SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

Here's something I've been thinking about for a long time... what is our responsibility as BS's to achieve real healing when we decide to keep our WS? Should there be some kind of unwritten "statute of limitations" where we either need to shit or get off the pot when it comes to REAL forgiveness, meaning that our WS gets to live a normal life again. Or is cheating a "life sentence" and we can just treat that WS like shit for the rest of the marriage? Once a cheater, always a cheater.. to hell with their remorse.

I can't speak for others, but I tend to be hard on myself. I have some pretty strict standards that I try to adhere to. So when I say I'm going to do something, or even "try" to do something, I feel like I need to be as good as my word When I said I would try R, I felt like I had to mean it. I've told this story often, but I remember shortly after we had started trying for R, I was shopping for groceries and noticed that my WH's favorite ice cream was on sale. I stood there for a few minutes thinking about the messaging. Did I want to treat my WS like nothing had happened?.. reward him?.. punish him? I mean, I could see pretty early on that punishment wasn't in line with what I was trying to accomplish. When you're trying to reestablish emotional intimacy, how can you punish your spouse without punishing yourself? You can't just harm the cheater's half of the marriage. It's one thing, not two halves but whole. I couldn't call it a "reward" either. Frankly, we have a fairly good lifestyle so on-sale ice cream isn't that big of a treat. It's more like a thoughtful courtesy... and to note it, then disregard it seemed petty to me when I remembered my promise to "try". So, it became about the goal of trying, what was I shooting for? And it really came down to a life where we could both be normal again. So, if it were a normal day and I noticed a good price on ice cream?... and bang, the ice cream goes in the cart.

I wouldn't have wanted to stay in a marriage where I won every fight because "he's a cheater" and nothing could ever be authentic or real or normal again. Five years seemed about right when I heard it here at SI, and THAT was where I set my goal, to be healed and moved on from the infidelity within that time frame. And boy howdy, it did take ALL that time! Now my fWH and I might still have problems, but they're the regular type of marriage problems. I'm not holding a grudge or hiding anything. I've said often that what he did was "unforgivable" and that to use the word "forgiveness" sticks in my craw. But... I've "written off" the debt, balanced the ledger, cleaned the slate. He doesn't hear about it anymore. I don't run to him with triggers. I'd be mortified to be caught revisiting the past, let alone wallowing in it. And I'm thinking maybe that's just me, taking a pragmatic and being super strict with myself... and maybe it would take other people longer to get there?

But is there a normal amount of time? It seems like there would be no way to set limits on healing from person to person. Each of us is so different, our WS's are different, our circumstances are different. How long does it take when a BS is really working hard toward healing?.. when they're really proactive?.. 5 years?.. 10?.. a lifetime? Can it be anything goes, just so long as the WS has agency regarding the TRUTH of the relationship? IOW, if the WS understands that they are NOT forgiven and still chooses to stay, that's one thing. But what happens when we don't tell them that they're not forgiven?.. when we're holding a grudge and they don't know it? At what point does the WS become the victim?.. wasting their years believing that they are forgiven and loved when it's just not so? Isn't that sort of the PG version of stealing someone's years rather than the XXX version that was perpetrated against us? Is there a point at which the BS becomes the monster, the very thing they despise, but with a different methodology?

I don't think this matters much for people who don't choose R. I'm just interested to hear other opinions on it. I do find myself a bit critical, if I'm honest, when BS's aren't really trying for full healing and recovery, and when they don't care to get unstuck. At what point should a BS realize that they are inconsolable, that the cheating was a deal-breaker and that they need to move on? It doesn't seem possible to put a time-table on it, and yet, there does come a time at which dithering becomes really unfair to the WS.

I think forgiveness is a process, not an epiphany.

Epiphanic forgiveness does not last very long, in my own experience.

True forgiveness in the face of such a toxic transgression is probably really the absence of deep bitterness.

Expecting forced forgiveness within an arbitrary legalistic framework seems fraught with peril, and yes, being way too hard on yourself CT.

I know I can be kinda harsh about reconciliation, and I admit I am an R skeptic. I want to believe marriages can be "stronger and better" but I don't see a ton of evidence for it.

