Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    Tell Ronny to get a lawyer NOW... to set up visitation rights and such 
    NOW.... the longer he waits, the more time he'll lose with the child.
    
    IF he is the father then so much the better... if not, then he can 
    have things sorted later.  BUT make sure the lawyer understand this,
    and understands exactly what Ronny wants.  
    
    There are ways to have the courts award joint custody to the child, and 
    even a three way joint visitation until such time as the true father 
    is determined.  
    
    The bad news is that he can develope a LOT of attachment to the child 
    in the three months before the first DNA test is done.  It is possible 
    that the test can be performed sooner, if the court so decrees.  So he 
    should try to work that issue as well.  
    
    But the important thing right now is to get a lawyer and get the
    lawyers advice on how best to proceed.  Ronny DOES have rights in this 
    matter and the sooner he finds out exactly what they are and what he 
    needs to do, the better off he'll be.
    
    Skip

    
    Ronnie,
    
    I wouldnt think anyone would go through what you have, even so far,
    just "cause they like kids". I suspect there's a much deeper reason.
    
    The old saying "it takes two to tango" has it roots in fact. What
    this means is that any relationship one has, says *as much about
    them* as it does the other person. With that bit of wisdom in hand,
    one can see that this is not "just this nice guy getting pooped
    on by this terrible woman". There's much more to it.
    
    [The question I ask myself and what raises my suspicion is "why on 
    earth did he stick around long enough to get Cheryl pregnant again
    or even end up wondering about it? If he had an inkling of being
    able to make for himself a healthy emotional interpersonal decision, 
    he would have been *GONE* soon after Cheryl announced she slept with 
    Steven again!"]
    
    This sounds like a very sick soap opera. Someone who aborts a child
    from a prior relationship while in a new relationship and then goes and
    tempts pregnancy again with the prior partner is probably sick and
    needs treatment. Someone who stays with them throughout this ordeal for 
    whatever reason, excuse, rationalization, justification (etc) is running a
    very_close_second, In My Humble Opinion. 
    
    I can say this because I've been there. I've been in the relationships
    where my partner had come out and told me about sleeping with another
    man, and my reaction was that we'll try to work it out! I've also been 
    in relationships where my partner has wanted *nothing* else except to
    get herself pregnant and have a baby. I've hung on for dear life after 
    relationship partners have virtually slung feces in my face. The
    question of interest here is: WHY, WHY, WHY!?
    
    I have also, as an infant, been that baby.
    
    My personal take on this is that it's a tradgedy for that child
    - *whomever* gets the child. Someone who's probably sick and needs 
    treatment, or someone who's also probably emotionally, uh, let's say 
    a bit less than sound and needs treatment. If I were you, knowing what 
    I know now, I'd get myself some counseling for something called
    "Codependancy" and in that take a long hard look at what it is
    *about me*, that kept me hanging on to Cheryl through all that sh*t
    and keeps me hanging onto the idea of possibly "getting" this baby for 
    myself now.
    
    	Best of luck!
    
    	Joe

    
    I'd tell him to get counseling AND a lawyer.
    
    And the way the laws go, unless she can be proven an unfit mother, or
    unless she is *completely amenable* to joint custody, I doubt it will
    happen.
    
    It sounds like she COULD make his life absolute hell even if he DOES
    get joint custody by punishing him by making visitation difficult, or
    time they must interact unpleasant, anytime she damn pleases. 
    
    I'd say she needs counseling too.
    
    I'd also say that he seems to want to play "hero" or "rescuer" for the
    baby or something - but it will unfortunately be only with the mother's
    permission (tacit, or otherwise).  I, too, wonder why he stuck around. 
    Then again, I wonder why Steve stuck around too.
    
    I was going to ask the obvious question about why nobody bothered to
    ask anyone about birth control, but perhaps they did, and the old
    "fertile myrtle" syndrome is in effect.  
    
    -Jody

    RE .2
    
    At this point, I think it's more a question of wither or not the 
    child is his.  IF it is, would you suggest he abandon it for the 
    first three months after it's birth until the DNA test is completed?
    
    Or would you recommend he seek legal council to try and spend those 
    three months with the child risking the possiblity of learning that 
    the child isn't his.  
    
