Help - Setting Boundaries, WW in EA - Thread #2

[sandi2]

Wasn't it your W who said she was trying to find the right time to end her A? You don't find a right time, and you don't let try to let the OM down easily. There is no tapering off an A, and there is no seeing OM one last time for "closure".

WW said she wanted to end the EA but didn't really know how to.

Seriously, if she had really had it out with the OM, I bet she'd know exactly how to end it with him. Her excuses sound scripted from the WW textbook.

I said that she knew what had to be done, she'd seen all the information I'd sent her previously and done her own research, and she would need to go No Contact. I said she should consider an IC or a friend to help her. She didn't want to involve 3rd partied and wanted me to help her. I can't remember how I responded to that. It's not right, she should really be asking me to help her end R with her EAP.

It's one thing to help find the information and give support while she is actually going through the withdrawals......but you cannot do it for her.
If your W truly wants help, I think she'll show more intent. Otherwise, I think she's playing you. The more she sees you accepting her betraying behavior, and she still profits from the MR in some kind of way......the less intent she'll have in ending things with OM.

Anyway, as far as I can tell she hasn't done anything about this, and we have settled back into limbo.

I look at it this way......it takes two to have an argument. If you don't argue with her, then she can't have an argument by herself. You cannot settle back into limbo, if you are moving forward. She can either move with you, or she can be left alone in own state of limbo. You don't have to join.

At dinner one evening, D4 mentioned that she & mummy might be moving to another house and I wasn't going but she wanted me to. W said that wasn't true. I wasn't happy with this as it invalidated D's statement - so I spoke to her about it. She had though D was getting confused about one of her friends moving house, and hadn't realised it was about the conversation from the previous weekend when she had spoken to D about moving.

To me, it sounds more like a WW's smoke & mirrors to throw off her suspicious H's questions.

emotional detachment comes and goes - good days and bad days. Not so good this week as I let myself become close again after the weekend conversations.

B/c your values and standards are being compromised.

I find the DR book to be much more conciliatory than the advice here with regards to waywards, although it does discuss what to do if they won't end the A, which is predominantly LRT.

Maybe b/c the book does not have feedback and speaks to more of a general audience of many scenarios....whereas, the board is dealing personally with you about the specific problems at your address. If it had not been for the specific advice from people on the DB board back in 2007, I don't know that I could have mustered the strength to go completely NC, and......not find another OM. FWIW, I felt that I did not find much instruction for me, as a wayward wife, in the DR book. That's not to say the book failed. As a WW, I just felt that it was mainly addressed to the LBS. Therefore, my instructions basically came from mentors on the board. The wayward spouse is not specifically addressed in the book, and the same approach is given for everyone......which in some cases, I have to respectfully disagree. I'm just giving you my personal opinion. If you will research the subject of the wayward wife, I think you'll find that a soft-love approach is not successful. With the WAW, most definitely, yes....and maybe even with some MLCW (IDK, b/c I haven't studied MLCW very much). My focus has been on the wayward, and I also believe there are many newcomers who label their own spouse as MLC, b/c the overt behavior mirrors the description list they read about MLC. However, it may not be MLC at all, but rather waywardness that has festered for years and just now acting out in the rebellion stage.