Again, I know I can be harsh, but I believe adultery is on the same list of top no-nos as murder for very good reasons. Not because a bunch of primitive patriarchial sky god worshippers decided to plunk it on the stone tablets, but because humanity has understood for ages and ages just how toxic it is.

I have said before that, like murder, adultery creates a hard boundary, a rift in time and space. It creates an abyss between "before" and "after." The impact is visceral at every level: psychological, in our organic brains, physical illness, emotional health, spiritual ennui.

To force a rushed, epiphanic forgiveness in that context seems harsher on the betrayed than anyone else, and deeply unjust. Even cosmically unjust.

Moreover, I believe that arbitrarily foreclosing a betrayed spouse's ability to simply end the marriage whenever they want -- even years later -- seems illogical and frankly somewhat wayward-driven in nature. Waywards exert a great deal of pressure on betrayed spouses to "lock in" forgiveness and reconciliation so they can then say "that was so long ago."

My own WW exerted a great deal of this pressure and it backfired. It should backfire.

I have always liked Desmond Tutu's words about forgiveness, and I feel they are very wise. Notice he's not soft on this topic. If certain conditions are not met by the offender, forgiveness is all but impossible -- although Tutu's faith and mine would still demand it.

I think in this sense, wise people like Tutu are doing what Bonhoeffer did in discerning between cheap grace and costly grace. So in my view there's cheap forgiveness and real, costly forgiveness. The evangelical church, for example, pushes a very cheap kind of forgiveness, and particularly does a number on betrayed husbands in this respect. You can read a lengthy thread in JFO about a recent betrayed husband's experience with just this sort of phenomenon.

It piled injustice on top of injustice. Forgiveness in this context is like ashes in our mouths.

I continue to contend that the "Truth and Reconciliation" model out of South Africa has direct application in infidelity situations, especially given that nearly everyone here on SI now agrees that adultery is a particularly toxic form of abuse.

I also think everyone heals at their own pace and should be able to forgive such a horrendous transgression at their own pace. The implication of a statute of limitations seems to give betrayed spouses no grace and only adds to undue pressure on them, in my view.

Anyway here's Tutu on the subject:

How could anyone really think that true reconciliation could avoid a proper confrontation? After a husband and wife or two friends have quarreled, if they merely seek to gloss over their differences or metaphorically paper over the cracks, they must not be surprised when they are soon at it again, perhaps more violently than before, because they have tried to heal their ailment lightly.

EDIT TO ADD: My one caveat here is if a betrayed spouse is being deliberately and consistently cruel or verbally or physically abusive. That's different. But if a betrayed spouse is trying to live their life, doing their best to forgive, doing their best to try to figure things out?

Seems like a real disservice to introduce the concept of a big ticking clock in addition to all of that.

Frankly, a "statute of limitations" seems like a pretty euphemistic version of "You just don't seem to be getting over this" which many betrayed spouses have heard from their wayward spouses over and over.

I dunno, it's a bit like asking, when is the appropriate statute of limitations for "getting over" someone deliberately creaming you with their car and leaving you permanently crippled? Seems very "unforgiving" and lacking in grace for the person who was the true injured party, if I may say.

[This message edited by Thumos at 6:18 PM, July 27th (Tuesday)]

He doesn't hear about it anymore. I don't run to him with triggers. I'd be mortified to be caught revisiting the past, let alone wallowing in it. And I'm thinking maybe that's just me, taking a pragmatic and being super strict with myself... and maybe it would take other people longer to get there?

Honest talk: this doesn't seem particularly healthy to me. Maybe it works for you. But you're essentially suppressing a huge part of your lived experience so your WH doesn't have to hear about something he's actually responsible for. I don't know, doesn't seem great. You're here on SI, so I suppose that means you think about infidelity and the impact it has had on you a lot. And your husband just can't be bothered with it all?

It doesn't seem possible to put a time-table on it, and yet, there does come a time at which dithering becomes really unfair to the WS.

