Am I Creating a SSM Part II

[Burgbud]

Wow. This is a very interesting thread. For whatever reason I feel compelled to jot down a few points and clarifications.

I've met Heather. I consider her a friend. I ran low on ideas for helping her months ago so I'm very glad she's found a source of new ideas and hopefully a sense of optimism. I'm thankful for everybody contributing here.

I often get concerned for Heather because of two things. I believe her to be a very smart, sharp and competent woman who, like many of us, would desperately like to be able to control her sitch and right the ship of her M. If the problems are hers and all she has to do is change herself, then that's what she's going to do. Probably I *am* more fatalistic than Cobra for although I believe our actions certainly influence the actions of those around us, I believe our actions fall well short of having the effect of controlling those around us. This distinction is important to me because of the other thing about Heather that is concerning; a certain penchant for guilt. Very natural in her sitch because she's the one who had the little A (due to my own circumstances I'm rarely able to call what she did "an affair" without qualifiers), because she has small children and because she's the one considering walking away from the M at this point. I fear that when she's told very authoritatively, and I'm paraphrasing here, "If you'll do these things you'll fix your M except in the very worst of cases", she'll internalize that to "Therefore if your M doesn't get fixed it's because you didn't do things correctly." In the first place, nobody's perfect and nobody will do everything correctly all the time. A marriage must be able to withstand these imperfections. Secondly as I've stated before, I don't have as much confidence as others in the certainty of one person's response to another's actions. I think human behavior varies more greatly from person to person than the impression I get from many of you. I'd be more than happy to be wrong about that. But my belief makes me wary of statements that look anything like: "If you do <some behavior>, your H will do <some positive behavior in response, eventually>."

So I'll say this, which perhaps everyone agrees with implicitly but I like to be explicit about it: I don't think Heather *owes* H anything. I don't think she *owes* him any more apologies than she's given. I don't think she *owes* it to him to go to counselling. I don't think she *owes* it to him to read any books or work on the M at all. If she walked away tomorrow I think she'd be perfectly justified. My perspective is that she's reading and working and going to counselling because that's what she *chooses* to do in order to get what she wants. In this case, what she wants is very noble and worthwhile and I think she should pursue it as long as it's not damaging to her spirit.

Having said all that I agree with a great many of the points and ideas proferred in this thread, including a few that I wouldn't have agreed with at first blush. I think the idea of H as a "married single" may still be useful but I completely agree with Stig that he's not functioning as a truly independent person who just happens to be married. This example may not mean much to many of you but I think it does for Heather, so I'll say that NYS's OM would fit the the true idea of "married single" if he and K actually got/get married, much moreso than H. I like almost all the ideas about differentiation that have been put forth but I think the possibility of H not reacting positively, even long term, is greater than many of you believe.

And while I instinctively loathed the idea of the incredibly-heartfelt-almost-to the-point-of-grovelling apology for her little A, I've come to feel there may be possibilities there. Heather, I'm very curious to find out what you think about it, even if you completely hate it and would never consider doing it in a million years.