Hi schoolbus. In one of your posts you said:

"The memory is a very interesting mechanism.
That's my job - memory, learning, language, so I get to do brain stuff all day long."

So I have a question for you about memory. My husband had an PA 9 years ago with my sister (talks plus 3 kisses over 3-4mo period), but D-day was not until March 1 of this year.

I feel that since March 1, he has been as forthcoming as possible about the details of the affair as far as he can remember, but since it was so long ago, he has trouble recalling the frequency of their talks and what exactly was discussed. I want to know more.

If he truly doesn't remember, then he doesn't remember, and there's nothing that can be done. But here's my question for you: is it possible that he's unwittingly suppressing information that can be remembered somehow?

About frequency, he said he's guessing maybe once or twice a week, but he can't say for sure. Cell phone records are gone at this point. And does it matter anyway? Yes and no. I wish I knew all the facts so I feel confident I know everything.

About content, he said it was about his dad's recent death plus other issues he was having with his family plus "probably" discussions about day to day things - work, kids, etc. He said he's never been one to talk about any details of our relationship with others (I know that's true), and he's said he honestly doesn't remember talking to her about what was lacking in our marriage. I find that hard to believe, and it's huge a sticking point for me. I would love to hear her take on this because I know she would remember more, but of course I'm not speaking to her and won't. He said they never discussed any feelings they had for each other. I do believe this could be true. From what he tells me, their affair never reached this point. He said he didn't reveal anything to her that he didn't also share with me. In other words, he says he wasn't going to her instead of me but rather going to both of us and to her a limited amount.

It is so hard to believe him, especially since he can't remember much other than "3 kisses and talks."

I'm quite certain that during this period I described to my sister in much greater detail the intricacies of our relationship more than he ever would have. We've always done this with each other. It makes me so sick. She was playing both sides for a few months. During their affair, I now know that she would lend support and get information from me and then, unbeknown to me, would turn around and do the same thing with him.

My story is here: http://forum.marriagebuilders.com/ubbt/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2350318&page=all

If anyone else has information about memory and ways to bring out what is suppressed, I'd be happy to hear it.

I have a crazy good memory. I remember specific details forever. WHY CAN'T HE????????????

I have read that this is quote typical of FWH. I don't have any experience with this myself. I am sure that others will be along to post soon.

its normal for a FWS to not remember because they fervently wish it never happened... i can not recall what i told BH of the timeline of my ONS (that one night) 10 months later. He can..he tries to see if I am lying. I am not...I wish fervantly it never happened and the details blur with time. What was said -i havent a clue. Its normal.

This is such a great question and I cant wait for schoolbus to address. I asked my WW "when was the first time and what were the circumstances?"

Can't really remember...

SWW

Wow, lots of questions here.

First, you have the issue of a nine year gap, and asking for details of conversations. Let me take that on first.

While we might believe we recall exact details of conversations, vebatim, it is actually the more frequent case that we recall the gist of conversations, and recall some sections of conversations verbatim. Some might believe that females are much better at the verbatim recall, but overall the edge goes just slightly in this direction.

What you are more likely to recall is the mood of the conversation, and several sentences, with phrases recalled quite well. Complete verbatim conversations are not recalled well, unless you are a trained listener and write it down immediately afterward. You would be very surprised at the difference in what you believe you said, and what you actually said, given taped or transcribed information after only a week.

Anyway.

The nine year gap will be quite a span of time for your husband to recall specific information regarding conversational interchanges, unless certain criteria were met. The memory would require some things to assist him, things that occurred at the time of the conversations.

For example, if I were to ask you what you talked about at breakfast three weeks ago Tuesday, you would probably have NO CLUE.

BUT.....if that just happened to be the breakfast meeting with your boss where he told you that the company was closing, or you were getting a raise....or it was the day of your wedding....why, then you might very well remember!

