Life has changed a great deal since we entered the 21st Century. Massive, worldwide economic, political and social upheavals are impacting all areas of our lives. Marriages (and equivalent relationships) are no exception. In fact, long-term relationships face new stresses and challenges. People enter them within a world of shifting social norms, diversity and increasing openness about emotional and sexual engagements, including ones that differ from the conventional.
These new realities raise an important question for couples to face head-on: Do you want to stay married at this point in your life -- in your relationship as it now exists, and at this time in our culture?
Consider this: It may be psychologically healthier to end your marriage. That is, I think that the conditions and challenges of the 21st Century world -- the "new normal" -- point to considering a more radical way of life: Engaging in two different kinds of marriages may be a better response to the emotional and sexual realities of our fluid, interconnected world.
On the other hand, you might decide to reconstitute your marriage in ways more in sync with how each of you are "evolving" in your individual lives, and more consistent with your vision of what you want a partnership to be as you become older.
Let me explain both paths. Increasingly, people recognize that our post-9/11 world -- the economic downturn, global crises and uncertainties, the impact of climate change, the increasing diversity of our population, global interconnection and a host of other shifts -- all of it forms a new era of uncertainty, unpredictability and diminished expectations of career and material success.
Part of this new normal includes turmoil in people's emotional and sexual attitudes and behavior, and generates what looks like contradictions in relationships. For example, people report wanting a "soul mate" relationship that sustains for the long run. And in fact, new brain research confirms that romantic love can, in fact, last; it's not a fantasy.
On the other hand, affairs are pretty much socially accepted, and the services of sex workers seem headed in the same direction. People seek that "high" associated with the intense connection and excitement of a new partner, and which is also visible in brain changes, according to recent studies.
Such apparent contradictions actually reflect a growing rejection of the tendency to simply accept a marriage's inevitable descent into the "functional relationship" -- one devoid of energy, connection and intimacy. This backlash had been underway prior to the events of the last decade, but it's now intensifying. At the start of the new century, men and women were reporting increasing boredom and crises in their marriages, along with the 50 percent divorce rate. Interestingly, research shows that the "love hormone" oxytocin is also associated with distinctly negative memories and feelings about one's partner. Not surprisingly, survey research shows that marriage problems often occur between about seven and 15 years of marriage
In my view, all of these shifts, challenges and social trends occurring within today's world warrant new ideas about what constitutes psychologically healthy relationships. I propose considering two kinds of marriages more relevant to current realities. And, in the meantime, I suggest that couples reassess why they stay together and whether they want to do so, at they go forward in their lives. Let's look at each:
Two Kinds of Marriages
In Marriage Number One, people who want to raise children would join with a partner who shares the same basic values about child rearing, and whose ethics, views about finances, education as well as physical features support a positive marriage partnership. The objective is raising healthy children within an emotionally supportive, stable environment.
Marriage Number Two is next, after child-rearing and financial goals of Marriage Number One have been achieved. Then, you would connect with a partner with whom you experienced a stronger romantic, soul-mate connection -- a shared "same wave-length" kind of feeling about how you envision your life, growing and unfolding in the years ahead.
Of course, some may find that both kinds of marriage occur with the same partner. But I propose this framework for thinking about what best serves your children and your own psychological growth and development throughout life.
Meanwhile, Do You Continue?
Say you've been together a number of years. You've probably had good times and bad; you've probably wondered what your lives might be like if you went in different directions without each other, or followed a different life path altogether. If you're in midlife, you've almost certainly had some of these thoughts. Maybe you suppressed them or dismissed them with a laugh. But just as many baby boomers are thinking about "encore careers" -- a career shift -- during one's prime, I suggest you do the same about your marriage.
Specifically, take an honest look at your marriage as it exists today. With your partner, confront whether you want it to continue. That is, your aim is to clarify whether you want to stay with this person for the rest of your life. If so, why? and what will it take?
And if that's not the case, can you end it with regret, respect and mutual support for your future life paths?
Some steps:
The most positive outcome, here, would be to reconstitute your marriage in ways that support who each of you are, in reality, at this point in your life -- assuming you're aiming in the same direction, and want to go that way together. That can build a new foundation for a self-sustaining relationship -- one that stays alive and resilient as you face the unknowns and unpredictable events and experiences waiting for you down the road.
Douglas LaBier, Ph.D., a business psychologist and psychotherapist, is Director of the Center for Progressive Development in Washington, D.C. dlabier@CenterProgressive.org
Follow Douglas LaBier on Twitter: www.twitter.com/douglaslabier
Susan Moss: Lessons Learned From Charlie Sheen For Your Custody Trial
Gingrich Talks About Marriage — and Infidelity
Millennials Value Parenthood, But Marriage...Not So Much
Pete Wentz Responds To Ashlee Simpson's Divorce Filing
And let's not kid ourselves - the spouse who wants out usually goes looking for whatever fulfillment they think they are missing BEFORE they divorce. Most people come to the conclusion that they have evolved beyond the marriage after they find someone else and experienced the emotional high of a new relationship.
