NC and reconciliation

[wellwhynot]

As an AP, I don't understand the concept of BS's who are claiming the importance of NC. I'd really like to understand this because I am unable to see where this changes anything for the AP or even the WS other than the need to be more careful.

 

I get NC when you are trying to move on from someone, I can see where that has benefit and could help ease pain and the like, if you no longer wanted to be with someone it make sense to stay far away from them..but I guess I don't see why it's a requirement for so many BS's to reconcile when I think it might in fact build in a false sense of security.

 

FACT:

If he/she wants to continue the affair they are going to do so, they are just going to get better at hiding things.

FACT:

If feelings of the affair partner continue, then guess what the feelings were REAL and not some random fluffy nonsense.

FACT:

If it's still a risk for the WS to see this person, nothing has been resolved.

FACT:

Quitting a job/club/activity isn't going to keep you from seeing a person if you want to

 

So I just don't get it?

 

What is gained by that other than more potential lying? I know that if I had a WS who worked with his AP and wasn't able to see her on a regular basis without resuming the affair, that tells me a lot and that I wouldn't want the role of "guardian of our relationship" instead of partner.

 

Checking phones, cell phone records, tracking devices, voice recorders, random "check ins," not allowing them to go places with friends, feeling dread every day that they might bump into their AP and rekindle. That just sounds... awful. That doesn't sound like reconciliation to me. It sounds like a life setence.

 

From my perspective, I can and would find ways around anything that would be a NC requirement, and I'm sure others have or can as well, so what is really the point?

 

From the OM/OW/WS perspective, what do you think about this? Do you think that a spouse requiring NC forces the APs apart? Drives them even more secretly together? Or is it really irrelevant, if they want to be together then they will be. Have you had any experience with this? How did it turn out?

Edited May 26, 2012 by wellwhynot
My question wasn't really clear.

[pkn06002]

What you have is the theory pushed by some well known "marriage" counselors. I never bought into the idea myself, even though I complied with it, but it is a good way for the BS to feel they have some control if they demand it and the WS complies.

 

But like you mentioned the whole NC did not push me closer to my W, I continued to pine for my MW. Then 2 years later when we saw each other found out she had done the same thing, we did start up again. So two years of NC with spouses monitoring etc... did nothing.

 

Now I can see it working if the feelings of the WS are really in flux and they do still love their spouse. Then who knows the show of strength, given no choice etc... you can reconnect. Rehabilitation is possible in prison under the right circumstances but there is a fine line between rehabilitation and punishment.

[Alice2012]

I guess I don't see why it's a requirement for so many BS's to reconcile when I think it might in fact build in a false sense of security.

 

I would guess most BS's don't even need to make NC a "requirement," as the WS often doesn't want anything to do with their AP after Dday and doesn't need to be convinced that NC is really the only way to prove themselves.

 

Of course the WS needs to WANT to prove themselves and those feelings must be genuine in order to maintain NC.

[wellwhynot]

I would guess most BS's don't even need to make NC a "requirement," as the WS often doesn't want anything to do with their AP after Dday and doesn't need to be convinced NC is the only way to prove themselves . . . of course the WS needs to WANT to prove themselves and be genuine.[/QUOTE]

 

That's a big part of my point if you read my post... if the person wants to prove themselves and be genuine there wouldn't be a need for it because they could sit across a table from the person they cheated with every day and it woudn't matter.

[pkn06002]

I would guess most BS's don't even need to make NC a "requirement," as the WS often doesn't want anything to do with their AP after Dday and doesn't need to be convinced NC is the only way to prove themselves.

 

Oh very broad assumption here and a faulty one at that.

 

A WS might comply out of panic but plenty of evidence on this site and others that the statement "doesn't want anything to do with their AP after Dday" is false. Too many discussions of people starting up again days, weeks, months or years later.

 

Sorry Alice I was typing when you added your last and MOST important qualifier.

[Alice2012]

 

Sorry Alice I was typing when you added your last and MOST important qualifier.

 

 

Yes, I added that afterwards NC only works if the WS is committed to it and doesn't want to repeat their past behavior.

