PsychoB and
Msjpw,
It is clear that the line has been drawn in the sand and on which side of the line each of you stands. How about agreeing to disagree?
Although a discussion and exchange about the MB principles and what Dr Harley says in relation to this or that is great, the personalization of the exchange here is rather - um - hostile.
With all the hurt and anguish that this board has, do we really need to be adding to anyone else's load?
Msjpw,
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Msjpw:
<strong>I believe that a WS goes outside the marriage when their ENs are not being met within the marriage. By the way, that is not "wishful thinking" - it's a basic premise of the MB program.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">You start with "I believe" and then end with a statement about a basic premise of MB. As a personal belief, it is yours to have; but as a premise of MB, I think it is an inaccurate statement.
Dr. Harley is very clear that a WS has an A because he/she did not apply the Rule of Protection. The MarriageBuilders Newsletter of a few months ago had this exact message repeated as one of the first items. Dr. Harley does NOT say, in any of the 5 Harley books I have read, that 'the WS has an A because his/her ENs are not being met within the M'.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">
From HNHN: "..twenty five years of experience with thousands of people has taught me an undeniable truth: IF ANY OF A SPOUSES FIVE BASIC EMOTIONAL NEEDS GOES UNMET, THAT SPOUSE BECOMES VULNERABLE TO THE TEMPTATION OF AN AFFAIR." (emphasis added)</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Dr. Harley says that if ENs go unmet, then the spouse becomes vulnerable. He does NOT say that if a spouse is vulnerable to an A it is because his/her ENs were unmet; or that if a spouse is vulnerable to an A, then his/her ENs were unmet (which is essentially your restatement). The two statements are not the same, and you cannot conclude the second from the first.
The MB principles are great, but care must be taken not to overextend what is actually said by Dr. Harley. We all necessarily interpret when we read, but each interpretation will not necessarily reflect what is actually written by the author.
Also, the critics of the Harley method to dealing with the aftermath of infidelity state that it is 'soft' on the WS. Other respected professionals in the same field suggest varying and differing plans for recovery from infidelity (for example Carder and Abrahms Spring).
And MBers are not universally unidimensional in their application of recovery plans. Many (myself included) have an entire library of recovery literature and try to glean helpful principles, methods, plans, etc. from them all.
Respectfully,
OneDay