This is because the memory would be able to attach the conversation to some meaningful event. If your husband's conversations with your sister were attached to such an event, perhaps a holiday or wedding or something like that, he might be able to recall something because that was "attached" to the conversation by time frame. It is one method by which I am able to assist clients in recovering their memories of events.

Another "reason" people store information is that the brain has attached a very high level of importance to the information. Again, if a conversation has a very important meaning to it, it is much more likely to be stored with broader attachments. An example would be your wedding proposal. You likely recall what your husband said, how he said it, where you were, etc. This is because that conversation had a very high importance level, and the broader attachments (context, location, etc.) were also stored as part of the memories in order to lend support to that information in the brain. Important information is stored with a high level of contextual support - and therefore more likely to be recalled. In your husband's case, if he was talking about everyday stuff, not really likely to be stored. I would tend to believe him that he doesn't recall what they talked about, because if they talked about REALLY important stuff, he would be able to tell you. He is probably guessing that it was everyday stuff - an excellent guess on his part. I trust that guess.

Your question about frequency is probably very difficult for him to address. Because this is nine years ago, my task in helping him to recall would be for him to have what would be referred to as an "anchor". There may not be an anchor for him to attach a timeline to. That is, when I work with patients, I work to find an anchor moment that is a fixed moment in time that the patient can absolutely point to as a date that everyone agrees is a known moment or date that a specific event occurred.

For example, if my patient had a traffic accident and lost his memory, and could not recall events prior to the accident except to a certain point. We would take that exact point and work from that - the "anchor". We then have a known point, and go forward (or back, depending on the memory problem!).

We are talking about conversations nine years ago. His "guess" is that the events were about once or twice a week. From my experience, this estimate is likely to be slightly underestimated, but probably in the ballpark. My experience tells me the 2-3 times a week would be more likely, as something I have seen tends to make time sort of "spread out" if that makes sense. It is not a purposeful change, but something that seems to happen as people age and time passes.

The last thing I will take on is the issue of talking about what was lacking in your marriage. Here is my best estimation of what likely was or was not discussed, given what your husband has reported. He says that he didn't discuss what was lacking, and you say that he does not discuss details of your relationship with others. Those two items are NOT conflicting information.

Next, you say that you believe your sister probably used information from you to try to get to your husband.

I tend to agree. She succeeded, as she was able to tempt him over the line.

Looking at it from a memory perspective, I tend to believe that your husband did not discuss what was lacking in your marriage. I would say that if you were to discuss this with your sister, however, she would say that they "did" = here's why:

She would have used the information that the two of you talked about. She would have talked to him about what YOU said. He, in turn, would have deflected her bringing it up. Thus, in her mind, they "talked about it". In his mind, they did NOT.

Your sister played the two of you against one another. Shame on her. You did a good thing to exile her.

My outside quarterbacking says your husband is working his memory to the bone. The hard part is that his memory may or may not actually have the information in there.

If he is to recall what they talked about, he may have to talk about where they were when they talked, what he did while they were talking, what he recalls about what he was feeling when they talked. Those things might do more to help him recall more of the gist of the information.

You might feel like it is trickling out. It is, in a way, but not because he is holding back. It is the fact of the way the information was laid down in there - and that I think he did NOT attach much of a level of importance to what your sister had to say. That in itself ought to make you feel better, in a way.

Sorry that was long.

Thank you so much, schoolbus, for your analysis. It helps.

I know what you mean about attaching conversations to events in order to remember them better. We have attempted to do this with a couple events from that period when we were both present with her, and we both come up blank on the specifics discussed. So I'm better able to cut him some slack on remembering because I don't even remember some things. I have remembered a lot more details and events than he has, and that has triggered his ability to share more facts.

For example, we remember a camping trip we went on with my sister and BIL and our kids in August (my grand idea I'm pretty sure), and my husband says there was never physical contact (kissing) between them there or anytime after that trip and there hadn't been for some time before. We remember that one night us four adults had been drinking ... arguing and craziness ensued -- first between sister and her husband -- and I remember her yelling at me about how I should be a better wife to my husband. But I don't remember specifics about what she said. I just know that I felt totally ambushed. That's what I remember ... me thinking "where in the hell is this coming from?" These are the red flags that I chose to overlook.

