"The best thing a man can do for his kids is to love their mother"

[ereks mom]

If the person takes that the word to mean "romantic love", then yes, I think that saying is bunk.

 

But if the word love is based on 1 Corinthinians 13, then that changes the whole meaning of that sentence.

 

"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self- seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always hopes, always perseveres."

 

I think the best thing a man can do for his kids is to love the Lord, then his wife. ;)

 

-Melissa

 

:iagree: If a man truly loves the Lord, everything else will fall into place.

[tntgoodwin]

If the person takes that the word to mean "romantic love", then yes, I think that saying is bunk.

 

But if the word love is based on 1 Corinthinians 13, then that changes the whole meaning of that sentence.

 

"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self- seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always hopes, always perseveres."

 

I think the best thing a man can do for his kids is to love the Lord, then his wife. ;)

 

-Melissa

 

:iagree::iagree:

[Audrey]

Sometimes the kids have to come first. We knew that going into parenthood.

 

Dawn

 

 

:iagree:

IMO, if you chose to have a kid or multiple kids, you have to grow up and realize that the kids coming first is just one chapter of a life long novel. There are lots of chapters where they don't. Just because you aren't in one of those chapters at the moment, doesn't mean you won't be at some point in the future. If both partners can "get" that, it makes it a lot easier to get through the tougher times when your own needs/wants/goals have to get shoved to the back burner.

[Joanne]

I do put my marriage first.

 

Putting my marriage first ensures my kids have two parents united in care of them for the rest of our lives. I hear rumor of divorces where the parents continue to to do that, but I've never ever seen it IRL. (obviously if you are one of them, then this doesn't apply to you.:) )

 

Obviously, sometimes we have to sideline things for other issues that come up.

 

Mostly I figure I'd like to still have a good marriage after the kids are all gone. God willing, I will still need to sleep next to this man for another 30+ years after the last has moved out. I don't want to be one of those couples that spends their lives focused on the kids and then once the kids are gone end up divorced or strangers to each other.

 

Again, to me, it's a false dichotomy. It's not either "focus on the kids to the detriment of your marriage" or "focus on the marriage and neglect the kids' developmental realities."

 

I don't put EITHER first. I address the most pressing needs, in order of who can least attend to them.

[Murphy101]

Again, to me, it's a false dichotomy. It's not either "focus on the kids to the detriment of your marriage" or "focus on the marriage and neglect the kids' developmental realities."

 

I don't put EITHER first. I address the most pressing needs, in order of who can least attend to them.

 

 

I don't think it is a false dichotomy. And I didn't say focus on kids to detriment of marriage or focus on marriage to point of neglecting kids. Don't put words in my mouth.

 

I try to do more than address the most pressing needs as they erupt. That would put me forever in a situation of immediate in the moment mode. I can easily see all those immediate moments adding up to suddenly looking across the table at a stranger in a decade. Or resulting in not noticing all the things one should have until a crisis erupts. It also means only the squeaky wheel gets the grease. A quiet patient husband gets the shaft in that deal. So do kids with that personality. I have always wondered if that is what really happened when a couple says they "just grew apart".

 

I don't know. To me this negativity of putting marriage first sounds like the theory of spoiling babies. I always run to pick up my babies the second I hear them squirming. I never wait for them to cry. I've had people accuse me of creating spoiled babies. They say I should wait until they cry to pick them up. Or better yet, let them cry and pick them up after they calm themselves down. My response? Why would I ever teach them to cry for my attention? Why would I ever teach them no one cares about their tears?

 

I guess I have the same attidude about my marriage and older kids. Why would I want to go from pressing need to pressing need? Why do they have to squeak or be in crisis to come to the top of my priority list? That sounds tremendously stressful to me.

 

So instead I try to be united with dh as much as possible so together we see to the needs of the kids. If we aren't united, both of us are going to struggle far more in taking care of the kids. Making each other a priority is exactly what makes it so much easier to take care of the kids in many ways.

 

But then again, I have been accused of spoiling my dh and I openly admit my dh spoils me. Which makes us both sorta :confused: because why wouldn't a couple want to spoil each other?

[Impish]

I agree w/the statement.

Wolf showing that he loves me, is committed to our marriage makes a positive impact on our kids. There is a security that comes from growing up w/parents that have a healthy marriage.

