Did I hear Dr. Laura correctly?

On the shuttle to work this morning, the driver was listening to Dr. Laura. I didn’t catch the entire call, but it sounded to me like this:

Caller caught her husband doing something. (I assume cheating, but since we’re talking Dr. Laura, he could well have been reading the Swimsuit Edition.) Husband doesn’t seem to know that he’s been caught. Caller calls Dr. Laura looking for advice on how to deal with this and save her marriage.

Dr. Laura asks her if she wants a divorce. Caller replies that she wants to save the marriage. Dr. Laura then informs her that the only choice is to simply forget about it, because delving deeper will only make it harder to stay with her husband. If she wants to deal with the issue, she has to get a divorce.

The caller clearly doesn’t think this is a satisfactory solution, and she wants to get the issue out into the open without killing her marriage. Dr. Laura then browbeats her into agreeing to divorce her husband.

The caller, in tears, ends the call on the note that she will now go to confront her husband and seek a divorce. Dr. Laura switches gears and coos, “I am so, so sorry.” As in, “I’m sorry your husband wrecked your marriage,” not, “I’m sorry that I’m a hateful harpie quack and my entire life is a fraud without end.”

I don’t listen to Dr. Laura, because her ideology makes my eyeballs bleed, but that seems about par for the course for her.

I’ll get relationship advice from her at the same time I get investment advice from Dr. Ruth.

How sad that Dr. Laura still has a forum to spew her bile.

You know, as awful as some of Dr. Laura’s commenary has been, I place blame for these sorts of things solely on their source: the callers.

It’s one thing to call up and ask “I think that one of my co-workers is stealing from the company, should I confront him or go straight to management?” or “Am I morally obligated to go to my sister’s wedding when the guy she’s marrying is a bigot?” (I heard that one day, I giggled, I surely did.) But to expect to get meaningful advice on a fundamental issue in your marriage like dealing with a spouse’s adultery in a 5> minute phone call that’s not just about you but about making a larger moral point to an audience of 10+ million people is simply stupid.

If you don’t know what to do with your marriage to that extent, call your mother, your sister, your clergyperson, your therapist, your local mental health hotline, someone, anyone who isn’t trying to fit you in before the next ad for Hooked on Phonics and doesn’t have to make sure to keep their advice practical for the millions of strangers listening in. Don’t call a radio agony aunt and expect to be able to talk things out properly and come to a conclusion that really takes the specifics of your situation into consideration instead of the general principles said agony aunt would like to apply to your situation.

If you’re old enough to married, it would seem that you should be old enough to figure that out.

That is so true, tlw.

I used to listen to Dr. Laura way back, in the days when she wasn’t so grumpy. (She was grumpy sometimes, but oftentimes she had something worthwhile to say. Honest. She even talked tolerance about gays back then. Honest!)

But it drove me nuts that she would give a snap judgment on the state of someone’s marriage or other big life thing in just a few minutes. I could hear the person trying to explain some important detail–not a meaningless rationalization, but an important detail (answering a question I’d had in my mind as I heard the call) and yet Dr. Laura didn’t have time to hear it.

How does that make any sense? It doesn’t. I don’t doubt that there were times (back then) that Dr. Laura, had she had the time, could have come up with a valuable and appropriate solution, but she had no time. So what was the point?

That is so true, tlw.

I used to listen to Dr. Laura way back, in the days when she wasn’t so grumpy. (She was grumpy sometimes, but oftentimes she had something worthwhile to say. Honest. She even talked tolerance about gays back then. Honest!)

But it drove me nuts that she would give a snap judgment on the state of someone’s marriage or other big life thing in just a few minutes. I could hear the person trying to explain some important detail–not a meaningless rationalization, but an important detail (answering a question I’d had in my mind as I heard the call) and yet Dr. Laura didn’t have time to hear it.

How does that make any sense? It doesn’t. I don’t doubt that there were times (back then) that Dr. Laura, had she had the time, could have come up with a valuable and appropriate solution, but she had no time. So what was the point?

Apparently there are huge Quantum fluctuations in the doctor Laura universe lately, she is starting to slip from her Orthodox Judaism. DL has was spied taking sailing lessons on the Sabbath day, an absolute no no for devout Jews, when some questioned her about it she made comments that she is falling away from orthodoxy.

