I was somewhat put off by Liam's original phrase, not because I felt it was wrong, but because I knew I fell short of that beautiful thought. Then when GeorgeH chimed in I flashed a bit with anger, but again it was anger at myself for falling short of the ideal.

Something God didn't mention in His interview was that we all fall short in different areas at different times. It is the defining part of our humanity.

I spent 11 years with my ex-wife. Certainly the last year or two was "for the children." I finally realized that I had been blind to an aspect of my ex-wife's personality when I fell in love with her and that our conflicts were irresolveable. We both tried in our own ways (together and apart) to make our marriage work. I finally decided that it was better for the children not to be exposed to the constant disagreements.

I cannot say it was easy for me or my children. One commitment that I made to myself and kept was that I would do what was in my power to ensure that my children had two parents. This required many compromises.

I feel I have been honest with my sons about the whys and wherefores of their parents' divorce, as I see them, including the areas where I fell short.

For children to have what Liam has offered his children is a true blessing which they will surely come to deeply cherish.

Both of my childrens' parents have established new loving relationships that look to have more permanancy that the initial marriage.

So, I will stand with Liam on his statement, but I will not feel hypocritical having not provided that for my children. But I will also keep myself aware that the world is not an ideal place and I am part of the world.

Roger in Baltimore