I also understand your anchor concept. We were able to pinpoint the date of kiss #2 because it occurred when I was out of state for a wedding, which has an exact date in mid-July. This helps to establish when kiss #1 occurred, which he says occurred shortly before and was the beginning of their affair because their secret talks on the phone started after the first kiss, attraction on his end was sparked, and it became a comforting, exciting escape.(GROSS!) But he is not able to state an exact date for kiss #1 or kiss #3, only that those occurred more at the beginning of the affair even though they continued to talk on the phone after kiss #3. He knows when the end date to their talks was because he remembers the work event he was at when he made the decision to not discuss things with her again.

Thanks also for your insight about the frequency of their talks and about what her take might be about him sharing our deep, dark problems (I have not heard this from her; it's just my guess), even though he says he honestly doesn't believe there was much to say in this regard ... that his problems were about his dad and daughter, not about me. I'm sure there were a lot of presumptions made on my sister's part about the failings in our relationship because they DID if fact kiss. There are a lot of presumptions made on my part, too, due to that fact. During that time, he selfishly pursued some kick/comfort from her that he chose not to allow me the opportunity to give him. That's it in a nutshell.

The really, really whacked part of her playing us against each other is 1) I didn't see it ... until it was already over 2) he didn't see it ... until it was already over 3) I really think part of her extremely demented self was trying to help us in some crazy way 4) of course, she was also trying to destroy us at the same time.


This is what a couple of my friends have said, one that knows just him, and another who knows both of them.

hmmmm ... I'm trying to see it like that.

Found out this afternoon that he wasn't suppressing memories. He was still lying. They had sex twice.

i am sorry that happened DDD - seriously - repetitive ddays are so hard - its a double wammy - i am sorry!

So it was not the conversations that were of any importance.


Sex was the issue.


Interesting.

The "kissing" was something that I wondered about. He was specific about three kisses. Knew this information specifically, and as I read that post about the ability to anchor the dates I had wondered about things. then, this last post of yours comes through.

So now you have something entirely different. What he was covering had nothing to do with conversations at all.


I still tend to believe his information regarding the conversations in GENERAL. However, given the new information with the sexual issue, we have a new ballgame.


What you now have to deal with is totally different. We were talking about kissing, and now we have shifted to sex. He states twice.

Okay, new problem here, because the conversations between the two of them likely initiated with his grieving, your relationship, and his "need" with being supported during this time. Your sister worked this angle, and SO DID HE. Do not lose sight of his role in this.

He fully comprehended where the relationship was going regarding the sex, and went there.


That being said, his memory of the conversations would still follow the recall pattern I explained. But the fact that he had sex with her will, of course, increase the importance level of the conversational interchanges - and if you understand what I tried to explain, you should then understand that his recall of certain conversations therefore MUST be STRONGER and very much more specific.

This is neurologically a fact. It is how the brain is wired, and we recall things because the brain is wired to recall them built around certain factors. We learn them and generalize them RAPIDLY, without special tactics because the brain is wired to do it. Among these:

1. high repetition levels (for example, stuff we do over and over again, we recall and learn and keep - like our phone number)

2. life safety (for example, do not stick yourself in the eye with sharp pointy things, avoid saber tooth tigers...)

3. importance to life events (attachment to others - remembering mom's face, where we live, our wedding day...)

4. importance to our emotional self (things that bring us calm, comfort, or fear, like teddy bears or snakes)

5. importance to future needs (things you realize will come up later - like the teacher says it will be on the test, or your wife is going to ask about)


There are many other things we store and learn right away, that we don't have to "think about". They just get stored immediately, and we remember them. (I often wish this was WHERE I PUT MY KEYS. )

But a conversation with an emotional and sexual partner in a clandestine affair - and moreover SEVERAL conversations - are a little more special.

