Nearly forgot I had another question too: My husband's OW was also married and the affair was never exposed to her husband. Was that a mistake? 2 years down the line I keep thinking how it might have been better if he'd known what was going on (less chance of it happening again). I was too afraid to do it at the time, now it is too late. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Bela

Yes.

Exposing it now is a touchy subject. We've had these "discussions" here before.

Are they still married?

Yes, they are still together as far as I know. I can't say that they are happily together as they had had a lot of problems before the affair.

At the time I didn't want to do it because a) I'm a coward b) they have kids and c) I didn't want the OW's husband phoning/threatening my husband at work.

But now I am starting to think that I would have felt safer if he had known what was going on too.

Bela

The OMH will not be too happy you didnt tell him, but I imagine it is better late than never. I am just surprised that your husband still works with her and you have tolerated this. Why didn't he find another job?

belacqua,

You're going to get alot of folks here who will tell you that exposure to the OPS is always necessary no matter how much time has passed....like Wat says....there have been numerous discussions about that on the board. From a strictly moral standpoint (as opposed to a marriage building strategy), there's no question that the OPS has a right to know....but it can create more conflict and risk in both marriages when that happens so long after the affair is over. So you'll get some varying views between folks who stress marriage building....and folks who stress morality. It's a hard choice to make, and one only you can decide for you. I definitely stress quick and timely exposure to the OPS when the affair is ongoing or the A partners are withdrawing....because after that....it's much harder to do...and has really mixed results for the marriages.

After reading your other thread.....the affair partners are STILL working together????? In that case....yes....expose the affair. I consider that an "ongoing" affair....because until contact ends...it is a recipe for disaster and an accident waiting to happen. The other marriage is also at risk because of continued contact.

Great post starfish!

It does bring up the struggle between doing what is best for a marriage vs. what is moraly right!

I know that is where my H is currently at. Wanting to do what is right..tell the OMW (but also knowing the pain that will come with that)...vs..concentrating on our M (and get beyond worring about exacting pain on OM)

In my sitch my H has talked to OM, which gave him "some" satisfaction, however, he seriously doubts the OM intentions of telling his W. (with good reason..most WS DO NOT tell until they "Have" to or when exposed!)...

Starfish is correct when saying each person is different and must do what is best for their own recovery! Look inside, you will know what the right decision is!

Good luck!

2crazy, it is always the right decision to warn the other betrayed spouse about the affair. The only time it becomes debatable is when YEARS have passed. And most, including Dr. Harley, advocate that the affair be exposed to the victim no matter how much time has passed. Most BSes agree that they don't care how much time has passed, they deserve to know. And they do.

The best interests of the betrayed spouse should not be sacrificed for some temporary peace in anyone else's marriage. That truth does not change from person to person, but is a universal truth.

Personally..

I would question my committment to any marriage in which the price of admission is that I have to make choices that are morally wrong in order to nurture or sustain it.

For me there isn't a morality vs marriage building issue...if doing the right thing will damage the marriage..the marriage is detrimental to me as an individual.

I hear the "personally" noodle and I feel the same way <for me>....but it's not a decision I want to push on anyone else. In this case....where contact continues....exposure is an obvious and necessary risk....but for other people, they may feel the risks (of exposing years after the fact) are too high <for them, they marriage, their family, their children>, and that it will reopen wounds that are healing, create renewed conflict, and risk recontact from the OP or OPS after a long period of healing. After a long time of silence....the moral issue remains the same....unfortunately, there is every likelihood that it will plunge both marriages back in crisis. I have some empathy for folks who decide exposure long after the fact is just not for them.

Ideally, one wouldn't have to face the question of exposing years after the fact if they did the right thing at the start. Because as starfish said, the moral issue remains the same and doesn't magically evaporate just because it becomes MORE inconvenient after time has passed.

Even so, that is not the case here and is irrelevant to belacqua's case since her H and the OW still work together. The OWH needs to be informed in this situation.

