This would be correct, if all we did was pepper him about the affair nature of his relationship. But many of us here (me, schoolbus), decided to ignore the affair, and focused entirely on his relationship as he described it.

And guess what? The relationship is a complete and utter disaster. He knows it. We know it. And it is not a marriage. So I told him what I tell everyone who is in a terrible dating relationship - "end it!". Dating is all about finding a suitable partner. His parnter is completely unsuitable for him. Case closed. We can sit here an sing "kumbaya" and make him feel good, but it won't change the things he said in his first post. Have you read it? Every time I read it, I shudder at the awful red flags in their relationship (and that is without including the cheating by his GF).

So I agree with ba109 - the analogy is not one of us questioning "why" he ended up in the hospital. A much better analogy is of someone bleeding to death but refusing to accept treatment. The treatment here is simple - end the unhealthy relationship.

AGG

Did I read his posts? Yes (NB my responses: 3367760 and 3367885 ); I believe you and I are in essential agreement about 'Jane'.

But I'd say only 'a few' here focused on the current relationship vs. the long ago affair.

- WG

OK, we are in vehement agreement then <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />. I sure hope that "John" takes note of the advice, though I think he is long gone by now.

AGG

WoundedGentleman,

One thing you are ignoring though, is the fact that the problems that the current relationship are having are BECAUSE OF the adultery and the way the relationship started.

I believe that the fact it started in adultery is KEY to what is going on here. You see, if we completely ignore how it started, then we might think there would be hope to save this relationship. but, it is fatally flawed from the beginning.

Thus, all the things that are happening would have been predicted right from the beginning, had John come on here then.

So, I dont believe you can separate the current situation from the way it started. They are linked. It is a causal relationship between the two.

And as I said above...that unfortunately for John...I doubt he comes back.

I doubt it too.

It is one thing to point out where he failed (his EA with Jane). It is quite another to be rude. Rather than offer him advice on how to fix this, many of you just wanted to chastize him--repeatedly. It took on such a snarky, rude tone. Capitalizing "YOUR AFFAIR" at every opportunity.
Can we not be firm, yet kind? I know that I would tend to listen and take to heart advice given freely and honestly, rather than angrily and bitterly.
Even Dr. Harley, in his last paragraph to John, gave him advice (POJA with Jane etc...) to fix what is happening NOW.
I realize the signifigance of his EA...but it that the only thing some of you can focus on?
I am pretty sure I wouldn't be seeking advice here if I were him. I am all against sugar coating....but this was not very constructive.

From what I understand, John's 'current relationship' is with a MARRIED woman, that he started dating when he was still married too, AND this married woman, Jane, is cheating on her husband with another OM besides John.

Now even if you completely ignore (for some reason?) the part about John cheating on his wife with Jane before his divorce was final, that still leaves:

John's current relationship is with a MARRIED woman, Jane, who is cheating on her husband with another OM besides John.

Also, John seems obsessed (inapporpriately IMHO) with wanting to have authority over Jane & her husband's kids, and with wanting to be first in Jane's life, in front of her kids, her husband, her other OM...

Imagine John writing to Ann Landers:

Hi Ann, I am involved with a married woman (that I started cheating with while I was still married to my X-wife). She has also cheated on her husband with another man besides me since I got involved with her. Now here's my problem: Her kids don't respect me and won't obey me as if I am their father - instead of her husband, their real father. Whatever should I do?

Even if you totally leave out the part in parentheses (about him still being married when he started cheating with Jane) I doubt seriously he would be advised to continue this relationship.

MM: I think you are mistaken -- 1of2 clearly states that they are now both divorced.

I don't share your perspective about the causality of the former affair and the current relationship. (Though I agree infidelity is a significant 'factor'.) I believe that I understand your perspective much better now. But I think your message (i.e., a relationship started in adultery has zero chance of working) is a tough sell. I was trying to help the original poster understand why the current relationship is not in his best interest with a more approachable tactic.

As bluerskies points out, even Dr. Harley's post offered some small hope for his working on this relationship. But you are entitled to disagree.

- WG

"I've read through your original question and the responses you've received, and almost to a responder, they are warning you about what happens to relationship that originated as an affair. I have counseled hundreds of these couples and am presently counseling couples that married after an affair, and I can tell you from first-hand experience, and their own unsolicited comments, that if they had put the same effort into their marriages, they would be happily married to their original spouses today."

The above statement was from Dr. Harley's post in this thread. Note that he says he did read our responses to John. Also note that he did not state that he found our responses to John to be inappropriate, offensive, or 'snarky'. IMHO it's safe to assume that if Dr.Harley believed our responses to John to be harmful or even the 'wrong' approach, he certainly has both the authority and the power to have them deleted and/or to state his objections. So perhaps the posting-police need not worry?

