would it be the right thing to do HIDE an 'AFFAIR' if...

[catinhell]

the marriage was already on the brink of being declared 'over'?

background:
both parties worn down over the years by being in volatile marriage with numerous issues.

both parties agree to separation. have had many temporary separations in past. got back together each time for sake of ds1 and 2. both feel marriage is over.

BUT a week before partner X decides to instigate the final separation, partner Y unexpectedly meets someone else.

partner Y has been loyal person for 20 yrs and was only receptive to meeting this new person as they craved affection due to the state of their marriage.

SO... given that the person was only ever on the scene for such short time, is it kinder to keep quiet about it? or is honesty always the best policy?

Say nothing - if the marriage is over it's kinder not to rub salt in the wound. But beware rebound relationships.

What is the point of hiding it? why doesn't Y simply say they have met someone else and the marriage is over?

you are "Y" yes ?

ok, but what if partner X suddenly started to panic about being on their own and started to back track (a bit) about ending the marriage?

would they then have a right to know?

i am neither X nor Y, actually.

the point of hiding it is so that the 'other person' doesnt get the blame for causing the marriage to fail, and end up overshadowing all the other issues.

I don't see why anything should have to be "hidden"

if both parties are on the same page re. the end of the marriage, what the other party does is their own business

I wouldn't be shouting it from the rooftops, and I would take it very slowly and discreetly and keeping the kids out of any new relationship for quite some time

but for the reasons WMMC hinted at, rebound relationships are pretty often a very bad idea, tbh

but "hiding" ?? no

It doesnt matter what X wants. the marriage is clearly over. Honesty is the best policy i think.

Is the affair over?

If it's still going on, I think Y should tell as kindly as possible.

If it's finished, why would Y tell X?

I wouldn't hide it.

The marriage is over in all but the paperwork.

Meeting someone new is moving on.

in that situation then, I would say that communication between X and Y has become so bad that it wouldn't actually matter what "Y" did, tbh

this X and Y stuff is getting a bit tiresome though, can you not just say who/what we are trying to advise you on ?

but peter, what if X started to panic/ backtrack- a bit?

i think there is a fear that 'telling' will make the separation more acrimounious and messy.

not telling = easier option.

it may actually be kinder in the long run then to make i clear to X that Y really has moved on (wih a new relationship)

false hope is a very shitty thing to experience, if I could prevent that I would tell (kindly, of course)

DON'T TELL ABOUT NEW PERSON UNTIL RID OF THE OLD ONE

I think if there is an official "end date" coming up then it is already over and Y should just be honest (but not unkind) about it.

Y really thinks they have met their soul mate.

X is starting to back pedal re separation... prob mainly out of panic

sorry about X and Y nonsense. they are people close to me. worried about being recognised.

if this is some shit about "blame" or "grounds" or even taking up a stick to beat someone, then it is going to turn acrimonious anyway isn't it ?

clearly X and y are not on the same page, and that needs to be worked on

telling lies and keeping secrets is hardly going to help with that

sorry, slow typing. agree re false hope.

ok, cat, don't mean to put you on the spot, it's just quite hard to visualise a situtaion using X and Y (for me anyway )

People in failing marriages often enter a rebound relationship in order to " end " the marriage and also to have someone hold their hand through the usual turmoil.

Seeing as they are still married id say they have a right to know .

although really, if you are not either X or Y, I have to say why are you taking such an interest ?

In many ways, I think it's best not to mention it. These things rarely last (ie the new 'relationship') if they start at these times/under these circumstances. It might just cause more hurt. Of course my idea is theoretical, but transitional relationships are often just a symptom. The one that usually gets hurt is the third person (ie outside the failing marriage).

Saying all that, if the third person is known to both the people in the failing marriage, and is likely to be on the ongoing social scene then it's better to spill the beans. It will probably all come out later on, if this is the case, and it could all get very, very messy. Worse than if it's mentioned now. And keep divorce proceedings/separation very low key until the heat of all the associated hurt etc has died down a bit. It's not a good time to make hasty decisions, for anyone involved.

You do know that unless this person is hidden for at least a year, they will still be blamed, don't you?

So if the new woman officially came on the scene a month after the formal split, the wife would instantly know that she was on the scene beforehand and would still brand her the homewrecker.

So don't fool yourself that you can hide it and be introduced at a later date as the new girlfriend.

Or Y can hide it and introduce the new person at a later date - whatever the situation is.

peter, i agree with you.

but not everyone is saying 'tell', so thats the dilemma, esp when someone is confiding in you.

i wish Y hadnt confided in me, as i reallly care about X and feel really compromised.

or the husband would know that the new boyfriend was already on the scene.

whichever way round it is.

I'm confused by this.

If Y wants to go, then surely just go.

If X is wavering, this is X's problem.

I was suggested that Y not tell X because I couldn't see the point of hurting someone unnecessarily. This doesn't seem to be the concern here - more that Y wants an easy departure.