Current clinical models for addressing infidelity tend not to make social context issues a central focus; yet, societal gender and power structures, such as female responsibility for relationships and limited male vulnerability, affect the etiology of affairs and create power imbalances in intimate relationships. How therapists respond to these societal influences may either limit or enhance the mutual healing of both persons in the relationship. Thus attention to these societal processes is an ethical issue. This paper presents one perspective, the Relational Justice Approach, for working with infidelity. It places gender, power, and culture at the center of intervention in couple therapy, and includes three stages: (1) creating an equitable foundation for healing, (2) placing the infidelity in a societal context, and (3) practicing mutuality. Each stage is illustrated with case examples and contrasted with current practice regarding infidelity.

Sociocontextual factors such as gender and power play an important role in the etiology of affairs and in recovery from them, yet it is unclear how current treatment models address these issues. Drawing on feminist epistemology, this study utilized a grounded theory analysis of 29 scholarly articles and books on infidelity treatment published between 2000 and 2010 to identify the circumstances under which gender and power issues were or were not part of treatment. We found five conditions that limit attention to gender and power: (a) speaking (or assuming) as though partners are equal, (b) reframing infidelity as a relationship problem, (c) limiting discussion of societal context to background, (d) not considering how societal gender and power patterns impact relationship dynamics, and (e) limiting discussion of ethics on how to position around infidelity. Analysis explored how each occurred across three phases of couple therapy. The findings provide a useful foundation for a sociocontextual framework for infidelity treatment.

Gender, culture, and power issues are intrinsic to the etiology of infidelity, but the clinical literature offers little guidance on how to work with these concerns. The Relational Justice Approach (RJA) to infidelity (Williams, Family Process, 2011, 50, 516) uniquely places gender and power issues at the heart of clinical change; however, this approach has not been systematically studied. Therefore a qualitative task analysis was utilized to understand how change occurs in RJA. The findings indicated four necessary tasks: (a) creating an equitable foundation for healing, (b) creating space for alternate gender discourse, (c) pursuing relational responsibility of powerful partner, and (d) new experience of mutual support. Therapists' attention to power dynamics that organize couple relationships, leadership in intervening in power processes, and socio-cultural attunement to gender discourses were foundational to this work. These findings help clarify the processes by which mutual healing from the trauma of infidelity may occur and offer empirically based actions that therapists can take to facilitate mutual support.

No abstract

No abstract