K, I don't talk with "Bill," as you keep referring to Dr. Harley, but I can read his words quite well, thank you. The letter he wrote to a poster on this board is quite clear and doesn't need parsing. I'm sorry I don't agree with your agenda, but we've agreed in the past to disagree and I guess this is one more item added to the list.

Also, where is it written there cannot be radical honesty with everyone in one's orbit? Actually, when one is “upfront” with everyone around one (including children), things flow so much smoother.

Just my opinion, of course. Everyone has one.

Here is Dr. Harley's email in its entirety. This was sent to PEM last month:

2334pem: While most affairs die a natural death in less than two years, there are some that take much longer to die. That's one of the primary reasons that my first rule in surviving an affair is to never see or talk to the lover again -- even if the affair seems to have died a natural death. An affair can rekindle after it seems to be over. And to guarantee complete separation between the unfaithful spouse and the lover, extraordinary precautions must be taken, such as providing radical accountability and transparency. In many cases, I've encouraged couples I've counseled to change jobs or even move to another state to help create permanent separation.

Another suggestion I make to a couple struggling to restore their marriage after one of them had an affair is to make the affair public. Everyone should know what happened -- children, relatives, friends, and especially the children and spouse of the lover -- so that the affair is exposed to the light of day. What often makes affairs appealing is that it is done in secret. Most affairs become very unappealing once everyone knows about it.

So whether an affair is a one night stand, or has been going on for years, the basic rule for ending them are the same -- extraordinary precautions to guarantee permanent separation. But I will admit that the precautions used for long-term affairs are usually more extraordinary than those used for short-term affairs. I've helped many spouses overcome affairs that have lasted over ten years, but none of them have been easy.

Best wishes
Willard F. Harley, Jr.

Much thanks for sharing that message ML!

I must say Wow,
all I was ever pushing for was telling the OP's spouse.

I can only imagine the reaction of the nay sayers to telling everyone.
Indeed, even I'm more then a bit surprised at the scope he is recommending (even once the A is over).

Never fear though,
most here these days tend to Pick and Choose what they Think is necessary.
This will most likely just be chalked up to the "not in my unique case" category.

Ain't it Nice to always be special?

Hi, Top Rope, everyone.

So, let's say that grandma had an affair 30 years ago. She quietly shut it down, turned her attentions toward her faltering marriage, then she and grandpa went on to have have a glorious, faithful marriage for 30 more years in addition to the 15 troubled early years. One day, granddaughter finds out about the affair while going through some of the grandparents belongings while helping grandparents with a house move. Should she expose grandma to grandpa and the rest of the family?

I agree with exposure to end an affair, and exposure (soon after the affair) to prevent a recurrence. My argument a week or so ago was similar to WAT's. I see no reason to fly the "Scarlet A" over events dealt with, dead and buried (PenaltyBox and PenaltyKill for example).

In my own life, where the one night stands and short term affairs of 30+ years ago are too numerous to even confess, my wife doesn't want to know about any more of them. Living in the same city, and now being well known publicly, doesn't make it any easier for us to deal with my or her past, and it still bites us with some regularity. We don't want to know, and we sure as hades don't want anyone else 'telling on us'.

So, here is the question for me (and I already have my own opinion), what is the statute of limitations on dead affairs? 5 years, 7, 15, 30, never?

WAT, you had asked what I meant by a responsibility that comes along with knowing the truth. Using truth to beat someone over the head for personal gain, or misguided angst, is never a proper use.

All the best,
Gimble

Gimble, I am not sure I would agree that public exposure would be the answer 30 yrs after the fact. However, I very much would want to be notified of an affair, even if it were 30 years after the fact. I don't believe there is a statute of limitations on the truth, especially when it involves MY LIFE. Nor is lying about affairs the solution to adultery. Lying for 30 years is no solution, it only compounds the crime.

As a free adult, I am fully capable of dealing with the truth MYSELF. I don't need someone else to decide what is "best" for me and withhold facts about my life. How arrogant for anyone to think they are better equipped to decide what is in my best interest. It is UP TO ME to decide what is best for me.

So, since I respect another human beings ability to decide for themselves what is best for them, I am all in favor of exposure to the OP's spouse, no matter how long it is. They have a right to know.

Further, Dr. Harley advocates exposure of past affairs, and in his professional, experienced wisdom, says it is the foundation of true intimacy in a marriage. I happen to believe him. I think the failure to do so, enmeshes one partner in a marriage that is based on deceit and fraud. It is a FRAUD perpetuated on the unsuspecting spouse to keep them in a marriage based on a lie.

