I'd like to get BS and WS thoughts on this article

[Popsicle]

especially those who stayed married after the A.

 

An Affair to Remember: What Happens in Couples After Someone Cheats? - Esther Perel

 

Do you find that you currently fall into one of the 3 patterns she described here? What are you thoughts about this?

[velvette]

especially those who stayed married after the A.

 

An Affair to Remember: What Happens in Couples After Someone Cheats? - Esther Perel

 

Do you find that you currently fall into one of the 3 patterns she described here? What are you thoughts about this?

 

Not exactly since we didn't go to marriage counseling and our issues were more complex than just infidelity since my husband was also abusive and hiding the secret that he had been sexually abused as a child.

 

 

We ended up similar to the third group but didn't get there the way described in this article.

 

 

He was cheating when I asked him to leave, but I didn't know that. I asked him to leave and not come back unless/until he got help for his anger management issues.

 

 

He went to therapy, made some progress but not enough, continued his affair which I later found out about. At some point, he told me about the childhood sexual abuse, sought more intensive therapy and we began talking about reconciliation. By then the affair was not over but had pretty much run its course.

 

 

Once he got serious in therapy we were able to move forward as a couple and he ended the A. I would never say his affair improved or was any catalyst for improving our marriage. If anything, it delayed him getting the help he needed because his A partner kept telling him he didn't need therapy. Of course, she had no idea what she was talking about or why he was going to therapy. And, it was easier at times for him to listen to that than to buckle down in therapy over an issue that was extremely painful.

 

 

Once he resolved his own issues, any marital issues we had were fairly easily resolved. Resolving the A issues was more difficult, because the OW started harassing me and that went on for almost a year.

[drifter777]

No, we've never fit into any of her categories. I doubt many couples do - they are so cliché. These kinds of articles or excerpts are always self-serving fluff pieces designed to sell books and find paid speaking engagements. When professionals give free advice its usually worth just what you paid for it...

[fellini]

I read this article several years ago, and I think it's quite insightful and well written. I have also read her book. There is a longer version of this article somewhere, and it is linked to the different therapeutic approaches available and how some of them ("trauma therapy", for example) can lead a couple into staying trapped in the infidelity, or as she suggests, addicted to the post affair.

 

We hear in LS that some couples that attempt reconciliation eventually end up separating years later. Her article goes a long way to explaining why that happens. I think it's revealing that, in the end, it isn't the affair that kills the marriage, but the inability to move beyond that, that sometimes does.

 

On the one hand, I think my WW and I are in the 3rd category, but at times, also in the second. I don't see them as categories so much as tendencies, as a way to see the trajectories of couples, not as fixed types.

Edited May 9, 2015 by fellini

[Red123]

I agree with Fellini, they seem more like tendencies to me as well, as I can't look at each category and say all of it is us. I would say we are the closest to 3, but still a work in progress. Thanks for posting the article it was interesting.

[Popsicle]

I read this article several years ago, and I think it's quite insightful and well written. I have also read her book. There is a longer version of this article somewhere, and it is linked to the different therapeutic approaches available and how some of them ("trauma therapy", for example) can lead a couple into staying trapped in the infidelity, or as she suggests, addicted to the post affair.

 

I would love to read that article.

[autumnnight]

I also agree that no one fits neatly and that they are more tendencies that categories. However, I have noticed that couples who tend toward 1 or the lower half of 2 do NOT like categories like this and tend to be in denial about where they are and why they choose to stay there.

 

I'll be honest; I know very very few people who get to 3.

[velvette]

I think people can move in and out of some parts of category 1 and 2 before they end in category 3. And, I can see how it would be easy to remain stuck in 1 or 2.

 

 

To me a marriage is an entity bigger than the two people.....something that you are building together.

 

 

So, just like if your house blew down and the two of you undertook to rebuild it........different people would bring different desires, skills and resources to bear on that process.

 

 

Some would just be happy to have a shelter over them again and slap one together, some will be content with an average house, some will want their dream home and go after it.

