I'm confused after listening to Dr. Harley define an EA as being "entirely dependent on whether or not you're in love" and reading Steve Harley's article "What is an affair?" where he says, "an affair is however the offended spouse defines it."

The radio clip is from the May 15th show at about 5:47 in the second segment after they discuss blended families and, obviously, the article is in the Articles section.

So ... where is the line?

As my husband and I continue to define and strengthen boundaries to protect our marriage the question of what constitutes an EA has come up. While in the past my husband has exhibited poor boundaries around other women he swears he's NEVER had any feelings of love for anyone else. He has enjoyed attention and admiration but never exchanged personal texts, phone calls, emails or gone for private lunches or dinners.

These two definitions seem to contradict each other and some clarification may be helpful.

I was also very confused while listening to that day's show. I hope someone can help clarify this for us.

If it threatens you, and your marriage, it's not okay. Does it matter if it's an EA or not? It puts him at risk for one, at the least. He needs to take "extraordinary precautions" to prevent any sort of affair/inappropriate relationship. One step leads to another - stay off the path, and you never have to worry about it.

I completely agree that EPs are important and the ultimate goal is to practice behavior that will never put your marriage at risk.

My question is about what seem to be contradictory statements from the two Harley gentlemen. We look to them for the ultimate guidance and it's confusing if they aren't saying the same thing.

Here's the radio clip so everyone can hear it.
Radio clip on EA at 5:45 mark

Thanks for the link, BrainHurts. I'm hoping this thread will generate some good discussion and clear up the confusion. Maybe I should email Joyce.

I think its a good question. I have had over the course of my 13 year marriage, lots of male friendships that yes, filled some needs in the way all friends do. Only when they crossed a sexual line (ie flirting, insinuating more, flat out proposals or declarations of more than friends intent, etc) did I consider them 'over the line' and end them completely. Those are ones I consider EA's. But now, looking back, I ask myself if even some of my platonic friendships were EA's since they did meet needs my H was not?

You are right RainySweet that it is irrelevant in that I know now I cannot even have male friendships if I want to protect my marriage, lessons learned. But I am still curious.

In your situation, Stupidcar, I would worry less about the definition, and more about adhering to PoRH and PoJA.

You percieved the situation as a threat to your marriage, and an affront to you - that is all that matters.

Your husband, through PoJA, should never do anything that does not have your enthusiastic agreement. Period. End of story.

This includes opposite sex friendships, or allowing any woman other than his wife to meet his emotional needs.

Was it an emotional affair? Was it not?

It doesn't matter - even if his actions due to his poor boundaries were not affairs, they were a violation of PoJA, and inappropriate interactions with the opposite sex.

This is a personal opinion, but I think the EA becomes 'official' when the APs declare their feelings for each other. No necessarily love, admitting attraction or saying anything inappropriate would do.

The run up to that I would define as poor boundaries and when it get to the point of telling lies to see each other, I would say they are 'on the brink of an EA'.

Once the APs have made it clear they have feelings for each other and are going to continue, thats a bona fide EA definition that no one can argue with.

Again, I agree with what everyone is saying and my husband and I are on the same page.

The reason I think it's important for the definition to be clarified is for people that are currently in a situation where they are trying to figure out their next steps. Whether or not their spouse is truly in an EA would dictate whether they expose, send a NC letter, implement NC which could involve changing jobs, moving, etc.

If you find yourself attracted to someone, realize you need to be careful and then limit your interactions with that person, is that sufficient? When does it become a situation requiring NC?

When a high love bank has become accumulated.

Exactly the same questions I have.

Either they have exchanged admissions of having feelings for each other or theres inappropriate communication, such as sexy or romantic emails etc.

If a WH got a crush on an innocent woman, theres no need to expose, he just needs to excersize boundaries and make sure he doenst spend any time with her.

And if you get the sense that someone has a crush on you, you need to make sure you aren't making any deposits into their Love Bank.

That's always a good idea. Also, the Harleys want to hear from people if they have questions or don't agree with them.

Harleys say on the show "it is your job to protect your own lovebank from others making deposits into it".

I think this is an important question because there are lots of lurkers on these threads. They may be in situations where they or their spouse are in an EA, but do not consider it an EA. To clarify that yes, this IS an EA and you need to treat it as an A, is important.

For instance. I have a good friend whose H had an EA with a coworker 3 yrs ago. He ended up changing jobs, they no longer see each other. But they did not really do any recovery or set EP's up, etc. Now at his new job he has women friends, who he trains for 5k type races with, and goes out to lunch with. I have been trying to get her on board with MB principles, and get her to buy into the fact that his EA WAS and A and that unless they put up some EP's and boundaries there will be another one. Clearly, it is already in the making! But she downplays the EA that happened 3 yrs ago, saying now he says she blew it out of porportion and they were 'just friends.' (IMO he is just saying that NOW because he is developing similar relationships and needs to be able to justify that, anyhooo) So for people like her, on here trying to downplay...well they are just friends, I'm just jealous, its not really an affair!!! discussing what an EA is and the true dangers of them is significant.

