my life with depression.com

while i was looking for the official definition of rebound - i know what it is, but i never dissected the word.

i found this on a page where someone wrote a legal analysis of love and relationship and dating that was published in the yale law journal (yale being known for their law school).

………..2.3 Aggravating Circumstances Model

Parties who enter into a relationship under aggravating circumstances must be careful to ensure that it will survive the dissipation of the forces that brought them together. Parties should be alert to undue influences, and proceed with extreme caution into rebound relationships.

………..b. Factors indicating rebound. The most prevalent aggravating circumstance is the rebound. A person on the rebound is almost always unable to evaluate a new relationship with judgment unclouded by the events of the previous relationship. While quick turnaround into a new, successful relationship is possible, a true rebound relationship is one that a party joins merely to be positioned in a relationship.

THIS BASICALLY SAYS THAT THERE ARE TIMES WHEN PEOPLE GET TOGETHER BECAUSE OF CIRCUMSTANCES. THEY NEED TO WATCH OUT AND SEE IF WITHT THE REMOVAL OF THIS CIRCUMSTANCE WILL CAUSE THE RELATIONSHIP TO DIE.

REBOUNDS ARE BASICALLY RELATIONSHIPS WHERE ONE (OR BOTH PARTIES?) STILL HAVE FEELINGS FOR A PERSON FROM A RECENT RELATIONSHIP CLOUDING THEIR ABILITY TO EVALUATE THE CURRENT RELATIONSHIP. this person might just be there to have a warm body.

here’s one on the dissolution of the relationship. this word is used in law as a word for divorce

…………4.1 The Decision to Dissolve

Parties should consult precedent in evaluating a relationship’s future. In evaluating precedent, however, parties must take care to avoid excessive reliance on outliers.

…………Comment:

…………a. Value of precedent. When deciding whether to end a relationship, parties may wish to consult the wealth of precedent generated by the experiences of similarly situated friends. Friends can convey information about their own cases, as well as references to other cases with which they are familiar. When consulting precedent, parties should take into account factors that may distinguish their cases. Differences in religion, ethnicity, race, age, or regional background may lead to very different outcomes in apparently similar cases. Whether the parties are in school or out of school may also have important consequences.

………….Illustration:

………….F considers breaking off a relationship with K because F believes K is not ambitious enough. F should consult prior cases concerning diverse topics such as: the benefit or detriment of matched ambition between parties; countervailing benefits of greater emphasis on family; one party’s security with the other’s greater ambition.

………….c. Special circumstance: long-distance relationships. An entire line of cases is dedicated to the special problems of long-distance relationships. No party should end a long-distance relationship without consulting this well-developed body of doctrine, which considers heavily litigated issues such as: frequency of communication and expenses arising therefrom; the ability to see other people; whether the relationship would benefit or suffer if the parties were together; and whether one party should sacrifice interests in order for the couple to live near each other.

IN REGARDS TO A LONG DISTANCE RELATIONSHIP, I NEVER THOUGHT ABOUT IT DISSOLVING WHEN THE COUPLE NO LONGER HAS THE DISTANCE. HMMM INTERESTING.