On a more serious note, Lord Rama usually gets the flak for 'abandoning' his wife, that too when she was carrying his child.
IMHO, he didn't do anything un-husband- like while sending Sita away. He acted in the best manner he could- protecting both his wife and the dignity of the throne he sat on. The reasons why I say so are as follows-
OK, some people in Ayodhya were gossiping about the purity of his wife's character. There was nothing he could do about it. He cannot shut people 's mouths.
He also knows that eventually Sita will also come to hear about the gossip and this was the kind of idle talk which will only increase with the passage of time, not diminish. Would it do good for Sita, in her state of pregnancy to be listening to what each Tom, Dick and Harry had to say about her character.
If Rama was worried about his wife, he was even more worried about his unborn child. What would it's condition in the womb be, if its mother was worried, dejected and upset?
By sending Sita away, he ensured that she would at least not get to hear the latest on the gossip front.
He does not abandon her in the middle of no where. He specifically instructs Lakshmana to leave her near Valmiki's ashram, certain that she would be given sanctuary there.
And the Chakravarti Maharaja that he is, wouldn't his spies have come and told him about Sita's safe arrival in the ashram, the subsequent birth of his sons?
Rama knew that Valmiki's word was the law in his ashram and the rishi certainly would not permit permit people engaging in idle gossip. Moreover the pure and spiritually charged environment of the ashram would have been a far better place for Sita to spend the remainder of her pregnancy that be cloistered in the royal palace with all its intrigues, plots and shadowy characters. Who could say that there won't be another Manthara?
comment:
p_commentcount