[notch656c]

Lol it's hilarious you pretended to ask a genuine question when you already knew the answer for your marriage. In fact you intentionally withheld it as some kind of poorly executed trap. Talk about a bad faith discussion.

Not all marriages involve people with the money to continue supporting the children when both rather than just one parent is bankrupted by medical debt, and not all disabilities end with being able to drive and walk. Usually don't involve people privileged enough to get "best in the world" Neurologists either.

There are people out there that may have to divorce precisely because they can't look their kids in the eyes with the marriage as it stands due to the disability, knowing a divorce will separate the finances and possible allow them to find more support for their child. Every human is susceptible to caretaker fatigue and you yourself can't possibly know you would never get fatigued if the disability never ended. Some people can go a 1 year without cracking, others a decade, others 100 years and until it happens you probably won't know your breaking point.

The fact of the matter is I get to see the people that deal with hundreds of seriously chronically disabled people. My dataset to work with is that it's a bad bet to expect that the counterparty will sacrifice themselves indefinitely for the sake of the marriage.

[bastardoperator]

You walked right into it, that's not my fault. LOL.

First you had family that worked in healthcare "I have family in healthcare so I hear the stories.". Now you're able to draw parallels because you get to see the people that deal with others? It doesn't even make sense. I have people that work in the healthcare industry including doctors too. Your evidence is andetoal at best, hearsay at worst. You don't have a dataset, you have stories. So which is it? Talk about a bad faith discussion...

The reality is there are plenty of people that would love their partner for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health.

[notch656c]

Yeah just be able to get the world's best neurologist and hope the situation gets better. If it does I'll say after the fact I'm sure no matter what it'd be in sickness and in health and I'm super man who doesn't fatigue. Obviously the impoverished mom who can't even afford to hire a doctor and walks away so the kids won't get bankrupted, well she just doesn't see marriage the same as you. Hell maybe she did all the things you tried and nothing responded, the husband couldn't go back to work after the operations failed and maybe even made things worse, we shouldn't really presume just because someone tapped out that they didn't go as far as you have.

You have even less than an anecdote, and then when you asked me for a response which uses actual anecdotes where it doesn't get better, you suddenly get upset about it.

>You walked right into it, that's not my fault. LOL.

This is just straight up sociopathy. You knew you had an unusual outcome, so you asked for the expected outcome with the trap that yours was a heartwarming but unexpected one. It was never coming from a place of curiosity.

>The reality is there are plenty of people that would love their partner for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health.

Marrying someone for this is also transactional if you expect this also of your partner as a condition of getting married. In this case it's like a transaction with an insurance policy built in as par of the transaction. You're just bragging about your particular transaction and terms for insurance.

To anyone else considering this, here's a test if you believe this applies to your situation. Ask your partner if they believe they would "love their partner for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health." If they say yes, tell them you think that's all bullshit and you don't reciprocate the agreement. You'll find out fast whether a transaction happened.