DEAR CAROLYN: Long story short, I left my then husband for my current husband when my kids were 5 and 7. They spent time with bio dad, but basically lived with me and their stepfather.
Fast-forward 19 years. Our daughter is getting married and wants to have both of them walk her down the aisle. She wants to honor both men as they were both fathers to her.
Understandably bio dad is not comfortable with this and told her because he is her biological dad it should be his privilege. Stepfather is OK with not walking her and has told her she should have her father do it. I suggested that bio dad walk her down the aisle and stepdad have the first dance, then they would both get separate time with her.
Her feelings are that none of what happened 19 years ago had anything to do with her and she should be able to do what is right for her wedding, and that she wants both of them to do it. What is right?
-- R.
DEAR READER: It's right for the bride to consider her own and her parents' feelings carefully; for the parents to weigh in when invited to but otherwise respect this as Bride's decision; for Bride to make a principled decision (versus one based on, say, making a statement); and, once that decision is made, for the parents to make accepting it their priority, over nursing old wounds or seeking justice or upholding "tradition" or dwelling on symbolism or whatever other meaning attaches itself to such choices.
From the scant information you've given, it does sound as if Bride is being needlessly, and selfishly, stubborn in her insistence on the double escort. She's so adamant that the events of 19 years ago weren't about her that she's letting those events take charge. What's a wedding, though, without a little irony.
If compassion were at the helm instead her fixed idea of what she wants, then she'd see that her father not only missed out on sharing a home with his own children, apparently against his will, but also can never get those years back and never be compensated for them.
Does that mean she automatically defers to his fixed idea of what he wants? No. But it does mean rethinking what she's trying to accomplish here -- maybe considering that, while the impulse to include them both is generous, opening her mind to what the three parents are saying to her might be more so.
This is, of course, academic, because I'm talking to you, not Bride. And, whether Bride is stubborn or generous or justified or merely immature is irrelevant to what the parents all have to do at this point -- which is for each, individually, to act on his or her own principles, just as Bride needs to do.
Meaning: Your ex-husband decides for himself whether he plays along or takes a stand. Your current husband decides for himself whether he plays along or takes a stand.
And you, though you no doubt feel in the middle of it all, recognize the sidelines as your proper place to stand. You've made your point. Now it's time to let others decide.
Chat online with Carolyn at 11 a.m. Central time each Friday at washingtonpost.com. Write to Tell Me About It in care of The Washington Post, Style Plus, 1150 15th St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20071; or email
tellme@washpost.com
Style on 09/23/2014