bigk,


If you think it's hard to find evidence about late exposure....you should try finding evidence that the above statement is "fact". I've scoured all of Harley's stuff, this site, his books, and all kinds of other articles on the net, looking for anything he has to say about exposure to bring some clarity to this issue. Aside from saying "put it on the evening news" on his radio show....which doesn't address the specific issues you mentioned. He advocates always revealing the affair to your own spouse very clearly...but I've known couples who counseled with SH (because the father is not doing individual counseling now)....and he does not always advocate telling others once an affair has ended. His primary concern is for the his clients...and what's good for "their" marriage. WH's affair proofing/infidelity fighting strategies which are all over the web....don't mention exposure to the other spouse at all.

Does that mean exposure isn't a good strategy? No! exposure is a great strategy for ending affairs (but there is nothing to suggest it's a good marriage building/recovery strategy once an affair has ended years before!) Even though there isn't much research, evidence, or even Harley quotes (about exposure) to support it....it makes logical sense and it works.


I formed my views using logic and good sense bigk. Research and evidence about affairs is scant....and when you get down to something like "exposure" it's even "scanter". When folks reach 2+ years after an affair....how many do you think are posting here and still thinking about undone esposure too? But it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the best window of opportunity for exposing is early and that later exposure loses some it's potential. Does it make sense to you that say 4 years down the line it would help your marriage to say "hey, yanno....we never told his wife about the affair?" How do you think your recovering WS would respond to having all that stuff dredged up again? How much do you think it helps the recovering BS either to start going over the details to tell the OPS and revisit the most painful time of their lives knowing what's in store for the OPS? Some evidence of what that does....I can see in my own marriage. 4 years in recovery....whenever something reminds us of that time or the subject comes up....it is extremely difficult for us. H feels like he will never be really forgiven or trusted. I feel hurt and triggered. Sometimes those feelings linger and create a loss of intimacy over a period of weeks. If we were dealing with an OPS who had just found out...potentially an angry OP too....because of late exposure....I can imagine what that might be like.

Remember I talked about "squirm room"? I found a post over on the Recovery board about how the BH told the OMW eight months after the affair ended and she didn't believe him. Why not? Because the OM had had time to cover his tracks and talk his wife into believing he had a crazy stalker instead. The evidence of the affair was no longer available....don't you think that's a problem? I'm looking at what things....from a logical perspective....might change when time has passed and the affair wasn't exposed when it should have been. I think some of those things make sense. I'm not presenting those things as "facts" but rather some of my own logical thoughts about exposing <years> afterwards.

Here are some benefits of exposing an affair even late. Now I don't have evidence about these either (and neither do you btw)...but somehow I don't think you'll object to that <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

*The OPS is functioning under the possible assumption that's she's married to a faithful spouse and that her marriage is honest and healthy. Imagine that *you* (general you) are in that position and how vulnerable you would be. Imagine whether you'd want that information....and if you would....be authentic and if you haven't revealed the truth to the OPS....do it....even late....it's information that most people would want.

*Don't assume the other marriage is thriving just because the affair has ended. Without honesty, it's unlikely to thrive and if the OP had one affair....they could easily have more. The OPS's health is at risk and they have a right to know that.

*No matter when an OPS finds out about an affair...it's devasting. Time does nothing to soften that blow....so waiting even longer won't make it better.

*Secrecy is one of the things that helps affairs thrive....as a society, and as individuals we have an ethical obligation to stop enabling and romanticing affairs so that it becomes harder to continue this destructive trend.

I'm looking at both sides of this issue....and I think that's the best way of helping folks make the most informed decisions for their own lives. Simply denying that there's other ways of viewing this issue....won't make that go away. I can tell folks...this is THE way...the only RIGHT way....and that's FINAL....but it doesn't respect their right to explore, disagree and CHOOSE. The original poster on this thread left because she felt as though she was portrayed as a "monster"....and one reason she did is because folks jumped on the "morality" issue, and were unwilling to recognize that she was worried about whether she'd hurt someone else's children by exposing now. I wanted to recognize her concerns as "valid" and talk about how I could understand those fears before offering her some good reasons for looking at the other side too.

bigk....the authentic me who would tell the other spouse....is the same authentic me who has compassion for folks afraid to tell and the same me who is willing to look openly at the practical applications of these strategies WITHIN the individual marital circumstances that arise.

bigk....thanks for your dialog about this....and thanks especially for your comment about "singling me out". I do understand your frustrations and I respect your opinion very much. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I think if you listen to Dr. Harley's radio show you will hear him advocate telling children OFTEN. He tells the story of how impactful - in a positive way - this was on his own upbringing. He has stated OFTEN that BOTH BS's and the children should "always" be told. So, no it is not hard to find evidence at all, he says it often.