    Co-dependency is in there... but it's a separate issue now, It's
    obvious that he's 'dumped' the idea of getting back with her.  And I
    think from what's been said, that he did what he felt was best at the 
    time so he could leave the relationship safely feeling that he'd done 
    all he could to make it work.  Now he's faced with the possibility of 
    the child she's carrying being his.  What rights does he have until
    such point as the decision is made conclusively as to WHO the father
    is.
    
    The reason I say it's obvious that he's dumped the idea of getting back 
    with her, is that there is no mention of 'How can we work things out'
    He's expressing a concern for the child.  
    
    Personally, I don't think what he did was necessarily co-dependent
    behavior, foolish possibly, but not necessarily co-dependent.  I know 
    that I have never walked out of a relationship without giving 110% to
    it, ever.  I never will, I've always explored whatever possibilities
    were there for making it successful, expecially if the first year into 
    the relationship was successful.  This doesn't make me co-dependent.
    It makes me conserned about the person I'm with, and means that morally
    I can not walk away from a relationship without exploring the
    possibilities of salvaging it first.
    
    However, once those avenues have been explored, and I know that I've
    done the best I can to 'make it work' and it's still failing, then I
    have to qualms (no matter how much it may or may not hurt) to walk away 
    from it.  
    
    The only 'bad thing' in the relationship until she broke it off with
    him, was the fact that she'd gone back to the other guy and slept with 
    him.  He decided to try and work it out.  Believe me, if everyone 
    broke it off as soon as they'd learned their lover had been unfaithful,
    there would be a LOT fewer marriages in the world.  A situation like
    that can usually go one of two ways... it will break the relationship 
    (as it did here) or it can strengthen the relationship.  
    
    Skip

    
    Thank you all for the replies so far.  I will relate them to Ronnie
    tonight.  Please keep them coming though.
    
    I agree with alot of what was said, especially from Skip.  Ronnie was
    in love with Cheryl that is why he did not break it off with her after
    he found out she slept with Steve.  Ronnie also admits that maybe
    sub-conciously he wanted a child with her, that is why they did not use
    anything, and maybe she wanted the same thing.  I guess she was very
    depressed after the abortion.  He admits to being foolish, but he was
    in love.  Unfortunately he did not have a chance to get to know the 
    "real" Cheryl until it was too late.  
    
    Cheryl is not keeping either possible father from the baby.  She has
    said that both guys can come visit the baby "at her place" until they
    know one way or the other.  The good thing is that she also does not
    want either one to get too attached because of the outcome.  Also, the
    reason why they must wait the 6 months for the DNA test is that Welfare
    will  not accept the results unless the test is done when the child is
    6 months old, as the test is more accurate at that time as opposed to
    when the child is 3 months old.
    
    I agree with the fact that Cheryl is Co-Dependent and have mentioned
    that to Ronnie and he agrees also (I suggested the book "Co-Dependent
    No More", but I think she would get pissed at him if he bought it for
    her).  But that is another issue.  
    
    In regards to reply .2, Ronnie has taken full responsibility for his
    actions and he is not looking for sympathy.  He feels that he got
    himself in this mess and now he has to deal with it.  
    
    I don't think he wants physical custody either (not unless it was
    absolutely necessary for the child's sake).  He has said that
    Cheryl is a good mother to her child with Steve.  Ronnie still lives at
    home with his mother (He's 21) and does not have the ability to fully
    support a child.  The main problem is that Cheryl does not want him
    bringing the child to his house because at times there are alot of
    people hanging around drinking beer & smoking cigarettes.  Ronnie has
    agreed that he is not going to bring the child around an environment
    like that.  He is trying to find another place to live right now, but
    it is tough because he does not make much money.  Can she make the
    decision as to where he does and does not bring the baby??  And what he
    does with the child??
    
    I've known Ronnie for a while, and he is very good with kids and I know
    he would never do anything to hurt his child (if it is his).
    
    Well, Keep the suggestions and advice coming & I'll let you know how
    Ronnie responds.
    
    Thanks
    Debby
     

    
    
    Deb,
    
    Even if welfare will not accept the results prior to six months,
    they still should have a test on day one.  At least that way,
    legally the rightful father can start the fight for custody
    and visitation if he chooses to do so.  I would guess that
    the only reason welfare needs to know who the father is is
    so they can go after him for support purposes.  At least that
    is the only reason I can think of.  
    
    I would suggest Ronnie get himself a lawyer who specializes
    in family law immediately.  Get the baby DNA tested on day
    one by an independant lab possibly by two just to make
    sure the results are the same.  This is really a leagal
    matter at this point.  At least that way he would know if he
    were the childs true father before he falls in love with this
    child and the child starts a relationship with him.  
    
