Has Dobson ever said...

[ThreeKids]

I actually do agree with the idea that, if the relationship between husband and wife were suffering, the relationship with the kids would follow. I don't believe a suffering relationship with a child would have as assured a result in the marriage relationship.

However, I don't believe life forces us to choose so it's a moot point.

I find that, if a relationship is suffering and it's within my control whether it suffers or not, probably a lot of relationships are suffering because I need to work on me. The philosophy that says we'd have to choose one or the other is a sound bite, not wisdom born of experience.

[BarefootBetsy]

Originally Posted by peridot

AMy that was what I was thinking of, but I didn't realise my parents had heard it there. It HAD to have come from Dobson, becuase to my knowlege that is the only parenting guru my parents ever read.


My Dad gave us that speech almost verbatim one time when we were kids. I felt very sad when he told us that, but I squashed it, because of course my daddy had to be right, ykwim?

Now- I'd save my kids. And I'd expect DH to save our kids too. THey are small and less capable- I'm an adult for pete's sake. I am fully capable- and I can do some rescueing too.

Yep - my parents told me the same thing with the exact same scenario and the only "guru" they followed was Dobson. And I could've written the rest of your post too

[momyshaver]

I very vaguely recall that boat scenerio too...weirdness!

[deena]

yup. Joyanne is right that he gives that date night advice...

This is something I wrote about the subject previously...

I disagree with the common Christian belief that the "marriage relationship" is above all others in the family. For instance it is sometime said that new parents should go out on a date every week as a way to put their marriage first. This seems ridiculous to me, that you have to leave your newborn child to get alone time with your mate to maintain a healthy marriage. The truth is that a family is an ever morphing group of loved ones. Everyone is always a different age, no one is ever in the same phase of life for very long. Sometimes one of the family requires more energy than the others. Sometimes the marriage is the focus of the family and sometimes it is the sick child or the newborn baby or dying elder. As long as your love for each other remains healthy and strong I don't see one relationship taking precedent over the others in a family.

A similar misguided belief is to "present a united front" to the children. This is usually in reference to discipline. I disagree with this philosophy vehemently because it's important to step in when a spouse over-reacts. Lets face it, we all lose our temper and over-react sometimes. And in the case of a person who is borderline- or fully abusive, it's, obviously, important for the spouse to stand up to that. The "united front" message cab be easily manipulated by the harsher parent to force the other to back down. Naturally you don't want to disagree in front of the children but it is going to happen. And if something is unfair, I won't wait to bring it up. We're a family. We'll talk it through right then and there.

[CelticJourney]

Not sure about Dobson, but I know I heard Rainey say this on FOTF one day (my daughters can vouch for it, I nearly hit the roof - which was easy because we were in the car - and went on for 5 minutes about how wrong he was)

[kwisie]

Originally Posted by deena

yup. Joyanne is right that he gives that date night advice...

This is something I wrote about the subject previously...

I disagree with the common Christian belief that the "marriage relationship" is above all others in the family. For instance it is sometime said that new parents should go out on a date every week as a way to put their marriage first. This seems ridiculous to me, that you have to leave your newborn child to get alone time with your mate to maintain a healthy marriage. The truth is that a family is an ever morphing group of loved ones. Everyone is always a different age, no one is ever in the same phase of life for very long. Sometimes one of the family requires more energy than the others. Sometimes the marriage is the focus of the family and sometimes it is the sick child or the newborn baby or dying elder. As long as your love for each other remains healthy and strong I don't see one relationship taking precedent over the others in a family.

A similar misguided belief is to "present a united front" to the children. This is usually in reference to discipline. I disagree with this philosophy vehemently because it's important to step in when a spouse over-reacts. Lets face it, we all lose our temper and over-react sometimes. And in the case of a person who is borderline- or fully abusive, it's, obviously, important for the spouse to stand up to that. The "united front" message cab be easily manipulated by the harsher parent to force the other to back down. Naturally you don't want to disagree in front of the children but it is going to happen. And if something is unfair, I won't wait to bring it up. We're a family. We'll talk it through right then and there.