But who says it must be a "marriage building strategy?" It is often a "conscience building strategy" to make amends to one's victims. We don't check our morals at the door when it comes to marriage building. Morals are the foundation that upholds the house. Their purpose is to drive all of our decision making. And it is a matter of morality that drives confessing one's crimes to one's victims. Morality and marriage building are NOT mutually exclusive, in other words.


I formed my views using logic and good sense bigk. [/quote]

But how is it "logical" to come to a conclusion without facts or evidence? I have been here for years and have yet to hear of a late term exposure that "damaged" a marriage. Dr. Harley is a licensed psychologist who has been practicing for YEARS and does not ever claim it is damaging. He recommends late term exposures. So, I am just as puzzled as Aphelion and BigK about why you tell folks to be cautious when Dr Harley doesn't and by your own admission, you have no evidence that would warrant such caution. So... I don't get it, starfish.

*Show me.* Pull up anything about telling an OPS years after an affair that was written by Dr. H. Mel, people have heard a repetition of these things so many times here.....so where are they? Why aren't they written down somewhere by the man himself? On the site? In the books? In the hundreds of published articles? In tons of published interviews? At the seminars? Why would he only talk about exposure in detail on his radio show? Does that seem logical to you?

I agree that it's a "conscience building" strategy....which is EXACTLY why it should be done when it benefits the OTHER people AS MUCH as it benefits the person whose doing the telling.....that's REAL conscience building if you ask me! If you really want to show your concern for that other BS....then why the heck would you wait a few years to go drop that bomb??? Telling them right moment you know is the most moral thing to do and shows real compassion for the other person....not showing up years later and saying "oh btw.....I just can't keep this secret anymore....". If you want a clear conscience....then tell the other spouse when they have the BEST chance of saving their own marriage and proving the validity of your claim....NOT just when the timing suits you down the road. Why check your morality at the door for a couple of years while you recover your own marriage before deciding to make that call? Is that logical? Or MORAL?



What "conclusion"? I didn't present these as "conslusions" mel.....just a discussion of some pros and cons. I've been here for years too mel so your experience isn't any greater than mine....and there isn't any evidence about telling an OPS years after an affair either way. To be honest....there isn't much evidence that exposure is a big part of Harley's infidelity strategies for that matter. He stresses honesty and transparency about affairs to our spouses and our children....even our families and friends....but that is not the same as the exposure strategy stressed here on MB. And he never says that his strategies are guaranteed or that any single thing will work for everyone....never. I'll tell you what I see LOTS of evidence about....that in spite of the fact that this strategy isn't stressed much at all in the Harley materials....it is stressed to extreme here on this forum and in terms so absolute....that God forbid anyone even raise some logical questions, concerns or other views.

Well, you can't credibly ask for evidence when you do not hold yourself to the same standard, starfish. However, he has stated on the radio when presented with the penaltykill case [4 yrs after the fact] and the 2Bnormal case [2 yrs after the fact] that he agreed with the exposure and that the BS should be told, despite the years that had elapsed. He has stated on other occasions that he does advocate exposure to the victim, regardless of the time that has elapsed. And yes, he "logically" spoke of this on the radio with an audience of HUNDREDS. Just because it isn't specified in his books is irrelelvant.


Agree. But that is neither here nor there. The discussion is about those who DIDN'T expose at the time of the affair. Ya can't go back and change reality. It doesn't lessen or erase the fact that it needs to be done.

I agree they are not conclusions, they were simply baseless hypotheticals that have very little to do with reality, "cautioning" folks about exposing late term. A "caution" that by all indications is completely unwarranted. If making amends to our victims is somehow as damaging as you purport, then that will be big news to every 12 Step program there is. Making amends, even years after the fact, is part of RECOVERY, not a damaging endeavor. As an alcoholic, I can attest to the necessity of amends in the recovery process.