WHY?

Because when you look at the list....they fall into more than one of those items I listed, don't they?


And when events or information that needs to be stored falls into one or more of the "important" categories that the brain has in what we might term "HIGH ALERT REMEMBER THIS" class,

the brain REMEMBERS that. Because items that hit more than one of what it might consider critical categories for learning and memory, IT STORES THAT INFORMATION, and that information would be much less likely to be forgotten or lost or discarded or vague.

The brain encodes items in those higher categories more solidly than other information, just as a "stand alone" category. In combination with others, those memories are much more ingrained. Some categories, of course are far more important than others. The brain of course prioritizes. But if you hit a number of these "priority" categories - either for purposeful learning in order to recall something, or as a matter of accident as life happens - your brain is much more likely to recall those events much better.

What I mean is, items in the "life safety" category are stored immediately and are NOT FORGOTTEN. Period.

Items in the "you need to remember this because the teacher said it will be on the test" are also high-level encoding items, and while they may be forgotten, if the teacher says, "Class, this WILL be on the test" are in the category that is considered very unlikely to be missed on the test.

High repetition items are seldom forgotten - with some odd exceptions. We are unlikely to forget repetitive motor functions we have learned, period (for example, riding a bike, skating, or tying our shoes, or signing our name). Other repetitive tasks, such as memorizing our phone number or address will remain intact for quite a very long time - and perhaps over the lifespan for many individuals. Certain numbers or information may be discarded, if deemed by the memory as "no longer necessary" as it falls to disuse after a certain period of time, if learned in this manner (consider your phone number from 4th grade, or information you memorized for a test strictly by rote).

But, if you pair an emotional conversation, with the physical act (SF), and the comfort he sought, plus the information he was secreting from you and "learning" to protect for future use (a unique memory situation indeed), I would be hard pressed to be convinced by this subject as my client that he did not recall even the gist of the conversations.

That, in my opinion, is a no-starter.

He does indeed recall the gist of the intimate conversations. And indeed recalled the sexual encounters. You see, he recalled enough - in the high priority category of "need to know for the future events" area....didn't he?

Does the OW BH know that it was more then just kissing?

Time to expose the BH once you get all the details out.

He hasn't said this himself, but it seems to me more and more that sex was the primary issue. It was probably both -- sex (sexual attraction, lust, etc) and the talks.

I'll let him figure that out in therapy.


Yes he did. Yet another thing he'll have to work through in therapy.

Thanks so much, SB!

Yes, I called him immediately and asked him if he knew they had sex. He did not. I told him they did and left it at that.

Delta

Let me add just one thing to SB's memory analysis. I dunno how it works with women, who are wired in their own way, or even with some individuals with their own differences.

I do know that in situations of panic and terror, some detailed memories may not be available on demand. It may take a bit of time for them to surface. Also, under questioning, someone may think they understand the question but they don't. You get an answer through a filter of misunderstanding.

You also get the "I don't want to tell her the first thing that just popped into my mind, she will kill me," thing. In any event, he is here. And now it begins. He doesn't appear to be dense. He will learn, I think. And he will change, I think. Time will tell you what you need to know. It may take a while. Just my initial thoughts.

Larry

he will also recall details

it is his desire not to hurt you that makes him relutant to tell you details


why????

because it was only afterwards that he realized that he was stupid

and complicit in her plan to undermine you

and only then did he fully comprehend the full impact of what he had said



yes, although this sounds stupid
and IS stupid

it is the truth



and he does remember saying negative things about you that intertwined into the seduction


he may not recall exactly the details


but he does recall that he was complicit in the negativity


and he does know and understand that detail.




That is the discussion YOU want with him. Only the details will be hard for him to recall. The FEELING, however, he does recall and wants to avoid discussing.

He would be better off discussing it with you, wouldn't he?

SB