I suppose I disagree entirely with this sentiment. What about the betrayed spouses showing up here 40 years later filled with doubts? Your answer would seem to suggest they should just suck it up, and how unfair it is to the WS that a BS is bothered by it decades later.

I mean, really?

It's almost like you're buying into some version of the sunk costs fallacy here: If you sunk more effort into possible reconciliation, but you're still bothered by it all, well too bad for you! Must mean you didn't really put the effort in! See ya!

[This message edited by Thumos at 6:10 PM, July 27th (Tuesday)]

A lot of really good questions and observations in that post.

I think I asked a similar question from a slightly different angle — not when would the WS become a victim of my sadness and anger — but when would I choose to no longer be a victim?

Some punishing goes on the first year or so of recovery, I think it happens while the BS tries to figure out where the ground is and what we need or want from life.

For me, I needed the two halves to be as whole as humanly possible.

I don’t want to be in any relationship where there isn’t some sense of balance. I just had to allow some time to get back to where I was healthy enough to make the call that R is really what I wanted.

Two to three years then was my statute of limitations.

Of course the scar is still there, as are all the other scars I have earned in life. Lots of loss and tough days, I think pain is a part of the deal.

That said, I can’t live there. I can’t live in the hurt. D or R I needed to see who was in front of me today, not yesterday or five years ago or 18-years ago, I need to see who shows up and wants to be in my life today, all in, and vulnerable.

My grandparents held their grudges and resentments, and it was brutal to watch growing up. I didn’t ever want to just be in a relationship due to some twisted sense of obligation.

It’s not forgive and forget, but it is an attempt to make up for a sin that cannot be made up for. It’s just cool to see what happens when we do focus on today and knowing we are going to try anyway, to make today way better (at least try anyway) than yesterday.

I do know it doesn’t happen very often, for two people to re-commit after the horror show one partner caused. I can’t believe I gave one last chance, but I did. Some people do well with a last chance, not all, but some.

At some point, be it 2-5 years or more, I think we have to let go of resentments just for our own health. D or R.

For R, sooner seems to have helped us along.

I think my wife would have served a life sentence if I asked. I just didn’t see the value in it. I had to really give her this last chance or move on.

I don’t know you could set a hard fast number but agree that 5 years is a fair number. I think if after that amount of time you’re still stuck or talking about it constantly it’s time to re-examine your motives for staying.

I don’t know you could set a hard fast number but agree that 5 years is a fair number.

Based on what qualitative or quantitative analysis?

Again, what about the people showing up here 15, 20, 40 years later?

This seems to utterly and arbitrarily disregard their pain.

[This message edited by Thumos at 6:21 PM, July 27th (Tuesday)]

Infidelity is a serious trauma, regardless of how you make it work with R. Putting a statute of limitations on how you feel about trauma seems harsh on a BS.

I'm still pretty pissed off about having been raped. I didn't put a statute of limitations on how I feel about that. I healed from it, but healing from it does not erase it or mean that I can't have feelings about it three decades later.

I think forgiveness is a process, not an epiphany.

Agreed. My forgiveness was a process. It's not about epiphanies. We went through all the same stuff other reconciling couples go through. Neither has it been "forced". I did set myself a goal, but that goal was really about holding myself accountable in terms of being proactive toward my healing.

Again, I know I can be harsh, but I believe adultery is on the same list of top no-nos as murder for very good reasons. Not because a bunch of primitive patriarchial sky god worshippers decided to plunk it on the stone tablets, but because humanity has understood for ages and ages just how toxic it is.

Oh, I agree it's toxic, but I no longer would compare it to murder. I vividly remember telling our MC, "I wish he had just shot me right between the eyes instead of cheating on me. I'd have been scared for a minute, but then it would have been over." And at the time, I seriously meant it. Like so many BS, I was still in anguish, suicidal ideation, depression, the whole nine. Having achieved as much as I have in healing though, I can no longer put adultery on the same level as death. I think that in trauma, we tend to catastrophize. But death is death. Death is unrecoverable. Adultery?.. we CAN recover from adultery, be it R or D.

