"....... me into someone else's arms!"
When a husbands advances for intimacy result in, yet another, rejection from the wife he's been married to for almost 16 years, and he makes this comment, you don't need to be clairvoyant to realise that he's either seriously considering, or already involved with someone else.
Do you?
However, if the wife responds by asking specifically, "Are you having an affair?", would that husband say, "Yes," if that were true?
It wouldn't be too difficult to imagine, at least, "I'm considering it!" in reply, if only to justify the previous comment.
Either way, they are both (in part) admitting a problem, and that opens the doorway to the range of probable solutions and their consequences.
There are some things that people will never want to admit, it takes unusual circumstances to combine together to provide sufficient reason for 'that kind of' admission. That doesn't mean to say that there are no admissions of that nature, perhaps they're just less obvious?
We also make decisions in how much attention we give them, how we interpret, whether we question and how much as well as what we accept in replies. We might choose to dismiss, for example, maybe we don't want to know, or we don't want to invest that amount of time or deal with the possible implications. Many admissions are 'open' to interpretation and deniable, depending on the consequences, or potential for these as suggested from the response.
Simple example:
New member of office staff arrives late (everyone else is in the office where she works between 9am - 9:20am). When asked why, they explain that they've had difficulty with traffic, so an alternative route is provided. Still, they arrive late, several times over the next few weeks (although they work later to compensate) the issue is again discussed.
They explain further:
They're a single mother, the youngest (of their four children) is just 9 years old and the last to leave in the morning (School starts at 8:45am and students are not permitted into the grounds before 8:30am). The 9 year old leaves the house between 8:15 and 8:30am. The journey to work takes 45 minutes, but the route to work involves a road notorious for heavy traffic and congestion and travelling to work may regularly take over an hour.
This workplace involves flexible working hours.
(Core hours are 10am - 4pm)
In addition, as a result of this further explanation, an agreed time 'window' is made between the employee and her superior officer. This is also agreed with their superiors. Colleagues are also informed by both the employee and her superiors (so that there shouldn't be any misunderstanding about why this arrangement or 'special agreement' has been made)in part due to this particular instance.
By agreement, the employee (and Mother (who has the 'strange' idea that children are the more important consideration in her list of daily priorities) ) is allowed to arrive between 9:15 and 9:30am and will ring the office if she's delayed en route to work.
Everything sound reasonable to you so far?
Does this seem an unusual problem/solution or does it seem fairly familiar/obvious to you?
Are you considering how the other employees are feeling?
Are you sure that you've given them enough thought?
Maybe you think this employee is expecting too much?
'Bigging-up' the issues of being a single parent/child care/home security/distance/travel?
even if you knew they were the victims of theft?
(you might not know but there could be some history of being the victims of violent crime?)
Okay,
maybe mistakenly,
I thought that was a good way of resolving the problem.
I soon found out that I was mistaken.
Someone wasn't happy about it, someone I clearly hadn't considered.
Maybe it was wrong of me to take the job given that they obviously wanted someone there before 9am. I was probably wrong for keeping the job in view of the fact that I so frequently didn't manage to get there before 9:15am.
I made the mistake, and I am guilty, of :-
a) Needing the job
b) Thinking I could probably be ready to leave the house before 8:30am and managing to get into the office by 9am, or very soon after - I did actually manage to do that, though no-one was standing at the door cheering and there were definitely no marching bands with "Hoorah!" banners in the car-park when I did..... afterall.... I felt I deserved that on each occasion - Still, I'm the one that got this wrong, so I was clearly in the wrong for feeling I deserved praise or nice comments for having overcome (what I considered) so many obstacles.
c) Having no idea also that this would continue to be an issue, that would keep rising up and haunting me, throughout the time of my employment with this organisation (3.5 years).
d) Not being sufficiently organised to ensure that the youngest child had, everything that he required, prepared for school the night before. And was always prompt leaving the house for school at 8:15am, never forgot anything and was never late i.e.: getting out of bed/eating breakfast/ bathed and dressed.etc) Not admitting I frequently had little or broken sleep the night before and had overslept.
f) Having slept through various alarm noises intended to wake me up Mon-Fri. i.e.:- radio/phone/children knocking and calling to me. (although I did mention all of these on various occasions - that were made opportunities - due to being late).
g) Was finding the workplace so stressful that I was often drinking in the evenings during the week now.
h) Imagining that working with so many managers and colleagues (all of which were women and predominantly parents) they'd appreciate how difficult it was for me, (especially because I was the only single mother amongst them - with school aged children) and not add to the burden i.e. - treat me like a criminal.
Stupid ... eh?
Still, I was new and, having asked during the interview what the anticipated 'settling-in' period was, I was aware that the managers who had interviewed me for the job of PA to them (The Clinical Director and Business Manager) were realistically expecting something in the region of 6 - 12 months before I would start to feel like I knew what I was doing for most (if not all) of the job.
They were more confident than I was, but then, I'd never been a P.A before.
This had also been discussed during the interview ( along with the huge range of experience I had gained within various other large and high profile organisations) so they were fully aware of what skills I had and those I wanted to develop within the role of PA.
On accepting the job, I contacted everyone else (who'd offered me an interview) and explained why I would not be attending.
I was shocked when the paperwork, detailing the appointment I accepted, finally arrived. The role of PA to the Clinical Director had changed from Band 5 (stated at the end of the interview by the Business Manager in the presence of the Clinical Director - twice, and confirmed over the phone a week later, on offer of the appointment) to the starting point of Band 4. Five thousand pounds, per annum, less than I'd accepted when I was offered the job.
They had mentioned the band and pay were subject to Agenda For Change, but that hadn't been applied at this point.
As I'd already cancelled every other job interview, and I needed the income, I decided to take it on the chin... at least, initially.
This situation between a couple is not unique, although it's not supposed to happen. Married couples have, after all, made a commitment through a series of promises to each other - wedding vows form a contract.
While there are couples who have various forms of open relationships, they are not (to my knowledge) the majority. They have, like every couple, discussed and agreed what is permitted within their relationship. However, most couples still want or expect a monogamous, mutually exclusive relationship. Both situations involve contracts by consentual agreement and the problems arise where some alteration is made without agreement, breach of contract.
Don't they?
Further questioning is most probably going to result in an argument.
Like any job or position, there exists the possibility that the current roles/status may change radically.
i.e.:
Married (or otherwise) couples may become Divorced - Single people/parents.
Employer and Employee may become Past employer and Previous employee.
There is always a clear point of choice.
What follows is not always due to the choice you made.
By obvious connection, there are multiple choices available, and you don't get to make them all by yourself.
Your choice can only influence to an extent, and that extent is pre-determined as much by those others involved and, whether or not they support your choice.
With me?
