Originally Posted by Icewraithonyx
I think the main reason I still think of it as coercive is because, like PhilsophicallyLost said, I tend to view our marriage as a partner "ship", like a large boat. Me, Wife, and our children. Whereas it seems your view is more akin to two or more individuals, each on their own jet ski. In "jet ski view", if Wife wants to veer left, I can veer left as well or go my own way. In "ship" view, if she veers the ship left, my options are to continue with the ship or jump overboard, losing not only the ship but all the crew. Stopping the ship or veering back to the right didn't seem to be an option.
No, it would be coercive if you were forced to stay on the ship. Since you've volunteered to stay on the ship, knowing that you will have to move as a unit, you have restricted YOUR OWN choices. You see the difference? You have freely decided to limit your options, if you are unhappy with this decision then change it.
It sounds more to me like you are talking about being caught up in the inertia of the change and are not sure how you want to react. Inertia can be a powerful force in a relationship and it is understandable that someone can get carried away by it. There doesn't need to be a bad guy in this, which calling someones actions "coercive" does by default.