The fact that WS's typically post & run has less to do with how they are responded to than it does with the fact that they (usually) don't find much support for their adultery here at MB's. They come here mistakenly thinking that if they just tell us how dead, boring, or horrible their marriage was... how it was 'over' long before the divorce was final... how their adultery partner is their special soulmate... then SURELY we will asure them that it's not really adultery, that they were meant to be together.

IMHO they are so fogged and delusional, they have gotten so much 'support' from perhaps well-meaning but uninformed folks/society, that they honestly don't realize that an internet site for STOPPING adultery is not exactly the best place to seek support FOR adultery! AND, as Dr. Harley himself stated, that even with the best of resources for saving relationships, it DOES decrease the odds of success tremendously when it is adultery-based.

I like the analogy that somebody posted about the Titanic: How we're trying to tell John the ship is sinking, that it has a fatal flaw that makes it extremely doubtful it can float, but John's insisting the only problem is the furniture needs to be rearranged.

Now maybe some here perceive it is 'snarky' to tell John to abandon ship? That no matter how much he rearranges the furniture, that even if he hires THE best furniture rearranger in the business, that the ship is going to sink anyway... So the chastisers of the chastisers hop onto the thread to tut-tut those who tut-tut the adultery.

SHEESH - has this place really gotten so bad that we can no longer oppose adultery here?!?!? REALLY - what exactly is so wrong with informing new posters of the FACT that adultery is wrong? Is it against the posting rules here to admit that adultery has tons of negative consequences - including the BC's (Betrayed Children) not respecting the 'authority' of their adulterous parent's adultery partner? Is it such a bad thing to do, apparently even worse than adultery itself, to call adultery by it's true name?

^^ Exactly. They are both divorced, for several years.
This is a prime example of people not wanting to help him, but to focus on the past EA and ONLY the EA. Some of you saw only what you wanted to see and angrily latched onto it. Not constructive at all.

In addition to genuinely trying to help a man in a great deal of pain, I think it likely that Dr. Harley wrote his response to model a post that is truthful of the painful reality, and also gracious.

I'm not one of those -- I did counsel ending the relationship with 'Jane'.

What is less wise about telling 'John' this is: (1) he isn't likely to be receptive; (2) once he was told by one or two, that ought to be enough; (3) it got so bad, that he essentially pled for responses that would help with 'Jane' and not get into a debate about his past sins (he knows about his past sins, he even sought spiritual guidance afterwards); and (4) by helping him in his present crisis without focusing on thie past, you might then be in a better position to convince him of the full ramifications of affairs.

- WG

I am completely agreeing that we should never support adultery. It's as bad as drugs. However, I also agree that I don't blame him for disappearing, considering the tone that many posters took. We would have had a better chance of helping him if we had said, politely, look, you've made some bad choices. You've got yourself and others in a mess, but here is how we think you can get out of it.

If you guys would have banged me over the head, repeatedly, for enabling my husband the way John was banged over the head, I would have left here for good, running and crying, humiliated. Just sayin', if you want to convince someone of something, you don't humiliate them first, and you use compassion. People are welcome to disregard that, of course, but this thread is proof of what happens when they do. What good did it do to treat him this way? He's now not here and not listening to any advice.

I would like to commment on this, though:
Regardless of the background of their situation, IMO John saw a devastatingly bad familial situation in front of him regarding how Jane was raising her kids. I don't give a flip about him or her, but it horrified me to hear how Jane was raising her kids. If I came into a situation where my partner or roommate or whomever was doing that to their kids, you can bet that I'd be 'obsessing' over what was going on under my roof with those kids; it takes a village, and all. He saw (rightly so, IMHO) that they were being emotionally abused through poor parenting, and tried to make his point. She repeatedly agreed/lied/ignored all over the parenting issue, and the kids suffered. I'm surprised they're not committed somewhere or in jail already. I don't agree that, just because you aren't a kid's biological parent, you don't have a right to have input into how they're being raised under your roof - especially if they're being raised so poorly. JMO

Bluerskies,

John was seeking validation for that which cannot be validated. He was seeking help for that which, as Dr. harley noted in the odds, is statistically improbable. John wanted to take a relationship that is flawed at its core, and which cant be made whole because of those flaws (which will be with the relationship for as long as it stays around) and he wanted us to help make it like a normal marriage.

That isnt possible! Sure, things can be made better. But they can never be as what he wants MB principles to make them. It is not only improbable, in my book, it is impossible.

I didnt attack him. Maybe some did. But, what I wanted to point out is the fact that he is betting his life, Jane's life and the lives of those kids...on a "one chance in a hundred."

If he was trying to bet all of his life savings o na stock that had one chance in a hundred, would I be loving and caring by helping him do so? Or would it be loving and caring of me and others to try to get him to get a little smarter, and not risk everything on a losing proposition?

