"The assumption implied by this letter is that what the LW has now...is better than what he would have with his wife in the PC. The assumption cannot be proven valid before the fact if you subscribe to the belief, as I do, that we usually don’t know what’s in our own best interest. The thing we can’t imagine doing often proves to be the best thing for us. Conversely, the thing we thought we most wanted proves the thing we would rather have done without."

I don't usually comment on other letters, but this is not an argument, just dime-store philosophy with self-negating logic.

If you REALLY subscribe to "we usually don’t know what’s in our own best interest" then you must apply it to both parties. Thus the wife doesn't know what's in her best interest either. She thinks the Peace Corp is what she most wants thus it's actually the thing she would rather have done without. She can't imagine not going, thus not going is the best thing for her. See how that works?

Let's recognize such phrases as "we usually don’t know what’s in our own best interest" for what they are: coded rationalizations for picking a side. Whoever you think is right is the one with the miracle insight, whoever you think is wrong lacks enlightenment.

The LW clear he respects his wife's needs, but he feels backed into a corner by the options presented to him. Taken at face value - and advice columnists have less space to speculate on what's unsaid than we do - this impass indicates a deeper flaw. it's an impass which likely arose from pre-existing problems. Who is most responsible for the lack of communication which led to this impasse is beside the point, both sides are equally valid. If the wife won't compromise and the husband feels both options are unworkable, then someone has to give, and the LW is offering to end it so he's not a burden on her dreams. Since he's the one asking the question and offering to let it go, I think it's reasonable to give him sympathy.

To all the pro-Peace Corps folks - I'm sure there are plenty of couples who enjoy doing the Peace Corps together, but this is because they both wanted to do it together. Any couple I know who made such a major, difficult commitment when only one person wanted to do it ended up unhappy. Quite often it was the man forcing it upon the woman, but just because the genders are reversed here doesn't make it any more right or workable.

I sympathize with your correspondent. And you have summed up the dilemma quite well: Either she goes PC, and the marriage is over (even if it can be restored later), or she stays, and gives up her dream, while he keeps a good job.

Maybe it's because of the Aquarian in me, but I wonder if there isn't a middle path. My wife and I adopted a Chinese orphan relatively late in life (late 40s); since then, we have kept up with several China-related organizations. One of them, HalftheSky.org, raises funds to train Chinese orphanage workers in basic childraising, hire foster-care families, and build schools and daycare centers in China. In fact, they have two-week "school builds", where people from the US (or wherever) sign up to fly to China, stay at an orphanage, and help build the schools or daycare centers that HalftheSky has funded.

Perhaps this - or something like it - would satisfy the Mrs.' yearning to be of service in another world, while allowing Mr. to keep his nice job, stay married to Mrs., and do something uplifting with their vacations!

Best wishes,

Jim Marfia

People do long deployments in the military and stay together. There are 2 and 3 year hardship deployments without spouses. To assume a marriage can not survive such a separation is not founded in evidence. WHO and other international AID workers do this all of the time, as do State Department workers.

There's therapy and other ways to make the transistion easier and keep them together.

This could be the best thing that happens to the, SHe will grow and appreciate the complexity of the world. They will not be in each other's pockets, where they can get on each other's nerves. They will be different enough to be interesting.

All of the negativity, based on anecdotal evidence, is not warranted. Not all, or even most, Peace Corps people go sexually crazy or divorce. In different, and especially sexually conservative countries, the bed hopping is not an option. In war zones (and rebels don't always give warning before they run into neighboring countires) sex is not the most important thing going on.

This is a very distorted discussion. I hope they talk to a counselor.

People do long deployments in the military and stay together. There are 2 and 3 year hardship deployments without spouses. To assume a marriage can not survive such a separation is not founded in evidence. WHO and other international AID workers do this all of the time, as do State Department workers.

How many of these people get married then announce they're joining up and leaving?

How many guys get married then come home and say "honey, I want to join the Marines and be deployed overseas for two years -- you can come with me if you want"?