Popsicle Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 If you get involved with someone else (even up to a PA) during a "trial separation"? Link to post Share on other sites
SoleMate Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 It depends on the terms the couple set for their trial separation. Typically it is meant to be a breathing space before deciding to either reconcile or divorce. Someone who's already getting into the heavy breathing with a 3rd party clearly isn't serious about reconciliation. 10 Link to post Share on other sites
kgcolonel Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 yep...it's at least insincere unless there was an agreement to remain faithful....It would be a deal killer for me personally, even if we didn't have a specific discussion about sexual activity with others, providing we both expressed interest in reconciliation or depending on the reason for the Trial Separation... 2 Link to post Share on other sites
whichwayisup Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 If you get involved with someone else (even up to a PA) during a "trial separation"? Yes. If the spouses didn't discuss dating others, then it's cheating. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
Author Popsicle Posted February 29, 2016 Author Share Posted February 29, 2016 So I guess a trial separation is just having a little vacation from each other to see if you miss each other and hopefully things will be improved when you return to be back together? Link to post Share on other sites
SSJROMANCE Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 I'm going to ditto everyone else - unless you agreed to see other people yes it's cheating. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 As long as the involvement is open and conspicuous socially, it can't be cheating because there's no deception. Annoying, sure. Plenty of folks date openly during trial, full, and legal separations. Goes on all the time. Check the divorce and remarriage dates for some evidence of how things can go. People meet when things go bad in a M or R, get on, partners are replaced and life goes on. Sure some folks do it deceptively. Others, in plain view. Opinion varies. Really, what are you going to do about it? Hurl some harsh language at them. BFD. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
PegNosePete Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 If you get involved with someone else I would say the "trial" is over, and the "separation" should become permanent. Whether it's "technically" cheating or not is pretty irrelevant. 4 Link to post Share on other sites
66Charger Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 I would assume if you had relations with others during the seperation, the "trial" part is over and it is what it is. A seperation. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
PegNosePete Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 So I guess a trial separation is just having a little vacation from each other to see if you miss each other and hopefully things will be improved when you return to be back together? No, a "trial" separation is to see if you're so co-dependent on each other that you can't cope with a full separation. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
SoleMate Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 In theory, a trial separation could be a useful mechanism to help each party understand what permanent separation would be like before decisions become irrevocable, or to resolve a certain specific issue (can't really think of a good example) with the help of professionals and without the distractions of a troubled relationship. In reality, 99% of the time, it's just a step along the path to divorce, and/or a way to pull the wool over the eyes of one's partner (getting space to screw around or try out a new partner rather than work on the marriage). I can't recall ever hearing about a single useful, intentional example on LS or elsewhere. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
lolablue17 Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 If you get involved with someone else (even up to a PA) during a "trial separation"? Why do you care so much about semantics and definitions, and care so little about hurting another man's feelings? 1 Link to post Share on other sites
smackie9 Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 To me a trial separation is to reflect on your marriage and see if you want to salvage it or not. Not to see if you can find a replacement. 4 Link to post Share on other sites
road Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 Problem is even if there is an agreement to be able to see other people. What happens is the one that did not see anyone will feel the same emotions as if they were cheated on. And, even when both parties dated during this time there is still going to be hurt feelings. Thus killing any chance of getting back together again. Also many a partner whether dating or married has pulled the separation game because they had an EA/PA in place and wanted to go PA full time. Either way even if there was no infidelity before it makes recovery of the relationship/marriage super difficult. So I say don't separate just end it. If you do separate do not date or agree to date. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Try Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 If you get involved with someone else (even up to a PA) during a "trial separation"? Legally you are still married, and legally sex outside of marriage is adultery. If you had a religious ceremony, morally you are still married, and morally sex outside of marriage is adultery. If you tell your spouse in advance your intent to date and have sex with others, you may not want to call it cheating, but it is definitely adultery. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Author Popsicle Posted February 29, 2016 Author Share Posted February 29, 2016 No, a "trial" separation is to see if you're so co-dependent on each other that you can't cope with a full separation. Lol thats probably it. Why do you care so much about semantics and definitions, and care so little about hurting another man's feelings? Huh? What do you mean? Link to post Share on other sites
candie13 Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 I think it's the wrong question. As a person not married, the only thing i care about is not just the legal but also emotional state of my potential partner. Still married means "not emotionally available" and very much still married. It's not about "cheating" or not, it's about f"cking around with a person who legally isn't available, emotionally and mentally isn't available... like... why bother? i ain't got no time to waste. I appreciate that being that person stuck in "separation" modes makes it difficult to live and have an active sex life, but to be completely honest, that ain't any of my damn businesses in the first place. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
lolablue17 Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Huh? What do you mean? I mean, if you are in a trial separation, and you get involved with another man, you might hurt the man you're separated from, because He probably holds his hopes to have you back. I think you might want to focus on "how can you hurt the least harm possible", better than "How to not being accused as a cheater". 1 Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 If you get involved with someone else (even up to a PA) during a "trial separation"? By whom? My H had a year-long separation from his xW (before the A...) The separation was initiated by her, very traumatically. (In retrospect, she was likely wanting to try a FTR with her then-AP.) During that time, he dated. The separation was an eye-opener to him - he had not considered splitting up to that point, but saw how much happier he was without her, and really loved his liberation. Sadly, the kids really struggled - I'm sure largely due to the way the whole thing was handled, her dramatic departure which left them traumatised, etc. So when she came bagging him to take her back, promising all kinds of things, he relented. It was a supremely useful separation, because it laid bare the true nature of the M. She knew he'd been dating, but hadn't cared initially (she was focused on her AP) but once he took her back, her tone changed and she accused him of not honouring his commitment, by casual dating. She clearly revised history to reflect that she wasn't cheated no, but he was. He, unlike her, had been upfront and open all the way through and s didn't consider his casual dating to have been cheating, and neither did anyone else. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts