After 1-yr of marriage, Husband tells me he has herpes

March 13, 2009

Good point OWoman........
Have you ever seen him take meds? Have you ever seen a "rash"?
If you've known him for that long - I'd think you would notice things like that?
So, some of you may be right - He may have JUST contracted it thru an affair & this is an excellent way for him to cover that up.
I'd suggest you make a very long list of questions & sit down & make him answer each & every one. You'll know if he's lying.

I don't buy into this for a couple reasons.

IF he's had Herpes for 15 years...then he knows all about it, including the fact that most of the people walking around with it...don't know they have it. He could have used this knowledge to his advantage and further the lie.

A much better lie would have been to say he never knew he had it- and went to the doctor because he had a rash.... and found out he had H. He could go on to say that his Doctor told him he could have had it for a long time and never known. That would make a better story - and that's exactly what a Dr would say to someone if they'd been in a monogamous relationship for 3 years and had a break out.

That's why I believe he is telling the truth about it. I doubt it's an affair.

First thing you should do OP is get a blood test. That's got to be weighing heavily on your mind.

Whether or not you choose to stick it out with your husband is up to you.

I don't know what I would do in your shoes. I am trying to put myself in your shoes and decide what I'd do... I'd be mad as hell... that's for sure.

How has your relationship been up until he told you this?

No one can tell you whether or not to leave. People have weathered affairs and remained together.... Sounds like you have a lot of thinking to do and decisions to make.

March 13, 2009

I disagree. Contracts are rendered null and void if they're made on dishonest premises - and in this case, her H knowingly withheld important information from her fully cognisant of the consequences (in fact, out of fear of the consequences). It was not an act of negligence, it was an act of deliberate deceit. This has nothing to do with their commitment to their marital vows - had he picked up the herpes (through some innocent route - eg kissing his mother who had a cold sore, and getting a cold sore himself) subsequent to the marriage, that would fall under the ambit of the vows. This was a preexisting condition he chose to lie (through omission) about. It renders those vows mull and void.

Who are you to disagree? You're not an attorney!

Most, if not all jurisdictions, do not recognize marriages like this as null or void.

March 15, 2009

"for better or for worse, in sickness and in health. Till death do us part".
Marriage and life is not easy, this is a curve ball it's throwing at you. You decided to take this major step in life. Don't become a statistic. Work on it. You promised each other. It's not all about happiness and good times. This is a test of your commitment. Nobody said it would be easy.

Yeah - but promised under false pretenses. It's like trapping somebody and then crying, "But you promised!" Yeah, well, IMO, he broke his vows the very moment he spoke them by carrying a secret of that magnitude.

Nobody should begrudge you, OP, if you want to leave. I certainly wouldn't. What he did was incredibly selfish. It would depend on your own moral code as to whether or not you could forgive him. Only you can make that decision.

March 15, 2009

After 3 years of dating wouldn't she already have an excellent chance of having it herself ? I'm sure they didn't wait 3 years to have sex no?

#1 get tested get it confirmed and if thats the case and your already infected as I suspect sorry to say. Then I would just work on the marriage IMO if the damage is already done.

Question was it happy other then this?? I agree its wrong as hell for him not to have not told you the marriage def needs work now he needs to learn to be totally honest from this point on..

March 15, 2009

I disagree. Contracts are rendered null and void if they're made on dishonest premises - and in this case, her H knowingly withheld important information from her fully cognisant of the consequences (in fact, out of fear of the consequences). It was not an act of negligence, it was an act of deliberate deceit. This has nothing to do with their commitment to their marital vows - had he picked up the herpes (through some innocent route - eg kissing his mother who had a cold sore, and getting a cold sore himself) subsequent to the marriage, that would fall under the ambit of the vows. This was a preexisting condition he chose to lie (through omission) about. It renders those vows mull and void.

Who are you to disagree? You're not an attorney!

Most, if not all jurisdictions, do not recognize marriages like this as null or void.

A good resource: go to findlaw dot com and use their search tool to find "State Annulment and Prohibited Marriage Laws"

Technically, you may be right: jurisdictions do not automatically consider marriages to be null and void unless they fall into a specific category of "prohibited marriages" - usually things like marrying too-close a blood relative, bigamy or a previously undissolved marriage, being under a state-declared age limit without parental consent, etc... It varies by state, of course. A marriage in this category is considered void from the start, even though it may not be discovered or acted upon until some time later.

