My first marriage ended in divorce, after my wife cheated, but she still was the filer and ender, although she did me a huge favor. I do think the rules change if you have children, because if the parents are miserable, then so will the kids be and that isn't fair to them.
> Marriage has always been a "roll of the dice" and you play the hand that was dealt to you the best you can.


So what do you understand about commitment that you didn't before you married?


----------



## ValAustin (Feb 28, 2015)

unbelievable said:


> Everybody has limits. Some seem to have none but everyone has some limit to the abuse or unhappiness they will bear. Even if you believe your spouse is a saint and will just put up with whatever from you, there is some point where the Pope and Mother Mary would both leave you.


I agree. The success and quality of a relationship is not just due to your willingness to commit to the relationship and the other person, but your ability to be someone to whom the other person can commit.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

Who decides or how: Communication, negotiation, compromise, and inevitably some things you'll have to accept that there is no agreement (if not a deal breaker issue, you just live with those).


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

ValAustin said:


> I agree. The success and quality of a relationship is not just due to your willingness to commit to the relationship and the other person, but your ability to be someone to whom the other person can commit.


Absolutely! Life with someone else requires modifications, sacrifice, negotiation, and compromise....from both parties. Nobody gets to have it their way all the time and remain in a marriage. You can be "boss" or you can be married. You can be "right" or you can be married. The limb that won't bend gets broken. Folks who have to have things their way would be better off living alone. Alone, they can be master of all they survey.


----------



## woundedwarrior (Dec 9, 2011)

ValAustin said:


> So what do you understand about commitment that you didn't before you married?


It doesn't matter how committed you are to a marriage, if your spouse doesn't share the same work ethic, then it will probably fail. A lot of steadfast committed people in dead marriages. I am one of those naïve people who believe in "for better or for worse" in the wedding vows.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Do you know the details of your friend's 3 marriages and divorces? It is possible that the issues were with his 3 wives not committing. His issues might be that he just does not know how to pick a woman who will commit.

There is a difference in the level of commitment that occurs in marriage vs any other type of relationship. For example with marriage, both the man and the women is responsible for the other financially. That includes any debt their spouse gets into, any legal issue their spouse has. Many people do not realize that the level of commitment goes up quite a bit because you are legally bound to each other. 

If I am dating a guy and he gets in legal trouble, I can dump him.

If I am married to a guy who gets in legal trouble, I can be bound legally for any fines, bonds, etc he has to pay. If he cannot work, I still have to pay his bills. Further I can lose my job because it matters in the work I do.


With medical issues. If your spouse ends up with a huge medical bill you have to pay it. If your spouse dies from the medical issue, you still have to pay that bill.

If this happens with your girl friend, you have no legal obligation to pay her bills or do anything else.

This is only one example of who the commitment is different.


----------



## ValAustin (Feb 28, 2015)

EleGirl said:


> Do you know the details of your friend's 3 marriages and divorces? It is possible that the issues were with his 3 wives not committing. His issues might be that he just does not know how to pick a woman who will commit.
> 
> There is a difference in the level of commitment that occurs in marriage vs any other type of relationship. For example with marriage, both the man and the women is responsible for the other financially. That includes any debt their spouse gets into, any legal issue their spouse has. Many people do not realize that the level of commitment goes up quite a bit because you are legally bound to each other.
> 
> ...


Thanks EleGirl. I get that marriage includes legal obligations, even though I've never been married. What I don't understand is how someone who has been married and divorced 3x knows more about commitment than someone who has had relationships that have lasted as long as those marriages, but never been married? If you marry and divorce, you are just as single as someone who just broke up with a long-term partner. If you marry and divorce, your relationship had a beginning and an end - frankly, a shelf life - just like a past relationship that didn't involve a wedding. 

I get that marrying someone is a holy sacrament and the intention is to be together for a lifetime, so you have further to fall when it ends. But the fact that it ends means a commitment was NOT kept anymore than the commitment involved in a failed relationship among unmarried partners. 

Regarding my friend - he had a need to be "white knight" and tended to pick unstable women who used him for his stability and gentleness. They took advantage of that and two of them cheated on him. While he's a very kind man and one with integrity, he is a poor communicator, a conflict-avoider, and can be very cold. Emotional intimacy is an issue for him and I don't know if that is a result of his broken marriages, or if it was a contributing factor. Either way, I still don't see how multiple divorces - or any marriage that ends in divorce - means someone has a better understanding of commitment than someone who DIDN'T enter into a wrong union.


----------



## CincyBluesFan (Feb 27, 2015)

Well, I always say I've learned more from my failures in life than from my successes. In your failures is where you find your character. Maybe people that have failed marriages have learned something about themselves, what they need in a mate, or marriage itself that those of us with long term happy marriages don't know.


----------



## chillymorn (Aug 11, 2010)

how much it cost to uncouple!


----------



## ValAustin (Feb 28, 2015)

CincyBluesFan said:


> Well, I always say I've learned more from my failures in life than from my successes. In your failures is where you find your character. Maybe people that have failed marriages have learned something about themselves, what they need in a mate, or marriage itself that those of us with long term happy marriages don't know.


I think this is so true! I would add that I've learned from my failed relationships, as well, even though they weren't marriages. In fact, I think that is why having relationships before marriage can be beneficial!


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

ValAustin said:


> Thanks EleGirl. I get that marriage includes legal obligations, even though I've never been married. What I don't understand is how someone who has been married and divorced 3x knows more about commitment than someone who has had relationships that have lasted as long as those marriages, but never been married? If you marry and divorce, you are just as single as someone who just broke up with a long-term partner. If you marry and divorce, your relationship had a beginning and an end - frankly, a shelf life - just like a past relationship that didn't involve a wedding.


