Pat Robertson Says Divorcing A Spouse With Alzheimer's Is Justifiable

[MrsSpringsteen]

(AP)Religious broadcaster Pat Robertson told his "700 Club" viewers that divorcing a spouse with Alzheimer's is justifiable because the disease is "a kind of death."

During the portion of the show where the one-time Republican presidential candidate takes questions from viewers, Robertson was asked what advice a man should give to a friend who began seeing another woman after his wife started suffering from the incurable neurological disorder.

"I know it sounds cruel, but if he's going to do something, he should divorce her and start all over again, but make sure she has custodial care and somebody looking after her," Robertson said.

The chairman of the Christian Broadcasting Network, which airs the "700 Club," said he wouldn't "put a guilt trip" on anyone who divorces a spouse who suffers from the illness, but added, "Get some ethicist besides me to give you the answer."

Most Christian denominations at least discourage divorce, citing Jesus' words in the Gospel of Mark that equate divorce and remarriage with adultery.

Terry Meeuwsen, Robertson's co-host, asked him about couples' marriage vows to take care of each other "for better or for worse" and "in sickness and in health."

"If you respect that vow, you say 'til death do us part,'" Robertson said during the Tuesday broadcast. "This is a kind of death."

A network spokesman said Wednesday that Robertson had no further statement.

Divorce is uncommon among couples where one partner is suffering from Alzheimer's, said Beth Kallmyer, director of constituent services for the Alzheimer's Association, which provides resources to sufferers and their families.

"We don't hear a lot of people saying 'I'm going to get divorced,'" she told The Associated Press. "Families typically respond the way they do to any other fatal disease."

The stress can be significant in marriages though, Kallmyer said, because it results in the gradual loss of a person's mental faculties.

"The caregiving can be really stressful on a couple of levels," she said. "There's the physical level. There's also the emotional level of feeling like you're losing that person you love."

As a result, she said, it's important for couples to make decisions about care together in the early stages of the illness, when its effects aren't as prominent.

[BVS]

Nothing but a false prophet...

[BonosSaint]

I'm not sure the vow reads "until kind of death do us part" if you value that vow.

I understand the difficulty. I understand the agony (even the inconvenience) of caring for someone who no longer recognizes you or has become someone you can no longer recognize. I don't make individual judgments on people's choices like that. But I'm not sure I would be giving a blanket blessing for the divorce.

[Earnie Shavers]

Originally Posted by BVS

Nothing but a false prophet...

Not even.

[MrsSpringsteen]

Originally Posted by BonosSaint

I understand the difficulty. I understand the agony (even the inconvenience) of caring for someone who no longer recognizes you or has become someone you can no longer recognize. I don't make individual judgments on people's choices like that. But I'm not sure I would be giving a blanket blessing for the divorce.

I understand it as much as I can right now..my uncle had it but I didn't have to care for him. I would imagine that having to do that is agony beyond imagination. I don't have the right to judge anyone who is in such a position.

I think you could argue that there are many forms of "death" other than Alzheimer's, obviously Alzheimer's is the extreme. So where do you draw the line, what mental or physical incapacities justify divorce?

I saw a news story on this a few nights ago and a couple that had been married 60 years or something like that. She has Alzheimer's and he got in bed with her and was hugging her and singing to her and she knew the song and started singing along. I just thought to myself, now THAT is love.

[BonosSaint]

I respect and honor that kind of commitment. That is the kind of commitment I strive for in my personal relationships (I often fall short). And the reason I keep my number of close relationships few and dear to me.

But I'm not in that situation. Maybe the spouses cannot provide any more than they already have. There are always backstories we don't know. I don't think though that the healthier spouse can escape that walking away is an abandonment. There are things someone can provide to the patient even if she/he does not recognize the spouse or is fading away from all the spouse knew about them. Like touch, sound, kindness.

Do you have dispensation to walk away from a child? And certainly as Mrs. S presented, what more loopholes are there for walking away?

[nathan1977]

Ordinarily I think this guy's a loon who I can't really stand. But at the same time, according to the clips I've seen, he hemmed and hawed in response to a very specific question about a very specific situation, and admitted that it was difficult, before going on to say that if someone has already begun seeing someone else, the least he should do is make sure that his wife is cared for in all legal ways before he goes through with a divorce.

This is a far cry from giving out blanket divorces.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by nathan1977

Ordinarily I think this guy's a loon who I can't really stand. But at the same time, according to the clips I've seen, he hemmed and hawed in response to a very specific question about a very specific situation, and admitted that it was difficult, before going on to say that if someone has already begun seeing someone else, the least he should do is make sure that his wife is cared for in all legal ways before he goes through with a divorce.

This is a far cry from giving out blanket divorces.

I don't care if he hemmed and hawed, and I don't care if he admitted it was difficult. For someone to spend as much time as he does going on about the sanctity of marriage to come out and state the divorce was fine despite the fact that it's not supported Biblically is a hypocrite.