 

Nowhere is it stated to love the spouse to the *exclusion* of the kids.

[I.Dup.]

Nowhere is it stated to love the spouse to the *exclusion* of the kids.

 

Well, it usually goes along with this quote that one is to make the marriage the "First priority" and that's the part that confuses me. Especially with young kids. Once our kids are all teenagers, sure we can go out more, talk in peace whenever we choose, etc.

[Plucky]

Well, it usually goes along with this quote that one is to make the marriage the "First priority" and that's the part that confuses me. Especially with young kids. Once our kids are all teenagers, sure we can go out more, talk in peace whenever we choose, etc.

 

Hmmm, although the marriage is very important. I think having kids changes the couple in that they are a family and frankly families are different than just a couple. I know that dh & I have had to sacrifice for our kids, and the kids have had to sacrifice for each other at different times. That is what a family does they try to see that everyone's needs are met - doesn't always work out the way we think it will or even always be successful, but the point is that we are all a team pulling for each other and wanting the best for each other.

[Impish]

Well, it usually goes along with this quote that one is to make the marriage the "First priority" and that's the part that confuses me. Especially with young kids. Once our kids are all teenagers, sure we can go out more, talk in peace whenever we choose, etc.

Well, I feel we do put our marriage first.

 

Let me explain, though.

 

Yes, esp when children are young, they have *needs* that must be met. Absolutely.

 

However, after that, I have no problem having them wait a bit in terms of 'wants' if need be.

 

For example: Wolf and I spend some time alone when he gets home from work. He comes in, greets everyone, and once the kids are back to whatever they were doing before Daddy comes home, he and I disappear into our room to talk. It's only 10, sometimes 15 mins, but we need that. The kids have been taught that unless it's urgent, not to interrupt.

 

So, they may *want* us during that time, but unless they *need* us, they wait.

 

We go out by ourselves. It may only be grocery shopping, but it gives us time alone. Our bedroom is off limits 90% of the time. We ensure that we carve out time and space that is for us, as husband and wife, rather than being Mom and Dad all the time. To us, it's important that we have that time.

 

I don't want to be so wrapped up in being parents that when the kids are grown and gone, we don't recognize each other as husband and wife anymore. And that's easily done when you're raising a family, imo.

 

I find that deliberately making time alone together a priority ensures that it happens, rather than leaving it as something we'll get to when we find a minute.

[Scarlett]

I don't think it is a false dichotomy. And I didn't say focus on kids to detriment of marriage or focus on marriage to point of neglecting kids. Don't put words in my mouth.

 

I try to do more than address the most pressing needs as they erupt. That would put me forever in a situation of immediate in the moment mode. I can easily see all those immediate moments adding up to suddenly looking across the table at a stranger in a decade. Or resulting in not noticing all the things one should have until a crisis erupts. It also means only the squeaky wheel gets the grease. A quiet patient husband gets the shaft in that deal. So do kids with that personality. I have always wondered if that is what really happened when a couple says they "just grew apart".

 

I don't know. To me this negativity of putting marriage first sounds like the theory of spoiling babies. I always run to pick up my babies the second I hear them squirming. I never wait for them to cry. I've had people accuse me of creating spoiled babies. They say I should wait until they cry to pick them up. Or better yet, let them cry and pick them up after they calm themselves down. My response? Why would I ever teach them to cry for my attention? Why would I ever teach them no one cares about their tears?

 

I guess I have the same attidude about my marriage and older kids. Why would I want to go from pressing need to pressing need? Why do they have to squeak or be in crisis to come to the top of my priority list? That sounds tremendously stressful to me.

 

So instead I try to be united with dh as much as possible so together we see to the needs of the kids. If we aren't united, both of us are going to struggle far more in taking care of the kids. Making each other a priority is exactly what makes it so much easier to take care of the kids in many ways.

 

But then again, I have been accused of spoiling my dh and I openly admit my dh spoils me. Which makes us both sorta :confused: because why wouldn't a couple want to spoil each other?

 

Martha, you said this all so well.

 

I feel like some people are not really understanding what it means to 'put the marriage first.' It does not mean you ignore your children whether they are infants or teens.