And of course, exposure is recommended here as a solution. Anyone who has spent any time here knows full well how very effective it can be and how ruinous it is to an affair. It is a tried and true method of affair warfare. However, folks here did not just pull that concept out of thin air; it came straight from Harley himself and has been advocated on this forum in all the years I have been here.

Having received another response from Dr. Harley (not the one that was posted a few weeks ago) Dr. Harley replied that he would NOT FORCE me to do this exposure if my H and I were not comfortable with it. Also, he is VERY clear that the FWS should NEVER make the contact for exposure to the OP's Spouse. This is direct contrast to what was recommended by some here with the "letter" I was going to send, but am never going to send to the OM'sW. This is what has been so puzzling to me....why some on this board believe that making amends with the OP's Spouse is a necessary step in healing when Dr. Harley recommends that the FWS NOT do the contacting. How can one make amends IF they are NOT do to the contacting? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Also...This was Dr. Harley's last sentence to his reply to me: I'm happy to hear that your own marriage is going well,and that's the most important part of the issue.
This speaks volumes to me...Much more than anyone on this board has EVER spoken regarding my situation.

Of course Dr. Harley could never "FORCE" you to expose your affair to your victim. How would he do that, with a gun to your head? What a preposterous notion. After you adamantly told him you didn't want to, didn't intend to, what was he supposed to say?

Let's recall what he told you, 2BNormal: "the betrayed spouse should ALWAYS be told." And you have bombarded him with emails looking for a way around that ever since.

He told you many things that you have conveniently IGNORED because you can't spin them as endorsement of not telling your victim.



Real easy. They have someone else do the contacting on your behalf. If Dr. Harley tells you that he is happy that you are happy in your marriage, that doesn't mean you don't still owe this woman the truth. Or that it isn't key to your recovery. Making amends to one's victim is an important part of any recovery.

MelodyLane,
I disagree with you. I'm entitled to my opinion and my thoughts. Just because you "say so" doesn't mean you are right.

2B,

Your post a few months ago:



I still miss the woman that wrote the words above. She was so much more convicted and resolute of what HAD to be done somehow. God told you what you to do it and yet you still found a human way to wriggle out of it.

The woman above doesn't sound sooooo happy in her own marriage. Her BH had to endure his wife in a crying heap partially with regards to OM's family. To him it likely feels like OM remains a part of your life. He worries that the exposure contact has some alterior motive...to split up OM and his wife so maybe the affair can recommence. He wants this crap over...but can it really be with this enduring loose end????

I think I have been abudantly clear that I think your husband should do it. For OM's Wife AND your marriage 2B. However, if he's to chicken then YOU are the next best alternative. In the alternatie, many here have even offered to do the exposure for you ourselves.

What's ironic is that most of us KNOW that once you do it you will feel a relief beyond anything imaginable. Once done, that fact it needed to be done will be soooo amazingly clear to you. I know you'll look back at these months of wrangling and inner turmoil as just wasted time and emotion. Your rationalizations and justifications will/would seem so silly to YOU at that time. You'll end up being a shining example and encourager to others about how relieving even delayed exposure is to you and your marriage.

It's really just a shame you can't see that AGAIN. We really have your, your marriages, OM'sW marriage best interests in mind. This is NOT a competition of principles. IMO, exposing will make YOU and your husband the victors. We don't suffer either way.

Mr. Wondering

p.s. - It's also not been 2 years of NO CONTACT. OM just tried to make contact with you this spring 2006.

And we both know that you will "disagree" with anything you don't like hearing. I don't see any point in rehashing this again, do you?

MrW, The woman that wrote what you pasted in your post was full of emotions from the pushing and bashing and hammering at me on this site. In addition to that, my emotions were in full swing from an issue at work and also something else that was going on in my life unrelated to the past A or exposing to the OM'sW. Emotions do not always equal hearing from God. I should not have relied on my emotions. I have not yet since felt a clear "go ahead" to send such a letter that I was going to send to this woman.


MrW, my H does NOT think I had ulterior motives to split up the OM and his wife. But, you are right about that he wants this "crap" over with. This is not an enduring "loose end" with my husband.