I believe that arbitrarily foreclosing a betrayed spouse's ability to simply end the marriage whenever they want -- even years later -- seems illogical and frankly somewhat wayward-driven in nature. Waywards exert a great deal of pressure on betrayed spouses to "lock in" forgiveness and reconciliation so they can then say "that was so long ago."

I'm working under the assumption that our WS is no longer "wayward". Their thinking has clarified. They are genuinely remorseful, they are working (or have worked) through the flaws which made cheating a choice. Their values system now reflects our own. If those things aren't in place (or in progress), why would we be trying for R???

So, at this point, we're talking about a WS who is doing all the right things, and while any of us, can for ANY reason, decide to divorce, is it morally acceptable to allow at fWS to believe that they have received forgiveness and that the marriage it stable, only to find out years later that there is in fact, a grudge being held against them, the love has gone, their invested years are gone, and they're being divorced. Is it morally acceptable to withhold the truth of where we are in the process of healing?

I also think everyone heals at their own pace and should be able to forgive such a horrendous transgression at their own pace. The implication of a statute of limitations seems to give betrayed spouse's no grace and only adds to undue pressure on them, in my view.

I do to.. believe that people heal at their own pace. So yeah, it would be real difficult to set a real "statute of limitations" on it, nor do I really believe that we should. But I have observed BS's who have given up trying to achieve healing and simply become abusive to their former cheaters. I've noted a couple of instances in the Wayward section where that unhealed bitterness has become utterly unacceptable. I do think there comes a point where the WS should bail out when the scales have tipped toward prolonged abuse. But that's not really what we're talking about here. This is more surreptitious, quietly contemptuous of the WS, but not overtly aggressive. At what point does the balance shift and the BS becomes the unethical party?

[This message edited by ChamomileTea at 6:36 PM, July 27th (Tuesday)]

but I no longer would compare it to murder.

My only comparison was to note that it is on the same list as murder because both have this same quality of creating a rift in time and space that is actually not something that can be restored. EDIT TO ADD: I mean this literally. On D-Day when I listened to that VAR conversation, it was like a bolt of lightning and a crack of thunder tore through my reality. A murder takes a life, and the life can't be restored. Adultery takes a marriage and the marriage cannot be restored. I really believe that. I think we need to be intentional in insisting on talking about reconciliation only in the context of a completely new marriage, or not at all.

They are genuinely remorseful, they are working (or have worked) through the flaws which made cheating a choice. Their values system now reflects our own. If those things aren't in place (or in progress), why would we be trying for R???

This clarification helps me understand better what you are trying to say. I do agree that if a WS has found deep metanoia, has told "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth" and then has committed to a consistent and long series of actions to restore honor and trust, then if a BS commits to reconciling in that context and is still embittered and angry ... then, yes, something is off.

How many situations would you say could be described like the above CT?

[This message edited by Thumos at 6:51 PM, July 27th (Tuesday)]

I also think everyone heals at their own pace and should be able to forgive such a horrendous transgression at their own pace. The implication of a statute of limitations seems to give betrayed spouse's no grace and only adds to undue pressure on them, in my view.

I really don't have those triggers anymore, Thumos. I can write with passion remembering those feelings vividly, but I no longer feel them. I hang around because I studied A LOT.. and I hope to pass what I learned on before I wander off.

What about the betrayed spouses showing up here 40 years later filled with doubts? Your answer would seem to suggest they should just suck it up, and how unfair it is to the WS that a BS is bothered by it decades later.

I have a theory on that. I'm thinking that the brain gets triggered and that memories which may have been stored in a faulty way during the trauma phase can bring the trauma back as if it were fresh. It could be that the better treatment would be for people who were happy and content with their R, but suddenly are overwhelmed with anxiety and the compulsive need for verifying would be better off trying EMDR or other reprocessing therapies.

But I have observed BS's who have given up trying to achieve healing and simply become abusive to their former cheaters. I've noted a couple of instances in the Wayward section where that unhealed bitterness has become utterly unacceptable. I do think there comes a point where the WS should bail out when the scales have tipped toward prolonged abuse.

Agreed. Absolutely.