Empathy..yes...agreement..no.

I empathize to the extent that I *do* recognize that all of the issues you bring up are realistic and can understand the conflict that these possible consequences may cause in an individual faced with making a choice.

However...when it comes to willfully and intentionally allowing another person to be victimized for my own security/comfort/convenience..that is a line I'm not willing to cross and am not likely to be in agreement with even if the consequences are very severe.

I liken the risks of delayed exposure to interest accruing on a debt.

The stakes are higher..it will cost you more *because* you chose not to do what needed to be done *when* the timing was correct/opportune/whathaveyou.

It is the same for WS who reveal affairs long past....it manages to be even MORE damaging than if they had told in the immediate aftermath because for the BS 10 or 20 or more years of their lives and choices have been taken away from them.

Do I think that marriages that have survived and flourished for 10 or 20 years post A take a decided risk in disclosure?

Absolutely.

However..for me as in individual...I am not so attached to any relationship that I am willing to allow it to turn me into a monster. That price is too high..and yes..I do believe that making a willfull choice to allow another person to live in a lie makes that person a monster.

It would be no different than if I knew a persons coffee had been poisoned..but so as to not upset my own position I sat there making pleasant conversation while they drank it. I didn't create the situation..but I am making a choice to perpetuate it...and it's worse still because I have personally *been* on the receiving end of that particular cup of coffee...I can not claim ignorance as to the effects.

ML....Like you, I would not find myself in the position of failing to expose an affair to the OPS early after discovery. One reason for that....is because I believe they have a timely and reasonable right to know their marriage is at risk, and another is that I wouldn't want to be sitting down the line, feeling guilty, wondering whether I should do it years after the fact. I also agree that the point is moot in belacqua's case.

It's impossible to live authentically while keeping this kind of a secret....a secret that harms someone else. And when you wait....you have more moral dilemas....the one of the OPS having a right to know, and using late exposure to assauge your own guilt at not having done it sooner, as well as the knowledge that waiting may create great risk and further harm for all concerned. For those folks who are years into recovery....the issues become more and more complex, scary and risky.....so please....expose early when the risk for both marriages is lowest, the benefits greatest, the decision is the clearest and freest from guilt, and before you have face a much harder decision down the line.

noodle I agree 100%

[color:"red"] EGG ZAK LEE[/color]

[color:"red"] DOUBLE EGG ZAK LEE [/color]

Whenever I watch mafia-themed movies I can't help but think about the Mafia wives ... living off the fruits of their murder-terrorist husbands' activities ... and sending their kids to exclusive private religious schools ... corrupt to the core ... "the price of admission is that I have to make choices that are morally wrong."

I make these decisions only for myself because I don't believe that morality and truth are absolute and definitely not universal. Many clergymen don't recommend exposure beyond asking God for forgiveness (not even to the WSs OWN BS.)...so this issue isn't as universal even for religious leaders or for "others" as it may be for me and some of the others here. I know where I stand....and my thoughts about my own life and the need to expose is similar to pep, noodle and ML....but I don't claim to know what's morally right for everyone else....only for me.

Individuals work out their answers to questions of morality about things like exposure on the basis of their own core, foundational, and theological beliefs. I might wish that were the same for everyone....but it's not.

Since there are many conflicting sets of theological beliefs and worldviews in existence, there will be different sets of moral "truths" that are passionately held in a religiously diverse society and even on a message board like MB. Consider arguments between conservative and liberal Christians........on the morality of abortion, homosexuality and physician assisted suicide. Even with one wing of Christianity.....the conservative denominations.....teachings differ greatly on topics such as divorce, ******, even the bible. If one includes the beliefs of other nations, and from other eras, the disagreements become even more pronounced. Here on MB....there is diversity about morality, truth and interpretations of Harley's work.