I don't agree that I'm the next best alternative. I don't agree that me, the Former OW, should be contacting this woman. And I know that others have offered to do this as well, but that is not something my husband would agree with.


But, most, if not all of you, who are so adament about this have not faced exposing to the OP's spouse years after it was over. This is what this thread has been about.... Exposing years after an affair ended. My husband and I can't go back to that point in time in which we should have told the OM'sW. I really feel it would have been the best time to tell her when my H first found out that the OM came to see me. But, for some reason, he decided to only contact the OM. At the time, he must have felt that was what he needed to do. I still continued to have email contact with this OM for another 10 months before I broke it off on my own. I still did not even confess this to my H until the online A with OM2 ended 6 months later.


MrW, I do believe you are sincere.


Yes, the OM did try to make contact with me by sending a silly offline IM message, but I did not reply. Nothing happened and the OM is clear that I want nothing to do with him (per my husband). He is NOT a threat to my marriage.

mel,



Ah....of course!! but that's only true for me right? You're not holding me to a standard you won't meet also???

I've already said multiple times that these are just my opinions and that evidence on the subject is scarce and I haven't been able to find much at all. I was only able to find one post on recovery about this topic with the lame search engine we have. You on the other hand claim to know exactly what a widely published Dr. says even though you can't produce a single quote.


Ah....penalty kill. Well you know...turns out that was some of the best "evidence" I've seen about how late exposure can have a "downside" when it isn't done early. Here's what penalty kill's OWN BS posted to you:


It sure sounds like that OPS was really doing some "conscience building" right? :rollyeyes: Sounds more like revenge and anger....not concern for penalty's marriage and nothing like morality. Exposure done for immoral purposes (harm)....doesn't make it moral!

If late exposure is needed.....then this is a really poor poor example of how it might be done. If you're telling me that Harley supported the malicious exposure in this case....his stock just went WAY down with me. The exposure *I* have heard Harley support....has been a "class act" designed to help both marriages. That's the Harley I know.


2B and her husband are entitled to decide using the POJA what is right for them and best for their marriage. It's not what I would decide, or you would decide....but I'm not living her life, and even Dr. Harley recognizes that. I will continue to encourage 2b to expose....but I'll probably do that in a way that still respects 2B not some public flogging because she disagrees with me.

I talked about a case....poster is named janvic (on the recovery board)...who waited to expose and the OPS didn't believe it was true. That was one of the things I mentioned as a "possibility" for late exposure. That proves nothing....and neither does the stuff you've posted. In each case....it only proves what happened in a single instance.

If Harley supports exposure no matter what....why isn't in his materials? Write him ML....make him come on here and tell me I'm a fool....I would just love it!! He doesn't talk about these things with the idea that "one size fits all".....I've heard him talk and "adapt" his teachings to meet the needs of individual couples. He's an extremely compassionate man who doesn't preach or humiliate people....ever. If he did.....no WS would ever talk to him.


I've listened to lots of his radio shows too....met him in person, counseled with Steve, gone to seminars at the Smart Marriage Conference etc. He suggests a much classier and more compassionate kind of exposure from what I've heard....designed with one purpose...ending the affair....and he doesn't make people feel like a "moral monster" if they don't agree with everything he says either.

Belaqua was a betrayed spouse who had suffered, grieved and reached recovery but was still haunted about exposure....worried about the children in the other family....and whether she should still tell. Instead of making any attempt to understand those feelings and show her compassionately how exposure might actually help the other family....she felt betrayed and hurt by the comments here. She didn't ask for this!! She didn't ask for the job of making somebody else's children cry like hers did because her H couldn't keep his pants zipped. She was struggling with that burden because she saw MORE than one moral dilemma.....she was weighing the importance of clearing her conscience against the happiness of those children. I respect her for that!!! I think it shows a far more complete moral consciousness because she ASKED about somebody else!!

Since we're asking moral questions here....how moral is it to re-victimize the victims?.....because that looks like what happened to belaqua on this thread to me. And it's OKAY to talk about the downside of exposure....because if this stuff doesn't stand up to the test of debate...then it's not the great stuff I know it is. It's become scary to see the effort to drown out any voices that question the interpretation of these strategies....and I'm not going to be silenced like so many others have.


