SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

DRSOOLERS posted on another thread in JFO about requiring NC and how it ultimately amounts to needing to police a WS so that they don't continue crossing lines, whether due to "moral bankruptcy" or lack of control over one's sexual impulses. (Being a WS and not being able to respond in JFO, and also not wanting to TJ, I'm posting here.)I hadn't really thought about that before, and it does make some sense.

But I do want to add a few thoughts. The first is that a WS is often stuck in limerance or the "affair fog" on DDay. Whatever the WS is receiving from the AP can feel pretty addictive, and I imagine for some, hard to give up. For those people, I think an outside force demanding a hard stop to the affair relationship can be necessary to cut through the fog. Kind of like an alcoholic being required to stop drinking cold-turkey in order to detox from the alcohol and get back in control of their lives-- the intervention and renouncement is how the addiction is broken and kept broken.

I would not be able to say exactly what percentage of WS would voluntarily initiate NC without it being explicitly required of them by their BS, but I bet the percentage is low.

The second is that affair partners who are aware of the betrayal (especially the ones who are also partnered) are equally morally corrupt, and it's important for the WS to distance themselves from those kind of individuals going forward, if they are intent on recovering and changing themselves. Not only should you want to be away from that kind of potential influence/enablement, but you shouldn't want those kinds of people in your life to begin with.

The third is that think NC benefits the BS because there is simply no more interaction for them to worry about constantly. It would really suck to wonder if your unfaithful spouse is acting appropriately or cheating again every time they're interacting with the "former" AP. Obviously it's just a bunch of unnecessary stress and triggering for them to continue having any sort of contact. Once broken out of the affair fog, if there's any chance of reconciliation, the WS should develop that empathy for their BS and not even want to cause that stress by interacting with the AP. But, in case that empathy isn't immediate, the BS ought to demand NC as a condition for potential reconciliation, if not to police their WS, but for their own well-being/peace of mind.

Maybe all of this is like, "Yeah, duh." Just thought I'd get it out there anyway.

ETA: I think what is important to consider is the WS's relationship to the boundary of NC over time. Initially they may feel like their spouse is policing them, and they're only maintaining NC because their BS won't "let" them. Then it may become that maintaining NC can be difficult at times, but they know it's important because they don't want to hurt their BS any further. Then maybe it becomes, "I don't even want contact with AP because s/he isn't someone I want in my life, even if I'm perfectly capable of behaving appropriately around them," in which case NC doesn't even feel like a restriction anymore...

In other words, does the initially imposed NC require *continual* policing by the BS, or does it *eventually* become naturally, effortlessly, voluntarily, self-imposed by the WS? If the former is true, reconciliation probably has a low chance of success. But if the latter is true, I'd imagine the chance of reconciliation is higher.

[This message edited by GotTheMorbs at 7:29 AM, Friday, August 14th]

Just for context, this came about when: I literally started writing out the standard, formulaic advice about the critical importance of NC in reconciliation, and as I was typing it, I stopped, stepped back, and realized the disturbing implications of what I was actually advocating. I then started to unravel these implications and grew more and more alarmed by them. This is probably not a great revelation to all but I'd simply not thought about it this way.

Your breakdown of limerence, the addiction mechanics, and how a unfaithful partner hopefully matures into self-imposed No Contact seems spot-on to me psychologically. I don't dispute that’s how the engine works when a couple somehow manages to pull off reconciliation.

Where we part ways isn't about how No Contact works, but the absolute absurdity that it needs to be explained to a grown adult in the first place.

Comparing an unfaithful spouse to an alcoholic needing a cold-turkey intervention is a simile I entirely expect, but that’s precisely my point. If your spouse is so completely out to lunch on their own ego and hormones that they require an explicit direct order to stop talking to the person they were shagging behind your back, you aren't in a marriage anymore. You’re running an adult daycare centre.

I have zero issue with someone who wakes up on D-Day, looks at the carnage, gets hit by a wave of basic human shame, and cuts the affair partner off instantly without being asked. That at least hints at a lingering pulse of moral self-awareness.

However, if the betrayed partner has to spell it out like a chore chart for a toddler, we've entirely lost the plot. It's a angle I hadn't fully weighed up before because No Contact seems like such blind common sense, yet having to demand it really does reveal more than I had considered. The fact that refraining from contacting an affair partner has to be laid down as a negotiated boundary, rather than being an automatic reflex, is the exact reason the house is already burnt to the ground.

Look at what the betrayed spouse is actually expected to swallow while waiting for this evolution you described. They're supposed to sit there, completely traumatised, taking deep breaths while their partner slowly detoxes off the affair and grows a conscience in real time. "Oh, don't mind me, darling, you just take a few weeks to sober up off the affair fog and figure out if I deserve basic human respect."