Edited May 26, 2012 by Alice2012

[pkn06002]

Yes, I added that afterwards. NC only works if the WS is committed to it.

 

There is a difference between committed and wanting it though.

 

Both my MW and myself were committed to NC for two years or so and would've continued accept for a situation that happened. We talked we both were the same in that we stayed with NC but feelings towards each other and our spouses had not changed.

 

But for some counselors NC where you stay in the marriage is still a win, so I guess it really matters how much stress you put on feelings towards you. Is NC where the person is wanting someone else but you still live with them have sex with them etc... a win?

[wellwhynot]

Yes, I added that afterwards. NC only works if the WS is committed to it.

 

See that makes sense.... but it doesn't really answer my question. My experiences have shown that very few really want to change things, that their "compliance" is really only lipservice really based on fear of the unknown.

 

My question comes back to IF they really DO want to change, then why on earth would it matter where, if, when, how they see the person they were involved with?

I guess my thought is similiar to that if they were happy in their marriage, or with themselves or there were no problems, way before anything started in teh first place, the AP could have sat naked on their lap and nothing would have happened.

[pkn06002]

See that makes sense.... but it doesn't really answer my question. My experiences have shown that very few really want to change things, that their "compliance" is really only lipservice really based on fear of the unknown.

 

My question comes back to IF they really DO want to change, then why on earth would it matter where, if, when, how they see the person they were involved with?

I guess my thought is similiar to that if they were happy in their marriage, or with themselves or there were no problems, way before anything started in teh first place, the AP could have sat naked on their lap and nothing would have happened.

 

NC for people that truly want to reconnect is needed based on physiological and chemical reasons; especially in that magically 2 year start up period. Have to break the addiction to get things moving in a different direction and if that temptation is still there when you are weak you might partake of it and back to square one.

 

Again though that is for people that really really want to reconnect with their spouse for emotional reasons.

[Alice2012]

My question comes back to IF they really DO want to change, then why on earth would it matter where, if, when, how they see the person they were involved with?

 

I see your point - I've read on various boards where affairs with family members, close friends and co-workers have successfully ended and indifference has set in. BUT most of them never had a Dday.

 

But as pkn stated, no contact/low contact is necessary to break the addiction and remain focused on reconciliation.

Edited May 26, 2012 by Alice2012

[beenburned]

wwn,

 

Most affairs start with friendship, talking, attraction, and flirting, that is then taken to a deeper level until the adultery finally happens between them.

 

All married people have boundaries that they are not supposed to cross. The WS has now proven that they have bad boundaries and can not control their actions.

 

No contact proves to the BS that the WS is serious in their attempts to become a faithful spouse. It doesn't matter what feelings the WS has toward the OW, as the affair/contact has to STOP if the marriage is to continue!

 

Your original post is talking about WS's who don't want to stop cheating and are willing to go to any lenghts to continue cake eating, and keep the BS in the dark.

 

I would question why they even want to stay married if they have no intentions of being a faithful spouse!

 

If you are unhappy and want someone else, just do the right thing and get a divorce.

[wellwhynot]

wwn,

 

Your original post is talking about WS's who don't want to stop cheating and are willing to go to any lenghts to continue cake eating, and keep the BS in the dark.

 

I would question why they even want to stay married if they have no intentions of being a faithful spouse!

 

If you are unhappy and want someone else, just do the right thing and get a divorce.

 

I agree with questioning this.. I don't necessarily understand it either, but from the things I am aware of, if he/she is going to leave then they just do, but a large number don't and never stop the affair.

[jwi71]

As an AP, I don't understand the concept of BS's who are claiming the importance of NC. I'd really like to understand this because I am unable to see where this changes anything for the AP or even the WS other than the need to be more careful.

 

I think you nailed it. Its a matter of 1) perspective and 2) desire

 

It is my experience that AP's CURRENTLY involved in an A do not "get" NC. And that makes perfect sense...why would an AP, who is at the very least tolerant of the confines an A demands, leave their love? Completely nonsensical from that view (the APs).