[autumnnight]

I think people can move in and out of some parts of category 1 and 2 before they end in category 3. And, I can see how it would be easy to remain stuck in 1 or 2.

 

 

To me a marriage is an entity bigger than the two people.....something that you are building together.

 

 

So, just like if your house blew down and the two of you undertook to rebuild it........different people would bring different desires, skills and resources to bear on that process.

 

 

Some would just be happy to have a shelter over them again and slap one together, some will be content with an average house, some will want their dream home and go after it.

 

You can even go further with the house analogy. There is the FWS who thinks they don't deserve anything but a shack. And then there is the BS who won't build a dreamhouse because they don't want their WS to live in anything BUT a shack. There are all sorts of permutations.

[fellini]

I also agree that no one fits neatly and that they are more tendencies that categories. However, I have noticed that couples who tend toward 1 or the lower half of 2 do NOT like categories like this and tend to be in denial about where they are and why they choose to stay there.

 

I'll be honest; I know very very few people who get to 3.

 

I suspect they are not the kind of couples who enter into LS. When you think about it, it sort of makes sense. People who move forward don't feel the need to come in here...

[AlwaysGrowing]

Besides telling a BS to look at how they were in the marriage, I didn't really read much what the author recommended for a FWS to do. Except for the couple, where sharing how the FWW felt/got out of the affair.

 

Also, the first couple...it stated the BS would ask about the affair/s and the serial cheater FWS would bring up the marriage. I can see why in that case, the BS might not feel heard.

 

Or, the case where the FWW (when the BH was out of town), dropped off the kids somewhere and never answered her phone. I think it is understandable that the BH had red flags go off...and it was condescending to flippantly state that the FWW was doing something innocuous and the BH overreacted. Being that most affairs hookups were when the FWS was supposed to be at work, conference, gym...etc.

 

Not sure where any help is given on how to navigate the aftermath other than suck it up, become a better spouse to the FWS. Surely, a BS is allowed to have as many complaints about the marriage/FWS and have the FWS address what they feel the FWS lacks.

 

Maybe, this is a condensed version.

[BetrayedH]

There are a few gems in there. But otherwise, there's too much victim-blaming, both for the affair and for failures in recovery. "Get over it" is Esther Perel's mantra (sorry Fellini, I know you're a fan but that's just how I see it). There's one phrase or statement after another that puts the blame on the BS.

 

From what I see, there's no one that wants the BS to be over it more than the BS. We get stabbed in the back and then people complain about how long we bleed on the carpet. Esther even mentions that it goes on "sometimes for years." Frankly, I think "years" is absolutely the norm.

 

Where I do agree with her is that many times, the affair isn't anything to do with the BS. That's not to say that we aren't impacted by it. But I think much of the time, it's not directed at us. It's not about the BS or the marriage. We are innocent bystanders. The wayward is broken to an extent and chooses a poor coping mechanism that brings a lot of destruction. I don't necessarily think that means it is unforgivable. I think a BS can see their WS as flawed and if they're truly remorseful, they can be forgiven those flaws. And therapy can help a BS to see it that way.

 

But recovery is much more about the attitude and actions of the wayward. True remorse may allow the BS to get over it. In my view, the success of a reconciliation rests much in the hands of the wayward. They either do the work or they don't.

[velvette]

You can even go further with the house analogy. There is the FWS who thinks they don't deserve anything but a shack. And then there is the BS who won't build a dreamhouse because they don't want their WS to live in anything BUT a shack. There are all sorts of permutations.

 

Sure there are a million variations.

[velvette]

Besides telling a BS to look at how they were in the marriage, I didn't really read much what the author recommended for a FWS to do. Except for the couple, where sharing how the FWW felt/got out of the affair.

 

Also, the first couple...it stated the BS would ask about the affair/s and the serial cheater FWS would bring up the marriage. I can see why in that case, the BS might not feel heard.