It could be that the better treatment would be for people who were happy and content with their R, but suddenly are overwhelmed with anxiety and the compulsive need for verifying would be better off trying EMDR or other reprocessing therapies.

Maybe. Another theory would involve the scientific research Haidt and others have conducted on primary moral emotions such as righteous anger and disgust. It seems the brain may be hardwired to simply not allow a person to suppress these primary emotions, and the cognitive dissonance in doing so comes at a high cost. I think this may explain better why we see betrayed spouses showing up decades later. The primary moral emotional chickens have come home to roost.

[This message edited by Thumos at 6:53 PM, July 27th (Tuesday)]

At what point does the balance shift and the BS becomes the unethical party?

Well...that's a hard one. Sometimes the BS genuinely isn't a good person. Not everyone who is cheated on is a decent human being. Abusive people are cheated on all the time.

Sometimes the BS is just genuinely not R material no matter what the WS does, but they try and force themselves to stay in the marriage for various reasons. Kids, finances. That is going to lead to bitterness and I have lots of empathy for those BSs. It was a dealbreaker but they feel powerless to act on that knowledge.

Neither of those are R, really. But then you do have the R where someone did something awful to you and you've managed to forgive them and stay with them, but you're going to have feelings about it sometimes. It was just that deep of a trauma and it affects us that hard. Even if there's real remorse and real deep love, this was a terrible trauma and part of being a WS in R has to be being supportive when those triggers hit and those sad times come. It's just part of being a WS in R, I would think.

Sometimes the BS genuinely isn't a good person. Not everyone who is cheated on is a decent human being. Abusive people are cheated on all the time.

I agree with this, but hopefully we can all agree on this thread that probably represents a minority of cases. With even adultery apologists like Esther Perel now conceding that adultery seems to happen in what mostly should be considered good marriages, it seems like a therapeutic consensus is emerging that suggests infidelity mostly seems to happen to loyal, faithful hardworking people. This would only make sense, since they are the ones who maintained their vows. The qualities I just outlined usually describe generally good people trying to work hard and be nice in their lives.

I think I asked a similar question from a slightly different angle — not when would the WS become a victim of my sadness and anger — but when would I choose to no longer be a victim?

Agreed. I remember going through that phase too, where I had to remind myself DAILY that I was trying R, and it wasn't because I had to, it was because I active CHOSE to. Taking ownership of MY choice as to where I would plant my feet every day made me realize that I was no longer a victim. And maybe it's a little perverse, but what helped A LOT with that was the realization that I was free to change my mind. Knowing that I was NOT trapped. I could leave anytime really made a huge difference. This is freedom, and we decide where to apply it. And I really did feel that way throughout the healing process. Keeping my exit plan in my back pocket helped me to take ownership of my daily choice to keep trying for R.

But is it ethical to keep that back-up plan in one's back pocket forever? I'm usually a real stickler for being fair, but I have to admit, the freedom to leave if I'm unhappy appeals to me. I didn't like the feeling of being so unprepared by my fWH's cheating. Perhaps if some new incident were to occur, something that made the marriage untenable? I couldn't feel good about pulling the plug on that which has already been resolved in the past though. Maybe that's the difference?

I'm usually a real stickler for being fair, but I have to admit, the freedom to leave if I'm unhappy appeals to me.

I'm in the camp of someone can divorce if their spouse is cross-eyed. I don't think that would be ethical and it would be a really shitty thing to do and it would make that person really shallow. But I think they have the right to divorce over it. So much more so if infidelity is involved.

[This message edited by Thumos at 6:59 PM, July 27th (Tuesday)]

I agree with this, but hopefully we can all agree on this thread that probably represents a minority of cases. With even adultery apologists like Esther Perel now conceding that adultery seems to happen in what mostly should be considered good marriages, it seems like a therapeutic consensus is emerging that suggests infidelity mostly seems to happen to loyal, faithful hardworking people. This would only make sense, since they are the ones who maintained their vows. The qualities I just outlined usually describe generally good people trying to work hard and be nice in their lives.

Oh for sure. I have seen those instances here where I wished for the WS to leave for their own sakes, but those are few and far between. I've also seen normal trauma responses early on from a BS be categorized as abuse and that's unfair.

