Spouse or children first

[BayouAngel]

I came across a few (oldish) internet articles about this topic recently and found some of the discussions interesting, and I was curious how the community here felt about it. In a marriage, assuming the children are physically safe, who takes priority - your spouse or your children? Which relationship do you put more energy into?

Some sites posed the discussion with the question of who you love more (spouse or children), but I feel that may be too misleading since we love both in different ways.

I realize this is not a black and white discussion, but certainly all of us do side more one direction than the other. Child-free people, feel free to give your input too. I'm hoping to hear some interesting perspectives

 

[Hetta]

It depends on the circumstances. Most parents soon find that the needs of a baby are overwhelming, and that a child between 0 to about 3 does take priority over the spouse. At 4, they can usually attend some kind of school program (if parents can afford to pay), and the child is usually potty trained and out of diapers, eating solids, sleeping through the night, etc. Anyone who thinks that a newborn doesn't take priority over a spouse has never had a baby, obviously.

But obviously, as we have have found, it all changes in time. The kids get more interested in their own activities, their friends, and then they start driving and by then you are lucky to see your kids other than at dinner every now and then! Our eldest 'child' married recently, and nothing brought home more clearly how quickly those babies become grown ups! It is important that your relationship with your spouse has been tended during that time, because if everything has been about the kids, what do you talk about when the kids don't need you so much anymore?

So it is a balance, for sure. When children are very young, they do need more care and attention and if a spouse is going to call a wahambulance about that, then he/she is not mature enough to be married, let alone have kids, but it shouldn't be all about the kids, because they can take over everything, and husband wife can look up and not even know each other any more.

 

[WolfGate]

Define "priority" - seriously - because from a practical, needs based standpoint, Hetta brings up the right points. At the same time, the best thing parents can do for their children is make their marriage the highest earthly relationship they have. That helps keep families together, gives children security that comes from seeing their parents as a bonded unit, and teaches them by example what they should strive for in marriage.

 

[BayouAngel]

God > Spouse > Children

My kids are going to grow up and have their own lives. They will leave my home and cleave to their own spouses. When that day comes it will be me and my husband. It is the relationship that I choose.

I'm glad this was the first response. Short, sweet, and to the point. Biblical and realistic.

Thank you for your input.

 

[faroukfarouk]

God > Spouse > Children

My kids are going to grow up and have their own lives. They will leave my home and cleave to their own spouses. When that day comes it will be me and my husband. It is the relationship that I choose.

I guess the word 'appropriate' comes to mind: what is appropriate under the circumstances of the particular stage of life.

 

[faroukfarouk]

I don't think this is what you meant, but your comment brought these questions to my mind.

Is there a stage where it is appropriate to put the marriage on hold in favor of childrearing? Should a marriage be subjected to that test?

I guess my thought was that they are not opposed but complementary; all part of the divine scheme for marriage and parenthood.

 

[Hetta]

I don't think this is what you meant, but your comment brought these questions to my mind.

Is there a stage where it is appropriate to put the marriage on hold in favor of childrearing? Should a marriage be subjected to that test?

If a marriage can't survive a test, it's not much of a marriage; however, I doubt that any parents/spouses would advocate for putting a marriage 'on hold'. It is usually just that the couple has less time and energy for each other, because the majority of time and energy is spent dealing with little ones. That is the compromise that adults have to make if they wish to have children. And I repeat that if either spouse whines about that, they are not very mature. I am so glad that my married son and his wife have decided to wait a while. They have realized very quickly just from raising a couple of puppies what a time suck "young creatures" are. They will go into parenthood one day with open eyes.

 

[faroukfarouk]

Perhaps, but one is the foundation for the other after all.

Well, yes, of course. They are deeply linked.

Unlike British colonial officials who would farm out their offspring to nannies and then put them in boarding school while they administered the 'natives' someplace.

 

[Hetta]

A strong marriage will survive a test, but a marriage isn't a marriage if one or both spouses are no longer participating. This is an extreme circumstance, but some spouses do face that reality.

I think all of us are not very mature sometimes. I'm not sure it's an insult or a particularly terrible thing.

When you have kids, you don't really have the time for immaturity, because you're dealing with the ultimate in immaturity i.e. a baby. Having a spouse who wants to be a child when you have a real child is exhausting. I've heard chapter and verse from some of my friends when we were all young parents, and I'm talking about both genders acting in an immature manner. It is very damaging when parents are dealing with sleepless nights, teething, or whatever stage of you are at, and the other person refuses to pull their weight. It can make things become twice as stressful. As you say, you're not a parent, but if you had been or you are, you'll understand what I mean.

As for spouses not participating, that happens in all kinds of circumstances, not just when children enter the scene. A marriage remains a marriage until/unless someone ends it.

 

[citizenthom]

Bible is clear. The spouse is your own flesh and blood. If that relationship is not healthy then the children suffer. If your relationship with your spouse is such that you cannot care for another human being in unison, don't have children. And if you make the mistake of doing so, your priority is still to rehabilitate your spouse into a better, more Christian spouse. Otherwise rearing a child or children together will be impossible and will end up in massive pain for everyone.

 

[Odetta]

Define priority and it's boundaries in practical terms. I don't think putting one's spouse ahead of children at the expense of the children makes for a healthy family.

Children take a lot of work to rear appropriately (training them in the way they should go) on so many levels - physical, mental, emotional, spiritual. Yes the relationship with one's spouse needs to be maintained to be healthy, but often the day to day activities are more centered around the children's needs because they can't do as many things on their own as an adult can. So in my situation, yes, both my spouse and my children need me, but because of their ages and abilities (there are also some special needs), my children need me more. If my husband starts demanding too much of me, our children suffer and I get stressed out. However, neither should he be ignored. The important thing is that the husband and wife need to be on the same page as to the amount of effort and time it takes to rear the children to be able to find the balance of what it takes to maintain the marriage relationship. For me personally, my husband making an effort to make our children a priority actually means he's making me a priority because he's sharing in the responsibility of raising them.