 

Or, the case where the FWW (when the BH was out of town), dropped off the kids somewhere and never answered her phone. I think it is understandable that the BH had red flags go off...and it was condescending to flippantly state that the FWW was doing something innocuous and the BH overreacted. Being that most affairs hookups were when the FWS was supposed to be at work, conference, gym...etc.

 

Not sure where any help is given on how to navigate the aftermath other than suck it up, become a better spouse to the FWS. Surely, a BS is allowed to have as many complaints about the marriage/FWS and have the FWS address what they feel the FWS lacks.

 

Maybe, this is a condensed version.

 

 

Yeah, I noticed all that. It seemed very lopsided.

 

 

I didn't go to marriage counseling with my H because of his abusiveness. The prevailing wisdom of experts on spousal abuse don't recommend joint counseling because usually the spouse being abused ends up futher abused.

 

 

I am starting to think the same is true of marital counseling post infidelity which imo is another form of abuse. I have seen very few experts that have a really good handle on how to deal with infidelity and rebuild a marriage. I think individual counseling is much more effective because you cant really build a healthy marriage without two healthy individuals.

[fellini]

I think what many posters here are not grasping about the article, is that this article is not about how to deal with infidelity. Nor is it about who is responsible, or negotiating blame.

 

It is about when a couple have decided to choose the reconciliation route, have put in the time together in MC during X number of months/years.

 

So her observations are AFTER all this work has been done, what has been going on in the marriage? And I think then when she says that, for example, a BS is still doing X, Y, Z it is after the BS has supposedly agreed to move on and NOT about assigning blame for the first time. What she says is that there is plenty of documentation about the process of therapy post DDAY, but her interest was to go back and interview previous couples to see what happened post THERAPY down the road.

 

And I suppose she has seen that for some BS's the therapy didn't "stick". For others, sufficient time and energy was invested and so the couple no longer are dealing with issues that continue to be present, and others have truly moved on.

Edited May 9, 2015 by fellini

[velvette]

I think what many posters here are not grasping about the article, is that this article is not about how to deal with infidelity. Nor is it about who is responsible, or negotiating blame.

 

It is about when a couple have decided to choose the reconciliation route, have put in the time together in MC during X number of months/years.

 

So her observations are AFTER all this work has been done, what has been going on in the marriage? And I think then when she says that, for example, a BS is still doing X, Y, Z it is after the BS has supposedly agreed to move on and NOT about assigning blame for the first time. What she says is that there is plenty of documentation about the process of therapy post DDAY, but her interest was to go back and interview previous couples to see what happened post THERAPY down the road.

 

And I suppose she has seen that for some BS's the therapy didn't "stick". For others, sufficient time and energy was invested and so the couple no longer are dealing with issues that continue to be present, and others have truly moved on.

 

 

I understood what timeframe she was talking about. I would take her observations more seriously if she had written even once sentence exploring the possibility that it was her therapy that was ineffective or that the prevailing beliefs of a lot of marriage counselors are ineffective at helping people.

 

 

She is quite clearly describing couples who are stuck in resentment, wherein love cannot thrive. Without love, reconciliation in the truest sense cannot occur. And yet, she does not seem to understand what she is even describing.

[fellini]

Not sure we have read the same article. First of all, it's a blog entry and Im not sure it makes sense to criticize something for what it doesn't do, rather than for what it does. None of your comments about its deficiencies are what the article was about.

 

The article is NOT an assessment of the efficacy of MCS ability to convince a BS to let go.

 

Why you claim she is "quite clearly describing couples who are stuck" is beyond me, the article is about the three patterns of couples after therapy. She says there are three, she names each one, she offers up some case examples of each. Are you so sure it is she that doesn't understand what she is saying and not you? Isn't that she has come across couples who are in number 3 evidence to the contrary of what you claim?

 

Perel has written elsewhere about the efficacy of MC, and especially, the models of treatments, in particular those she feels are better suited to produce the 3rd result in reconciliation, and those that are not (victim based, and trauma based therapies - much like LS is, to be honest), which she argues are more likely to reinforce the negativity of infidelity and risk the BS remains (or settles into) in trauma mode because the power relations shift to the BS and there is a tendency to hang onto that.

