Must I endure infidelity after infidelity?

[on_the_hill]

Where did you get this idea? Many women do this, it’s not all that uncommon. Once a cheater, it’s easier the 2nd time.

Yes, but a guy could convince himself something’s going on, then the thoughts start to build on themselves. I think he ought to make sure it’s happening before doing anything drastic.

Talking to a priest would be a good place to start. I might even talk to the priest before asking the wife, just to be better prepared if…

 

[Rete]

I must ask - are you a licensed practicing attorney in the state in which the OP resides? Do you know other particulars of the OP’s situation not shared in the forum?

I proffer these questions because while I agree with your general premise of the OP’s self-protection, he needs to understand that there is a very good likelihood that his filing first would provide no meaningfully greater protection to him and may poison the well for any future reconciliation. It very much does depend on the state, but fault, including infidelity, may very well be ignored in the deliberations of the courts. Because he is a man, he is at a terrible disadvantage in any proceeding and should probably assume that he would not get custody of his own children even if he could prove gross infidelity on his wife’s part. The courts are there to see that the divorce goes though - period - not necessarily effect justice by any standard recognizable by any reasonable adult.

The Church’s understanding of the machinations of family courts in the U.S. is woefully and willfully ignorant. Canon law seems to expect that the civil courts will render a just verdict that incorporates fault into the equation. This simply does not happen in many cases, and the OP needs to hear that.

In the end, the OP might still find that it’s worth pursuing, but he needs to assume the worst.

Samson answered my question about paternity and support of an illegitimate child, at least for his state.

From what I have seen, the only chance a father generally has is to be the first person to make an accusation (to be the plaintiff). Otherwise, he will be dragged down with endless, baseless, allegations which he must prove were lies with a lot of documentation. Then when he proves she lied (and nothing will possibly happen to her for committing perjury), she will make another accusation, and it repeats. He can attempt to enter motions, but good luck having them heard. The day of the hearing, she need only come in with another accusation of being in fear, and the process resets with his motion set aside to deal with the (obviously) pressing accusation.

If he can get the kids out of that equation immediately, and immediately extricate himself from her vicinity, then her ability to make accusations will be greatly diminished. But also would have to establish right up front her lying and cheating in order to paint a picture of a dishonest and manipulative person.

I am honestly surprised that so many men are still willing to marry American women until this situation is rectified. If you are a professional and even modestly successful man, it makes absolutely no economic or social sense for you to marry a woman in this country. The risk is far too high. Family values issues aside, we are better off simply becoming single fathers with some kind of surrogate program. The only things that make that unrealistic are family values which require a mother and a father. It’s basically the reverse of what women faced in the 19th century.

That’s the state of family courts in this country and why I think the only chance a father could possibly have is to be the plaintiff. Even then he has to have overwhelming evidence that she ought not be given full custody of the children.

 

[Rete]

And to be clear, what I meant by the above post was predicated upon the assumption of a hostile divorce where the mother is trying to take him for all he is worth, along with his children. If there is a chance of doing it with mediation, then that is the best option.

Obviously saving a marriage is ideal, but I also see and hear from far too many Catholic spouses enduring abuse for the sake of saving an abusive marriage. I was one of them and I regret not letting it go years sooner. It’s not worth that kind of abuse. Celibacy is far better than that.

 

[lily22]

Nope… get out. You may even have to pay child support for another man’s baby… I am not kidding…

 

[holyrood]

Since it’s not common for a woman to have multiple infidelities, I now wonder if you are certain of this or just suspect it?

Sorry to doubt you, but there is the thought that she may not be actually unfaithful.

Are you sure? Have you discussed this with her, as a sanity check?

One of the more frustrating aspects of infidelity has been those who poo-poohed it all and told me I might just be imagining it. A Catholic marriage counselor suggested that I had ‘no proof’ and that she could help me work on gratitude lists. In the meantime, XH was racking up more and more debt, in addition to continuing inappropriate activity with various women.

My own mother is still telling people at my church that I imagine things.

