If he doesn’t win an Oscar on Sunday it will be a crime. Colin Firth’s performance in “The King’s Speech” was outst-st-st-anding. But the best role he has played is as a husband and father. He has been married 15 years and has two sons. Having become a heart-throb after emerging from a lake, dripping wet in Pride & Prejudice 16 years ago there have been many admirers!
The secret of the longevity of his marriage in an industry known for a high failure rate of marriages, is his devotion to his wife and family. “You just have to navigate things on a daily basis. We are crazy about each other. But the real secret is time – we have to make sure we spend enough time together. Every relationship in life, you’re going to have to take care of it. There is a marathon factor to it.”
The happiest marriages are based on a deep friendship. This is the single most important ingredient. Making and taking the time to foster and deepen that friendship will bring richness to a marriage and enable any couple to navigate whatever comes at them in the normal course of life. Friendship fuels the flames of romance. It’s a daily thing.
Eat together. Talk together. Play together.
Tuesday, 22 February 2011
Wednesday, 16 February 2011
Mr Cameron's Big Society. A Jewish Perspective.
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, now Lord Sacks, who has been Chief Rabbi since 1991, says:
"If the Jewish experience has anything to say to Britain today, it is to recognise marriage, not just cohabitation, as in the best interests of the child. Do so in the tax system, do so in the educational system, do so in relationship support. Without stable marriages we will not have strong families and without strong families we will not have a big society."
"If the Jewish experience has anything to say to Britain today, it is to recognise marriage, not just cohabitation, as in the best interests of the child. Do so in the tax system, do so in the educational system, do so in relationship support. Without stable marriages we will not have strong families and without strong families we will not have a big society."
Monday, 14 February 2011
Valentines All Year Round.
It’s that time of year. Valentine’s day. We are surrounded by the commercial opportunity to be romantic. Not a bad reminder to do something romantic together with our partner or spouse.
The real work in a relationship however is on-going. The best relationships are built on a strong foundation of friendship; a mutual respect for and enjoyment of each other’s company. It is about having an abiding regard for each other and expressing this fondness not just in big ways but in little ways, day in, day out.
"As a result such couples have a marriage that is far more passionate than do couples who punctuate their lives together with romantic vacations and lavish anniversary gifts but have fallen out of touch in their daily lives." (John Gottman)
Eat together. Play together. Talk together.
Tuesday, 8 February 2011
Stood Up By Kaye.
I almost made it on to BBC Scotland this morning. At 8am I had a pre-programme phone call and then at 9.20 the producer called me and told me to stand by to take part in the discussion..........................but after a few minutes of me nervously waiting he said, we have had a flood of calls, so we will have to leave your contribution for today, thanks. Fair enough I thought. They want to hear from Joe Public rather than another “professional.”
“Why does marriage matter?” was the issue under discussion. The debate centred around why we should want to promote marriage above cohabitation and should the Govt favour one over the other, in the tax system.
A number of things struck me. Firstly, Kaye Adams hosted the programme very well and was very fair to all sides and did so with good humour. She led a very good discussion.
Secondly. It is ok, up to a point, to speak from personal experience. But, whatever your experience is, someone else will argue from theirs. So how do you decide which is the most valid? And who decides? People need to discuss on the basis of more than personal experience. What does the evidence actually point to? And the fact that marriages are 4 times more likely to succeed than cohabitations is telling.
Thirdly. Individual cases do not make the rule. We heard from a number of cohabitees who have been together 25 years or more, which is undoubtedly commendable. Some are celebrating by getting married! (Why bother now, I wonder?) But on the bigger scale, the level of trends in society, these are the exceptions. Only 4% of cohabitations will last 10 years or more. The majority will break-up within 5 years. Take 100 Cohabitees. 74 will still be together in 5 years time. 26 will not. Take 100 couples who marry. 91 will still be together in 5 years time. 9 will not. The difference is great. The social and emotional cost huge. And the key element is to do with commitment.
This is the main difference between the two. In the purely private arrangement of cohabitation the door is ajar. In the publicly commitment of marriage the door is closed. Not in the sense of being trapped but rather as a way of saying, we are a couple and we intend to stay together for our own benefit, for the benefit of any children and the good of wider society. The Counsellor on the programme was correct when she said, “Marriage has been devalued. We need to revalue commitment.” People chose to express their commitment in different ways other than marriage. They have a baby as a sign of commitment. Or they take out a mortgage as a sign. Is that enough?
My last reflection is about “Legacy.” What are we modelling for our children with regard to relationships? If it is true that cohabitations are the preferred lifestyle choice of the majority and if it is true that they are intrinsically more fragile than marriages irrespective of the age of the couples involved, then what are our children witnessing, experiencing and absorbing as a model for their own future? Fragility? Impermanence? There is plenty of evidence that relationship patterns jump to the next generation. So the way our parents behave influences the way their children will behave. The same can be said of bad marriages of course.