 

All of these arguments, including her views of the cultural differences in infidelity in North America and other cultures are in her publications. To focus on what is not said in one article of hundreds she has published is hardly fair. But then again you have already comitted to the idea that MC is a waste of time, so perhaps the real issue is your reluctance to be open to someone whose opinions you don't respect.

 

You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink is equally true of WS decisions to enter or not into an affair, as it is to use MC to suggest how to reconcile and move beyond the affair. If the BS, after years of IC and MC simply refuses to undertake to forgive, and move on, years later, maybe his/her heart is not in it, or s/he does not have the resources to do so. Regardless, to blame the MC for how adults decide to explore their reconciliation and how they monitor their progress, after therapy, seems a bit like blameshifting.

 

In the end the couple has to take responsibility for continuing or not, a specific strategy for reconciliation. If it isn't working, and they don't address that why blame the MC?

 

When I attended a session to discuss my WWS infidelity, jointly with her IC, I said to him, I didn't understand, she paid him money to get his advice on what to do about her EA, before it went PA. His recommended strategy was to stop talking to the AP and start talking to her H. Of course she didn't take his advice. But is that his fault?

 

 

I understood what timeframe she was talking about. I would take her observations more seriously if she had written even once sentence exploring the possibility that it was her therapy that was ineffective or that the prevailing beliefs of a lot of marriage counselors are ineffective at helping people.

 

 

She is quite clearly describing couples who are stuck in resentment, wherein love cannot thrive. Without love, reconciliation in the truest sense cannot occur. And yet, she does not seem to understand what she is even describing.

Edited May 10, 2015 by fellini

[truncated]

Many people engage in therapy when they are in a time of crisis, and thus a therapist is in a real position of power to either do great help or harm. that crisis state can extend for a long after the initial trauma, and reading this blog post, it made me feel like she is re traumatizing the bs all over again.

 

From the stories of friends I know who have been cheated on, one of the main things they wanted and needed to hear was an acknowledgment of their pain. I don't really see that in her writings. What I do see is the usual blame shifting onto the bs. She seems to be sneaking in facets of both spouses being responsible for the actions of one spouse.

 

What I would have liked to have seen is her saying that for some bs, rebuilding trust and a sense that they can depend upon their partner to be there for them just can't happen. In taht situation, rather than to continue to beat themsleves up ' the marraige is failing ebcause of YOU", it would be better to advise they go their separate ways as amicably as possible.

 

While reconciliation is a wonderful thing and preferable if it can be done in a way where neither spouse feels continually sad, in some cases, in simply isn't in the cards, and denying that by implying that if the bs simply worked harder at it, things could be made better is unfair.

[autumnnight]

What I would have liked to have seen is her saying that for some bs, rebuilding trust and a sense that they can depend upon their partner to be there for them just can't happen. In taht situation, rather than to continue to beat themsleves up ' the marraige is failing ebcause of YOU", it would be better to advise they go their separate ways as amicably as possible.

 

This. There is no shame in saying "I just cannot be with this person in a REAL relationship of any trust after the way they horribly betrayed me." In that case, the respectable thing for both parties to do is part ways. There is nothing really honorable or good for anyone - including kids - about staying in 1, and probably not much good about staying in the lower half of 2. If you can't be a solid 2 or 3, then don't be ashamed of it. Move on and give yourself a chance at some kind of peace and happiness.

[AlwaysGrowing]

Fellini, I guess where I agree to disagree with you is simply due to the fact...in each of the three models she has experienced...the lack of getting to true R rested on the BS alone.

 

Surely, there was ONE couple...where what the FWS was still failing to give to the relationship was at the root of why a BS still was deep in the trauma of the affair.

 

Also, I believe the OP did in fact ask us for our opinion on the blog/article....so I have....and am criticizing what it is doing.

