Content area
Full text
Nowadays, infidelity means more than extramarital sexual relations and includes such acts of betrayal as clandestine spending of household savings and internet or virtual affairs. Despite the most noble of intentions to repair the relationship, impasse often results when the offending partner desires to move on and the offended partner subsequently feels retraumatized and becomes reactive. Unfortunately, family therapists are often responsible for maintaining this impasse by getting stuck in the same content-level arguments as their clients as well as failing to adequately consider contextual factors like gender and power. In this article I propose a theoretical, integrated, systemic therapy model that balances attachment-informed approaches with systems-informed neutrality. The approach focuses on rebuilding attachment while avoiding even tacit, content-level judgment. It is believed that this will help the couple use existing resources to build a loving interpersonal connection where each partner can safely and openly communicate to move beyond infidelity-related impasse.
Despite already widely acknowledged high infidelity rates, historically narrow definitions of infidelity mask that the problem is even more pervasive. Ironically, one of the most difficult types of cases faced by couples' therapists is infidelity where the act of betrayal is not part of an ongoing relationship, the offending partner demonstrates remorse for the affair, and both partners are motivated to recover and improve their relationship. Yet such couples (and their therapists) often experience impasse in their attempts to resolve this problem. This impasse or inability to repair the attachment injury despite the best intentions of all parties, is common and treatment-resistant to empirically supported couple treatments (Gordon, Baucom, & Snyder, 2004). The model proposed in this article is an integration of strategic therapy, solution-focused therapy, and emotionally focused therapy. It is based on systemic theory and anecdotal evidence and should not be mistaken for a data driven, clinical study. The proposed integrated model is informed by three core assumptions: ( 1 ) How reciprocal communication and behavioral patterns affect couple relationships (Fisch, Weakland, & Segal, 1982; Haley, 1963; Watzlawick, Bavelas, & Jackson, 1967); (2) Historical treatment of infidelity is inherently problem-focused and culturally biased toward a particular belief of coupling relationships (Atwood & Seifer, 1997; Penn, Hernandez, & Bermudez, 1997); and (3) While the offending partner's attempts to move on may be...