However, there is also a category of "voidable marriages" - a marriage that can be legally annulled. In this case, the marriage is considered valid on its face, but can be "wiped from the books" (anulled) by proper showing of one or more parties. The grounds vary by state, but they almost all include some form of "consent obtained by fraud" as grounds for anullment.

But the original point isn't so much the legal argument: Would a real court rule that this "contract" would be null and void? The point being discussed is, are you personally, morally bound by your marriage vow when your spouse knowingly withheld this information from you? Isn't it widely recognized that an agreement - whether it be a legal contract, a promise, a vow, whatever - must be a meeting of the minds based upon full disclosure of all material information beforehand? And that failure to disclose information material to the agreement is grounds for some kind of action - at least review and renegotiation of the agreement, if not outright discarding it?

So in my mind it comes down to whether the withholding of the STD was "material" or sufficiently strong to release the wife from her vows. Personally, and now we're in the realm of my opinion, I think it was material and he very well knew it, as he specifically stated that he did it because he expected he would lose her, i.e. he withheld information that he KNEW she would need to make a fully informed decision in entering into their marriage and taking her vows. I don't want to get all hysterical, and turn this back into a legal argument, but that's fraud.

I'm not addressing whether or not I would advise her to choose to stay - that's something she needs to work out for herself - but rather countering the argument that she is somehow obliged to stay by virtue of her marriage vows. I think she entered into the marriage under fraudulent circumstances, and is not morally obliged to stay, on the basis of those vows.

March 15, 2009

Without going into much detail. I've always advocated for making marriages work. I'm old school like that. I believe that too many people are just lazy and don't want to face the problems head on. They lack integrity. I'm not judging those who say "run".

In MY opinion, marriage is a life long commitment. if you were that worried about STDs then you would've asked for both of you to get tested BEFORE sleeping with him for the first time. I think you're using this act as a scapegoat to justify your wanting to leave the marriage. I'm willing to bet that it's hit a stagnant point where you're not feeling completely inamoured with him anyway and this just gives you the perfect social leverage to leave.

If you're this serious about getting a divorce then maybe you shouldn't have said I do in the first place. Did you go into this marriage thinking "if it doesn't work out, then I can always get a divorce"? Or "I'm going to spend the rest of my life with this man"? To me, the true test of integrity is when you keep your word even if it's no longer fun or convenient.

"Well, he lied too / he went in without full disclosure / he hid the truth about his illness" are all things HE did. HE broke HIS promise, does that mean it's ok for you to break yours? No. You're responsible for your own promises, he's responsible for his, he should now work to atone for his mistakes.

March 15, 2009

Incidentally, "hiding the truth about HIS illness," as you put it, isn't all he did - he continued to knowingly expose HER to that illness without disclosing that as well. And it may be semantic, but it wasn't a "mistake" that prevented him from disclosing it - it's better termed a choice.

Without going into much detail. I've always advocated for making marriages work. I'm old school like that. I believe that too many people are just lazy and don't want to face the problems head on. They lack integrity. I'm not judging those who say "run".

In MY opinion, marriage is a life long commitment. if you were that worried about STDs then you would've asked for both of you to get tested BEFORE sleeping with him for the first time. I think you're using this act as a scapegoat to justify your wanting to leave the marriage. I'm willing to bet that it's hit a stagnant point where you're not feeling completely inamoured with him anyway and this just gives you the perfect social leverage to leave.

I think you're putting thoughts into the OP's head and words into her mouth that you don't have any evidence for, other than to say "if you're considering leaving, then according to my beliefs you must not have been that committed right from the start."

If you're this serious about getting a divorce then maybe you shouldn't have said I do in the first place.

What? Where did that come from? She didn't know about this "in the first place." That's the whole point - if she had had this information "in the first place" then she could have made a decision at that time that was fully-informed and consistent with her views and beliefs. He specifically withheld that information because he knew it might change her mind.

Did you go into this marriage thinking "if it doesn't work out, then I can always get a divorce"? Or "I'm going to spend the rest of my life with this man"? To me, the true test of integrity is when you keep your word even if it's no longer fun or convenient.