My first step was to discuss what I was finding with my then-husband. I was quite naïve to think that someone who was cheating and lying to begin with would have an honest discussion about that! My attempts to discuss it with him only led me further into the insanity. This is infidelity we’re talking about which is based solidly in lying and deception to begin with!

 

[Samson01]

One of the more frustrating aspects of infidelity has been those who poo-poohed it all and told me I might just be imagining it. A Catholic marriage counselor suggested that I had ‘no proof’ and that she could help me work on gratitude lists. In the meantime, XH was racking up more and more debt, in addition to continuing inappropriate activity with various women.

My own mother is still telling people at my church that I imagine things.

My first step was to discuss what I was finding with my then-husband. I was quite naïve to think that someone who was cheating and lying to begin with would have an honest discussion about that! My attempts to discuss it with him only led me further into the insanity. This is infidelity we’re talking about which is based solidly in lying and deception to begin with!

Bingo!!! I just realized this last night. There is no talking to them without risk of counter accusations or of being called crazy, paranoid…I guess I was clinging to hope of saving the marriage but it isn’t my choice. I’m cashing in my chips. As a cancer survivor I mourned not seeing different places. I plan of traveling a bit.

 

[hurting]

From what I have seen, the only chance a father generally has is to be the first person to make an accusation (to be the plaintiff). Otherwise, he will be dragged down with endless, baseless, allegations which he must prove were lies with a lot of documentation. Then when he proves she lied (and nothing will possibly happen to her for committing perjury), she will make another accusation, and it repeats. He can attempt to enter motions, but good luck having them heard. The day of the hearing, she need only come in with another accusation of being in fear, and the process resets with his motion set aside to deal with the (obviously) pressing accusation.

If he can get the kids out of that equation immediately, and immediately extricate himself from her vicinity, then her ability to make accusations will be greatly diminished. But also would have to establish right up front her lying and cheating in order to paint a picture of a dishonest and manipulative person.

I am honestly surprised that so many men are still willing to marry American women until this situation is rectified. If you are a professional and even modestly successful man, it makes absolutely no economic or social sense for you to marry a woman in this country. The risk is far too high. Family values issues aside, we are better off simply becoming single fathers with some kind of surrogate program. The only things that make that unrealistic are family values which require a mother and a father. It’s basically the reverse of what women faced in the 19th century.

That’s the state of family courts in this country and why I think the only chance a father could possibly have is to be the plaintiff. Even then he has to have overwhelming evidence that she ought not be given full custody of the children.

I think I might agree from a strategy standpoint that the husband filing first MIGHT give him an advantage he might not otherwise have. It certainly is no lead pipe cinch, however.

Everything else you say, sadly, accurately describes domestic relations law in this country.

 

[hurting]

And to be clear, what I meant by the above post was predicated upon the assumption of a hostile divorce where the mother is trying to take him for all he is worth, along with his children. If there is a chance of doing it with mediation, then that is the best option.

Obviously saving a marriage is ideal, but I also see and hear from far too many Catholic spouses enduring abuse for the sake of saving an abusive marriage. I was one of them and I regret not letting it go years sooner. It’s not worth that kind of abuse. Celibacy is far better than that.

The cost of me sticking it out and trying to make it work for six years after the first serious sign of trouble is measured in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to say nothing of the detriment to my kids and sanity.

My attorney advised that the scenario you describe above is the factory setting. other outcomes are anomalies and outliers.

 

[Samson01]

I think I might agree from a strategy standpoint that the husband filing first MIGHT give him an advantage he might not otherwise have. It certainly is no lead pipe cinch, however.

Everything else you say, sadly, accurately describes domestic relations law in this country.

The benefits, if there are any of not filing first is in getting a full financial discloser and reasons for divorce up front. In my case wife hid accounts, debt, income, retirement, thrift savings plans through the Govnt and Lord knows what else. She also plans to hang me out on any possible relationship dynamics to avoid alimony…I’ll have twenty days to get counsel and respond appropriately with a respondents packet and include any mediation to be considered before the hearing.

 

[Michaela1]

No you must not! A priest once told me that we are not required to live in Hell here on Earth in order not to go to Hell later. That was great advice! I am so sorry you had to experience this from the very woman who vowed to honor and love you. Divorce her!