Personally, I find that stance utterly incompatible with self-respect. That is fine, as many people are willing to trade away a bit of their dignity for the life they want to save, but I certainly wouldn't advocate for it.

I don't doubt that for the percentage of people who pull off reconciliation, the journey from forced restriction to genuine realization is how it happens. My point remains that having to demand the absolute floor of human decency from someone who promised to love you is a staggering tax to pay. Life is far too short to act as a parole officer for an adult who needs a written policy on why cheating is bad, even if it is only for a few months.

Some would argue a few months of playing warden is a small price to pay when set against a divorce. I can't argue with their math, but I know that I, and presumably many people like me, would end up hating themselves for putting up with it at all. Keep walking, get your peace back, and let them figure out basic right from wrong on someone else's time.

[This message edited by DRSOOLERS at 9:59 AM, Friday, August 14th]

Well I think just about every WS knows cheating is morally wrong, the same way most drug addicts know that drugs destroy their health. But they're chasing that high, whatever they're getting from the A or the drug or the Bad Thing, no matter how high the cost. The BS who has to demand NC isn't waiting for their WS to figure out that the cheating is wrong, they're waiting for them to figure out it isn't worth it, to turn back to the marriage and choose their spouse over whatever the AP is giving them in that moment.

We've discussed on here before how BS can be split between the part of themselves that wants to maintain their principles and walk away from someone who has treated them poorly, and the part of themselves that still loves their WS and wants to keep the marriage, even after the betrayal. Attempting reconciliation, provided the WS demonstrates the remorseful behavior required of R, can be a form of self-respect, in that you're honoring what the latter part of you desires... It's a deeply individual thing, I think.

Like I said, I do think voluntarily, self-imposed NC probably indicates a higher likelihood of successful R than if the WS has to have it imposed on them. But that's also evaluating the WS right after DDay, when they're still psychologically a mess, and before they've had time to make any progress towards becoming a safe partner again... Well, that is, if they're caught in the affair or happen to blurt it out, rather than taking time to do some processing/preparation before self-disclosure (in which cases I imagine NC is generally self-imposed...)

I think it was around 3 hours after the initial confrontation on DDay that I sent the NC text to my AP (and part of that time was just having forgotten I had to do it, in the emotional chaos.) Unlike a lot of stories I hear, in my case, there was never any question in my mind about who I was picking. And honestly I don't remember if my BH directly asked me to go NC or not, but I already intellectually accepted that it was necessary to do it. That it was the right thing to do. Yet still, it was hard to send that text and cut myself off from my source of validation, connection, desire, etc. It took willpower, and it took willpower to maintain that NC for a while. But it's not hard anymore. I learned why it's important to H. I stopped wanting to know if AP had been lying to me or if he's still thinking about me. And H doesn't have to police me because I want nothing to do with that shitbag AP.

But I imagine it's different for someone who believes they've found a second true love, who are perhaps several months or years into their A instead of just a month...

Well I think just about every WS knows cheating is morally wrong, the same way most drug addicts know that drugs destroy their health

I'm not sure I fully accept that. Plenty of unfaithful spouses actively convince themselves they are entitled to the affair because their partner didn't invest enough time in them, help with the kids, or do their fair share of the dishes. In their minds, those perceived slights fully justify the betrayal, rendering it completely moral in their own distorted ledger.

Others lean heavily on the "what they don't know won't hurt them" logic, genuinely believing that if the partner never finds out, no harm was actually done. Then you have those who argue it isn't wrong simply because "everyone does it," usually because they were raised in dysfunctional environments or surrounded by questionable peers.

I can concede that the majority of cheaters likely know what they're doing is wrong on some level, but certainly not all. Moral gymnastics is a powerful drug in its own right.

Attempting reconciliation, provided the WS demonstrates the remorseful behavior required of R, can be a form of self-respect

Agreed. But having to demand No Contact—or negotiate it in any way—demonstrates on arrival that they aren't showing the remorseful behavior required for reconciliation.

But that's also evaluating the WS right after DDay, when they're still psychologically a mess, and before they've had time to make any progress towards becoming a safe partner again

This is a deeply personal view of mine, but I firmly believe it is far better to judge someone at their worst than at their best. When the chips are down, what sort of person are you? It is dead easy to be a decent human being when life is smooth sailing, but who are you when you're in the trenches?

I know it’s an extreme analogy, but consider Jimmy Savile. He was celebrated as one of the UK’s greatest philanthropists, raising tens of millions of pounds and saving countless lives through his charity work. Yet post-mortem, it was revealed he was a rampant predator who abused hundreds of victims. I don't know a single soul who says, "Yes, but look at the hospital wings he built." Everyone rightly views him as a monster. You could theoretically try to weigh his heart on the ancient Egyptian scales of justice and ask if he did more tangible good than bad, but it changes nothing. He remains a monster. Character is defined by your absolute baseline, not your performative highlights. But I won't try to convince you of that.