 

However, if one changes vantage (or if the confines of the A become less tolerable), NC may make more sense. Now I think its best I halt here as the foundation of my thinking has a reasonable chance of dragging the thread off-topic. So, when one's thought process changes, NC becomes a viable and perhaps necessary step. This applies to BS as well who are attempting to isolate the AP's.

 

..but I guess I don't see why it's a requirement for so many BS's to reconcile when I think it might in fact build in a false sense of security.

 

This is potentially true.

However, from what I read, the WS tends to "come around" and detach because of NC - which is the goal in this line of thought. Is it a false sense of security? Well, one you presume the BS feels secure and two it presumes that the WS doesn't actually abide by it. From what Ive seen, the threat of "NC or else" tends to give the WS pause.

 

FACT:

If he/she wants to continue the affair they are going to do so, they are just going to get better at hiding things.

 

It doesn't mean they get better at hiding. But yes, a WS intent on an A will do just that and continue the A. It is simply a return to the status quo of hiding the A from the BS and the confines (perhaps a bit more arduous due to BS) of the A.

 

FACT:

If feelings of the affair partner continue, then guess what the feelings were REAL and not some random fluffy nonsense.

 

While I do believe that most AP's DO develop emotional attachments they do NOT tend to be sufficient for the WS to actually D. An OM/OW is likely to "hold on" to the fact that the A is indicative of true emotion, the BS is likely to "hold on" to the fact that the WS hasn't filed for D as indicative of their true love. For me, it impossible to tell whom a WS "loves" more...the AP or the BS (or the reason he stays in the M). I wouldn't bother asking as the WS is likely to simply answer with what he/she thinks the AP or BS or whoever is asking wants to hear (aka maintain the status quo).

 

FACT:

If it's still a risk for the WS to see this person, nothing has been resolved.

 

100% agree. The return to the A is just that - a return to the status quo. No choices have been truly made and the situation can continue for as long as the AP's desire- sometimes for years, decades even.

 

FACT:

Quitting a job/club/activity isn't going to keep you from seeing a person if you want to

 

Correct. It does make it HARDER though. That line of thought holds that breaking the cycle of contact is KEY to ending the A. Much like keeping an addict away from cocaine.

 

What is gained by that other than more potential lying? I know that if I had a WS who worked with his AP and wasn't able to see her on a regular basis without resuming the affair, that tells me a lot and that I wouldn't want the role of "guardian of our relationship" instead of partner.

 

It basically boils to something I had tried to avoid introducing and that's the fog. The belief is an A is foggy thinking and by isolating the AP's it is hoped the fog dissipates and the WS "comes to his/her senses" and recommits to the M.

 

Checking phones, cell phone records, tracking devices, voice recorders, random "check ins," not allowing them to go places with friends, feeling dread every day that they might bump into their AP and rekindle. That just sounds... awful. That doesn't sound like reconciliation to me. It sounds like a life setence.

 

Agree. However this is VERY BS centric. Please realize that in all of this there is a SIMPLE solution the WS can affect - D. Why does the WS simply NOT file for D instead of going through all these hoops?

 

People are they want to be ultimately. Its a choice.

If the BS chooses to make these demands then the WS is free to refuse. Yet they don't as evidenced by your post - they agree and go deeper underground. And that's the WS choice. The AP can choose to accept it or not.

 

So, for me, the ins and outs of NC and the why's and how's is a moot point. The WS chooses to accept this and then chooses to go deeper.

A choice to simply stay in the M AND have the AP.

And NOTHING truly changed.

[wellwhynot]

I think you nailed it. Its a matter of 1) perspective and 2) desire

 

.

First... thank you very much for taking the time to respond so thoroughly to my post. You make some excellent points, and gave me a few things to think about. I don't agree with the fog, so maybe that's part of why I have a hard time understanding. I never looked at any of this with less than rational thought, so it's foreign to me that someone may.

[beenburned]

wwn,

 

I disagree that large numbers of WS's don't end the affair and take it futher underground after d-day.(based on statistics I think it is a minority)

 

Most BS's don't want to be married to a spouse that can't be faithful. I read that 75% of all divorces are due to infidelity.

