I think this is partly semantics, and partly morality/ethics. In the Buddhist tradition, there is the concept of "right speech," which is speech that is intended to benefit others. One story recounts a wealthy merchant whose house caught fire. The house had a narrow door that could only fit one person through at a time, yet the merchant's three sons sat inside the house playing with their toys. The merchant saw that his boys were so wrapped up in their games that his only recourse would be to carry them out, yet he could not carry them all out together, as they would not fit through the door. So, instead, he told his sons that there was a beautiful oxcart (this story is reputed to be ca. 2500 years old) outside — an oxcart of their wildest dreams one that they'd always wanted to see and to play on. So, the boys ran out, full steam, with their father behind them, only to find nothing but the house burning down behind them. The point of the parable is that there is no "plaything" (as used in the parable) more valuable than life itself, and thus the father did his children a great deed of kindness by telling them an untruth, so that their lives could be saved: his intent was pure. (It further goes on to state that the father then did go on to buy his boys that oxcart, making good on his promise later on.)

Does one lie to oneself? Again, I could examine this from these angles as well, but from the philosophical viewpoint expressed above, the answer would be more or less "yes, all the time." However, that explanation would be completely off topic, so that's better left for another forum entirely.

Numbers are numbers. Take something as Dialectiacl Behaviour Therapy.

There are numbers published with this Therapy as well.

But there is one major difference.

Their numbers are verified, studied and modified via peer reviews.

The majority of people in the world look at numbers and figures.

If 90% was no big deal then it would not be tossed out there as a straw to grasp.

If you cannot understand that logic then I bow out of the conversation.

I'm not trying to take hope away from you here, but you seem pretty confident that future events will take a certain course and that she is in 'active withdrawal' from you also.


My crystal ball isn't good enough to make such forecasts, and my mind-reading ability is far worse.

I think there is some truth in the idea that her affair will come to an end: most do end within a couple of years if not sooner, and eventually they all end just like all marriages end when one partner dies if for no other reason.

So assuming the affair ends, what then?

Also, do you remember how quickly you forgot about your attachment to past girlfriends when you were in a new relationship?

So if the burning house was your marriage and the fire was started by your wife and her affair partner, would you wish that someone would encourage to get out to look if there is anything worth saving or would you rather sit there and hope that the fire burns itself out before the roof collapses on you.

Which is brutal reality, the truth or a lie?

TOS violation. Badgering, personal attack; continuing from other thread after warning. Please adhere to the TOS. Further violations within a 2 week period will result in a red flag.

Pookie, this is off-topic. The topic I was addressing was the semantics/ethics/morality of lying, and even that is off-topic, except insofar that it might have to do with statistical claims of success of the MF program.

I want to redirect this conversation right now, so that it does not get diverted in the way the thread I started a few days ago got diverted.

The point of this thread, to my understanding, has to do with MF in general, what it's about, and people's experience with it. Right now, it appears that I am the only forum member with experience at MF, so I understand the curiosity. Please be careful to direct questions at the program itself, not at things such as my beliefs. I realize this is a tricky area, since, as a MF "practitioner," I have to address things from my own personal experience. But my experience on this forum thus far is that such discussions quickly can escalate and get dragged into the mud. This is an unproductive situation. Therefore, questions such as:

teeter very close to the edge of crossing that fuzzy line (e.g. of beliefs), so I'll decline to answer such queries. However, I'm happy to give whatever feedback might be productive in light of how MF approaches various situations, and this may require me using a personal anecdote or two for illustration.

So, here's one good question that can be productively answered:

The MF position is that you use the termination of the affair as a platform for reconciliation. Mort considers cases of infidelity generally easier to work with than obstinacy absent infidelity, as I've said elsewhere, and this is because there will be change when the affair ends. The question for the MF practitioner is one of endurance: to outlast the affair. During this time, one is implementing the program as much as is possible, i.e. learning better relationship skills, and especially working on one's own "fixings." This latter needs little to no input from a spouse who may or may not be present.