I'm still pretty pissed off about having been raped. I didn't put a statute of limitations on how I feel about that. I healed from it, but healing from it does not erase it or mean that I can't have feelings about it three decades later.

Exactly. And I'm so sorry that happened to you. And you're right, the adultery wound takes our agency, exposes us to the unknown flora and fauna of a hidden AP that we did NOT consent to. Our security is threatened, our privacy invaded. But we don't choose to keep a rapist, and I think that's where ethics come into play... when we choose to keep the WS. What's our moral obligation to go forward with honesty and effort?

But is it ethical to keep that back-up plan in one's back pocket forever? I'm usually a real stickler for being fair, but I have to admit, the freedom to leave if I'm unhappy appeals to me. I didn't like the feeling of being so unprepared by my fWH's cheating. Perhaps if some new incident were to occur, something that made the marriage untenable? I couldn't feel good about pulling the plug on that which has already been resolved in the past though. Maybe that's the difference?

I think it's ethical, but at the same time, I don't know how to relax into a marriage if I had to think of my back-up plan regularly. That's where I think you have a strong point on being all-in. If the new marriage is going to be a source of satisfaction in life, surely it can't feel like "it works for now". Or maybe I'm still a dumb romantic even after all this where I'd want to assume "forever" and enjoy that feeling.

Exactly. And I'm so sorry that happened to you. And you're right, the adultery wound takes our agency, exposes us to the unknown flora and fauna of a hidden AP that we did NOT consent to. Our security is threatened, our privacy invaded. But we don't choose to keep a rapist, and I think that's where ethics come into play... when we choose to keep the WS. What's our moral obligation to go forward with honesty and effort?

Thank you.

I definitely wouldn't be the R expert given that I don't think I'm R material. It would have been far too much like keeping the rapist for me. There's a strength and level of compassion that those who truly R have that I don't think I possess and it is impressive to me.

But yeah, I don't think you can truly R without meaning it. Without getting the favorite ice cream or buying that gift that you know he'd love. Without saying I love you from the heart. All that. It takes a lot of vulnerability to do that 100%.

I think it's ethical, but at the same time, I don't know how to relax into a marriage if I had to think of my back-up plan regularly. That's where I think you have a strong point on being all-in. If the new marriage is going to be a source of satisfaction in life, surely it can't feel like "it works for now". Or maybe I'm still a dumb romantic even after all this where I'd want to assume "forever" and enjoy that feeling.

I mean, look, I'd love to be able to relax back into a marriage with my WW. Really. I don't think I can given the set of circumstances I've had to deal with -- to whit, she brought another man, my friend, into my home for planned unprotected sex, she tried almost successfully to convince me I had unfounded paranoia and she would have been perfectly happy to see me unnecessarily medicated in service of her adultery, and after this was revealed she continued to lie about it, then insulted me repeatedly by saying things like I was "sexually immature" because I wouldn't understand she'd had "meaningless sex" in the sanctity of our family home. Etc. Etc. Ad nauseam.

So I'm withholding myself, I don't feel a bit bad about it, and I'm not being cruel about it. I'm certainly not being abusive. Day to day it's fine, my son gets stability, my college-aged daughter gets stability. We get along great. We laugh. We do things together. It's more like having a FWB from my viewpoint. I don't feel there's anything unethical about this. I've been crystal clear with her about it, too.

Also, I just don't know how we could expect any BS to really *know* how committed they can be in a reconciliation until a number of years have passed. I mean a number. A good number. There are lots of cases we're all familiar with here no SI where I think we can safely say things look pretty decent from the outside, and the BS feels ambivalent, and the jury's still out and is going to be out arguing in a back room "12 Angry Men" style for a good long while.

To which I would say, sorry but that's the consequence of deeply violating trust and betraying the person who reposed utmost trust in you over the other 8 billion folks on this planet. A truly remorseful spouse with authentic metanoia would be willing to offer recompense and willing to face that consequence head on.

[This message edited by Thumos at 7:18 PM, July 27th (Tuesday)]