I don't think it is either necessary (in the sense of understanding the definition) or fruitful to compare the statements from Dr and Steve Harley. I don't think it is fruitful because using even Dr Harley's definition does not tell us how to conduct ourselves around the opposite sex. Dr Harley is not saying that it is okay to hang out with members of OS, have coffee at work, go on "platonic" dates, as long the spouse doing it does not feel in love.

If you are looking for an answer to the issue of when to send an NC letter etc, there are two articles that make it clear.

In this one, Coping with infidelity: Beginning, a wife has a crush on her husband's friend, but the friend does not know. Dr Harley cautions against letting OM know in any way that the WW is interested in him. He says that the WW must tell her H, and together they must avoid Bob - but Bob must not be told - so obviously there must NOT be an NC letter:

So far, R.J. is not actually having an affair. She is simply drawn to Bob. He is attractive to her because he is so easy to talk to. Whenever they are together, he makes a special effort to converse with her, and he shows a genuine interest her favorite topics. The friends of good conversation prevail, and the enemies of good conversation are nowhere to be found (see the Q&A column, "What to Do When Your Conversation Becomes Boring and Unpleasant"). The pleasure of her conversation with him deposited so manylove units that she fell in love with him, and so it's natural to assume that she will want to talk to him even more. She is finding it difficult to wait for the next opportunity to see him. If she wants to talk to him more often, she will need to create new ways to spend more time with him.

R.J. is now at a crossroads. She can take the next step in developing her relationship with her husband's friend, or she can explain her problem to her husband and try to resolve the issue with him. The advice I gave her was to tell her husband about the entire situation. He should be the one she enjoys talking to the most, and her feelings for his best friend was a good wake-up call. If her husband were to learn to meet her need for conversation, the temptation to have an affair with Bob would be much easier to handle.

But if she were to do what most people instinctively do, her next step would be to tell the man how she felt about him, and ask him to get together with her more often, privately. She would tell him precisely what she wrote in her letter to me, saying that he has "rekindled feelings in me that have been dormant for a long time. I find myself thinking about you often and wish I could be with you. I feel so guilty and ashamed of these feelings, but nevertheless, they are there. I try not to think about you, but I do."

Once this honest expression of feelings is out of the bag, an affair is off and running. Even if her husband's friend had never given her a single romantic thought, the seed is planted, and starts to grow. Such an admission would lead to his thinking long and hard about his own marriage, and he would start seeing R.J. in an entirely new way. If one of his important emotional needs was not being met in his marriage, he would express his frustration to R.J., and she would willingly agree to meet that need. The rest would be history....

...At the crossroads R.J. faces, she should avoid telling Bob how she feels about him at all costs. And she should certainly not let him know that she is dissatisfied with her husband. As soon as Bob would know about her feelings for him and her marital dissatisfaction, the risk of an affair would be so great that she must end her friendship with him for life. From the moment he knows she loves him, their friendship should end.

R.J. should be able to talk to someone about her marital problems. I'm glad she had the courage to write me. We should all be able to tell someone how we feel deep inside. But R.J. should not complain about her spouse to anyone unless she has made the same complaint to her spouse. Furthermore, the person she confides in should be either a same-sex friend or a professional counselor (like me). To tell an opposite-sex friend about your terrible marriage is to invite disaster.

R.J.'s greatest failure was dishonesty. If she had been honest with her husband about her need for conversation, and they had resolved the problem, Bob's conversations with her would not have been so enchanting.

It's almost impossible to stumble into an affair if you follow the Rule of Honesty. Her husband loves her dearly, and if she were to have told him about her frustration with their conversation, he probably would have taken steps to improve. In the beginning of her relationship with him, he may have spent hours talking to her just as his best friend did. In the beginning of their relationship, she may have fallen in love with him because of their conversation. But, as so many spouses do, he began talking to her less and less, little knowing that he was draining her Love Bank.

The solution to R.J.'s problem at the time she wrote her letter is to follow the Rule of Honesty. She should write her husband the same letter she wrote me. He should know about the disaster that is about to take place so he can protect both himself and herself from it.

In this one, Escaping the Jaws of Infidelity, the wife is drawn to a man at work. Nothing has been said between them. Dr Harley tells her to move away from that job, but again there is no need for an NC letter.

So I see the question as being not so much about when he definition of an EA has been met, but about the attraction being mutually acknowledged. If it has not been acknowledged or reciprocated then it is enough to stay away from that person (and work on the marriage). However, if the feelings have been indulged and mutually acknowledged, an NC letter, and presumably exposure to the other spouse, should be done.

Thanks, SugarCane. That's a very helpful explanation.