Archive for November, 2005

There is very substantial agreement among those who come into close contact with marital disorder that the intra-personal and inter-personal difficulties already considered, and possibly others related to them, are frequent factors in marital disorder. But it is becoming more and more realized that they do not explain nearly all of the marital disorders. Some American sociologists are asking whether these factors can adequately explain the high rate of marriage dissolution in the United States as compared with that in other countries.

For example-does the neighboring country of Canada, with only one fifth the divorce rate of the U.S.A., have such a high standard of personal fitness and so high a quality of personal relationships that only one fifth of their people, proportionately, are unfit for marriage? Does Britain, another industrialized country, have only one quarter proportionately of people unfit for marriage as compared with the United States, where the divorce rate is four times as great?

One must of course allow for differences in divorce legislation in any such comparisons, but the difference would seem to be more significant than the actual differences in legislation would account for. (And, of course, this very difference may be regarded as an environmental factor to be reckoned with in marital disorder.)

But we have also to consider the great increase in the divorce rate over the last half century in many countries, and to ask ourselves whether this could be explained by any comparable decrease in personal fitness for marriage or any comparable corruption in people’s capacity for close personal relationships.

These interesting considerations have led to an increasing amount of concentration on the environmental factors, particularly the sociological, in marital disorder, in the realization also that marriage is a living relationship in two-way interaction with the environment, and therefore inevitably affected by it. The home and family in fact can be attacked by influences from outside in the same way as people can be attacked by germs and other noxious agents from outside.
The environmental factors may be considered from the point of view of the different aspects of the marital environment, physical, personal, social and cultural, and spiritual.

Immorality includes much more than infidelity and adultery. It also includes such common enemies of partnership as dishonesty, untruthfulness, cruelty, mental as well as physical, extreme meanness and many other similar kinds of attitude and behavior. One of the essential obligations of people in any kind of partnership, even in business partnership, is that they should “play the game.” This is equally true, though much less enforceable, in the marriage partnership, and although adultery is one of the most common grounds for divorce, many of the other kinds of immorality may be strong factors in marital disorder and breakdown. The situation is made more difficult by the fact that almost any kind of immorality is apt to lead to reactions on the part of the offended partner that may also extend to immorality.

While there seems no reason why any wife or husband should have to put up with unlimited injury and insult, the fallibility of all human beings would seem to warrant a reasonable tolerance of both sides and a willingness to forgive in the realization of the fact that none of us is so without sin as to be fit to cast stones. Failure to forgive in this same sense may do as much harm to a marriage partnership as many other kinds of immorality.

Perhaps it is worth reminding ourselves that although marriage is quite dependent on the quality of love that exists between the partners there are times and situations in which it is difficult if not impossible to love, at least in the “feeling” sense of the relationship. But fidelity, being a matter of the will, is possible to anyone with mature disciplined self-control, even though at times it may be difficult.

To stand firmly together through the difficult times, even though it may seem to be “flying blind,” and at the same time seeking help and giving it time to work, may be the real salvation of a marital disorder.

Intolerance, indifference and inattention to the marriage relationship are put together because they are different expressions of lack of the “goodwill” or the “we” feeling which is essential for happy marriage.

Intolerance, already mentioned, means a refusal to allow one’s partner the normal autonomy or “self-government” which we have come to regard as an essential part of our democratic way of life. Of course there must be limits to tolerance, and refusal to allow such illegal actions as cruelty, theft, or adultery is not only justifiable, but an essential aspect of good partnership. But it is very common to find in marital disorders that one or both partners are trying to mold the other into an arbitrary kind of personality pattern, and being demanding and dictatorial about matters that are not essentially of common concern.

These possessive dictatorial attitudes are often found to be signs of deep psychic insecurity and fear of being dominated, frustrated or humiliated, and in such cases they are neurotic attitudes which may need help. Sometimes intolerance is simply the “carry over” into marriage of a “spoiled child” attitude.

Intolerance may show itself in many different ways. There may be outbursts of temper, and aggressive demands with moodiness and sulking when they are not fulfilled. There may be “righteous indignation” with the conviction that it is possible to hold another person up to his “moral obligations.” There may be persistent nagging, “the chief weapon of the weak against the strong,” or jealousy and bitterness. And there may even be suffering or illness for the purpose (generally unconscious) of “blackmailing” the partner to conform to the person’s wishes or demands.

Indifference may be described as lack of interest in the partner’s welfare in all its aspects, attitudes, interests, doings, and in the partnership itself. This may arise from the feeling of being threatened in status or control, from preoccupation with selfish affairs, or from deeply imbedded individualism and self-centeredness. It may also be a result of despair about the marriage. The really self-centered are generally poor candidates for marriage unless they can see themselves to a sufficient extent to develop beyond their self-worship. But they often get married in the blind assumption that all their needs will be met by a devoted partner, who is generally unaware of these great expectations and soon comes to rebel when they become obvious. Indifference is the true opposite of goodwill, just as hatred is the opposite of the emotional aspect of love. When marriage and the family are not given a high priority in the attitudes of both partners it is inevitable that their standards will drift into dull monotonous mediocrity or incessant wearing conflict.

Inattention to the marriage relationship is often an expression of indifference, but it is just as often due to ignorance or immaturity. Young people do not always realize that love is a living quality, and that it therefore needs constant nourishment. It can only be nourished by being expressed and received, by word and gesture, by thoughtful kindly spontaneous actions, and deepest of all through the mutual self-offering of a devoted sexual relationship. Marriage needs constant daily work from both partners if it is to be kept alive and fresh, and when the marriage and one’s partner are “taken for granted” the marriage must suffer to some extent. Neglect from whatever cause throws a big strain on it.