I write all this around the idea that higher priority means more time spent there than for a lower priority. That idea, which I have heard discussed in planning workshops and even Sunday school, simply doesn't work in reality in a household with children, in inverse proportion to how young they are. It's the same with daily quiet time. Does one seriously spend, say, 50% of waking hours in bible study, 30% with spouse, and 20% with kids every day? If you work, where does that fit in? Hence back to my opening line - define priority in practical terms. Time? Effort? Mental capacity? Emotions? What?

 

[MiniEmu]

Most of the time I think we do the relationships with our spouse and children are done a great injustice by being directly compared. I also think it is unreasonable to weigh up priority by the time invested in the relationship, as children will have to take priority over your spouse time wise when they are completely dependent on you.

There are multiple sides to every story, and I do feel that those tales we hear should be taken for what they are; one perspective of a relationship. What is often missed is how both spouses are failing to give the other what they need, be it support, affection, attention, or other.

Having children (can be) hard work. The relationship dynamics (sometimes) have to change, unless you can afford external help/have a generous network of family and friends who will help out on a regular basis it is very hard to adjust to fulfilling the needs of an adult, and the needs of children. You can't just think about the physical safety of your child, you're responsible for their well being (emotional and physical). Ideally your partner realises that, as an independent adult in a marriage where young children (and even older children) are present, their needs will sometimes have to take a backseat.

I've rambled. I'll reform the words above later.

 

[mkgal1]

who takes priority - your spouse or your children? Which relationship do you put more energy into?

I never quite understood that belief that "as parents we need to put the marriage first". Why should there ever be a point where there's a conflict? Shouldn't husband and wife (together) be doing both---raising their children together AND nurturing their relationship (isn't the working together of raising the children something that nurtures the marriage in itself)? If what's meant is that a couple needs to have "private time" 3 times a week and to not allow the needs of the children to "get in the way" (locking the bedroom door if necessary)----then I firmly do NOT believe in that.

 

[singpeace]

I came across a few (oldish) internet articles about this topic recently and found some of the discussions interesting, and I was curious how the community here felt about it. In a marriage, assuming the children are physically safe, who takes priority - your spouse or your children? Which relationship do you put more energy into?

Some sites posed the discussion with the question of who you love more (spouse or children), but I feel that may be too misleading since we love both in different ways.

I realize this is not a black and white discussion, but certainly all of us do side more one direction than the other. Child-free people, feel free to give your input too. I'm hoping to hear some interesting perspectives

It's my opinion that in an ideal world, a husband and wife would set an example for their children by putting each other first in a Christ-like fashion and that the mom and dad would always try to be on the same page concerning the welfare of and discipline of their children. If mom and dad love the Lord with all their hearts, then love each other as Christ would, their children would know their home is a safe haven - a place with boundaries and comfort and peace.

 

[LinkH]

Ideally, there should be harmony in the family, not a set of competing interests where fulfilling one person's needs takes away from another's. It is good for children to see their parents loving each other and being on the same page (in unity) and things like that. It doesn't have to be a war.

Children need to see husbands loving their wives as Christ loves the church as Ephesians 5 teaches, and wives doing what Ephesians 5, Colossians 3, and the opening section of I Peter 3 says to do toward their husband.

 

[mkgal1]

Ideally, there should be harmony in the family, not a set of competing interests where fulfilling one person's needs takes away from another's.

Well said, Link.

IMO.....the one thing that brings any two people together is having a united goal (and raising children could be one of those). To my mind, that's how affection and love for another is either torn down or built up (all depending on how each one works with the other in trying to achieve what's best for all concerned).

To me...."affection" is more than a physical thing--it's kindness and thoughtfulness (and a lack of selfishness & pride).

A great example I can think of is Jimmy & Rosalynn Carter and all their mutual projects they've worked on together throughout their many years.

 

[HannahT]

Ideally, there should be harmony in the family, not a set of competing interests where fulfilling one person's needs takes away from another's. It is good for children to see their parents loving each other and being on the same page (in unity) and things like that. It doesn't have to be a war.

Yes, I never did appreciate people approaching it like conflicting aspects or interests. It never made much sense to me.

Children are a gift from God, and at times we need to remember that just for a moment. When we view them as such? It throws the whole 'conflicting interests' out of balance, or shows you it never should have been there to begin with.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

God, spouse then kids. The spouse takes priority because if the marriage goes south, it affects the kids too. This doesn't mean you neglect the kids obviously. It just means you put more effort into making sure the marriage is good. Like for example if problems are arising and you go to have counseling but it means you have to tell your kids "Sorry but we can't have that party here tonight with your friends!", then so be it.

 

[Dan61861]

This reminds me of a girl a long time ago.

She had asked me on our first date. If we had children and there was a tragedy were you could only save me or the children. Which one would you choose? I reasoned within my mind, who would I want saved if it was a choice between me and the children. According to her, I chose wrong.

In Christ
Daniel

 

[joshua 1 9]

It's my opinion that in an ideal world, a husband and wife would set an example for their children by putting each other first in a Christ-like fashion and that the mom and dad would always try to be on the same page concerning the welfare of and discipline of their children. If mom and dad love the Lord with all their hearts, then love each other as Christ would, their children would know their home is a safe haven - a place with boundaries and comfort and peace.

Depends on the issue. Sometimes children need protected from their parent.