I understand that MF asks for "at least a year of Herculean effort". That seems to be the minimum timeframe. Is there a maximum timeframe, a point at which MF says it's time to throw in the towel?

Alternatively, are there "signs" that MF says means the marriage is unreconcilable for now?

There is no implicit maximum to my knowledge, as this ultimately is a personal choice. He has said that there are situations after which it might not be productive to continue. For example, a person may have given a truly "Herculean" effort for well over a year and seen absolutely no change whatsoever. This might indicate that reconciliation is unlikely, but it's probably a decision that should be reached with the guidance of an experienced professional (this does not have to be an MF coach, BTW).

I could not agree more CityGirl. It concerns me that some marriage programs (or how they are typically implemented) may actually undermine that process. Can anyone comment on the specifics of how Fertel's program addresses this critical issue?

I agree with this as well, at least insofar as emotional recovery is concerned. I don't know how financial recovery could play into such a program, as that seems to be a totally different topic, and I'm not sure what physical recovery has to do with it either. (Perhaps this has to do with physical abuse? That being the case, MF simply advises getting out of the marriage ASAP.)

The single weakest link in Mort's program is dealing with the emotions. He devotes a lot of time to transcending emotions and aligning actions with values, but he has very little to offer in terms of working with emotions. This is unfortunate, because I think it is (IMO, anyway) the single most difficult issue most face. I came to the program with a background that enabled me to handle the emotional vicissitudes pretty well, and have found other resources along the way that have been helpful, too. Others struggle, and I know some who have struggled mightily.

I guess I'm just cynical, but after Pookie noticed that MF charges $525. an hour for phone counseling, or $5500. a day, my radar went up. After a 5 minute search on the net, I found a B- rating by the BBB, with 22 complaints, and numerous other customer complaints on other sites.

That said, most of his users seem to really like the program and found it very helpful. Here's a 7 page discussion on TAM -

http://talkaboutmarriage.com/self-help-m...ss-program.html

I'll add that most of his program is available for free to anyone, so won't completely discount him for the high prices.

It is the rare BS/LBS who is not financially impacted by their situation. While the ideal marriage program would not necessarily get into detailed financial management, it would address the practical situation of being in a marriage crisis. For example, my former husband used marital assets to rent an apartment so he could live the single life, sustain his leisure/entertainment budget, and incur more debt, etc. during a time period when I was totally dependent on him financially. Without the support of the members of the DivorceBusting forum, including CityGirl at the time, it would have taken me much longer to face and address my precarious situation. Although financial issues may seem separate, many BS/LBS put up with mistreatment by their spouses due to their financial ties, so I always applaud those who bring the practicalities to the fore from the get-go.

Many BS/LBS are not doing basic self-care - eating, sleeping, healthy habits. Physical issues, especially in the months following devastating revelations, can seriously undermine the BS/LBS' ability to cope and act in their own best interest. That was certainly the case for me and many, many others' stories that I am intimately aware of.

That is unfortunate.

I think that the BS/LBS who is not in a good place physically/emotionally/financially is much less likely to have any chance of reconciliation, so I would always advise people to put a strong focus on personal recovery.

Good points.

Re: financial issues - Mort does have the concept of the "business meeting," which is a once-weekly, predetermined time at which the spouses take care of financial/logistical arrangements for the week. This frees up the rest of the week for just connecting as spouses. (Pressing/emergent needs can be taken care of as needed, though, i.e. outside of business-meeting time.) This is hard to do with an uncooperative spouse, but I have had success a few times at sitting my wife down to deal with financials, taxes, etc. The idea here is that this moves from the "me" to the "we" category, and also that problems can be viewed jointly (i.e. as "our" problems, not "yours" or "mine," which often happens in dysfunctional marriages — mine included) as opportunities to connect and come together as a couple. Again, this is hard to pull off with an uncooperative spouse, but it certainly can happen occasionally.

However, there is no advice on financial planning, recovery, etc. It truly can be a burden; I know that from personal experience.