 

One analogy I can think of is a house. Think of the marriage as the foundation. You can pretty up the inside all you want....but if the foundation isn't strong, the insides that you gave so much attention to will eventually suffer.

 

I like Imps examples of how she and her dh stay in touch. It really doesn't take that much and probably most of the people confused by the concept are actually doing it too....But I've seen husbands ignored for years except on pay day (and the reverse can be true of course....husbands ignoring wives except when they need them for something).

 

Every relationship takes work to maintain. In a family that begins with the marital relationship.

[Plucky]

I actually like that quote, but maybe I have a different take on it. So many of my family members including my parents divorced in the 70s and most men including my uncles and others seemed to not be very connected to their kids. They would play daddy to whoever they were living with or married to at the time and ignore their own kids including no child support. I know that is a very sexist things to post.

 

I think men today are more connected with their kids but I do think that some may revert back to parenting whatever child is in the home because it is easier and there is a payoff (affection/sex with girlfriend/wife).

 

Okay, you can skewer me now. LOL

[Impish]

Yup, Scarlett...

 

I think sometimes folks get into an 'all or nothing' mindset, that they can't do one w/out it being at the expense of another.

 

Putting our marriage first means that it doesn't wait for a better time, we make a point to carve out that time and space.

[Lady Florida.]

I think the best thing a man can do for his children is to show them that THEY are worthy of love. Modeling respect for their mother is definitely important, but a child who grows up believe that s/he is worthy of love and respect will carry over that lesson into more areas of life than marriage, IMO.

 

:iagree:

 

 

I don't agree with the idea that the marriage is the first priority. There are no constant first priorities in relationships. We need to have justice in our relations with other people - each relation gets its due according to its own nature and current needs. Sometimes our spouses are the priority, sometimes the kids, sometimes our selves. Sometimes it might be a parent who is ill, or even a friend who needs our help while we leave the kiddos home with dad.

 

All of these good relationships are interdependent - if some begin to fail, others will suffer as well. When one demands more for a time, others must wait. It is a complicated balancing act and probably one which can never be accomplished perfectly.

 

:iagree:I think this is true. A family is a unit, and one aspect of the family doesn't always get to be the priority. There are seasons in a marriage, and a strong marriage is able to come through each season intact.

 

However, we have been told MANY times throughout our marriage that we just NEEDED to:

 

1. Go to marriage retreats

2. Go on regular date nights and get a babysitter

3. Go away for the weekend without our kids.

4. Make the kids stay in their own rooms, even as babies

 

 

Sometimes the kids have to come first. We knew that going into parenthood.

Dawn

 

The first part always bugged me because we never felt the need for any of those things. As to the bolded, :iagree:

 

Absolutely this.

 

Don't have babies if you can't grasp the fact that for a very long time, they will dominate the landscape of the home. If you can't put them ahead of yourself and your hubby, they end up having emotional problems.

 

The dynamic of marriage and familial relationships is too complicated to be reduced to such a simple statement.

 

All healthy relationships are a balancing act. The above statement does not reflect that delicate teeter-totter. You can't totally neglect your relationship with spouse, but don't have kids if your marriage isn't strong enough to withstand the 18 years of intensive parenting in which the kids will come first more often than not. Most of the time, the kids need to come first in order to receive the training and emotional investment necessary to be well-adjusted adults later.

 

As far as I'm concerned, the greatest gifts a man can give his children are his unconditional love for them and time. Chances are if he's prioritizing his children, he isn't out there "unloving" his wife because he doesn't want to hurt his kids.

 

Faith

 

Well said.

 

Mostly I figure I'd like to still have a good marriage after the kids are all gone. God willing, I will still need to sleep next to this man for another 30+ years after the last has moved out. I don't want to be one of those couples that spends their lives focused on the kids and then once the kids are gone end up divorced or strangers to each other.

 

I used to think BIL and his wife would be one of those couples. When I first met dh, BIL's kids were 14, 12, and 9. Everything they did revolved around those kids and their activities, school, friends, etc. They rarely did anything as just a couple. I thought BIL and SIL would find themselves alone one day with nothing in common. However, all 3 kids are grown with spouses, children, and careers, and guess what? BIL and SIL still have a strong marriage. They enjoy going out with friends, working on projects around the house, and have fallen into a comfortable empty nest routine. In addition, they have a wonderful, close relationship with their adult children.

