SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

It's been 9 months since D-Day. We've been attempting reconciliation and attending marriage counseling. Progress has been slow, largely because whenever I ask questions about the affair, he tends to become defensive.

Earlier this week, though, I felt like we were finally making some progress. He made a genuine effort, sat down with me, and what he described as a "full disclosure" of the affair. For the first time in a long while, I felt a little hopeful.

But of course, after being lied to before, it's hard to simply take someone's word for it. I asked him, "Can you swear that you're telling me the truth and that this is the only person you've ever cheated with?" He said yes and swore that it was.

The problem is that he also swore before that he had never cheated on me.

So I followed up with another question. I asked whether he would be willing to sign an agreement stating that if I later discovered he had lied during disclosure or if he cheated again in the future, we would divorce and he would forfeit any financial claim to our marital assets.

His reaction caught me off guard. He immediately became angry and said, "Hell no." He then said it sounded like a scheme to take his money.

I explained that the agreement would only ever matter if he lied again or cheated again. His response was that he's already worried about his job, is going through a career crisis, and there is no way he would sign something like that.

For context, I'm in California and I already know an agreement like this would likely not be legally enforceable. I wasn't really asking because I expected it to hold up in court. For me, it was more about whether he was willing to put some real stakes behind his words.

I think what disappointed me most wasn't just that he refused to sign it, but how quickly and strongly he reacted. Part of me thought that if someone was truly remorseful and committed to rebuilding trust, they should be willing to do almost anything to reassure their spouse.

So I'm looking for some perspective from others who have been through this.

Is asking for something like this unreasonable? Is it unfair to view his refusal as a red flag? Or am I expecting something that most remorseful wayward spouses wouldn't agree to either?

I'd appreciate any honest feedback. Thanks!

It's not unreasonable to want some kind of proof that your WS is committed to not cheating again. I know that I also attempt to administer similar "tests" to other people for various reasons. The problem becomes, sometimes people behave differently than we predict they will, and that can contaminate the data and make the results unclear. The problem with your test is that there could be any number of reasons why he responded with anger and refusal, the most obvious one, to me, being that he's already under financial stress, and a contract like that would be an additional danger/stressor. His amygdala (the part of the brain that's associated with emotional processing) is probably going off like a firetruck siren inside his head.

So the results leave us with the following possibilities (and this is probably not an exhaustive list):

- He isn't committed to reform, got angry, and refused, because he doesn't want additional consequences for cheating again.
- He's under financial stress and having an emotional reaction to an additional stressor, thus refused angrily
- He is committed to reform, but doesn't trust himself not to "mess up" again (this is a fear I'm struggling with currently)
- He's committed to reform, but doesn't think it's safe/smart to sign that contract for other reasons
- He hasn't decided whether or not to commit to reform-- maybe he doesn't even know what "reform" is meant to look like yet--and this just feels like an insult

etc.

So you see, you haven't really gotten any conclusive results. And it's a sucky thing to have to tell you, but there's really no test that's going to give you a conclusive answer. He could have just as easily smiled and said, "Sure, I'll sign it," and then cheated again the next day, banking on you not divorcing him or the contract being thrown out in court. He could give you months of consistent repair effort and reassurance and still cheat again. It's always a possibility... What the BS here generally recommend is that you go with "trust, but verify" and watch his actions for consistency over long periods of time, where you can begin to bank "trust transactions" again. And if you get enough positive trust deposits, the trust builds back up... But you still verify the truth when you can/feel you need to, just in case. And he ought to be understanding and reassuring rather than defensive when you go to verify, because you are the one who is being vulnerable with your heart by trying out reconciliation with him. That's not something you have to do, of course.

I have administered several tests like this in the past two years.

The first was taking a lie detector test. I thought if she wasn't lying any longer a test of this kind would be easy to agree to. She was still lying and not committed and thus fought against the test, but eventually took it months later, and passed.

The second was getting rid of trinkets that her affair partner gave her. She set the date and promised to get rid of them. My thoughts were that someone committed would be able to do this easily. The date came and went, with her not doing it. I had to pester her to do it and finally she did. She wasn't there at that time, but recently found another one that she had forgotten about and freely gave it to me.

So she failed both tests initially, but eventually passed them.

So im not sure what I can really take from that except that people change and they might not be ready or able to pass the test at the time its presented. But that doesn't mean they won't eventually get there.