Ooooh, the "united front" brings up very big feelings in me. There were times that my mom needed to stand up to my dad in front of us, not just later behind closed doors. I still feel the hurt of that, years later.

[MomtoJGJ]

Wow.. I've never heard that about saving the wife instead of the child. I would be furious and it would completely wreck our marriage completely if DH chose me over the kids (when safety/life/death is concerned) and I think he would feel the same way.

Now, I do think that the focus should not be primarily on the kids in a family. There should be a nice mix of focus. Because seriously... and I know this has to have been said by SOME parenting guru at some point... I'm going to be with DH for the rest of my life, the kids are going to be leaving me in about 16 years from now or less (depending on which one it is) and while they'll still hopefully love me and visit and call, etc. They will have their own life! And I'll have MY own life with DH. So I can't just let me marriage take a back seat until the kids are gone... I have to actually keep up the friendship/marriage DURING that time.

[hey mommy]

The "united front" thing is affecting my marriage.. DH thinks I'm taking C's side if I don't agree with him.

[Emerald Orchid]

Haven't read replies, but all I can remember from my Dobson using parents is co-sleeping being a big no-no because the bedroom is only for the couple. My mom did cosleep with me for two months though because I was such a HN baby.

[deena]

Originally Posted by hey mommy

The "united front" thing is affecting my marriage.. DH thinks I'm taking C's side if I don't agree with him.

(((hugs)))

[Aubieirish]

This thread is very interesting to me for several reasons. Mainly because I can remember hearing this very thing growing up. My biological donor (this is what I refer to my father due to the fact he was not a Dad, nor a Father in any sense of the word) told me this several times. He was married to step-mother number 4 at the time and he told me in a very hateful and forceful way that if I ever got in the way of his relationship with her (step-mom) then I would be out of the picture so fast I wouldn't know what hit me. At the time we were attending a very traditional church and I could see how the culture would influence him to say that, and of course, he was a mean man.

I would be curious to find out if Dobson has said this or alludes to it.

~Heather~

[krysmh]

Wow. My parents were big Dobson fans. I don't think I was ever told the boat scenario, but I have vivid memories growing up of my dad doing and saying things that made it very clear my mom was more important than I was. He was a good dad. I was loved. But... this attitude and belief caused huge issues in me. And was, I believe, the start of a bad relationship with my mom. (We're good now, but not when I was living in their home.)

I'm still processing these issues now, at 30.

I'm trying to make my husband understand how unbalanced this point of view is. Looking forward to the blog post.

[Wonder Woman]

yeah, I grew up hearing that children were interchangeable and could be easily be replaced (as if we were spare Lego parts or something!) but that the husband/wife relationship was the most important and could never be replaced I don't think my parents read Dobson until I was older, but that attitude has been prevalent in certain Christian circles for a long time

(And no, the opposite of that is not "children first, spouse a distant runner-up." It *is* possible to have a balanced family, where the center is God, and the needs of individuals within the family will each be more dominant at certain life stages )

[Aubieirish]

I always find it interesting as well because if we lived by this rule our 6 month old would be put so far on the back burner with her needs that she would be a sad and broken baby and later child as would our older two children. I just can't imagine doing that to them.

[rjy9343]

I have heard that the marital relationship is more important that than the children and never liked that, but have also heard that if my marriage suffers then my children will suffer because the marital relationship is the cornerstone of the family unit. That sort of makes sense as does the idea that DH and I will (presumably) be together long after the children leave so we should take time to nurture our relationship, but to do so to the point that we would not save our kids is just sick and twisted. In fact, if DH chose me over our daughter, I would divorce him because we have an ethical, moral and legal obligation to do the very best we can by our kids, and I could not live with someone that would abandon the weak while ignoring that obligation.