[Soror]

Yup, Scarlett...

 

I think sometimes folks get into an 'all or nothing' mindset, that they can't do one w/out it being at the expense of another.

 

Putting our marriage first means that it doesn't wait for a better time, we make a point to carve out that time and space.

 

I think it is true in the reverse as well, for those that are having difficulty with the saying. It doesn't mean that they or "all or nothing" either, we can as a couple choose to focus on the children first without it being at the expense of the marriage.

 

Mostly I think it is just semantics. Those on the side of marriage first are thinking of those parents that just ignore their marriage while raising kids and by the time they are grown there is nothing left. While the other side sees those marriages where children are often ignored for the sake of what the parents want and want to avoid that.

 

I think in reality that we look more similar than we think.

[LucyStoner]

I think the statement is a reaction to spouses or couples who use the kids as an excuse to put nothing into their marriage. Especially when one pours themselves into parenting and the other wants to be a couple in addition to be a parent and is ignored or scorned. It is really not surprising to me that so many marriages end after children are born.

 

I agree that it is not as simple as any one statement. That said, I do see a lot of people 100% ignoring their marriage for the sake of the kids. I don't think that serves anyone well in the long run.

 

I think that parenting while married is like triage- what needs the most attention in the moment. Do I ignore a toddler with an ear infection to spend time with my husband? Of course not. But we both make sure that somewhere in the mess of life, we get our time.

[Murphy101]

Well, it usually goes along with this quote that one is to make the marriage the "First priority" and that's the part that confuses me. Especially with young kids. Once our kids are all teenagers, sure we can go out more, talk in peace whenever we choose, etc.

 

No it doesn't.

 

I have always had young children, multiple young children under age 6, for all except 23 months of my almost 19 years of marriage. I breastfeed on demand, tho that has varied by infant situation with some of them. Our babies sleep in the bed with us, again that's varied by their situation. It wasn't until last year that we went on a date night for a dinner outside the house alone. And we haven't been on one again since the newest heir was born a year ago. Tho dh did take me and baby out a bit back. I home school all of them, which means I am spending all the time my dh is at work with these kids. Taxi, teaching, playing, feeding, conversing, and so forth.

 

So when I hear someone say that putting my marriage first must mean my kids come second, I think it's reasonable for me to look at them like this :001_huh:.

 

We do insist the kids who aren't breastfed or teens go to bed between 7:30 and 9:00. We need that time to just be quiet with each other and baby and it gives the teens a quiet time to talk to us without little people about.

 

I think that's about it. Otherwise the kids or most of them are ALWAYS with us. We take them to nice resturants with us when we can afford it. In fact, we usually take them anywhere we go. We have never had the luxery of money or family to watch them and given how long we have had young children - we decided early on that we weren't going to wait decades to do things.

 

Putting my marriage first is eactly what makes it possible for us to do all that other stuff with and for our kids.

[I.Dup.]

 

So when I hear someone say that putting my marriage first must mean my kids come second, I think it's reasonable for me to look at them like this :001_huh:.

 

 

 

 

I agree. That's why I posted this thread, this quote seems to be thrown around quite a bit (not here) and it just bugs me. I don't like the idea of one or the other having to be "first."

[Impish]

For me, kids naturally are a priority, w//out having to think about it.

 

Wolf doesn't cry, whine, poop his pants, or is dependant on me for basic needs. So it would be too easy to put him aside and focus on everyone else.

 

By choosing to make my marriage a priority, it makes me focus on us, rather than just juggling it in somewhere, catch as catch can.

[SpecialClassical]

Yes, lately that saying has been rubbing me the wrong way as well. It is entirely possible for a good man to adore his wife and relate well to her while at the same time love his kids and have no idea how to show them that love.

[I.Dup.]

Yes, lately that saying has been rubbing me the wrong way as well. It is entirely possible for a good man to adore his wife and relate well to her while at the same time love his kids and have no idea how to show them that love.

 

YES. This is what bugs me about those simplistic statements. It might make people think "oh, we're good" when in reality, it's not good.

[Scarlett]

YES. This is what bugs me about those simplistic statements. It might make people think "oh, we're good" when in reality, it's not good.