"We met at work, became co-workers, friends and eventually became romantically involved. We were both in bad marriages (mine life-less and love-less where we hardly spoke, and hers angry disrespectful and resentful). We became a sounding board for each other and then became each other’s support system."

From what I can tell John is now divorced from his X-wife, I may have missed the part in his posts where he states that Jane is also divorced now too?

But even so, the fact still remains that their relationship is adultery-based.

And whether or not one approves of adultery-based relationships, whether or not one chooses to support such an adultery-based relationship, the fact remains the odds of an adultery-based relationship succeeding are extremely slim.

IMHO there is absolutely nothing wrong with pointing out that fact to a new poster.

IMHO there is also nothing wrong with opposing adultery-based relationships and challenging those involved in them to end the adultery-based relationship.

IF/when the rules are changed here so that:

adultery cannot be called adultery,

adultery cannot be challenged or opposed,

the problems caused by the adultery can't be directly linkled to the adultery,

posters here can ONLY post to adulterers IF they are trying to help the adulterers resurrect their dying adultery,

then I will stop posting here!

Why? Why is it a tough sell. It is the facts! Please re-read what Dr. Harley posted. Those numbers are the facts. We can debate WHY these relationships dont work, as there is much conjecture out there. but debate on whether they work or not has been settled.


He offered a small hope that the relationship could be made better than it currently is. But nowhere in there did he state the possibility of that relationship finding what we all have been seeking here. As a matter of fact, he very accurately spelled out the fact that the odds of John having a successful, loving relationship as defined by MB and what it is about...is one in a hundred.

Those are terrible odds!

Who was angry?

If it's 1 in 100 it's his choice. The affair was pointed out repeatedly, and we were beating a dead horse. Dr. Harley recognized that too, and gave him the tools to work with Jane. It isn't something "I" would want...but it's not for us to say what relationships are worth saving. I agree that it is loving and caring to help him see that it is an unhealthy losing proposition...unfortunately that's not the tone it was addressed with <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

"they were being emotionally abused through poor parenting"

Their adulterous mother allowing her adultery partner to move into their home was emotional abuse too. IF the situation with her kids is truly as John describes, that is a discipline problem for the mother and father of those kids to address, with counseling, parenting classes, etc. Again, IF it is even true than those kids are lacking in limits and discipline - in other words spoiled. However, it is not appropriate for one of their mother's adultery partners to try to exert obviously unwelcomed authority over those kids. He should not have been living under the same roof with those kids in the first place. THAT displays so much disregard for the emotional well-being of those kids that one has to wonder what John's true motive for wanting control over those kids might be. IMHO he is in a power struggle and maybe even resents Jane's relationship with her children period. Why should his claim for the welfare of those children even be believed when he so obviously didn't mind damaging their emotional health by exposing them to adultery? Even if Jane has spoiled her kids, are we to pretend that the break up of their family, divorce, and being exposed to adultery, AND having some OM hang around demanding daddy-authority over them, has NOT been a danger to their emotional health?!?!?

Sheesh! Oh, yea, let's just totally ignore all that and pretend the ONLY, or the WORST problem in those kids' lives is that they are spoiled.

What I got from John's complaints about Jane's kids is that he wants Jane to put him first before her kids, he wants Jane to parent her kids the way HE sees fit, he blames Jane's kids for the adultery-based realtionship crumbling (even thogh that's what MOST adultery-based relationships eventually do)...

IMHO that sounds very little like genuine concern for her kids but more like selfishly wanting her kids to not interfere with his relationship with their mother. In fact, it even sort of sounds scary to me, like he's maybe thinking if the kids were totally out of the picture he and Jane could somehow recapture how fun the adultery was before reality set in?

It is VERY COMMON for adulterers to get hooked on the romantic fantasy-based phase of adultery and then to not like it so much when that part ends and they have to start dealing with real-life issues such as finances, kids, POJA, etc. It is also VERY COMMON for spouses in blended families to disagree so much on how their respective kids are parented, each thinking the other is favoring or spoiling their own kids. A wanna-be step-dad claiming that her kids need stricter discipline... that if it wasn't for her kids everything would be perfect... YIKES says I!

I am not sure what you mean by "tone". At least in my case.

But, it is in fact what we are trying to do in helping someone understand if a relationship is worth saving. We do that all of the time. many BSs wonder if they can save their marriages...or if they want to. And we wholeheartedly help them understand that, yes...it can be saved with work and with using MB principles.

And the flip side is true. When a WS comes on here and wants help with leaving their spouse and making their relationship with the OP work, we tell them that they are barking up the wrong tree. That they really have no chance of making it work. Because, the reality is...they dont work!

Well, what I got from his complaints was that he walked into a nightmare of bad parenting and tried to make the best of a bad situation. We'll just have to agree to disagree, but IMO, your disapproval of him is filtering what you see.