We are in danger of perpetuating a skepticism about relationships. They probably don’t work. So my attitude to any future one is deeply coloured by what I have known at home and learned from society. And it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy of failure. Entering a relationship with such a low expectation of hope of success surely doesn’t bode well for the couple. What is it that kills off relationships in the end, according to Michelle Weiner-Davis? Loss of hope. Well, if you start with fragile hope, where does that lead in the end?
As for tax benefits for married couples? Why not! The long term benefits which marriage gives back to society in terms of health and well-being, productivity, input from fathers, child care, children's education and development etc etc ought to be recognised and encouraged.
We should strive to give our children the gift of growing up with both parents, living in a committed and loving relationship, enjoying the highs and working through the inevitable lows. Remember, relationship patterns jump to the next generation.
“Why does marriage matter?” was the issue under discussion. The debate centred around why we should want to promote marriage above cohabitation and should the Govt favour one over the other, in the tax system.
A number of things struck me. Firstly, Kaye Adams hosted the programme very well and was very fair to all sides and did so with good humour. She led a very good discussion.
Secondly. It is ok, up to a point, to speak from personal experience. But, whatever your experience is, someone else will argue from theirs. So how do you decide which is the most valid? And who decides? People need to discuss on the basis of more than personal experience. What does the evidence actually point to? And the fact that marriages are 4 times more likely to succeed than cohabitations is telling.
Thirdly. Individual cases do not make the rule. We heard from a number of cohabitees who have been together 25 years or more, which is undoubtedly commendable. Some are celebrating by getting married! (Why bother now, I wonder?) But on the bigger scale, the level of trends in society, these are the exceptions. Only 4% of cohabitations will last 10 years or more. The majority will break-up within 5 years. Take 100 Cohabitees. 74 will still be together in 5 years time. 26 will not. Take 100 couples who marry. 91 will still be together in 5 years time. 9 will not. The difference is great. The social and emotional cost huge. And the key element is to do with commitment.
This is the main difference between the two. In the purely private arrangement of cohabitation the door is ajar. In the publicly commitment of marriage the door is closed. Not in the sense of being trapped but rather as a way of saying, we are a couple and we intend to stay together for our own benefit, for the benefit of any children and the good of wider society. The Counsellor on the programme was correct when she said, “Marriage has been devalued. We need to revalue commitment.” People chose to express their commitment in different ways other than marriage. They have a baby as a sign of commitment. Or they take out a mortgage as a sign. Is that enough?
My last reflection is about “Legacy.” What are we modelling for our children with regard to relationships? If it is true that cohabitations are the preferred lifestyle choice of the majority and if it is true that they are intrinsically more fragile than marriages irrespective of the age of the couples involved, then what are our children witnessing, experiencing and absorbing as a model for their own future? Fragility? Impermanence? There is plenty of evidence that relationship patterns jump to the next generation. So the way our parents behave influences the way their children will behave. The same can be said of bad marriages of course.
We are in danger of perpetuating a skepticism about relationships. They probably don’t work. So my attitude to any future one is deeply coloured by what I have known at home and learned from society. And it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy of failure. Entering a relationship with such a low expectation of hope of success surely doesn’t bode well for the couple. What is it that kills off relationships in the end, according to Michelle Weiner-Davis? Loss of hope. Well, if you start with fragile hope, where does that lead in the end?
As for tax benefits for married couples? Why not! The long term benefits which marriage gives back to society in terms of health and well-being, productivity, input from fathers, child care, children's education and development etc etc ought to be recognised and encouraged.
We should strive to give our children the gift of growing up with both parents, living in a committed and loving relationship, enjoying the highs and working through the inevitable lows. Remember, relationship patterns jump to the next generation.
Wednesday, 2 February 2011
She said. He said.
Comments from a recent evening of Marriage Preparation.
5 couples. All Co-habiting.
She said: I was intrigued at the prospect of doing some marriage preparation. At the end of the evening I feel reassured and motivated.
He said: I felt just ok about coming on the evening but now that I have been here I feel motivated.
She said: I was nervous about coming to the evening. Now, having been here I feel excited.
He said: I was intrigued at the thought of coming. I now feel reassured.
She said: I enjoyed having time to sit and talk with my fiancée. This evening has given us loads of ideas of things to discuss at home.
He said: This has been a very useful evening. It has highlighted some important aspects that are critical in daily life.
“Love Well. Live Well” – Key Skills For A Healthy Relationship.
2 hours which could make all the difference.
Monday, 31 January 2011
Celebrating Commitment..
“Celebrating Commitment.”
Marriage Week 7-14 Feb
It’s 25 years since the tragic Shuttle disaster when the rocket blew up soon after take-off and all lives were lost. Space travel is risky. “Statistically”, says Scott Stanley of the University of Denver, “Marriage is as risky as space travel. Research suggests, however that not being married is even more risky, especially if you want the best shot at life-long love. Nothing besides commitment in marriage brings the same benefits of health, economic stability, companionship and even sexual satisfaction. There is real power in knowing you are a team and that you can count on each other in the future.” (The Power Of Commitment - Scott Stanley)
Marriage Week (7-14Feb) is about celebrating commitment. During this week or in the week after, why not make a special effort to create some space for you and your partner to do something different, beyond the routines of daily life.