 

I guess I've never known anyone that dumb. :tongue_smilie:

[Bluegoat]

I guess I've never known anyone that dumb. :tongue_smilie:

I've seen parents who were more interested in each other than their kids. And ones that were more interested in themselves than the other spouse or kids.

 

Talking about a "first" priority means everything else comes second, third, or further behind. That's what "first" means.

[Scarlett]

I've seen parents who were more interested in each other than their kids. And ones that were more interested in themselves than the other spouse or kids.

 

Talking about a "first" priority means everything else comes second, third, or further behind. That's what "first" means.

 

Oh. Good to know. :glare:

 

Having a priority list doesn't mean 2nd or 3rd on the list is unimportant. Or that 'oh my dh loves me' so all is right with the world/family/kids.

[I.Dup.]

Or that 'oh my dh loves me' so all is right with the world/family/kids.

 

You've never known anyone like this??! Good grief! I know TONS!

[I.Dup.]

esp. in patriarchal, evangelical circles. TONS.

[I.Dup.]

I've seen parents who were more interested in each other than their kids. And ones that were more interested in themselves than the other spouse or kids.

 

:iagree:LOTS.

[Scarlett]

esp. in patriarchal, evangelical circles. TONS.

 

Well....no. Guess we don't travel in the same circles. :D

[Murphy101]

I guess I've never known anyone that dumb. :tongue_smilie:

 

I have!! But it wouldn't matter what their priority was, they'd still be foolish in how they follow it. That isn't a question of priority. It's a problem of loose marbles.:tongue_smilie:

 

Oh. Good to know. :glare:

 

Having a priority list doesn't mean 2nd or 3rd on the list is unimportant. Or that 'oh my dh loves me' so all is right with the world/family/kids.

 

:iagree: I think someone else previous mentioned foundations. Saying foundation is first priority doesn't mean don't care about the layout, or framing, or whatever. It means all those other things are likely to be seriously screwed if the foundation isn't solid.

 

Well....no. Guess we don't travel in the same circles. :D

 

UG. Because I have 10 kids, those circles sorta bump around me frequently. Once they find out I'm not as ummmm... Well... Whatever....Once they find I don't match their idea of what a SAHM of many is supposed to be - they usually drift away.

 

Some days that really cuts deep.

Most days I'm just relieved not to be insulted or martronized by them anymore.

[ChristineW]

For me, kids naturally are a priority, w//out having to think about it.

 

Wolf doesn't cry, whine, poop his pants, or is dependant on me for basic needs. So it would be too easy to put him aside and focus on everyone else.

 

By choosing to make my marriage a priority, it makes me focus on us, rather than just juggling it in somewhere, catch as catch can.

 

ITA. BTW, its much harder for me than for DH to put the marriage first. The kids know that daddy loves mommy and that she's "most important." However, since they all get love and attention from both of us, it doesn't matter to them who is "top dog". I think it makes them feel safe.

 

Christine

[I.Dup.]

 

Some days that really cuts deep.

Most days I'm just relieved not to be insulted or martronized by them anymore.

 

This is where I am right now. I'm trying to cut away from those circles. Maybe that's partly where this post came from. I'm just so tired of it all. I can't believe I spent so many years entrenched with them.

[Scarlett]

This is where I am right now. I'm trying to cut away from those circles. Maybe that's partly where this post came from. I'm just so tired of it all. I can't believe I spent so many years entrenched with them.

 

Ahhhh. Things are making more sense now.

 

(((blessedwiniter)))

[Nakia]

For me, kids naturally are a priority, w//out having to think about it.

 

Wolf doesn't cry, whine, poop his pants, or is dependant on me for basic needs. So it would be too easy to put him aside and focus on everyone else.

 

By choosing to make my marriage a priority, it makes me focus on us, rather than just juggling it in somewhere, catch as catch can.

 

Wolf doesn't cry or whine??? LUCKY! LOL!!!

 

My husband doesn't either. He leaves all that to me. ;)

[Mo_Babee]

If the person takes that the word to mean "romantic love", then yes, I think that saying is bunk.

 

But if the word love is based on 1 Corinthinians 13, then that changes the whole meaning of that sentence.

 

"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self- seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always hopes, always perseveres."

 

I think the best thing a man can do for his kids is to love the Lord, then his wife. ;)

 

-Melissa

 

:iagree: Exactly!!!