What if the spouse would not WANT to be married to such a person? Not telling them would be denying them the right to make such a decision. That is, in Dr. Harley's words, "cruel, manipulative, and in the final analysis, DANGEROUS." I happen to agree with that analysis very much.

Gimble, your hypothetical story totally validates the next to last paragraph in my first post on this thread, doesn't it? Thanks for giving us that example.

Here's what I wrote:
Thank you for providing an excellent illustration of my point that exposure is a good way to settle things once and for all. I really appreciate your support on this. Of course, since I'm just plagiarizing words written by the founder of this website, I can't take any credit for it and I don’t. It's just nice to see others agreeing with Doctor Harley, even when they seem not to be.

Just my opinion of course.

Hi, Mel.

I love the truth myself, so does my wife. Regarding my past, she has had enough truth and doesn't want anymore. She is well aware of my past, as I am aware of hers.

PenltyBox stated that he would rather have not known. I think that his preference is just as legitimate as someone that wants to know.

I found the survey on this website interesting.
http://www.passionatelife.ca/Details.htm

My spouse, whom I have an excellent relationship with, doesn't want any more truth. I am assuming that there are others just like her. Her reasons are her own. I will not presume that I am welcome to tell her about "the time I did it with MaryJo" because I just remembered it, or someone else reminded me or us. All that does is hurt our marriage. It is unnecessary pain.

If something is dead and buried, exhumation should only be considered in the most extreme situations.

Please note that I am NOT talking about active or recent affairs.

You may not believe this now, but there comes a time in a relationship when some types of information are no longer welcomed, no matter how true they are. That is not sticking your head in the sand, that is a choice.

All the best,
Gimble

Hi, Longhorn.

I think that if you go back and read my past posts, you won't be so quick to toss me or my opinion in a nice little box of your own construction.

I am a firm believer in exposure. I am NOT a one size fits all person.

All the best,
Gimble

Gimble, I understand there are people who just don't want to know. However, as you said, your wife KNOWS and has chosen to not be told more. That is her right! But shouldn't everyone else have the same right as she to determine how much they want to hear?

Just becasue some do not want to know does not mean that others forfeit their right to pertinent information about their own lives. They should have the opportunity to make decisions about thier own lives just as did your wife. They have a right to determine what is or isn't in their best interest to know. NO ONE ELSE IS QUALIFIED, especially the adulterous spouse.

That is NOT for others to decide. And sure, a small few will claim they don't want to know, but they don't speak for the numerous WHO DO feel they are the only ones who are qualified to determine what is or isn't in their best interest to know.

If folks don't want to know, it shouldn't matter. They can just dismiss the information and move on, nothing lost. They didn't care anyway. However, those who weren't told the facts about thier own lives have no recourse to make such a determination if the truth is withheld frm them.

Unfortunately, there is no way to know WHO wouldn't want to know unless you tell them and therein lies the rub.

Hi, Mel.

My wife does NOT know of all my infidelities, only some of them. She does read and post here.

My point in my posts is a simple one, regardless of the complexities of the examples.

Truth is a double edged sword that should be wielded responsibly, and no person knows (including the good Dr's) the best way to use it in all situations.

The person that exposed PenaltyKill did so in a merciless, intentionally harmful manner for personal revenge. That is bad form in my book, and a poor use of the truth.

The truth in my relationship is that my wife and I made poor choices. She had a boyfriend (I still find that painful 30 years later, even with all my improprieties), I had more relationships than I can count. We chose a life together anyway. For her, new discoveries are not welcomed. My stance is a bit different, but similar. I will never be unfaithful again (and I get offers, even at 50), neither will she.

You are not going to agree with me, and that is your choice. I do appeal to you that you take the responsibility of the truth that comes your way to heart. Please be careful and considerate of how you use it. It can be healing, or divide asunder.

All the best,
Gimble

Gimble, no one has ever argued that one should not be considerate in their use of the truth, that is not even debatable. I don't know that the message delivery in the pk case was any more brutal than the message itself. And I sensed there was much resentment just about the fact that it WAS delivered.

Even so, I fall down on the side of Harley on this issue and think it should be up to each individual to determine what is or isn't in their own best interest to know. To think that we know what is best for another person is profoundly arrogant, and as Dr Harley says "dangerous." I agree with him 100%.

Hi, Mel.

Quote:
==================================
To think that we know what is best for another person is profoundly arrogant...
==================================

I agree, and that includes truth telling.

All the best,
Gimble

Gimble, but that is exactly why the person needs to know the facts about his own life. To do otherwise is to deny them pertinent facts about thier life, thinking we know better. It is up to them to decide what to do with those facts. To decide that we know better what is in their best interest is to say we know what is best for them. THAT is arrogant. And if someone withheld the truth from me, thinking they know what is best for me, I would be deeply resentful at such profound arrogance.