 

Why would a MM want to stay married if he has no desire to ever be faithful to his wife? Why not be single and play the field?

[wellwhynot]

wwn,

 

I disagree that large numbers of WS's don't end the affair and take it futher underground after d-day.(based on statistics I think it is a minority)

 

Most BS's don't want to be married to a spouse that can't be faithful. I read that 75% of all divorces are due to infidelity.

 

Why would a MM want to stay married if he has no desire to ever be faithful to his wife? Why not be single and play the field?

 

The problem is once you start talking statistics, all stats can be skewed to make a point by the person making them by only providing data that supports their opinion.

I will adapt my statement then... from what I have read, and from situations I know about, 72.34% (Yes I did the math) of the people who have had a DDay and who's BS agreed to reconciliation are still involved with their OW/OM. To me that counts as large numbers/majority.

 

I don't know why they woud want to stay married? That's a different thread and one I'd love to see the input on. Maybe someone wants to start one!

[LadyGrey]

If I ws tells his bs that he will go NC, then he/she ought to honor it but of course honoring something isn't something that a ws is very good at since he/she didn't honor their vows. If the ws didn't want to go NC then he/she should have said so because they had the perfect opportunity to make a decision as to which direction they wanted to go. Not going NC and keeping the bs in the dark and keeping the ow/om also is indicative of someone who isn't making any decisions and indicates a weak willed or just a I don't give a damn, I will continue to eat cake person. Also it should be noted that if a ws says they are going nc but don't and it's known by the bs and the ow/om then both are enabling him/her to do exactly that. Who gets the most benefit from that arrangement, the ws I would think.

 

Personally I'm not going to be someone's babysitter nor would I be the one to enable someone to have it both ways, (cake eat). I say shyte or get off the pot.

[beenburned]

LadyGrey,

 

I agree totally!

[Artie Lang]

NC is put in place out of respect toward your BS, your marriage, and most importantly yourself. if the affair itself was truly a mistake, then you owe it yourself to distance yourself from said "mistake." don't we all put some distance against past "mishaps?" don't we all try to move past these "bumps in the road".....well, it's the same for AP's. it is put in place so you can focus on your marriage and help detach from your AP.

 

if you don't want your marriage, and still pine for AP, then you should end the marriage as well as the shenanigans.

 

now, if you maintain contact with AP, and are now single, how are you gonna give a potential mate a fair shot if you're constantly in contact with your former flame? how are you trying to move on if you're still somewhat in the affair in a psychological sense?

 

clearly, if your still in contact with former AP, you are that much more inclined to re-start the affair at any given time, seeing that the both of you have NOT moved on.

 

it's a TOTAL falsehood if you think you're "over it," and are still in contact. you're just lying to yourself.....trying to minimize the situation as just a "friendship."

Edited May 26, 2012 by Artie Lang

[wellwhynot]

NC is put in place put of respect toward your BS and your marriage. it is put in place so you can focus on your marriage and help detach from your AP.

 

if you don't want your marriage, and still pine for AP, then you should end the marriage as well as the shenanigans.

 

now, if you maintain contact with AP, and are now single, how are you gonna give a potential mate a fair shot if you're constantly in contact with your former flame? how are you trying to move on if you're still somewhat in the affair in a psychological sense?

 

clearly, if your still in contact with former AP, you are that much more inclined to re-start the affair at any given time, seeing that the both of you have NOT moved on.

 

it's a TOTAL falsehood if you think you're "over it," and are still in contact. you're just lying to yourself.....trying to minimize the situation as just a "friendship."

 

Here's where I'm confused.... if at any time you are inclined to re-start the affair it means that any type of NC/reconciliation wasn't helpful or wasn't effective, so what is the point?

 

If they are really over it, or if they never mattered, then they just stop being important, they become immaterial and it shouldn't matter if they see them.

A long time ago, the gymnast Nadia Comaneci gained weight. Her coach then prepared and served her meals. This became a problem she wasn't loosing weight simply because presented when in the presence of non-diet food, she of course ate it, because she had no desire not to. She didn't understand why or how this was important or how it was impacting her life. She didn't make a choice, he just took away her food.