I insisted on a post-nuptial agreement weeks after DDay. 1. It communicated to my FWS that divorce was absolutely an option of mine. And 2. It took me staying with him because of finances off the table for me. My mom divorced and was destitute….I didn’t want that happening to me.

It helped me to feel safer knowing that those decisions were already nailed down. I didn’t do it to punish him, but I wanted to be sure that I had some security and that our child would be taken care of no matter what happened. We both had our individual attorneys review them. It was pretty equitable….though I did have a clause making things much more favorable to me if there was ever another A and to him if I had an A. We also wrote our wills at the same time.

I agree….the FWS, if they’re hoping to recover/reconcile, should be willing to do almost anything to help you feel safe. But they also have their own boundaries to work out. My FWS drew the line at a lie detector test. He had this vision of how they’re manipulated from TV. But, pretty much anything else I asked of him….he did and then some. Though it took time for him to realize that this is what was needed. For example, in the first few weeks he balked when I requested him phone…..got defensive and asked for mine….which I gave. Eventually, when I asked again….he just handed it to me saying, if this makes you feel safer….have at it. Then eventually, the looking at the phone or following him on apps like life 360 became more harmful to me than reassuring. No amount of checking will stop someone if they’re going to cheat. Though the truth eventually always comes out.

Call him on being defensive when he is. It doesn’t help your marriage or recovery when he is. The Gottmans call defensiveness one of the four horsemen of the apocalypse. It is natural for anyone to become defensive when they feel attacked. My FWS felt attacked anytime I brought up the A….because many times I was attacking him in that first couple of years. Calling him a cheating bastard, etc….and much, much worse. Later my bringing up the A, even in gentler terms, felt like an attack to him. We don’t need to talk about the A really anymore, unless I run into the OW or something disturbing. But, that took years.

idkkat,

I'll be honest.

I don't think it's reasonable to ask for 100% of marital assets in a divorce with infidelity, but I guess it depends on the marriage. Probably 95% of our assets are marital, and the assets are substantial. We've been together 30+ years. The infidelity is a small part of the marriage - incredibly painful for me, but not substantial in time or financially a large part of our marriage.

I should say that I am the BS and wife in the marriage. The other ~5% of what I consider the non-marital assets, but are not legally, are gifts to me from my family that I willingly combined as community property and my other investment funds prior to marriage, or substantial gifts after marriage to his family members. I regret not keeping those monies separate and would not do that in hindsight. I have had the greater income at our higher earning times, but we had similar positions. I do feel that his income potential became greater probably due to his sex. I'm being honest here.

I also think it's strongly unreasonable to ask for a legal agreement that is not enforceable. My view is based on owning small businesses - large enough to have to deal with many contracts, but small enough to not have in-house attorneys. There's no point in a contract that is unenforceable.

If my husband asked me to sign a document giving him 100% of our marital assets under any conditions; and I haven't cheated and won't, I would say no. I would rather just divorce.

If it's a test, well I guess I would fail. Sorry.

I have had attorneys advise me to think of what I truly want, and try to ask for and get it. Do you want a financial out if infidelity happens again? What's a reasonable ask? A legally enforceable post-nup? A separate personal fund to help you out?

That's all more reasonable to me and likely to be legally possible.

[This message edited by KitchenDepth5551 at 10:06 PM, Monday, June 1st]

Thank you all for sharing your honest feedback and perspectives.

Looking back, it wasn't a well thought-out plan. It was really just an idea that came up during a conversation, and his reaction caught me completely off guard.

I wasn't actually asking for his money. What I was really seeking was reassurance, some kind of proof or guarantee that he wouldn't betray me again. During the conversation, he said something along the lines of, "I have my parents to support, so I wouldn't risk it." My immediate reaction was that if he isn't willing to risk his money over something that is entirely within his control / his behavior, then why should I be expected to risk the rest of my life on his behavior?

That said, reading everyone's responses has helped me see the situation from different perspectives. I understand now that there are many reasons someone might be uncomfortable signing an agreement like that, and not all of them necessarily indicate bad intentions.

I also realize there probably isn't a test, contract, question, or promise that can give me the certainty I'm looking for.

I think that's one of the hardest parts of rebuilding trust after betrayal. We desperately want a definitive answer, something that tells us we'll never be hurt again. But trust doesn't seem to work that way.

Hopefully, through consistent actions, honesty, transparency, and time, trust can slowly be rebuilt. Unfortunately, we have to live with a certain amount of uncertainty while waiting to see whether the trust bank gradually fills back up. I don't like that answer, but I'm beginning to accept that there may not be any other one.