I think you are seriously minimizing the situation to say that it is about fun and convenience.

"Well, he lied too / he went in without full disclosure / he hid the truth about his illness" are all things HE did. HE broke HIS promise, does that mean it's ok for you to break yours? No. You're responsible for your own promises, he's responsible for his, he should now work to atone for his mistakes.

Does that apply in the case of infidelity, too? Even Western churches recognize infidelity as a grounds for divorce. How about physical abuse? Do you stay, and hope he will atone for his "mistake?"

Let me be very clear: I am not equating non-disclosure of pre-relationship herpes to infidelity or physical abuse (although some might, I'm not necessarily taking that stand to make my point.) My point is to ask you, is your position an absolute, or are there some situations (infidelity, physical abuse) where we say "oh yeah, well everyone knows that's not OK..."

If you allow that there is some dividing line, some threshold between "stay no matter what" and "you're justified in leaving" then I maintain it's a gray area where you put this situation, and we're just quibbling about where the line should be drawn.

March 16, 2009

I'm stating my opinions. I'm not going to start debating your interpretation of what I'm writing to the OP, if the OP has questions because my opinions are not clear to her I will respond directly to her.

March 16, 2009

Voidale will become void only if both parties in the contract consent to it being void. In other words, it's not automatic like a void marriage.

Negative. Those are two different statements. No, it's not automatic - a party still has to take action and show cause to have a marriage annulled, but are you claiming that the perpertator of a fraud has to agree and consent, in order for a contract to be ruled void, or likewise that a marriage annullment requires the consent of both parties? Is that your claim here?

March 16, 2009

I was editing the last post and didn't quite make it. here's what I was adding to it:

To clarify, I do not belong to any organized religious, my opinion is entirely based on personal responsibility and knowing right from wrong. It's about accepting your life's choices and not making excuses or using other people's shortcomings, "choices", lack of integrity as a measuring stick by which our own lack of integrity can be leveraged. Also note: I'm not defending his mistakes - which is closer to "choice" than "accident". Semantically speaking you can't have an accident be a mistake. Accident implies no fault. You can make a mistake (which implies choice) and cause an accident to happen but not the other way around - or saying that he is entitled to a second chance. I'm saying that if we chose to break our word, we should own our lack of integrity, and not blame it on "but he did or didn't do this or that"

March 16, 2009

I'm stating my opinions. I'm not going to start debating your interpretation of what I'm writing to the OP, if the OP has questions because my opinions are not clear to her I will respond directly to her.

Too bad. I'm just trying to understand the boundaries of your absolutist approach to marriage vows, and I'd have a couple more questions to try to understand you. But so be it. Hope it helps her.

March 16, 2009

Maybe some of the lawyers here can clarify this...but I DO think not disclosing his STD before marriage can be grounds for annulment.

OP, please have yourself tested. There are many tests available, your PCP will tell you which one he thinks is best for you. I am assuming you are of child bearing age, am I right? then all the more vital that you be tested. It is very dangerous for pregnant women--well actually for the baby, esp. if it is a vaginal delivery. The virus can attack the baby's vital organs including the brain and may cause death.

One of the posters here said herpes is not uncommon, she is right. That it is not uncommon does not mean we can be cavalier about it. Genital herpes stays with the victim forever, flare-ups are caused by stress, colds, or anytime your immune system is not that great. It is very contagious during the incubation period-first few days of the flare-up- the bad thing is, during that time it is also barely noticeable, esp. to the other person. A person who has herpes MUST take very good care of his health to at least minimize the occurrence of flare-ups. As it is dangerous for babies being born to a mother with herpes, it is also going to be a significant concern when a person with herpes gets old, as we know, when one is old, one's health also wanes and he/she becomes very susceptible to flare-ups. Ever saw an old person with herpes? very disturbing sight, as they can barely withstand/tolerate the pain and the aggressive meds.....

Btw, shingles and chicken pox come from the same herpes family-different strain.

March 16, 2009

I live in Colorado. These are a couple of the applicable laws regarding annulment:

Legal Grounds for Annulment in Colorado

Unlike a dissolution of marriage, which requires simply that the marriage be irretrievably broken to proceed, a person seeking a declaration of invalidity of marriage in Colorado must prove one of the specific legal grounds...