Hi, Mel.

There is a time to tell what you think is the truth. There is also a time not to tell everything that you think you know. It depends on the situation.

From a biblical perspective, we see through an opaque glass. Therefore, we simply must proceed with the same or greater caution as one does while driving in fog.

You are assuming that you know and understand the whole truth. That is a very dangerous assumption. Logically, we must assume we are working with generalities, not absolutes. That brings a high level of responsibility on the person with the truth (the driver or the one making assumtions).

You can make truth an absolute all you want, and I can give you situations where people (you, me, anyone) don't apply it evenly to every circumstance or all situations.

All the best,
Gimble

That is so much the case. One of the liberating things for my wife was that she doesn't need to watch what she says in conversation. We moved away from our house - she was telling people something and didn't have to go into long explanations of why we weren't living in our newly renovated house. She doesn't need to worry about what she says and to whom because it's all in the open.

As we were all close families with her affair partner, we are also free within our family to talk about times we had together as 2 families before the affair. It really is quite liberating for everyone - our kids know about everything and none of us need to second guess anything.

Gimble, I am talking about situations where we DO know the truth in a hypothetical sitution. If one does NOT know the truth, they have nothing TO reveal in the first place.

ok, I called Dr.Harley and here is what he had to say in response to his email.

I am paraphrasing. He agreed that public exposure should take place in "HIGH RISK" situations regardless of the affair status. He specifically cited the example of church members who still see each other at church by saying that if the church members KNOW then a resumption of the affair would be very hard to take place.

He went onto say that public exposure is NOT NECESSARY after the affair if the "lover is truly out of the picture." Unless it is POJA'd.

He then said that the spouses and the children should ALWAYS BE TOLD. After that, any exposures should be POJA'd unless, of course, it is a HIGH RISK situation where the affairees would still cross paths.

Hopefully, others caught my phone call and comment because I was quite nervous!

Hi, Mel.

Quote:
===================================
Gimble, I am talking about situations where we DO know the truth in a hypothetical sitution. If one does NOT know the truth, they have nothing TO reveal in the first place.
===================================

Again, an assumption of the truth.

Mel, I will not concede my stance that the situation must mandate the level and type of exposure (if any), and that we, as humans, have no absolute hold on truth. Since you won't back down from your stance, I think we have reached stalemate.

All the best,
Gimble

Gimble, is that the truth? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> If one does not know the truth or is not intelligent enough to discern the truth, they should probably not be walking about free, much less tell someone their spouse has had an affair. This hypothetical presumes, of course, that the person DOES know the truth. Otherwise, there is nothing TO tell.

Thanks for the responses. I've read everyone's dialogue, viewpoints and perceptions regarding this issue with great interest and I appreciate all the contributions. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Just a view things I want to comment on:

I agree with K's viewpoint and interpretation about exposure by the BS after an A, although I think it will be good to get full clarification from Dr Harley on this issue to clear up any misunderstandings or misinterpretations about this. I hope someone will contact him and post his comments here. According to the counselling and advice K had received from the Harley’s, it seems Dr Harley may have changed his view about this over the years.

I agree with Melody's viewpoint and beliefs regarding exposure to the OP’s spouse many years after the A has ended. It is indeed the BS's choice to decide how much they want to know and the truth should not be withheld from them.

Many of the things Longhorn has said I agree with and rings true for me. The need I had to develop a support system and be totally honest and transparent with friends and family close to me after my EA has ended, was the main reason why I've decided to expose myself. Some of the friends I exposed to were people at my workplace (one was a colleague and close family friend who worked at the same department as XOM). But I still wouldn't find it acceptable if my H would decide to expose without my knowledge and agreement after all contact has ended. That would definitely be a huge LBer for me and would deduct huge amount of love units from my love bank.

There is one aspect I don’t agree with in Longhorn’s post – it’s regarding exposure outside the close and intimate circle of friends and family (such as acquaintances and colleagues one don't have a close and trusting relationship with). I wouldn't feel comfortable at all with exposing myself outside my close and intimate circle of family and friends. There are just too many people out there without integrity and who will use such knowledge against the FWS and gossip behind their backs. This would have made me feel very vulnerable and I wouldn’t view such gossip and degrading as a legitimate consequence of the betrayal. No, if God and my H has forgiven me and if I had made amends in my M, there isn’t a need for further unnecessary “legitimate consequences”. IMO such actions would just serve to punish oneself and would probably indicate that such a person hasn’t yet forgave him/herself… I also feel my private life and the wrong choices I've made have nothing to do with people outside my immediate circle of close and supporting family and friends (except for support groups and counsellors of course).