Eat: Take time to make or order in some of your favourite food and when the children are in bed, enjoying a quiet uninterrupted meal.
Talk: What does your daily communication as a couple consist of? Organising the family and home, questions about the kids, what needs to go on the shopping list? Or perhaps some of the big decisions of life – whether to move house, what new car to buy, your health or ailments? When was the last time you sat down and just talked about “you” – the challenges of life, what’s motivating you, what’s dragging you down, how it feels to be you – or perhaps your hopes and dreams for your future together? Make time this week to sit down together just to “talk”!
Play: When we first fall in love life always seems to be full of fun – but as the years go by, sometimes we forget to play together! This week, why not make some time to do something together you both enjoy. It could be as simple as going for a walk, watching a movie together, or spending an evening in your local pub. Or of course you could do something adventurous – go para-gliding or bungee jumping! Or perhaps, you could just curl up together in front of a fire, and read stories to each other. Whatever it is, try and find something you can both take part in, and which will remind you of the fun times in your relationship!
Monday, 24 January 2011
Facebook & Divorce?
For most people, Facebook is a harmless way to keep in touch with friends and family. But flirtations on the social networking site are now becoming a major factor in marriage breakdown.
Family lawyers have revealed that the problem has become so great that almost every divorce they have dealt with in the past year has involved the website. One expert said she had dealt with 30 cases in the last nine months and Facebook had been implicated in them all. Whilst another online law company said one in five of their divorce petitions in the past year contain references to Facebook.
Emma Patel, the head of family law at Hart Scales & Hodges Solicitors, said the site acted like a "virtual third party" in splits. "Facebook is being blamed for an increasing number of marital breakdowns, and it is quite remarkable that all the petitions that I have seen here since May have cited Facebook one way or another," she said. "Its huge popularity as well as the lure of sites like Second Life, Illicit Encounters and Friends Reunited are tempting couples to cheat on each other. Suspicious spouses have used these to spy and find evidence of flirting and even affairs, which have then led to break-ups." She said that many of divorces came after partners found "flirty messages" on the Facebook wall of their partner – and also "inappropriate suggestive chats" which spouse's can see.
The lawyer said that she urged all clients to "stay off" Facebook during divorce proceedings – as it could throw a spanner in the works of it going smoothly – especially if they post photos of new lovers. She said: "They feel compelled to share their feelings online, and, in some cases, they not only express their stress, but also make inflammatory accusations against their partner. Divorce is a highly-charged and emotional time, but it is vital not to turn the situation into a public slagging match, played out for everyone to see online. The situation has deteriorated so badly that we advise feuding couples to avoid these sites until their divorces are settled."
The family law specialist based in Dorking, Surrey, said that one divorcing couple's rows on Facebook got so bad one party was charged with malicious communication after the police got involved.
A spokesman for Facebook said it was "tosh" that Facebook could ruin a relationship. It is like blaming your mobile phone or your emails," he said. "Does being on Facebook force you to do something – absolutely not I would say."
Family lawyers have revealed that the problem has become so great that almost every divorce they have dealt with in the past year has involved the website. One expert said she had dealt with 30 cases in the last nine months and Facebook had been implicated in them all. Whilst another online law company said one in five of their divorce petitions in the past year contain references to Facebook.
Emma Patel, the head of family law at Hart Scales & Hodges Solicitors, said the site acted like a "virtual third party" in splits. "Facebook is being blamed for an increasing number of marital breakdowns, and it is quite remarkable that all the petitions that I have seen here since May have cited Facebook one way or another," she said. "Its huge popularity as well as the lure of sites like Second Life, Illicit Encounters and Friends Reunited are tempting couples to cheat on each other. Suspicious spouses have used these to spy and find evidence of flirting and even affairs, which have then led to break-ups." She said that many of divorces came after partners found "flirty messages" on the Facebook wall of their partner – and also "inappropriate suggestive chats" which spouse's can see.
The lawyer said that she urged all clients to "stay off" Facebook during divorce proceedings – as it could throw a spanner in the works of it going smoothly – especially if they post photos of new lovers. She said: "They feel compelled to share their feelings online, and, in some cases, they not only express their stress, but also make inflammatory accusations against their partner. Divorce is a highly-charged and emotional time, but it is vital not to turn the situation into a public slagging match, played out for everyone to see online. The situation has deteriorated so badly that we advise feuding couples to avoid these sites until their divorces are settled."
The family law specialist based in Dorking, Surrey, said that one divorcing couple's rows on Facebook got so bad one party was charged with malicious communication after the police got involved.
A spokesman for Facebook said it was "tosh" that Facebook could ruin a relationship. It is like blaming your mobile phone or your emails," he said. "Does being on Facebook force you to do something – absolutely not I would say."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)