[autumnnight]

Yeah, for that first year, I would think that the recovery would rest pretty much completely on the remorse and change and hard work and transparency of the WS. The BS is pretty much in massive trauma in the beginning and the WS better bring it.

 

When things are still bad 5, 8, 10, 12 years later....that to me is less about the WS and more about both.

[fellini]

I beg to differ. I think if you read the first part of the article again. You will see that the author puts her emphasis entirely on the words, "couple", "marriage", "matrimony". She shows how each of them digs their heals into their own perspective and she uses the language that the couple uses, not her own interpretation of them.

 

The whole point Esther is trying to make is if a couple is stuck at stage one, continuously holding ground in terms of victim - bad guy, trauma-free ticket, trust-no forgiveness, then the marriage is doomed. And surely she is correct in asking why they bother to try reconciliation if neither is going to give up ground. This assessment is, I repeat LONG after they have stopped therapy. What Perel is saying is the couples who display this type have fallen back into old models of addressing issues and have not shown they can go the distance without the watchful constant eyes of the therapist. I really fail to see why you criticise the author for this important insight.

 

 

Many people engage in therapy when they are in a time of crisis, and thus a therapist is in a real position of power to either do great help or harm. that crisis state can extend for a long after the initial trauma, and reading this blog post, it made me feel like she is re traumatizing the bs all over again.

 

From the stories of friends I know who have been cheated on, one of the main things they wanted and needed to hear was an acknowledgment of their pain. I don't really see that in her writings. What I do see is the usual blame shifting onto the bs. She seems to be sneaking in facets of both spouses being responsible for the actions of one spouse.

 

What I would have liked to have seen is her saying that for some bs, rebuilding trust and a sense that they can depend upon their partner to be there for them just can't happen. In taht situation, rather than to continue to beat themsleves up ' the marraige is failing ebcause of YOU", it would be better to advise they go their separate ways as amicably as possible.

 

While reconciliation is a wonderful thing and preferable if it can be done in a way where neither spouse feels continually sad, in some cases, in simply isn't in the cards, and denying that by implying that if the bs simply worked harder at it, things could be made better is unfair.

[fellini]

Fellini, I guess where I agree to disagree with you is simply due to the fact...in each of the three models she has experienced...the lack of getting to true R rested on the BS alone.

 

Surely, there was ONE couple...where what the FWS was still failing to give to the relationship was at the root of why a BS still was deep in the trauma of the affair.

 

Also, I believe the OP did in fact ask us for our opinion on the blog/article....so I have....and am criticizing what it is doing.

 

I genuinely do not see anywhere in her article where she blames the BS for the collapse in reconciliation. I se her dexcribing how both parties do their thing, and she wonders why they even bother trying if they cannot find a middle ground. She blames both.

[AlwaysGrowing]

Do you not find it interesting, that for the last couple in her blog, she herself went against what she normally suggested...and advocated for a more full disclosure of the affair by the FWS. Where in the first couple, she stated the BS would ask...and the FWS would go between blaming the BS and some disclosure.

 

I personally find that very telling in how the healing process progressed.

[fellini]

Do you not find it interesting, that for the last couple in her blog, she herself went against what she normally suggested...and advocated for a more full disclosure of the affair by the FWS. Where in the first couple, she stated the BS would ask...and the FWS would go between blaming the BS and some disclosure.

 

I personally find that very telling in how the healing process progressed.

 

 

So if the BS asks, and the FWS blames the BS, how do you jump to the conclusion in your previous post that the author is putting all the blame o the BS? And come on, she is trying to use examples of the ways that 1st type couples typically relate with each other to show what she means by remaining trapped in the infidelity even addicted to it. It's her way of giving us an idea of what it looks like on one level, it is hardly the definition of these types of couples. She is simply offering up some details for you to sort of go, okay, I get what you mean by couples who are stuck. As readers we are not supposed to pick the crap out of the de tails of that couple. do you honestly believe that if you see some small fault in a word or two in her example that this is sufficient to write off the entire point of the article?