One spouse married because of the other's fraudulent act or misrepresentation which went "to the essence of the marriage",

And there is a deadline to act:

A Colorado annulment must be initiated within the following time frames, and only by the persons indicated:

Lack of mental capacity, fraud, duress, jest/dare: Within 6 months of learning of it, by the aggrieved spouse.

So if I were you, OP, I'd contact an attorney. Most likely the timeframes in your state are similar.

Information found at: http://www.colorado-family-law.com/colorado-annulment.htm pursuant to CRS 14-10-111

March 16, 2009

One of the posters here said herpes is not uncommon, she is right. That it is not uncommon does not mean we can be cavalier about it. Genital herpes stays with the victim forever, flare-ups are caused by stress, colds, or anytime your immune system is not that great. It is very contagious during the incubation period-first few days of the flare-up- the bad thing is, during that time it is also barely noticeable, esp. to the other person. A person who has herpes MUST take very good care of his health to at least minimize the occurrence of flare-ups. As it is dangerous for babies being born to a mother with herpes, it is also going to be a significant concern when a person with herpes gets old, as we know, when one is old, one's health also wanes and he/she becomes very susceptible to flare-ups. Ever saw an old person with herpes? very disturbing sight, as they can barely withstand/tolerate the pain and the aggressive meds.....

Btw, shingles and chicken pox come from the same herpes family-different strain.

Um... just have to clarify some things.

It's actually contagious all the time. Sores do not need to be present or forming. It's called viral shedding- and can happen anytime.

Mothers are well taken care of and monitored- they'll do a c-section if there is any concern.

Break outs diminish as a person lives with the virus and the body adapts.

The old people with herpes you are talking about? That's not HSV2- that is shingles.

Just trying NOT to freak out the OP with misinformation.

As for leaving or not leaving- this is a decision that only the OP can make.

March 16, 2009

It's actually contagious all the time. Sores do not need to be present or forming. It's called viral shedding- and can happen anytime.

umm..I actually did no say it is NOT contagious ALL the time, I said it is VERY contagious during the incubation period of a flare-up...Asymptomatic viral shedding actually happens when there is a flare-up or when the virus is reactivated but there is no sign and symptom (thus the term asymptomatic) and the virus "rises" to the surface without the carrier ever noticing any change in how she/he feels (no flu-like symptoms, no itching, no rashes, etc.). That's precisely why it is highly contagious because nobody is aware of it. Viral shedding happens the same way, but it can come from visible sores and lesions-the more apparent the herpes, the more (hopefully) people are able to protect others from it or themselves from it.

Mothers are well taken care of and monitored- they'll do a c-section if there is any concern.

Yes of course, the mother will be well taken care of-more so if the diagnosis is new(worse if it is on the third trimester) as the flare-ups are most likely to recur more on the first year and then it wanes in time. A Caesarean section will be done so the baby does not have to past through the birth canal. I believe I did say it is dangerous for the baby IF IT IS A VAGINAL DELIVERY. I must mention, too, that there is no evidence herpes can be passed on from the mother to the baby while it is in the womb.

Break outs diminish as a person lives with the virus and the body adapts.
The old people with herpes you are talking about? That's not HSV2- that is shingles.

I actually know the difference between genital herpes and shingles-and I have taken care of old people with GENITAL herpes. I think they blame Viagra for this

. But hey, you do not have to believe me. Science does not know why certain people have more recurrence than others, thus, the push for ALL people diagnosed with herpes to keep themselves healthy all the time as it IS a recurring lllness.

There are many things developing in the treatment and management of herpes. While it is an STD and can make one's life uncomfortable at some point, it is hardly a death sentence.

Just trying NOT to freak out the OP with misinformation.

What misinformation?

As for leaving or not leaving- this is a decision that only the OP can make.

of course, it is his life.

March 16, 2009

Maybe some of the lawyers here can clarify this...but I DO think not disclosing his STD before marriage can be grounds for annulment.

I have said it once, I'll say it again. It does not (in most, if not all jurisdictions) and it does not matter what YOU think.

March 16, 2009

It would be good if the OP could return and at least give us some kind of update on how the situation is going.