My partner knows my worst most immoral actions and I hers. Luckily in both instances, I don't think they are character shaking choices.

The BS who has to demand NC isn't waiting for their WS to figure out that the cheating is wrong, they're waiting for them to figure out it isn't worth it

Even if I grant you that, let’s rephrase what that actually looks like:

Look at what the betrayed spouse is expected to swallow while waiting for this evolution. They are supposed to sit there, completely traumatised, taking deep breaths while their partner slowly detoxes off the affair and decides whether stabbing the person they vowed to love in the back is worth the cheap thrill the affair gives them.

Does that reframe make it sound any better? It feels markedly worse to me.

At the end of the day, this is entirely individual, and there is no universal right or wrong answer. Some people have no qualms whatsoever wallowing in the dirt if it maintains a comfortable life. Others don't view wallowing in the dirt as lacking dignity at all, so long as it’s their partner's dirt and not their own. Meanwhile, others would gladly torch a comfortable life to the ground just to be proud of the person looking back at them in the mirror.

Though, frankly, it never ceases to amaze me how many people seem to navigate their entire lives without ever bothering to look in the mirror at all.

Either way, I hope this discussion is useful to someone.

[This message edited by DRSOOLERS at 12:17 PM, Friday, August 14th]

In other words, does the initially imposed NC require *continual* policing by the BS, or does it *eventually* become naturally, effortlessly, voluntarily, self-imposed by the WS?

On Dday I issued ultimatums...the first one being that my H was to send the adultery co-conspirator a NC message and then never contact her again. I was NOT going to police him. IF he ever made contact with her after that...the M was over...PERIOD. My H didn't even hesitate...and sent the NC message immediately.

I do want to add that when the adultery co-conspirator wrote back...she was very hurt and confused. I then told him to send her another message...making it CLEAR to her what was happening. After that my H has never contacted the adultery co-conspirator again. He would let me know when she tried contact though.

There is a saying on here that you have to be willing to LOSE the M in order to SAVE it. I told my H on Dday that he didn't have to do ANY of the ultimatums I stated...but if he didn't do EVERY ONE...I was leaving. I meant it and HE KNEW I meant it. I didn't know about SI on Dday...but I had experience from when my 1st H cheated on me...and my lizard brain took control and was AMAZING when my H confessed about his A!

Thank you both for sharing your thoughts on this ! NC is very important to start breaking the ties to the adultery co-conspirator...and start rebuilding ties with the BS. Although ALL A's follow a pattern...two selfish people who use each other for their own desires...getting to recovery for a BS has many paths. NONE of them are right or wrong...just different. What works for one may not work for another depending on the situation. But NC is critical for R...and the sooner the Wayward starts it and keeps it...the better .

When people show up here, BS and WS alike, they’re somewhere on a spectrum of trauma. For the BS, that tends to sit at the higher end. For the WS, it varies wildly, which means logic, emotional regulation, and self‑awareness are all unreliable in the early days.

This site is called Surviving Infidelity for a reason.

Over two decades of collective experience, research, and lived outcomes have shaped a kind of survival manual. It’s not theoretical. It’s not philosophical. It’s what consistently keeps people alive and sane in the aftermath of betrayal.

And in that manual, NC verification is step one. Not because it’s morally profound.
Not because it’s intellectually complex. But because it’s the first stabilizing action in a crisis.

Yes, it’s a no‑brainer. No one disputes that.

But you’re missing what it does when it’s done with the BS.

There is something almost regulating, grounding, even, about hearing your WS say directly to the AP

"This is over. Do not contact me. I am choosing my spouse."

For the BS, it’s the first moment their nervous system gets a breath.

For the WS, it’s the first moment they confront the reality of their choices out loud.

It was the first thing I did after my BH handed my phone back, I blocked the AP immediately. No goodbye, no closure, no NC letter. Just blocked. I told my BH afterward. Then I posted on SI the next day, and it was suggested that I do a verbal NC with my BH present. He agreed. Saying those words in front of my BH humbled me in a way I could never convey with language. It wasn’t a demand. It wasn’t a chore chart. It was a reset, a line drawn in real time that both people could see and feel.

That’s the part you're overlooking.

You’re framing NC as a moral IQ test, "If they don’t do it automatically, they’re beneath dignity."

But NC isn’t about morality. It’s about triage.

Some WS are in limerence withdrawal
Some are in denial
Some are in shock
Some are still rationalizing
Some are cake‑eaters who thought they were getting away with it
Some are avoidant and terrified
Some are narcissistic
Some are simply emotionally stunted

There is a spectrum of WS mindsets, and pretending they all operate from the same psychological place is just inaccurate. You don’t have to relate to it for it to be true.

