Treatment Through Marriage: Illusion and Reality
It is common in some societies to believe that marriage can serve as a remedy for psychological or behavioral problems suffered by one of the children, such as severe depression, untreated mental disorders, or addiction. This belief often stems from what may appear to be a well-intentioned motive: some parents assume that family stability, assuming responsibility, and the presence of a virtuous spouse are sufficient to reform the son and return him to the “right path.” However, despite its prevalence, this notion raises profound ethical and humanitarian concerns and, in many cases, may lead to disastrous outcomes that extend beyond the individual concerned to affect an entire family and innocent children.
The first major problem lies in concealing the truth from the woman’s family. When a son who is mentally ill or addicted is married off without informing the bride’s family of his health condition, this constitutes a clear violation of the principle of honesty upon which the marriage contract is supposed to be founded. Marriage is neither a therapeutic experiment nor a testing ground for the success or failure of a psychological or social hypothesis; rather, it is a human and legal bond with deep and lasting implications for the lives of both parties. Concealing illness or addiction places the wife in a reality she did not knowingly choose and burdens her with psychological and social responsibilities to which she did not originally consent.
There is no doubt that a virtuous woman, by virtue of her awareness, patience, and good companionship, may be an important source of support in her husband’s life and may contribute to his stability and improvement—provided that he is aware of his condition, actively seeking treatment, and willing to assume responsibility. Yet turning this possibility into a general rule represents a leap away from reality. A wife is not a mental health professional, nor is she religiously or morally obligated to become a rescue project for someone who has not been properly prepared for marriage from a psychological or behavioral standpoint.
From the perspective of fairness, a legitimate question arises: what if we reverse the scenario? What if the bride’s family married off their daughter while she was suffering from a severe mental illness or substance abuse, without informing the groom, on the assumption that marriage might reform her? Many would undoubtedly reject such an act and regard it as deception, fraud, and injustice toward the man. The same rejection must apply equally to both cases, without double standards; human dignity is indivisible, and injustice cannot be justified by differences in gender.
The potential consequences of this form of “treatment through marriage” can be severe: chronic tension, domestic violence, divorce, or—most dangerously—the upbringing of children in a psychologically unstable environment, with all the long-term effects this entails for their mental health and social behavior. At this point, the mistake shifts from being an individual decision to becoming an extended family catastrophe.
This discussion ultimately leads to a fundamental truth: the marital bond is a sacred one and should not be burdened with more than it can bear. Marriage must be built on clarity and honesty, and on a reasonable degree of psychological, intellectual, and social compatibility, so that each party can fulfill the role entrusted to them—affection, compassion, and shared responsibility. Mental illnesses and addiction, on the other hand, have clear therapeutic pathways that begin with acknowledgment, followed by diagnosis and specialized treatment. Marriage may come later as a stage of stability, but it should never be the primary means of treatment.