As for physical recovery, there is the advice (especially from the MF coaches) to look out for yourself first: if your strength and/or health flags because of lack of sleep, nutrition, etc., your ability to work any program will decline. It was and occasionally continues to be an issue for me. I lost 20 pounds in the first 6 weeks of my marital crisis, and I had a hard time sleeping more than 5-6 hours a night. It could be that a program such as Marriage Sherpa addresses some of these issues, but as I've not done that program, I don't know. Personally, I've use hypnosis for some of these issues, and it has really helped.

But, as I said, it's really with the emotional aspect that MF falls flat. If I ever had Mort's ear, I'd tell him that he needs to figure a way of addressing that ASAP. His program (as is probably the case with others) does engender pushback from the obstinate spouse, and a lot of people take this really hard. (I don't, generally speaking; I've learned to see through it, almost to see it like a show.)

Mort's rates are ridiculously high; however, my understanding is that, at the outset of his business, he made himself available more regularly as part of the program, e.g. via email communications. You do get a 10-minute "laser" session with him as part of the program, and I know others who have had sessions with him and have said he is remarkably effective. The house calls are reputed to be very effective: he apparently can usually get through even to the most obstinate spouse, not necessarily to trigger reconciliation, but at least to produce the "birth of a question." I've worked with one of his coaches, Dave Rispoli, who has been remarkably effective. He did a joint session with my wife and me some months ago over the phone, and it was startling how quickly he built trust and rapport, and then turned that to his advantage by throwing some zingers at her that seriously questioned her path. (The first time he did this, I remember thinking, holy *(*&, I can't believe he just said that!) I do know that Dave has been very effective with a wide variety of cases, and he is currently working with a couple that has been divorced for one year, one partner wants to reconcile (the one who filed & finalized, actually) and the other is obstinate. The latter has really come around and is nearly there at this point.

I think it was the link at TAM that I looked at extensively before ordering the program. It looks to have been updated quite a bit since then.

It's true that he has a free set of emails you can sign up for, and he has said that it is important to him to make his program accessible to as many as possible via various price points and options. There is a subscription email for those who want to continue the emails (I think the ones you get for signing up at his site run out after 2-3 months), and this is pretty expensive; then there's an audio-only version of the program which does not include any of the extensive workbook assignments that runs somethign like $70. The boot camp (which I did) costs about $400, and I split it over 3 payments. I don't regret spending one penny of that at all, because the life/relationship skills I learned alone are worth far more than that. Suffice it to say that you'll really know how to be with a partner after having completed that program — even if, for some reason, you don't end up staying with your current one.

It is amazing just how much time/effort has been wasted on MA discussing such a ridiculous "program".

Originally Posted By: MA TOS

Characterizations of someones' posts as not worthy is specifically prohibited.

We've all be exposed to quite a few theories/programs since we found ourselves in this unfortunate club. Some you can pick up a pointer or two from, some have a solid core concept, and some are just junk notions that appeal to only a small dysfunctional subset. MF clearly falls in the latter category.

It appears to me that MF is for the uber-weak and helpless and it appeals to them by justifying their fears about moving on with their lives, by giving them excuses to remain in LIMBO.

If this is a "review" section, then all opinions/reviews of the program should be allowed, not just those supporting the concepts.

Well, it appears that your comment was duly allowed.

Nobody is forcing you to read this thread, and if you want to participate in this discussion of the program on its merits (or perceived lack thereof), that's fine. But if your only comment is to disparage the character of those who might be practitioners in that program, then you would be making essentially an ad hominem attack that likely would closely flout this sites TOS.

It doesn't bother me personally if there are forum members who might want to impugn my character/morals/actions/etc. because they would act otherwise; rather I object to the fact that such impugning does nothing whatsoever to further the discussion.

So, let me attempt to add something constructive here: in my opinion, a sound, well thought-out program should have a core of guiding moral/ethical principles. MF does, and in fact the entire program flows from this ethical core. Moreover, a good program should also have its basis in behavioral science, and this does as well: Mort's program draws on the work of Martin Seligman, Steven Covey, and others, and seems to have a strong link with the work of George Pransky.