A WS is either going to choose NC or they aren’t.

But when NC is done with the BS, you establish

baseline transparency
baseline cooperation
baseline willingness
baseline tolerance for accountability

All of this "can" be very telling on how this is going to go. From there, the BS can make informed decisions instead of reacting from shock.

That’s not daycare. That’s crisis management. And it’s the difference between a BS navigating trauma with clarity versus navigating trauma blindfolded.

For many unfaithful spouses, I do not think the AP is actually the drug.

The container of the affair is.

The secrecy, transgression, escape, compartmentalization, fantasy, and the ability to step outside of normal life can create an altered state that is extremely compelling. The AP becomes the person associated with access to that state.

In some cases, the AP could almost be anyone. Sometimes an undesirable or low-stakes AP may even make that easier. There is less risk of "messing it up." The AP can become a blank slate onto which the unfaithful spouse projects whatever they want or need in that moment. The relationship does not have to survive normal life because normal life was never really the point.

That is why I think some unfaithful spouses misunderstand what they are reluctant to give up after D-Day. They may describe it as validation, connection, desire, or missing the AP. Sometimes that may be true, I am not convinced its usually true.

But sometimes I think what they are actually reluctant to lose is the feeling created by the affair itself.

They do not necessarily miss the person. They miss who they got to be inside that container. This is also why I think NC matters for reasons beyond reassuring the betrayed spouse. Continued contact preserves the container.

Even if the contact is supposedly platonic, the AP remains connected to that secret world, that identity, that fantasy, and that altered emotional state. The doorway is still there. NC closes it.

Then the unfaithful spouse actually has to confront what they were getting from the affair and why they needed that particular environment to access it. Sometimes the answer may be that the AP did not really give them much at all. The affair did.

I agree that ultimately NC should be the unfaithful spouse's choice. I do not think a betrayed spouse should have to spend years policing another adult and making sure they do not contact the person they cheated with.

But reconciliation without NC is extreme hard mode.

The unfaithful spouse is free to choose continued contact with the AP.

The betrayed spouse is equally free to say, "Then I am not going to attempt reconciliation with you."

If the unfaithful spouse refuses NC, I think most betrayed spouses should seriously consider ending the relationship rather than attempting to rebuild while the doorway back into the affair state is still being deliberately held open.

That is not policing. That is deciding what conditions you are willing to reconcile under.

For wider context—to anyone who hasn't read the thread this was taken from—this discussion was specifically about a betrayed spouse having to negotiate, demand, or enforce No Contact. Which, frankly, sounds very different to the voluntary, self-initiated case you just described.

You’re framing NC as a moral IQ test, "If they don’t do it automatically, they’re beneath dignity."

But NC isn’t about morality. It’s about triage.

I don't see those as mutually exclusive at all. It can easily be both.

Some WS are in limerence withdrawal

Some are in denial

Some are in shock

Some are still rationalizing

Some are cake‑eaters who thought they were getting away with it

Some are avoidant and terrified

Some are narcissistic

Some are simply emotionally stunted

There is a spectrum of WS mindsets, and pretending they all operate from the same psychological place is just inaccurate. You don’t have to relate to it for it to be true.

I’m certainly not pretending they all operate from the same psychological place. Any single item on the list you provided could very well explain the reluctance.

However, if every single reason on that list ultimately leads to the same end point—a betrayed spouse having to negotiate, demand, or enforce No Contact—the underlying psychology ceases to matter. The outcome is identical.

It is beneath dignity to have to enforce basic decency on a partner. It is beneath dignity to have to negotiate with an adult on whether they should stop communicating with the person they betrayed you with, or to issue ultimatums just to get them to stop.

I’d argue that any form of reluctance on the unfaithful partner's part is about as red a flag as you can possibly get, and at that point, reconciliation shouldn't even remain on the table. If a betrayed spouses asks for this, that should be the end of it. If a wayward spouse at that point requires their arm twisting, they simply aren't worthy of your time. In an ideal world, it should be self supposed immediately by the cheater. Which does happen. Suppose it depends how desperate one is to continue with the relationship.

The idea that a betrayed partner has to plead with their partner for them to do the bare minimum is what I'm trying to push back on. It's already humiliating enough to be cheated on without that on your conscience. We need to start recognizing a wayward spouse is not a prize but a debt.

You frame enforcing NC as "crisis management" and "triage." I see it as a traumatised person taking on the emotional labour of managing an adult who should have managed themselves. When a spouse has to step into the role of warden or referee just to secure the absolute baseline of respect, the relationship dynamic is already fatally broken.

You can call it triage if you like, but some of us simply refuse to be the medical staff for the person who stabbed us.

[This message edited by DRSOOLERS at 3:30 PM, Friday, August 14th]