↖ Homepage of the site 'What to do with your life?'
What is a good spouse?
Before reading this question, read the question 'What is a good friend?'
Indeed, a good spouse is almost the same thing. The relationship therefore presents the same fundamental characteristics of respect for others, trust in others, solidarity, projects or common interests.
Simply, at the level of a spouse, solidarity must be more important, because you can have several friends, but only one spouse.
In addition, the common project must be broader since it is a global life project.
Finally, the relationship with a spouse presupposes a minimum physical attraction.
The risk of living as a couple
We can live for years without realizing that in others, respect and solidarity are only a facade, that the other wore a mask even in the intimacy of the couple, therefore that trust was an illusion on the bottom. It is often only the troubles of life that lead us to discover the real intentions of the other.
This is to be differentiated from betrayal, for example adultery, which can be the result of a temporary outburst.
The limits of communication
Fashion is about communication. In fact, couples therapists tend to reduce everything to communication problems. However, couple problems have two very different causes.
The first cause is that we don't dare, that we don't have the courage to address the problem, or that we let ourselves be overwhelmed by emotions when expressing it. In this case, it is indeed a communication problem... and again. It is often more a question of a lack of mastery of the problem-solving technique (identifying the problem, exploring the causes, finding a partial solution, implementing it).
On the other hand, the second cause is that we regularly come back to the problem, but this does not produce change. In this case, it is a fundamental problem at the level of one or both members of the couple, and communication will not change anything. Worse, if it is a problem of respect of one member of the couple towards the other, then by reducing this to a communication problem, we transfer part of the responsibility from the aggressor to the victim 'who didn't communicate well enough'. See questions'Why do you need to control your ego?', 'What do you have to do to be a good person?' And 'Is fidelity necessary in a relationship?'.
To separate, or not?
When the union (marriage or alternative form) does not give satisfaction, the question of termination arises. At this stage, it is important to move beyond the simple 'I don't get along with him/her anymore' before seriously considering separation. A better starting question is: Is it still possible to find a constructive way of living with the one we initially chose?
Such a reformulation has two advantages:
•
|
It excludes dolorism where life as a couple would become a station of the cross.
|
•
|
It sets an extremely strong requirement which is not to have been content passively to note that 'it no longer worked' or 'he or she betrayed me' but to have also tried everything that was reasonably feasible to reposition the relationship on constructive bases.
|
Then, answering this question requires working on two levels:
•
|
The possibility of making the couple satisfactory, that is to say reestablishing the four qualities of friendship at the couple level (respect for the other, trust in the other, solidarity, projects and common interests). From the above we can conclude that this supposes that both partners switch towards a 'succeed in life' approach, which is quite improbable if one of the two had an approach clearly oriented towards 'succeed in life'.
|
•
|
Measure the reasons exogenous to the couple which can justify its continuation even if its functioning is not completely satisfactory. For example, protecting children. Once the exogenous reasons have been established, if the issues linked to them are major, then the question can possibly transform into: What, as an individual, am I capable of reasonably taking?
More detailed explanation: Remember that friendship and love are measured by how much one accepts to be wronged in the relationship with the other in order to preserve this relationship. In the present case, this can be formulated in the form of how much one accepts to be harmed at the level of the couple to protect exogenous reasons, for example the children. Ultimately it's about finding the right balance between 'I don't want to be wronged at all', and 'I accept being wronged beyond my abilities, or beyond the issue linked to exogenous reasons'. .
|
Go deeper
See question 'Tell me how you make decisions, I'll tell you who you are'who offers a typology of the individual.
Regarding the troubleshooting technique, refer to the question 'What conditions must be met to produce serious reasoning?' as well as the book From capital to reason chapter 9'The problem log'. The problem solving technique is described in paragraph 'operation'. This method provided for the world of work may seem strange, rigid, in the private sphere, but knowing how to assist each other in the production of reasoning in the face of a problem is a basic know -how which fully finds its usefulness in the private sphere. Better a reasoning carried out a little rigid than a reasoning leads to a single but which has hidden one of the steps.