March 16, 2009

I have said it once, I'll say it again. It does not (in most, if not all jurisdictions) and it does not matter what YOU think.

Other than repetition, and the sheer force of your fingers against the keys, do you have any credentials to back up why it matters what YOU think?

March 16, 2009

Actually, it matters what BOTH of you think...as evidenced by the rising blood pressure you both are now having.

If it did not matter, then a response of silence would be most evidential of that.

March 16, 2009

I have said it once, I'll say it again. It does not (in most, if not all jurisdictions) and it does not matter what YOU think.

You mean like what you think also does NOT matter?:rolleyes:!!!!! you are picking on me signed, how come?

March 16, 2009

Just wanted to repeat, the shingles are not caused by the virus that causes genital herpes but are caused by the chicken pox virus. I read somewhere that there is a vacine you can get for this but can't remember where I read it. Hope the link works.

http://www.webmd.com/skin-problems-and-treatments/shingles/shingles-topic-overview

March 16, 2009

Actually, it matters what BOTH of you think...as evidenced by the rising blood pressure you both are now having.

If it did not matter, then a response of silence would be most evidential of that.

Well, I suppose it will seem disingenuous of me to claim it, but mine's not really rising - I'm really interested to know if SI has some background or credentials that lend weight to his point, because if so, I will give it its due... It's an interesting question, because I find that a lot of states have "under fraudulent pretense"-type clauses under their "voidable marriage" category, but I don't know what is the realistic threshold for fraudulent pretense, in practice. Criminal Record? Debts? Prior marriage? STD? Does it have to take the form of an explicit lie to a direct question from the prospective spouse: "Do you have an STD/Criminal Record/outstanding debts/current marriage?"

I must be coming off as boorish, because rod won't talk to me about it, and now SI is all panty-twisted...

I'm open and interested to hear from anyone who has first-hand experience or knowledge (which I fully admit that I do not), but just saying "I know and you don't..." doesn't quite meet my threshold.

Also, note that I didn't say it doesn't matter what he thinks - I asked for some credibility so I can treat his opinion with the weight it deserves. And, yes, I reflected it right back all snippy and sarcastic... I'm not proud of it. Well, maybe a little...

March 16, 2009

Just wanted to repeat, the shingles are not caused by the virus that causes genital herpes but are caused by the chicken pox virus. I read somewhere that there is a vacine you can get for this but can't remember where I read it. Hope the link works.

http://www.webmd.com/skin-problems-and-treatments/shingles/shingles-topic-overview

You are right, Angie. SHINGLES is not EQUAL to GENITAL HERPES, however they are both HERPES. One HERPES ZOSTER(shingles) and the other is HERPES SIMPLEX 2(genital herpes). Yes, there is a vaccine.

March 17, 2009

Yes, an undisclosed STD would be grounds for annulment. Did nobody read what I posted from the Colorado law book? Maybe it's different in other states. But I'd sure as hell say that lying about a SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASE would go to the "core of the marriage." It's something that exposes the spouse to the disease due to "marital relations." It puts future children at risk. He could have the type that could give her a hand developing cervical cancer, putting her life at risk. Are you kidding that this is not grounds for annulment? I'd say it was a pretty serious lie.

But nobody on this forum could say conclusively - that's why she should get a freaking attorney.

March 17, 2009

I'm leery of posting links, because so many destinations end up with ads associated. But, if you google: annulment law "sexually transmitted" with the quotes as shown, the first article "Annulment Law" at expertlaw dot com is written by an attorney, and lists concealment of an STD as a circumstance under which annulments are "typically available." Lots of other sources mention this (notably a Nolo Press article that is found at a number of sites, including Nolo, Findlaw, etc...) but this is appartenly straight from an attorney.

Sign In

After 1-yr of marriage, Husband tells me he has herpes

Recommended Posts

D-Lish

signedin2008

SoulSearch_CO

SpanksTheMonkey

Trimmer

rod_in_gtown

Trimmer

rod_in_gtown

Trimmer

rod_in_gtown

Trimmer

tami-chan

SoulSearch_CO

D-Lish

tami-chan

signedin2008

JackJack

Trimmer

JamesM

tami-chan

angie2443

Trimmer

tami-chan

SoulSearch_CO

Trimmer

What's New

My Activity Streams

More...