You missed my point entirely. Martial commitment is different than commitment to a long-term relationship while single. You down play the legal part of marriage; that with marriage the couple becomes one in many things legally. Therefore, when one marries they are making the commitment to take on many financial and legal obligations for their spouse. Both men and women are legally bond this way. There is no different in the legal bound based on gender.

You tried to brush it aside as though it’s not significant. But it is the entire point of marriage…that legal entity. (I’m only addressing secular marriage here.)

I’ve had long term relationships while single. I’ve been married more than once and divorced more than once. I the commitment in marriage is greater.

Being legally responsible financially and in other ways for another person is HUGE.

In my first marriage my husband became very ill. We had huge medical bills. He was not able to work so I had to pay them. I had to drop out of college to pay them. It was too much and I had to file for bankruptcy. So my financial future was harmed by him becoming sick. When he needed medical decisions to be made, I was committed and thus had to make those decisions. It’s hugely different to have made the commitment to care for a person in that manner.

As a single person in a relationship, you have no legal rights to make medical decisions unless there is a medical power of attorney and in many cases those get thrown out anyway. As a single person, you have not made the legal commitment to take care of your SO when they are ill, you are not burdened with making life-death decisions, etc. 

The fact that you bush off the specific examples I gave as not really example of additional commitment (e.g. financially & medical), means that you do not understand the depth of the commitment made when a couple marries. 

Ask any person who is married and has had to work longer hours to pay off their spouse’s debt. Ask person going through a divorce who has to pay their ex some kind a support if their marriage as a greater commitment than single and living together.

Comparing being single with being married is like comparing a sole proprietorship with a corporation. Both are legal entities. But with a sole proprietorship you are not responsible for the actions, finances and life of another person.



ValAustin said:


> I get that marrying someone is a holy sacrament and the intention is to be together for a lifetime, so you have further to fall when it ends. But the fact that it ends means a commitment was NOT kept anymore than the commitment involved in a failed relationship among unmarried partners.


Marriage is not always a holy sacrament. Everyone who gets married in the USA has a secular marriage. They can additionally add to it by having a marriage in a Church and have their marriage blessed. But it’s still a valid secular marriage.

What matters is the commitment that a person binds themselves to while married. 

My second husband was emotionally/physically abusive. He was also a serial cheater. I was completely committed to him while married to him. I supported him and our child while he was in medical school and residency. He chose not to be committed to me. The commitment I had to him while married to him was much greater in the 11 years of our marriage was many times greater than the commitment I had in the 5 years we lived together before marriage. This 



ValAustin said:


> Regarding my friend - he had a need to be "white knight" and tended to pick unstable women who used him for his stability and gentleness. They took advantage of that and two of them cheated on him. While he's a very kind man and one with integrity, he is a poor communicator, a conflict-avoider, and can be very cold. Emotional intimacy is an issue for him and I don't know if that is a result of his broken marriages, or if it was a contributing factor. Either way, I still don't see how multiple divorces - or any marriage that ends in divorce - means someone has a better understanding of commitment than someone who DIDN'T enter into a wrong union.


Probably because you have never been there. I’ve done both. The commitment in marriage is much greater. 

Most married people will work harder to fix thinks in their marriage. Most will stay far too long when a marriage goes bad because they are so committed to their marriage. Your friend probably tired hard (for him) to make his marriages work. His wives apparently were not very committed.


----------



## meson (May 19, 2011)

Marital commitment has several stages. First one makes a decision to commit. Second one actually commits. Third one resolves to continue the commitment in the face of adversity if there is adversity.

Someone who has married and divorced has gone through at least two of these stages and maybe even the third for some period of time. 

Someone who becomes engaged to be married has experienced the first stage. This stage involves deciding to live with and love someone who you thinks loves you and wants to live with you. Questions about the relationship may have come up and there may have been a large element of the fear of the unknown to overcome to become engaged. This fear may not be trivial. My nieces fiancée is one that believes he should be a provider. He is a good provider but he wasn't sure he could adequately provide for a wife. He had to work and build up a business to convince himself that he was a good provider. 

The second stage of commitment is when reality sets in. It is the actual time to make the commitment. This is when quite a few people get cold feet and rush to resolve any final uncertainties they may have. Some bail at this point because of the fear of the unknown. For some this is really hard.

The third stage may be easy if there are no adversities in the marriage. Or it may extremely difficult. As Elegirl said many at this point continue their commitment too long especially those in an abusive relationship. Others may give up too quickly or crave new people or experiences and just leave.

Someone who has married and divorced has gone through at least two of these stages and maybe even the third for some period of time. 

Someone who has a great marriage and who never had any doubts can go through all three and consider it as natural and without effort. But yet they don't know the full meaning of the third stage with adversity. Someone who is divorced may know quite a bit about this and more than someone in a great marriage.

Someone who has not become engaged or married has not made any of the decisions that require trusting to fate and moving forward. They don't realize that there is an element of uncertainty and for some even fear to overcome.

ValAustin, this does not diminish the decision you made. But rather I suspect your friend is saying until you take the plunge you don't know what it's like. I don't fully agree with that view because you have made progress towards the first stage and it is probably very prudent decision where you experienced many of the emotions. I think far too many people jump blindly and you have chosen not to do that which will probably result in you having a better marriage when you do actually commit.


----------