Poppycock!! Bulldunky! Baloney!! It's irrelevent to WHOM? YOU? It sure isn't irrelevent to me....and it makes absolutely positiviely NO SENSE at all that one of the mainstays of his philosphy is so CONSPICULOUSLY absent on the homesite, and in every book, lecture, article, and interview circulating the web. Explain that mel....because if you can't....your argument is "irrelevent" <to me>.

When you talk about "irrelevence" it reminds me of that "starfish story":


belaqua was one of those starfish to me....and I think she mattered and was forgotten in this maelstrom of debate. My sincere regret is that I wasted so much time on this crap....rather than solely concentrating on her. I regret that deeply and my own moral conscience is hurting. And I'm sorry because she is the one who deserved the time and energy. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" /> She deserved someone who said...."I can understand how you feel....but what about this......., have you thought of this......?"

So my bad....I vow to do better or leave.

*editted for grammar

But you aren't in a position to even ask, are you? You can't hold others to a standard by which you admittedly don't abide. But of course, I can produce a quote, and just did previously in this post. If you dispute that he said this, you can call him yourself. He talks about exposure often. On the other hand, you have no evidence whatsoever, so you can't claim that evidence even enters into your equation when you make a claim. As you said, they are "just your opinions." So, you are not in a position to demand evidence from others when admittedly you do not use it yourself.


You are confusing situations and have grabbed the WRONG example. This one does not serve to support your assertion because we are discussing the effect of late term exposures on marriages where BOTH SPOUSES already know. You have claimed this would be a "problem" in the marriage, such as 2Bnormal's marriage where BOTH spouses know but the spouse in the OTHER MARRIAGE does not know.

Because, OF COURSE, there will be great fallout in a marriage like penaltykill's where her BS was NEVER TOLD. What in the world would you expect?? The tragedy there was caused, NOT BY EXPOSURE, but by an AFFAIR and YEARS OF LYING. Do you really imagine that there could possibly be a happy short term outcome to finding out your spouse is in an affair? OH DEAR!

Even so, you are mixing up the situations and the penaltykill example does not support your assertion that there is "damage" in exposing to the OTHER BS victim in the marriage where both partners know. Even short term exposures produce the SAME VOLCANIC effect, and I don't see you "cautioning" against that.

Oh yes, he MOST CERTAINLY did support this exposure, even though it is beside the point. Here is a thread that cc46 posted about the call in reference to the penaltykill thread. Dr. Harley read the thread on MB and commented on it in response to a call into his show. http://www.marriagebuilders.com/ubbt/sho...part=7&vc=1

This call into his radio show about the penaltykill thread was replayed later and many others heard it also. And there was nothing "malicious" about it. The other victim's "intent" is entirely unknown and entirely IRRELEVANT. What mattered was that her husband was told the truth. Sure, they were upset, but it can't be argued that it "didn't help" their marriage. The TRUTH is the solution to adultery, not more LIES, so I am AMAZED that you could see it any other way. Dr. Harley certainly didn't see it any other way. I guess he just doesn't live up to your own personal standards of "compassion." I suspect he might have felt it was more "compassionate" to tell the victim, not protect the victimizer.



Again, it matters NOT if it is "in his materials" AT ALL. [and no one has ever said he "supports exposure no matter what;" that is your own rendition added for dramatic purposes. He doesn't say on the radio "ignore the principles I espouse here becuase they are not in my book." If that is the case, then you are also guilty of recommending a principle that, by you own admission, is not in his book! If this is your "standard" then how do you rationalize giving that advice yourself? Seriously, do you think this stuff through before you post it?


The principle of exposure has been WIDELY circulated on this forum FOR YEARS and is discussed ALMOST DAILY on his radio show. It most certainly is not a SECRET. He espouses the principle of exposure DAILY.


But you can't establish its supposed "relevance." Just asserting it is not in his book means NOTHING. SO WHAT? He does mention it OFTEN on the radio. It most certainly IS irrelevant in the sense that he widely ESPOUSES exposure, EVEN LATE TERM EXPOSURES, regardless of whether it is in his book or not. Sorry, starfish, but when he talks about exposure, he NEVER says to ignore his advice or expresses the manufactured cautions you express when he discusses EXPOSURE. There simply is NOT relevance to your objection that "its not in his book" and you have been able to produce NONE. SO WHAT? Apparently, it hasn't stopped him from talking about it OFTEN.