 

Not a 100% apt analogy but it is what popped into my head.

[Artie Lang]

it's akin to having an alcoholic or drug addict near his/her fix.

 

you're telling me the affair wasn't somewhat addicting in nature?

 

it's an emotional, as well as psychological high. there are endorphins at play here.

[wellwhynot]

it's akin to having an alcoholic or drug addict near his/her fix.

 

you're telling me the affair wasn't somewhat addicting in nature?

 

it's an emotional, as well as psychological high. there are endorphins at play here.

 

Maybe? I do think it's a bit of a cop out, like "the fog" to say that though. I enjoy being with him, I love him, it makes me smile and happy to have him around. He's my best friend, but "addicting"? I'd have to disagree with that. I'm sure there ARE endorphins but after multiple years, I think any "flash lust" or behavior caused solely by hormones are kind of silly to be speaking of.

Definition of addicting:

to cause to become physiologically or psychologically dependent on an substance, as alcohol or a narcotic. I'm not dependent on him.

 

to habituate or abandon (oneself) to something compulsively or obsessively [COLOR=#000000]I'm not obsessed or abandoning myself or anything else either.

]So, no, not really. I guess it must tie into the fog so many people are convinced of and because I can't understand that.. then maybe I won't understand the concept.

[Artie Lang]

no one said you were "dependent" on him. i'm sure you can do well all by yourself.

 

addicting in the begining, or else you would've cut it off. now, being that you've been with him so long, the familiarity of him has taken hold. in your mind, he's aready yours.

 

if he(affair) wasn't so addicting, why haven't you been able to cut it off, then. why are you here still trying to figure it out.....asking all these questions?

Edited May 26, 2012 by Artie Lang

[wellwhynot]

no one said you were "dependent" on him. i'm sure you can do well all by yourself.

 

addicting in the begining, or else you would've cut it off. now, being that you've been with him so long, the familiarity of him has taken hold. in your mind, he's aready yours.

 

if he(affair) wasn't so addicting, why haven't you been able to cut it off, then. why are you here still trying to figure it out.....asking all these questions?

 

Because I like him? Because I love him? Because he's family to me in a way that most people are never lucky enough to have without any trappings to go along with it?

 

And I'm here because I find some of this fascinating... not because I'm unhappy.

[wellwhynot]

My husband didn't have no contact, but there really was no way he could have even if I had wnated him to. It felt cruddy at first, but I realized that I had to be able to trust hm, and that trust meant that I had to trust that he could still see her every day at work and nothing would happen. Nothing did, and that was one of the biggest signs that I really could trust him.

 

In think the concept of 'no contact", as it pertains to a betrayed spouse, is a concept that you would truly have to have been in that position to understand why it is important for some couples that there be "no contact'. If that is what gives them peace of mind at a difficult time in their lives, them I am all for it. Perhaps, in that situation, no contact could be seen as a temporary measure until the reconciling couple is better stabilized and more able to deal with the situation.

 

If no contact between the wayward spouse and the other man/woman causes the wayward spouse to decide that their affair partner wasn't who they wnated to be with then I would really question whether there was ever that much between them i the first place. Personally, if I were an other man/woman, i couldn't ever really trust my affair partner if they were so good at lying and sneaking that they wee able to convince their spouse that the affair was over, especially during a time when said betrayed spouse would most likely be hyper vigilant to any signs to potential cheating.

 

Actually, I commented in the thread that actually sparked my question from the other forum that I have a GREAT deal of respect and give a lot of kudos to relationships like yours, where the ws and the ow/om didn't go NC. To me the fact that they didn't, and you were able to reconcile and go on to create a new life together, that he did the work necessary and wanted it shows real reconciliation. It's what I know I would have needed... not saying "Ok you can't talk to her anymore, change your job, change your hobby, change this or that."

I guess I have been looking at it as a bandaid... like trying to cover a severed artery and couldn't see how it could work. I do see how it could be helpful as a temporary measure I suppose. I've learned a lot from this thread, I don't agree with all of it, but there is a lot of good information here.