An individual who is searching for a program that meets his or her needs can choose to make an informed decision based on the compatibility of a given program with one's own ethics. If this program doesn't mesh with those ethics, that's fine: there are likely others that do.

Will you at least concede that YOUR ethics can be different (even lesser) than the ethics of someone else with a different perspective? That some may find what you describe as YOUR ethics to be UNethical based on THEIR standards?

Badgering/ attack/ disparagement

I'm willing to concede that people can and do have differing ethics. I don't see any need to concede that my ethics are "lesser" than anyone else's, any more than I see any need to assert that they are better. My ethics are grounded in morality, so I don't find any need to defend them.

I've said this before, so I'll say it one more time, and then not again. You are free to disagree with what I do. You are also free to exercise your free will and choose a course of action you believe is more appropriate. Moreover, you are free to express your belief as to why you feel that your choices are better. Since I'm interested in furthering the discussion, I simply feel that to continue to insist on a point that has already been made is really not productive.

Please note that I am not commenting on your marriage or choices in this post.

When a spouse is affairing or abandoning, I would consider that a marriage in crisis, not just dysfunctional. Many BS/LBS find themselves suddenly in a situation where there is no "we" when it comes to financial issues. For me, it was less than a week between the ex's revelations and him moving out and renting an apartment with our family income - something that we could ill afford at the time. Every cent that my former spouse spent on his apartment and his wayward activities incurred joint debt or decreased our joint assets. Many live with post-divorce financial nightmares for many, many years. In my opinion, it would be unethical to advise people in that kind of precarious situation to attempt to make consensual decisions regarding finances. It sounds like you experienced the typical rapid weight loss and sleeplessness that most do - so you realize how vulnerable people can be at that stage. IMHO, it is critical for people to protect themselves financially when in marriage crisis (ongoing affairing or abandonment) - especially when children are involved, which is also typical.

I would agree with this. I don't want to sound like I'm suggesting that Mort is saying joint financial decisions should be made with an unwilling spouse — that's likely not going to work out anyway. But, broaching the situation can be effective over the long haul, as it's another indication one is standing for the marriage. Mort is very clear that it is the "standing" spouse's obligation to protect him/herself financially, and that may in some cases require legal measures.

FTR, rodion, this is not your thread. Telly started this thread months before you ever came to MA to discuss the pros and cons of MF.

IMHO, just because you believe in this plan and choose to illustrate the "pros" of it doesn't make your perspective any better than those who choose to address the "cons" of MF.

It is my understanding that this particular forum is for the discussion of ALL perspectives relative to a particular plan to see if it can stand up to scrutiny. If MF can stand up to that scrutiny and deliver on its claims, then it will be accepted as a viable option to advocate by this community.

I believe the more accurate way to say this is that if MF stands up to your scrutiny and you feel it delivers on its claims then you can accept it as a viable option.

Groupthink doesn't exist in this kind of environment.

FTR, I've looked over my posts here and don't find evidence of claiming ownership.

FTR again, I don't find evidence that I've tried to belittle any dissenting perspectives.

Personally, I support that agenda. The problem I've seen in the short time I've been here is that discussion of this topic, both here and especially on the other thread that I did start, all too quickly devolved into ad hominem attacks.

It is totally and completely possible to have a reasoned debate on the relative merits of any idea or program without descending to impugn the character of the person who explicates such ideas or programs. I should think you are certainly welcome to express whatever opinion you might have about the ideas expressed here on the merits of those ideas themselves.

I hope that I was clear.

The ability to make and maintain the distinction between the idea and the person presenting the idea requires a degree of higher level thinking. Not everyone has the skills and sophistication to do so. It is an acquired skill that requires a certain level of maturity and discernment.

One thing I can say about MF is that he is a prolific writer. You can google MF and just about any subject and he has an article on it.

And he isn't completely against divorce, just wants people to be certain they've give their first marriage their best, before ending it. That is part of the one year effort thing. And as he remarks, second marriages have a higher divorce rate than first marriages.

I really don't disagree with much of his stuff that I've read.