And I think it is bizarre that one assumes that you can’t be both devastated and horny. What an odd thing to be able to only feel one emotion at a time.
The vow to love is not a promise to be “in love with” someone or to feel a certain way about them. It’s about choices and actions rather than about things beyond one’s control.
I think widowed people (and I would consider someone dealing with a spouse in a coma or the like very akin to widowhood) discover new and fascinating ways to feel every emotion at once!
Even if both parties to the vow agree on an amendment? Things look a lot different at 60 than they did at 25. I’m perfectly fine with my wife finding some comfort if I’m demented or in a coma, and she is likewise. Why should we be bound exactly by a vow taken decades ago which I don’t even remember precisely?
Can’t say as I’d argue with ya
It’s not really a real vow? Could have fooled me. I meant it, she meant it and it’s legally binding. Yes, everyone takes that vow (or some form of it – there’s no reason you can’t write your own vows, with whatever conditions you want). Some don’t take it seriously. That doesn’t mean I don’t.
I made it to the woman I married. Who will be the same woman in ten, twenty or fifty years. She may be heavier. She may be unhappy. She may be in a coma. She’ll still be my wife. If your conception of “love” includes only romantic love, or sexual infatuation, then your conception of love is much more limited than mine.
The point is “why”? Sure you entered into a marriage in good faith with the intent to stay together forever. But why stay together if you are miserable and unhappy?
Well, I didn’t say divorce should be outlawed, did I?
Still, I didn’t go into marriage with an escape route planned. And as long as I’m married to my wife, I’ll keep my promises.
Yup, it’s exactly the same. A coma and a nap are equivalent. :rolleyes:
A vow is only a vow to those who look at such things as being ‘holding a higher meaning’.
Marriage, for me, is a contract. One you enter into willingly and with whatever bounds you apply to it. If such things are discussed prior to or even during the marriage, then feel free to do what you will.
The contract of marriage is ALWAYS open. New negotiations can always be had. Whether or not the other party can negotiate seems to be the sticking point here.
Will she, though? If there’s *absolutely *no chance of her coming out of it? Would that still be your wife, or just her body?
To me, people “are” their minds and personalities. I don’t believe in souls, but if you do, then that’s essentially what I’m talking about. If I lose a limb in an accident, I may have 20% less body, but I’m still 100% me. Conversely, if my body is intact, but my mind is gone, never to return, then I don’t exist anymore. The body which used to be mine might still be “living”, but nobody’s home. I’m gone.
And if I don’t exist anymore, then to me, that nullifies any contract or vow that my spouse has made with me. “'Til death do us part” applies.
Somewhat tangentially, this thread reminds me of a woman on some fashion makeover show I saw. Her friends had nominated her because she had been depressed since her husband had divorced her something like 10 years prior, and they wanted to give her some motivation to get excited again about looking good and living life. She was resistant, though, largely because they suggested she stop wearing her wedding ring. They weren’t even pushing her to date; they just felt she was hurting herself by holding onto her failed marriage. Her attitude was that *her *marriage *wasn’t *failed, only her husband’s was. And she wasn’t going to stop honoring her commitment just because he had.
To me, that is exactly the equivalent of getting fired from a job and still continuing to come to work every day. Or continuing to pay an employee after they’ve quit. A marriage vow, like an employment contract, is a promise between two parties. If one of those parties backs out, or ceases to exist, the contract cannot said to still be in effect.
When my husband dies, or as per the OP, ceases to exist, I will be devastated. I may well be so sad that I can never bring myself to love again. But if I do, that won’t have any bearing on my marriage to him - because it will have ended when he dies. He will always have been my husband, but he won’t still be, no matter how much I would wish it so.
I heard something yesterday that I found rather funny and somehow fits into this thread:
You are only as faithful as your options.
Hear, hear, Heart of Dorkness.
So how much of a change would be an acceptable threshold? We’ve all heard stories about how much fun someone was before marriage, loved to stay up late and party, laughed all the time, held a good job, took care of themself, etc. Then post marriage they were a stifling, intractable, near shut-in with deteriorating health. They’re still fully functional, but this is a nearly 180 degree personality shift. Is this enough to essentially void the marriage contract? Or are we limiting the discussion to only those severe medical conditions like coma or PVS?
