Newby here, desperate for some advice (thread 5)

[CT1118]

I am definitely looking forward to the trip with the kids. Hopefully the weather is good. They should have a blast.

This is all you need to care about, which you know fully and completely at this point in your game. Above you express the right attitude, the right priorities, and the right people.

I really continue to struggle, as I always have, with detaching. As both of you know, it's hard to do when you live under the same roof.

JRuss,
For me, I am glad live-in ended, regardless of what will be. I will say though, reading what I quoted from you. It made me want to share this...I work with trees for a living. Trees fascinate me. One of the amazing traits of trees - if a tree is wounded, the wound remain for life. Tree compartmentalize their wounds, that is to say, the wound is sealed off to prevent further damage to the overall structure, but the damage remains inside as the body continues to grow. In time, all physical remnants of the damage become small fissures on the outside, unnoticed by the untrained. This is because trees generate cells, they do not regenerate cells. In mammals, they get injured, damage cells are replaced and sometimes result in scars where cells are not efficient. In trees, they get injured, damaged cells remain, new cells cover them up. Trees only put new growth in places where reinforcement is required, no energy is wasted, e.g. the wind blows hard, micro-fractures occur inside, new cells are produced to reinforce. These new cells make the locations of old wounds stronger.

The lesson here is not to seal off wounds, but to put new strength where it is required. When I looked at your sitch dates again and read you are still GAL'ing and 180, I felt proud for you - reminded me of trees; strength is placed where strength is required. You remain in a wind storm, you remain standing. This is physiological mechanics. This is the slow power of a nature which can live beyond us. This is you leaving an example for your children. Wise old oak.

[JRuss]

FG -- yes, MC chosen and date set (10/12). MC appears to be "pro-marriage" in outlook, and that's what I wanted, although I recognize W may not engage. I still think she's probably doing this as a guilt-reduction move and not serious about trying, and I think the MC will pretty quickly pull the plug if she indeed is pro-marriage, but I figured if we start with a marriage-neutral MC, we'd immediately land in the not-trying, just trying to learn how to most peacefully decouple as possible zone. We will see.

CT1118 -- thank you for your awesome post. I tend to get down on myself and my efforts (too results oriented, not detached, "peeking" to see if they are "working"), and it was great to read your take on things. I really like the imagery of an oak tree. I feel more like a weeping willow most times, though, so "Be an Oak" is a good mantra for me. Thanks again.

[BluWave]

Hi JR,

I know I am late to the party :-) I read this thread, but did not read all the way back. Is or has there been any type of A? Or is she WAW?

I'm confused at to why you want to go to MC if your wife is not committed to making things work? You have said more than once that she is box checking and so I am concerned that you are giving that to her. I am afraid that if she is not committed to piecing, that she will use MC as a way to validate that she should move forward with D. MC can be intense and bring lots of baggage to the surface, and so without a solid foundation, I do agree that you may be giving her that check mark.

My sitch is diff in that my H is not a woman (but was a giant wus) and was quite wayward in his fog. Well he did pull this box checking on me and it was terribly painful! We went to MC about 2 mos after he moved out and I was very hopeful it would lead to reconciliation. I was so wrong! He was just using it as a platform to absolve some of his guilt for being a cheating POS. So I found myself more hurt with additional humiliation to boot.

Even when he left OW I was weary of going back to MC because I did not yet see he was ready to piece. I was right, he left her, waffled for a couple months, and then ran back. I am glad I didn't go to MC and give him another opportunity to reject me (and with the support of a professional). Because they will take their word and use it to their full advantage.

It wasn't until 8 mos later when he cut all ties with OW, did a sharp 180, and was committed to the M, that I found MC helpful. And even then it was difficult and painful. It is emotional and intense. So my fear for you is that this could cause you some insult to injury.

Perhaps before agreeing to MC you can share your goals of it with one another. If she is not committed to making the M work for some amount of time then you can reevaluate your expectations of it. I think you owe yourself that much if you are handing out free check marks :-)

I just want to see you protect your heart!

Blu

[JRuss]

Hi BluWave -- W hasn't flatly disavowed working on the marriage and trying to make it work, but we are also by no means piecing. She has said she'll go into MC with an open mind, so I'm going to do it. Were I to have turned her down, after asking her for 2 years to go and even telling her how much it had hurt me that she'd never been willing to try, I think the guilt box would have also been checked off for her (if that's what this is really all about), but with no possibility that MC would be in any way helpful. This way, there's at least a possibility of some improvement, albeit I need to keep my expectations low for my own health.

[ForGump]

CT-- I too work w/ trees.

JR-- How did you select the MC? Just curious, because, man, there are all kinds of counselors out there.

Blu/JR-- Yes, I think it's important to stay aware of the possibility that a WW will abuse the MC. In that case, yeah, pull the plug. My take on JR's situation is that, JR's suspicions notwithstanding, there is not yet sufficient evidence to conclude his WW just wants to box check and abuse his good faith engagement in MC.

[JRuss]

FG -- I asked for recommendations from my IC and got a few names. I then looked at all of their websites and reviewed qualifications and training, what they say they try to do, where their bias is (marriage or neutral). I've read where Emotionally Focused Therapy (EFT) has the best results, so I eliminated anyone that didn't utilize that in their practice. That got me down to two names, and I gave both of them to my W and let her pick, thinking that would minimize the risk she'd say I crammed a bad pro-me choice down on her. She apparently ran it by her IC and picked the one we're going with.

I will bail in short order if I get the sense W is just going through the motions. I also think the therapist we've chosen will also pull the plug if she sees the same, since she has a pro-marriage bias.

I do not work with trees but sure do love them. Watching them move in the breeze is a favorite meditative practice of mine.

[ForGump]

... where their bias is (marriage or neutral)

Is that something state explicitly on their websites? Or are there code words for being pro-marriage or pro-divorce?

[JRuss]

It's usually more in the nature of code words and the descriptions they use as to what they do. Pro marriage might be something like "I will give you the tools to help the two of you repair a damaged connection", whereas "help with navigating transitions" would be more in the nature of a neutral or divorce coach.

[ForGump]

Makes me wonder if my IC is pro-divorce. Her website talks about breaking patterns that lead to unhappiness. Is that code language for pro-divorce?
Kind of felt that way when I first began meeting w/ her. But I didn't simply buy into everything she said -- I've stayed true to my feelings and values even when she was nudging me in certain directions.

JR -- I know you feel ineffective and even weak at times, but I look at how you've held on, held out, for so long, and I see unwavering core values. I respect that. Your kids will see that.

[JRuss]

FG -- thank you for the support, now and ever since I first started posting. You've really been a lifeline in such a bad time. Here's to both of us emerging on the other side in good shape, whatever that ends up looking like.

Re ICs, I think most think only of what would make the client happy in the quickest way possible, whereas MCs, at least "pro-marriage" ones, are really working "for" the marriage, i.e., the marriage itself is the real client. My IC would never come out and say it, but I don't believe she thinks my W is capable of being the sort of spouse I need in order to be happily married. So I'm cognizant of her gently nudging me through the grief cycle, and I don't begrudge it -- heck, I frequently think I do just need to give it up. Where I think a client would need to make a change is where the IC gets frustrated at the pace at which you're moving, if that makes sense.