DL

Just the other day she blamed her parents for not giving her the correct religious up bringing.

I buddy of mine works in radio and his show replaced Dr. Laura in the afternoon slot on CJAD (Montreal). He said the callers just wanted some kind of masochistic flogging.

Though in this case, I sorta have to side with Laura. The caller has a choice: ignore the transgression, or confront it and risk her marriage. It’s certainly possible to confront it and not lose the marriage, but we’re not (and Laura probably wasn’t) given enough detail to perform a full risk/benefit analysis. It may be that the caller was looking for some independent support that she was 100% RIGHT and her husband was 100% WRONG and she wants to dance happily in her victory over him, but Laura pointed out that this could almost certainly destroy the marriage.

In any case, if the caller depends on a total stranger for advice, she’s an idiot, regardless.

If anyone can find a transcript of this call, I’d love to read it.

Well, she does have a PhD in biochemistry.

Physiology, actually. She is also a licensed Family Couselor. On top of that she’s a sanctamoneous jackass and a hypocrite.

Haj

Nice to know Nazi Psychiatry is still alive and well…

Er, no. Her degree is in physiology.

IME, Dr. Laura isn’t as evil as people make her out to me. An employee here would listen to Dr. Laura in the office and, since background noise I actually like when working, I let her.

I listened to many of her calls.

Her main emphasis is on families. Probably 80% of her calls deal with this. You can understand how Dr. Laura will respond by following this axiom:

‘Always think of the children. No sacrifice is too great for your children’

One father called in and had an offer for HUMUNGOUS more $$$ but would have to move several hundred miles away to Seattle. He didn’t even call in with asking if he should take it, but about something else. Dr. Laura browbeat him for a long time that he shouldn’t take the job. Reason? He had two children and the move would be uprooting them.

She constantly demands 100% sacrifice of a parents life for their children. This leads to some very ‘cruel’ (IMO) advice given to parents. She will demand divorced parents quit good paying jobs/career and move to where their children are even if the economy is crappy. She even once demanded that a single teacher not ever date because it might hurt the children to see their teacher express romance with someone (this grated on my nerves since I was a teacher and was told ‘informally’ that I couldn’t date)

She is huge on stay at home motherhood no matter the sacrifice. Daycare is out of the question. Step parents have no family rights (that is for mummy and daddy) but she demands huge sacrifice out of these step parents to help the children.

etc. etc.

It grates many times.

However…Children very much do get pushed aside and their needs not put on equal par with adults. She has a point. She is ‘radical’ that way but she isn’t completely whacko with her premise.

Do any you people arguing about her degree actually have any kind of cite? I know this is the Pit, and all, but jeez. . .

Oops, I misread Podkayne’s and thought he disagreed with hajario. I’ll go somewhere else now. :o

I haven’t listened to her for a few years now, but I used to listen quite often. I think the “drop it or divorce advice” while obnoxious, cuts to the heart of the matter and forces people to confront a stark real world choice about what they value more. I don’t know what the issue was at hand in the call, but I can well imagine that in certain situations wanting to gear up to confront a spouse about a past infidelity (or something of similar weight) , and the roiling emotional turmoil it will cause could well spell doom for a marriage that already has troubles.

Marriages die like mayflies over precisely this “must air out and confront the issue” stuff all the time when the confronting or confronted partner decides enough is enough, and in practical terms it’s often a decision between letting sleeping dogs lie or putting on battle armor and going to war, and war in these situations often ends in divorce. Just because the advice is obnoxious doesn’t mean it’s incorrect.

You’re right! I give!

I’ll do an extra 40 minutes on my Krebs Cycle as penance.*

*I still think the “Er” was a bit over the top, though.

I don’t listen to Dr. Laura, because of what I’ve heard and read about her I don’t think listening would be an enjoyable or valuable experience. Maybe not.

But I’m not so sure if the advice she gave to the situation as presented in the OP was all that terrible.

What did the wife want Laura to tell her what to do? Confront the husband. Make him promise he’ll never do it again? Go to couples counseling. Maybe what Laura means is get rid of the guy, or live with it, because the inbetween is just going to make things worse.

Not sure if that way would work everyone, but women who are cheated on, then insist that the marrige should be saved may be trying to fix something that can’t be fixed.

When Dr. Laura or any of us know the DEFINATE answer to this, let us know.

The world awaits.