I don’t know if there’s a universal bright line which can be drawn here(certainly I don’t feel qualified to draw one). I’ve known people who were in this sort of situation, and made the choice to stay together, and some who chose to split up. There are pros and cons of each decision of course, but how you define who a person is will be the key to determining if a personality shift is grounds for breaking the marriage contract. Judging from the various comments Mr. Schiavo received during his recent time in the spotlight, it’s something lots of people come down on both sides of the fence over.
Enjoy,
Steven
Well, if we’re not limiting the discussion, then I would say, yes, that person is essentially not the person you married anymore.
I think anyone getting married should have the expectation that people change. Habits, behaviors, desires, beliefs, can all change over time. And of course, accidents and aging happen, so health will absolutely change. But if it were a change in something truly fundamental - if someone kind and giving became cruel and selfish, or if a marathon runner decided to live on soda and cheez doodles and move as little as possible - then yes, they are a different person. For all intents and purposes, your marriage to the other person, the one to whom you originally made your vows, is over.
Unfortunately, you now have a different marriage, to someone you did not choose, and to whom you did not make vows. And you have to decide whether you want to remain in this new marriage or not. In such a case, I would do everything I could to help that person get back to being the person they were, or failing that, to enjoy the person they have become. But if it became clear that I would be unable to change them or like them, I’d probably get a divorce.
The difference between that and the OP is that if your spouse simply ceases to exist, in the sense I described, then you are not in a new marriage. It is not that your spouse is extremely changed, or even that there is essentially someone else in their place. They are gone. And while I agree that it would be hard to draw a bright line in the case of a personality change or gradual loss of mind, this seems to me to be well on the safe side of any line. If your spouse suddenly and irreversibly turned into a ficus, or a block of swiss cheese, no one could fault you for saying, “Well, this marriage is effectively over.” To me, having your spouse turn into a living corpse, gruesome as it sounds, is basically the same thing.
That may be all your vows are worth, but some of us take the concept more seriously.
Again – you may think that, others feel differently.
For mine.
I anticipate getting married next year. I also anticipate that at some point in the years subsequent to that, my wife will become tired of me. I will gain weight, I will be lazy, my depression will come back, I’ll fuck up in some huge way. Or maybe it’s just that my mannerisms will grate and my schtick will be played out. In short, I will become quite unlovely to her at some point. Nonetheless, I hope she stays. Indeed, it will be in those unlovely times where I will need her the most. I want and need a woman who will stick by me even when I’m a no-fun lazy fat asshole idiot.
My solution, then, is to get her to swear by all that she holds dear that no matter how unlovely I get, she won’t give up on me. Of course, it just so happens that she is looking for the same commitment. You stay married to someone even when you’re not feeling all lovey-dovey because 1) you know they need you and 2) you know at some point, you will need them and they won’t be feeling all lovey-dovey.
Marriage without committment is just a very expensive form of dating.
So, you’re getting married next year and you are lecturing those of us married for 30 years on long term commitment?
I’ve been lucky, but I know some people for whom divorce was absolutely the right thing to do. But we’re not really talking about divorce here, since I think someone who wants out of a marriage should do it and not cheat until the divorce if final in all but the signing. We’re talking about cheating on a block of wood, basically, when not being married might well cut off care or cause financial hardships to someone. If you were basically brain dead, would you really want your wife to not have a life?
Sounds like you just want trap someone in commiting to be with you no matter how miserable you make them.
Probably why I don’t make “vows” to people. I say exactly what I will do and how I will do it.
I don’t know if I would do it or not–and in my case this is not as theoretical as it might be for many others, as my wife is chronically ill and has been for some time. Though she is nowhere near comatose, she’s not in good health and we have no idea what tomorrow or next month may bring.
What I CAN tell you is that I would absolutely understand why anyone in that situation might make the choice to date and/or have sex with someone else. “Judge not” seems to me to apply quite strongly here.
Chris McGonigle, a woman whose husband eventually died after years of declining health, has some very interesting things to say on the subject in her book Surviving Your Spouse’s Chronic Illness. The choice she made was not…comfortable…for a lot of people she knew. I recommend the book highly, for a lot of reasons.