If it can be a mutual decision, of course it's ok. But until we change it to "until the kids are grown do we part," let's try to concentrate on helping people save their marriages and be fulfilled inside of them.
The same principle would apply to a family where the father raised the children while the mother perused a career and supported the family financially. That kind of family arrangement is more common in Millenials, but it is definitely something to consider for future generations.
First, we need economic equality. Then the we can consider the search for soul mates or the desire to remain single later in life.
The young couple who is attracted, makes plans and starts a family are driven by hormonal and societal needs to settle down. What happens when those hormonal needs change, when the natural instinct to nurture children and a family changes and the individual realises that he has somehow forgotten his own needs in the process? I believe that in mid-life, re-assessment of one's relationships and individual goals are an absolute necessity or we risk withering away into nothingness.
I think of all those old couples who have been married for 50 years with everyone holding them up as an example of longevity and happiness. I don't buy it. Most of them have been self-medicating for years just trying to get through it, hoping to save face, keeping the family together.
No one wants to fail at marriage, but being big enough to recognise when it has run its course is fairer for all concerned.
In no comment do I see anyone mention that a man might have a complex emotional life, my think with more than his penis, or that all middle aged men will not date middle aged women, and instead will only date 23 year olds. Almost all the negative comments here assumed that straight men are nothing but pigs.
What a load of crap! Men are as emotional as women, aren't always the ones who leave, or betray, or manipulate. And there are plenty of middle aged men who are perfectly happy with women their age, in fact prefer them.
Love and relationships are much more complex than most commenters on here seem to think. And no, it is not always the man's "fault".
However, one question that I would raise: in order for this idea to become an acceptable alternative on the societal level, there should be a change in collective consciousness within the society, which would then be reflected politically as well. How do you see this play out in the legislation? Provided that the idea stands as a psychologically reasoned alternative, do you actually see this option as a lawfully institutionalized one? Divorce settlements are expensive, would the system undergo some changes to facilitate the enactment of the second marriage?
I don't understand straight relationships sometimes.
I may well have missed it - but exactly what is supposed to happen to the first spouse AFTER her procreation and child-rearing responsibilities are over, and time has come for her to be traded-in for a younger model?
Where does she go, seeing as she's past being anyone's younger model at this stage, and she is also pretty-much past the procreation and child-rearing phases?
Is she simply taken out into the woods and shot dead?
.
Most women today in their 40s to early 50s have a LOT of options with a LARGE pool of divorced single people at that age floating about. They are also much much more financially secure than women just a decade or so ago. Nobody is talking about "replacing" anybody with a newer model but merely re-evaluating your life priorities and being honest about your chances with each other going forward. Neither party would be the same as when they met and therefore it is important to evaluate if what you have is working for you, if you can live with it or do you see something more. After all the stark reality is that we all have just one life to live and if there is a possibility of greater happiness it would be foolish not to part ways to get what you believe you deserve.
As far as the "LARGE pool" of divorced men their age floating about - we know that most of these men (PS: I don't have the figures) are looking for that younger model. You know - the accomplished, successful middle-aged man who leaves his wife of 25 years to be with his 22 year-old secretary?
That's more the societal meme than the one about divorced middle-aged men hooking up with their female counterparts. We hear about it all the time.
So, I respectfully disagree about the "large pools" and "lots of options". There are some - no doubt - however the standards for the different genders as far as aging are starkly different - at least in this society.
.
And in what circles are affairs "socially acceptable"??
This author puts all the responsibility of your life on your partner; want to change your life, change your partner. I would suggest that that is the problem with our society's need for instant gratification and lack of self reflection. No one ever takes responsibility for their own behavior or their own happiness. If there is a problem let's spend our energy figuring out who to blame intead of how to fix the problem. If you are unhappy in your life swap out your spouse for a new model for as long as that thrill lasts. Whatever you do, don't look in the mirror at your own behavior. Never hold yourself accountable for your own happiness. If something is wrong its got to be someone elses fault because you are certainly blameless...sound familiar?
Men don't usually file - women do - "cheaper to keep her."
In Marriage Number One, you have one person, usually the husband, building a lasting career while the other, usually the wife, supports him by taking care of the home and children.
In Marriage Number Two, you have one person, usually the husband, who is established in his career and decides that now "true love" is important, and goes out and finds that "special connection" with someone else while the other, usually the wife, suffers financially as a result.
Even in modern marriages where both the wife and the husband have careers, one career is more "important" than the other. One person is the one who leaves work early when the kids are sick and gets no sleep that night. One person is the one who has to move when the other gets a promotion. And so on.
My point is, during Marriage Number One -- my example and the author's -- a life is being built together. It's not like the two parties can split the life equally. One partner is going to walk away better off than the other.
And then there's the issue of merged families, family history, children, and what they see as a model for relationships. Hardly issues to be ignored.