    Hoping for the best for all concerned,
    Michele

    re:.0
    
    If the baby isn't Ronny's the he should get while the gettin' is good.
    
    He's being tooled by Cheryl.

    > Welfare will not accept the results unless the test is done when the 
    > child is 6 months old, as the test is more accurate at that time 
    > as opposed to when the child is 3 months old.
    
    Anybody know the reason for this?  Sure sounds fishy to me, but maybe
    there's some problem in the method of collecting sample cells.  (But
    what could that problem be??  Every cell has DNA... ever since
    fertilization took place....  Don't they use blood samples?  What's
    different in a newborn's blood-cell DNA from a 3-month-old's?)
    
    Sounds to me like a case of not wanting to get a Round Tuit, but I'd
    like to know if there's a real (medical) reason.
    
    Leslie                                 

    
    	Re .5 -
    
    	Thanks for the regards.
    
    	I find it utterly fascinating how opaque the great blanket of
    denial can be:
    
    >I agree with the fact that Cheryl is Co-Dependent and have mentioned
    >that to Ronnie and he agrees also (I suggested the book "Co-Dependent
    >No More", but I think she would get pissed at him if he bought it for
    >her).  But that is another issue.  
    
    	Of course, NO ONE in this would consider anyone else BUT "Cheryl"
    as "the Codependant one" or buy that book intended for themselves...
    
    	Hahaha - Gosh this brings back memories! Of buying the self-help
    books for "the person with the problem". Hey, guess you gotta go
    through what you gotta go through, eh? I went through it. Anyone
    who'd stop for a second to listen to me, just might not have to.
    
    	Love. I challenge that this guy Ronnie even has an inkling of
    what love even is and how that contrasts with Codependancy. To wit:
    
    >Ronnie was
    >in love with Cheryl that is why he did not break it off with her after
    >he found out she slept with Steve.
    
    	I'm sorry. People who know what love trully is _break it off_
    with someone when they've been as unfaithful as having sexual
    intercourse with someone else, period! For people who dont do this,
    it's more likely they have a *pathological relationship* to the mood
    altering experience of being with the someone who's been unfaithful!
    
    	That's damn close to the definition of someone who's an addict.
    The only thing missing is the life damaging consequences part. Gee,
    what could be life damaging to Ronnie in this situation? I dont
    know, possibly being all tied up with this kid at 21, not even out
    of the house yet with his whole life ahead of him, a decent career 
    not even *begun* yet!? Noooooooo, that would !$%& things up but good 
    for him...
    
    	I got my regards but not *a word was heard*. (That big blanket
    of denial again). Yeah, it's *Cheryl* that needs to stamp the cover
    of "Codependant No More" with "Read and Understood".

	Joe

    I'm sorry but in my own opinion, just because Ronnie was willing to 
    give her a second chance after making the mistake of going back to 
    Steve once doesn't show me any sign of his being Co-dependent....
    
    It DOES show he was willing to deal with the problem, and allow that 
    she made a mistake.  I also understand that the relationship ended
    after she returned to Steve a second time, and from what I gather,
    there is no desire on his part to go bck to her after this.  
    
    Not everyone cuts their loses after someone else goes astray.  
    
    Even psychologists state that it can happen in a relationship and if 
    dealt with properly can strengthen the relationship afterwords.  
    
    The reaction being displayed is more like someone who was burned and 
    hasn't laid it to rest yet.  But for the record, my father was 
    unfaithful to my mother at one time.  There were reasons, and
    realistically I can understand them.  I don't necessarily agree with 
    them, but I CAN understand them.  My parents were probably the farthest 
    thing in the world from 'co-dependency' yet my mother dealt with the 
    problem and it never happened again.  In fact after it had happened 
    they're relationship became stronger, he started to think more in terms 
    of 'us' instead of 'me' and so did she.  They spent time together, 
    although they still displayed the independence they'd always had.  
    
    That's love... not co-dependency.  That's the dicission to take on the 
    problem find out what's wrong and solve it, instead of saying...
    
    "you're a b@$+@rd and I don't want to ever see you again."
    
     Once is a mistake, twice wellllll that's another matter.
    