I myself find it extremely troublesome that exposure is stressed so vehemently here and often presented as the first and foremost response to infidelity....and that it isn't mentioned even once on the main site or in the book "Surviving an Affair". For something so important to have no mention....is confusing for people and leaves that issue open to more interpretation...even if Harley does talk about it on the radio show.

If one set of theological beliefs is absolutely, objectively, universally true, then its corresponding set of moral truths would also be absolute. So which theological beliefs are "the one"? I can only answer that for me.

Even on the subject of contract killing...there may be some radical factions of religion that think it's not only moral but part of God's plan for a holy war. "Exposure" is likely to be the subject of even more diverse moral standards because even though people might recognize that they have moral obligation to the OPS, they believe their "moral obligation" is <greater> to their own marriage....than someone else's.

Morality is a religious issue....and until we can all reach a consensus on a common set of theological beliefs, we will never achieve universal agreement on moral questions.

While exposure is clearly a moral issue for many of us (myself included)....and our own truths are clear and well defined....it's obvious that not everyone here agrees....whether we think they should or not. So my advice for folks considering the decision for late exposure is to FIRST....don't wait....but if you do, be authentic to your OWN set of moral beliefs (would YOU want to know?) and be aware of the problems that waiting entails so that you're prepared for the fall out.

Agree..

You are going to have to take you everywhere that you go...you are going to have to live with the consequences of your choices...and you are going to have to look at your own face in the mirror every morning.

The person whose choices you need to be concerned about is you.

Is that the truth? The problem with this statement is that it is self refuting. If truth is not absolute, then your statement is not absolute and is NOT universal; it is self refuting. I DO believe that truth and morality are absolute and most certainly ARE universal. The fact is that something is the truth whether or not one recognizes it as such because the truth is based on REALITY and most certainly is universal. Otherwise it is not the truth. The truth is NOT contingent upon one's ability to recognize it.

Nor is morality a "religious" issue. Even folks who do not believe in God can be moral and know right from wrong.

There are clergymen who do not advocate exposure and there are those who do. But, this is not a matter of popular opinion but a matter what is right and wrong. We don't get to make up what is right and wrong, not even clergymen. If we do then we can't say that adultery is bad or that murder is bad. Adultery is wrong no matter what one's belief; murder is wrong no matter who believes that. If we all get to make up our own set of morals, then we have no right to incarcerate murderers and rapists and certainly no right to come here and complain about the betrayal of adultery.

It was a matter of popular opinion in early American history that slavery was right, but that does not make it right even though it was "culturally" right. See how this philosophy quickly falls apart when you take it to its logical conclusion? It invalidates all world wars in the deal.

I am very familiar with the mental illness of moral relativism and know that it quickly falls apart under even minor scrutiny. Folks who claim a belief in moral relativism demand an absolute standard of morals in treatment OF THEMSELVES, for example. They won't be singing the moral relativism fogsong when someone tries to mug them. They won't be saying 'that is right for you but wrong for me,' when someone tries to murder them. Suddenly, they will become moral absolutists, I suspect, and DEMAND that the murderer recognize an absolute moral standard against murder. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

They won't tolerate such "fuzzy" standards when it comes to their bank's treatment of their OWN money. Oh no, they will expect EXACT, ABSOLUTE moral standards when it effects them personally. So, I have yet to find a moral relativist who really believes in m.r.

And that is your prerogative. But then by the same token, you can't object to those who say they DO KNOW right from wrong [beyond the silly claim that the only wrong is claiming that you DO know right from wrong]. That would be refuting your own claim that there are no absolute standards of morality and truth. If you say that only you get to decide what is right or wrong, then that same standard must be afforded to others.

The reason it is expressed so vehemently here is because those of us who have experienced it and have seen the results KNOW how very effective it really is. And even though it is not mentioned in SAA, it is spoken about OFTEN by Dr. Harley and by his children in counseling sessions. It is simply the most effective tool I have seen here in killing affairs. So, of course it is going to be recommended often. Folks come here asking for our opinion on the best way to break up the affair, so we would be remiss if we didn't tell them.