[cobl04]

My grandfather divorced my grandmother after she got MS still loved her, made sure she was very well looked after and moved on with his life.

[MrsSpringsteen]

Yes I think the "sanctity of marriage" thing comes into play. If you're going to go around constantly preaching about that in order to justify that marriage is only man/woman then I think you'd better take that all the way. Real death would be the only real death. In sickness and in health.

People are probably ultimately better off if someone leaves them just because they get sick or worse-because that's when you know what a person is truly made of. Maybe it just reveals other big underlying flaws in the relationship. I know there are always backstories and all that.

[BonosSaint]

Originally Posted by nathan1977

Ordinarily I think this guy's a loon who I can't really stand. But at the same time, according to the clips I've seen, he hemmed and hawed in response to a very specific question about a very specific situation, and admitted that it was difficult, before going on to say that if someone has already begun seeing someone else, the least he should do is make sure that his wife is cared for in all legal ways before he goes through with a divorce.

This is a far cry from giving out blanket divorces.

I understand that he was answering a question about a specific situation.
But did he call it a "kind of a death"? I didn't see the clip. If he did, isn't that "kind of a loophole?" Just wondering if that statement can be interpreted to mean an absolution for divorce in this kind of situation even for someone who isn't already having an affair.


But the fact that Pat Robertson said it isn't really important to me. I don't much care who says something. I thought it made an interesting values discussion.

[nathan1977]

Originally Posted by BVS

I don't care if he hemmed and hawed, and I don't care if he admitted it was difficult. For someone to spend as much time as he does going on about the sanctity of marriage to come out and state the divorce was fine despite the fact that it's not supported Biblically is a hypocrite.

I don't think he said that it was "fine", merely that, if he was going to do it, for God's sake (literally) make sure his wife would be taken care of. A far more pragmatic response than Robertson's been known for in the past. Maybe he's slowly realizing that sometimes the most moral thing you can do is play the cards you're dealt as best you can, and leave the rest to God.

[the iron horse]

Originally Posted by BVS

Nothing but a false prophet...

Agree

[deep]

Originally Posted by BVS

false prophet

redundant

[yolland]

Originally Posted by BonosSaint

I don't think though that the healthier spouse can escape that walking away is an abandonment.

Agreed in that I found it rather strange that Robertson apparently considers the technical adultery (can you cheat on a "kind of dead" person? since that's the logic), rather than the literal abandonment of the teminally ill spouse (legally, financially, personally) to be the greater wrong here. Though maybe that's just a difference in how Jewish law vs. (Robertson's version of) Christian ethics prioritizes the obligations in such a case. On the other hand most Alzheimer's patients do wind up in a nursing home eventually, which realistically limits how much personal support the healthy spouse can provide whether s/he wants that or not. It's not really analogous to child abandonment IMO; no one abandons their child out of a feeling that s/he's keeping them from all the other, more rewarding parent/child relationships they need(?) and could be pursuing instead.

[BonosSaint]

I don't think I would have any problem with the healthy spouse seeking outside companionship/relationship once the Alzheimers becomes severe. But I would hope that he/she would visit, would provide some kind of weekly constancy, perhaps. Look in on the facility, make sure the spouse is being treated well.

You're right about the child. It was an exaggeration in a way. I was equating the vulnerability, but it wasn't analogous.

[mama cass]

oh i think it would be just awful, to ditch your spouse, the love of your life, in sickness, in their biggest time of need... abandonment... i reckon it would take quite a hard-hearted bastard to do that tbh!

[purpleoscar]

Someone's not following the golden rule. Plus anyone who doesn't want to take care of their loved ones must be a narcissist. Fucking embarrassing. We're all going to die of something, so how do we want to be treated?

[cobl04]

So you're both saying that if you divorce someone in poor health, that means you are unequivocally, inarguably a cold, heartless asshole? shades of grey people

[mama cass]

no, not "in poor health" but "because of poor health"

if that were the only reason, then yes... and i would add "selfish" to the mix as well

although, i would think, for someone to do such a thing, there must have been underlying issues in the relationship...

i guess if your spouse had been a real bastard to you all your marriage, you would have very good reason to ditch them at any time

but if that person was the love of your life, to divorce them because of illness is just tragic not to mention inconsistent... and i don't think anyone would divorce the love of their life, if they truly were that, because they were ill tbh...

i knew someone who's wife divorced him because she'd just retired as a teacher, he was unemployed, and she was required by law, as his spouse, to pay for her mother-in-law's retirement home, which costs a fortune... anyway, the mother-in-law in question had truly been a real bitch to her daughter-in-law the whole time she'd known her, and had made her life hell over the years, so she basically said, stuff it, i haven't worked my whole life to end up struggling in my retirement having to support this horrible old woman financially, and the only other option was to divorce her husband, so she did! really sad story - he was heartbroken, but i can totally see her point though lol!!