    Skip

    
    Thank you Skip, I agree with you completely.  Like you had said in a
    previous message, if everyone left a relationship when one person had
    an affair, there would be fewer marriages/relationships.
    
    Now, Joe, I don't understand what you mean about there being a blanket
    of denial????  I don't see any denial going on.  The only thing I can
    think of is when I mentioned the book "Co-dependency no more" for Ronny
    to give to Cheryl.  The reason why I say that Cheryl might be a 
    Co-dependent is because I am one, and I have read the book.  I just 
    think she has alot of Codependent tendancies (ie. trying to control 
    everyone and every situation).  Please expand on what you were saying 
    because I am confused.
    
    Thanks,
    Debby
    
      

    
I think Joe was being kinda harsh, but he's GOT A POINT.
    
    I don't know about this "oh, let's give her another chance" thing, but
    look at the timeline.

>    Ronny started seeing Cheryl last September.  Cheryl was 19 at the time
>    and had a 9 month old daughter from a relationship (with a guy named
>    Steve) which had just ended about 2 weeks before she started with Ronny.  
>    About 4 weeks into the relationship with Ronny, Cheryl found out she was 
>    about 6 - 8 weeks pregnant with Steve's child.  
    
    They Ronny and Cheryl start seeing each other last September.
    Cheryl was  TWO WEEKS out of the relationship with Steve.
    In October, Cheryl found out she was pregnant with Steve's Child.
    Ronny supports her through her choice.
    In November She slept with Steve (again) - Ronny stayed.
    Cheryl gets pregnant again.
    
    Now after knowing this woman for THREE MONTHS at the MOST, Ronny
    decides to stick by Cheryl through the pregnancy, not knowing WHO THE
    FATHER IS?
    
    Cheryl sleeps with Steve AGAIN, Ronny still stays.
    
    June comes by and Cheryl tries to get rid of Ronny. 
    Cheryl continues to hurt Ronnie.
    Ronnie sticks around, still not knowing if it's his baby.
    
    Cheryl slept at least 2 times with Steve, while purporting to be
    with Ronny, during her relationship with Ronny which started TWO WEEKS
    AFTER HER BREAKUP WITH STEVE?
    
    I think they're all a little maladjusted.  Codependence is not a dirty
    word - I've been there!  I've STAYED in unhealthy relationships.  I've
    stayed in relationships with a man who said "I was the one he loved",
    while he went out and saw other women who I CONVINCED myself weren't
    important to him.  BULLSHIT.
    
    Ask Ronny to wake up and smell the coffee, and try to create a
    healthier template for HIMSELF in relationship, to ensure this NEVER
    happens again.
    
    -Jody
    

    I agree with Jody and Joe.  I think poor Ronny has some problems.  He
    should've been gone long ago, imo.  
    
    Lorna
    

    What is this desire in people to label everything with co-dependency
    anymore?
    
    Ronny was trying to do something for better or worse, he was willing 
    to take on the responsibilties of the child.  At 21 that's an admirable 
    trait.  Yet instead of people looking at it as an admirable trait, they 
    start labeling him as being co-dependent.  
    
    Co-dependency is NOT a bad word, but it is not a catch-all word either.
    
    It does not apply to every man who made a fool of himself over a woman
    or vice-versa.  
    
    Maybe Ron DOES have some problems, but at this point it looks more like 
    LEGAL problems to me then weather or not he's co-dependent... He isn't 
    expressing the typical co-dependent response of 'If I could only get
    back with her somehow'.  
    
    More like, If the child is mine, I want to do right by it, does she
    have the legal authority to control what I can and can't do with the 
    child between the day it's born and the day it's determined if I am in 
    fact the parent or not.
    
    Skip

    
    	Skip, I guess I was coming across a bit definitive there. I
    cant agree more with the idea of *understanding*. God knows it's
    saved so much for me in my life, I dont know where I'd be without
    it.
    
    	I also agree with the idea that it's to each his (or her) own;
    what level of unacceptable behavior is tolerable and where
    understanding can be applied and when things have gone "beyond
    understanding".
    
    	Note however in the case of your mother and father, though
    she came to understand him, I'll bet she probably also understood
    a lot about herself and *her* role in what happened too. This is the 
    hallmark of how understanding and forgiveness leads to a 
    strengthen-ing of a relationship between two people.
    
    	This is much different than one person leaving the relationship
    with only the understanding that "it's this other guy/gal who's 
    Codependant" or "an Alcoholic" or whatever, and missing out entirely 
    on the opportunity of understanding something of themselves and *their*
    role in it and what happened.
    
