Neil Clark Warren, the genial, Mr. Rogers-like face of eHarmony.com, has written several books, including the eHarmony companion, Date … or Soul Mate? Warren, a graduate of Princeton, Princeton Theological Seminary, who then got a Ph. D. in psychology from the University of Chicago, has years of clinical practice in marital therapy. He also draws on his own and others’ research to back up his claims that he can tell you “how to know if someone is worth pursuing in two dates or less.”
The book is light, unfootnoted, and a little repetitive. It could be reduced to a set of lists and slogans, once you get the basic idea. Still, the basic idea is solid, and the practices behind it, which Warren tells us they employ in eHarmony as well as in his personal clinical practice, are likely to help you find a well-matched mate – and to avoid a bad marriage.
The core of Warren’s advice is that if you are emotionally healthy, have a realistic concept of what you bring to mate selection and what you want in a mate, and are seriously looking for one, you can find the love of your life. If you are not emotionally healthy – if you are too neurotic, if you are an addict, and especially if you have a character disorder which makes you a charming, conscienceless manipulator, you have no business getting married. If are emotionally unhealthy, get help. If you are dating someone like that, run.
For the average person, though, Warren has good news. The core of his argument is that if you really want to find the love of your life, look for people who are similar to you, who bring roughly the same level of personal and marital qualities to the relationship, and who match your particular list of “must-haves” and “can’t stands.” He presents 50 popular contenders for each list, but urges the reader to pick only ten of each. This is a reasonable compromise between being too picky, and not choosing carefully enough. Warren notes that the culture pays the most attention to physical attractiveness, but what proves more worth choosing for in the long run is kindness, chemistry, similarity, and adaptability.
Warren doesn’t really get down to cases in this book on how you can tell all this about another person in two dates. He is probably right, though, that if you are clear on what you want and can’t stand, you will be able to read the clues in another person’s conversation and presentation better than you could explain in words. He reports that most failed marriages were flawed from the start, and very often one or both parties knew it. Having the courage to act on that knowledge, and the firm conviction that a bad marriage is worse than no marriage, could save many couples heartache, and save society the disaster of divorces.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
We must do something for the children. As a family lawyer, last year over half of my domestic law cases involved unmarried parents in parenting or support issues. Of my paternity cases, about 75% were initiated by the Bureau for Child Support Enforcement (BCSE), and of the ones initiated by the BCSE, in about 20% of the cases, the mother did not start the proceeding, but was a necessary party to the government action because she had received TANF (temporary aid to needy families) benefits. The other 25% of my paternity cases were initiated by the father who wanted a legal relationship with his child, and was concerned, after they ceased living together, that the mother would want nothing to do with him, or would move out of state, leaving him without legal recourse to visitation or parental decision making.
So what would be a good policy that might help with this situation? It seems to me a good thing to establish legal paternity (and maternity) for every child. Would that work?
One problem with requiring determination of paternity (maternity is always determined at birth)is a political decision would have to be made to pass a law that there would have to sanctions imposed on the mother for failing to identify the father at birth, with exceptions, such as in rape cases, or it will not work. I actually have had cases, this year where the mother either (a) did not know who the father was even in the context of consensual sexual relations - two men came forward, and DNA testing was ordered, and (b) the mother intentionally misled child support authorities. These are generally rare, and perhaps, with sanctions (and a willingness to enact and enforce them), the second situation would be less likely to occur.
Do fathers have to agree when they are named by the mothers? I think the political will to identify fathers and penalize the non-compliant mothers could be mustered. There seems to be bipartisan support for going after deadbeat dads, which seems to me to be a parallel problem.
This sounds like such a sensible book - much more so than so much of the crap like "The Rules" which infests the relationships section of bookstores. I should try to get my hands on this - the fact that it's written by a psychologist with years of experience counseling couples is a HUGE plus.
Men named as fathers do not have to agree, and can ask for DNA testing. The State initially pays for the test, which the father has to pay for if the test does not exclude him as the father. This year I have had two cases where the DNA testing excluded the named father. If he signs the birth certificate as the father, that is considered an admission, and paternity is determined. Most of the DNA testing is rendered in child support cases. You are right about the bi-partisan support for going after "dead-beat Dads." Congress has declared that any state which fails to take affirmative and aggressive action in suing to collect child support is in jeopardy of losing all federal funding administered through state departments of health and human services. Tax intercepts, mandatory wage witholding of up to 66% of a man's disposable income, mandatory health insurance implementation, and serious penalties for employers which do not comply are mandated by the federal government, to be implemented by the states, which must do so, or risk losing federal funding.
This is the rare case where new technology can help change a social norm. In a generation, it could be an accepted norm that all children have identified fathers and mothers.
Post a Comment