Well, starfish, the claims that you made did not stand up to debate and I suspect that is why you are so enraged. You don't expect to get asked to back up your claims as you were here by several people. And sadly, the assertion you made could not withstand scrutiny. However, that is not to "drown" out your voice at all. You have a right to make whatever claims you wish, and others here also have the right to question and challenge those claims when they make no sense.

And since I have no idea what you mean about "revictimizing victims," I can't respond to that. belaqua is no "victim" and it would be silly to portray her as such simply because folks were straightforward with her. No one was "victimized" on this thread, so I haven't a clue what you mean. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

Value = benefit - cost.

Put them in the same units and subtract.

If positive, you accrue advantage (gain, do good to, improve situation…)

This applies to latent exposure. It may be that long delayed exposure to OP’s spouse has negative value.

Ethics requires one to not blindly do such exposure but to determine if more bad (integrated across everyone) than good can be expected.

IRL it’s often a crap shoot. But, the more intel, the better the choice and the better the choice the better the expected outcome.

This is ethics.

Takes a little effort, actually.


With prayers,

PS: Belacqua didn't leave this thread because of this interesting discussion; she left because she thought someone called her a monster. Thin skin maybe, but probably not a monster.

So, I only do the right thing if it PERSONALLY BENEFITS ME? What kind of moral is that? It sure wouldn't benefit me to turn in a child molestor. That is not my moral system, Aphelion.

Morality means that principles are followed regardless of the personal benefit. Sure, there are tough situations that have to be considered, but in a general sense, one's principles can't be contingent upon the question: "does this personally benefit me" or they aren't moral principles at all.

Repeat:

Ethics requires one to not blindly do such exposure but to determine if more bad (integrated across everyone) than good can be expected.


It's not just you (or just me) in the equation. In fact, it may be bad for you (or me) with the greater good accruing elsewhere.

Wp,

And just how would one know what is best for the other victim spouse? Does the victimizer get to decide that for her victim? It she qualified to make such a determination?

Does the rapist get to decide what is "best" for the rape victim?

"Does the victimizer get to decide that for her victim?"

No, Harley says the WS/FWS should never make this contact. That would be bad. Bad enough to cost the recovering M too much.

It is the BS's decision to weight the value. And the BS must make this decision after gathering intel as best as she can as to cause and effect. This is why it takes some effort and should not be blindly done.

Most likely, as the experts all say, it should be done. But IRL it is not without rare exception (an actual phrase in a government report) that there will be cases where it would have negative value integrated over all participants.

Even Harley, Glass, Spring, Pittman, Carder and – well, all the professionals, say this: look before you leap. Don’t knee jerk anything. Not even delayed exposure. Especially not delayed exposure.

Yes, we all know the unexposed M is vulnerable, hobbled and less intimate, rife with confusion and maybe even STDs. Its entire potential is constrained. The probability of removing these troubles by exposing the hidden FWS usually outweighs the interim heartache.

But it just might not.


One further thing. Once a BS exposes a long time after the A has ended they, IMO, have an ethical responsibility that did not exist with timely exposure to assist the other betrayed spouse get personal and M help. Like come here. An offer of a band aide must be part of ethical (moral, in your case) exposure terms and conditions.

Aphelion, I don't disagree with a thing you said and don't know anyone who would. Of course, exposures should be done with the greatest of care.

I would suggest, though, that the WS has an obligation to ensure that their other victim BS is told, though. When someone victimizes another, they have that moral obligation, even though they should probably not do the telling themselves as Harley has advised.

I tend to want to bring things to a simple level... all of this high thinking [email]cr@p[/email] about exposure is for the birds. We owe people honesty and a right to make decisions about their life based on honesty. We owe people the truth when we have trampled on them... even when they are unaware of the wounds. 100% of the time... no exceptions. Any negative outcome is not a result of exposure... it is a result of the A. IMHO, there is no room for debate about this issue.

ML, I agree with you 100% here.

You know, that's something I really struggled with - do I tell the spouse or not. I opted not to tell him. It wouldn't have changed anything; I would have felt worse, and he would have felt awful, too. It just wasn't my place. However, he will learn someday, if he doesn't already know. I'm happy with my decision not to tell.

Recovering - clln