    	Debby, The "denial" I'm trying to point out is -
    
    	- Apparently you've read the book and understand it, yet only seek 
    	  to point out to "Ronnie" the Codependant traits in "Cheryl". 
    	  How come you limit that to stuff about her?
    
    	- Codependancy implies two to tango. It takes two to do the
    	  dance of Codependancy. Therefore, if you're certain one is a 
    	  Codependant...Chances Are.
    
    	I mean at the very least, the fact that Ronnie got so tangled up 
    in Cheryl emotionally is a strong indicator that Ronnie might want to
    check that out about himself. So, here's a guy we're all going to help
    out to get this baby - and he hasnt even bothered to check into his own
    emotional health (!?) - even though the indicators are present which
    - some people say - would tell him to do so? This is the 3rd time I've
    mentioned the idea of "says as much about *him*, as it does her" and
    I'd spose that the only way this could remain as yet misunderstood, and
    not acknowledged, is through denial. 

	- The difference between love and codependancy is made clear
    	  in that book I believe. 
    
    	Ummm....Might it have been possible for Ronnie to have used a
    bit of denial to get past the idea of Cheryl sleeping with Steven? Oh 
    but he was "in love" with her! So she could do just about anything that
    could hurt him; she can _use_ his company while having her abortion and 
    then run off and screw this other guy all the while she was with him,
    till she's pregnant again and that's okay, I guess? Hey - he's "in
    love"...or maybe he was more accurately addicted to a relationship
    with her, or to having sex with her or something. You dont spose
    *that* would foster such a thing as the ability to "deny" reality?
    
       	Now, I am *not* a professional counselor and only speak from my
    own limited experience and knowledge with this stuff. I've been
    through it, only lucky enough that I didnt ever have to wonder about
    what Ronnie's wondering about. In the time since I've learned some
    things and when I read about someone who's thinking of taking on 
    a task like custody of a baby, who *couldnt even get a relationship
    to work out*, I admit I get a little excited in my enthusiasm in
    reply. I'd say I've just got the "getting relationships to work" 
    part down, at 35...
    
	Joe

    
    Thanks again Skip for bringing this note back to its purpose.  I agree
    with you all that this is a messed up situation, and sure maybe Ronnie
    is also co-dependent, but that is not the issue at hand.
    
    Now Joe, I don't know where you got the idea that Ronnie wants to
    "take" the baby, and wants custody --- I never said that.  Ronnie does
    not want physical custody, he just wants joint legal custody with
    visitation, he is content with being a non-custodial parent, as he does 
    not have the means to raise a child on his own.  Cheryl is on Welfare 
    and the State of Rhode Island supports her.  Ronnie is a Sheet Metal 
    fabricator for a very small company (with hardly any benefits) and is 
    just getting by.  Cheryl has already agreed that he can have visitation 
    (one night during the week & every other weekend) if it is his child.  
    
    The reason why he wants joint legal custody is because he wants to be
    involved in the child's life.  He feels that if she gets full
    legal/physical custody, she does not *have* to involve him in the
    childs life, not that she will do it, but he has seen the way she uses
    her other child with Steve, and Ronnie does not want that to happen
    with him.  
    
    A little background info:  Ronnie did not know that Cheryl had just
    broken up with Steve when he had gotten involved with her, he found out
    when she found out she was pregnant (the aborted pregnancy).  He admits 
    over and over again that this should have been his first sign to break 
    it off with her, but he didn't, and he can't change the past.  Everyone 
    has some "Should have" situations in their lives, so don't judge him so 
    harshly for doing the right thing.
    
    If he had dropped her like a sack of potatoes when he found out she was
    pregnant with possibly his child, then he would have been considered an
    a**hole, and now when he is trying to do the right thing, he is being
    labeled a chump, sucker, and co-dependent.  He cannot change the past,
    he just wants to learn how to deal with the future.  His priority
    right now is this child and he is trying to make the best of a bad
    situation.  Any suggestions on that would be great, but lets stop
    arguing about the past, it can't be changed, and that is not what
    Ronnie is looking for.  
    
    Thanks,
    Debby
    

    I asked in VMSZOO::MEDICAL about the age factor in testing the baby's
    DNA; interesting answer in (MEDICAL) note 629.8.
    
    Leslie