Effects of Enright's forgiveness therapy on marriage success in couples experiencing infidelity

¶ … Enright's Forgiveness Therapy on the Success of marriages of Couples Ages 18-34 After Infidelity

Forgiveness is hard thing to achieve in full honesty. Yet, it is an important step in moving past an act of infidelity or other injury. Thus, the following proposal explores the previous research involved with Enright's forgiveness process model and how it is applied to various population groups who have had to deal with emotional injuries. It then moves on to explore the need to study Enright's model within young married couples who have had to deal with a recent infidelity within the context of their marriage. It outlines specific stages which counselors will then determine if the couple has moved passed based on a sliding scale to provide statistical data to analyze.

Introduction

The topic of infidelity is a very sensitive one within the context of all marriages. It represents the violation of one of the most sacred marital principles. What does a couple do when faced with such a disastrous situation? Many couples will opt to take the easy road out and completely end the marriage. However, there are those who do still love one another so immensely that they will be willing to do whatever it takes to reconcile their marriage in an effort to continue on with their lives. The question is, how do couples forgive?

There are various methods in which a counselor can help a couple try to achieve a good balance within the marriage after one or both parties are unfaithful. Forgiveness itself is important within the scope of counseling, for it "is a response to unfairness that includes the diminution of resentment or anger toward an offender and institution of more positive feelings, thoughts, and behaviors toward that person," Knutson et al. 2008:194). The role of the subsequent counseling after the occurrence of an infidelity is immensely important. It can help facilitate true forgiveness by the injured party in a healthy way through various steps. In fact, "the process of forgiveness in romantic relationships enables victims to view themselves as accommodating, their partners as redeemable, and their relationships as resilient," (Gunderson & Ferrari 2008:3). It gives the relationship new hope to fight through such battles and live to move forward with the life the couple had previously planned. It is an essential part of either closing the relationship or moving forward with it; "Forgiveness is critical in determining whether couples repair their relationships and restore closeness following hurtful events," (Bachman & Guerrero 2006:46). However, forgiveness is not something so easily achieved. True forgiveness takes time and effort on both the part of the injurer and the injured. It is a journey which must be consciously decided upon in order to really rectify the infidelity which had caused such chaos within the context of the relationship.

There are several approaches in which a counselor can facilitate this real type of forgiveness in order to allow the couple to really move past the actual act of infidelity. One of these methods has been formulated and studied by researcher Robert Enright, who composed a model which formulates a process model to guide a couple through such treacherous and trying times. Within the scope of this process model, Enright has isolated twenty one specific stages of forgiveness within a broader spectrum of four major stages. These four broad stages include levels where the injured party is allowed to explore and accept the injury which occurred through the infidelity of his or her partner.

After the initial uncovering of an infidelity, there must be recognition of such an act. Thus, the first stage of Enright's model is that of the uncovering phase, where "individual becomes aware of the emotional pain that has resulted from a deep, unjust injury," (Enright & Reed 2009:1). This time period may vary depending on the nature of the infidelity and the mind of the individual who was injured. Within this spectrum, the injured party is allowed to explore his or her feelings of anger and hatred as a way to fully understand them and eventually move past them in the subsequent stages. In this phase, "the injury is honestly understood," (Enright & Reed 2009:1). All emotions towards the act of infidelity and the party who committed the offense are uncovered and explored. This is an absolutely crucial step in the process of Enright's forgiveness model. Without uncovering such feelings of anger and hurt, there is no true way for the injured party to efficiently move past them. Exploring these emotions may be an incredibly painful for the injured party, but is an absolute necessity in order for that person to not harbor any residual feelings of anger or resentment during the latter stages of the process model.

The next phase within the model incorporates the conscious decision to move on with the relationship and forgive the injurer for what he or she has done to put the relationship in such jeopardy. During this phase, the "individual begins to understand that a change must occur to go ahead with the healing process," (Enright & Reed 2009:1). Thus, the injured party has to make the painful but honest decision to move forward with the forgiving process in order to completely rid him or herself of the anger and resentment harbored for the injurer within the relationship. Forgiveness is then used as a healing strategy for the injured party. With the conscious decision to forgive comes a sense of power and commitment to the relationship. The injured party then commits to forgiving the injurer. At this early stage, it is not a total and complete forgiveness right away, but rather a commitment to the process of forgiveness. True forgiveness is never achieved right away, and any attempts to claim so will eventually lead to underlying resentment that was not fully explored and expelled from the relationship.

After making the conscious decision to work towards forgiveness, the real work begins. Within the context of this phase, the "individual begins the active work of forgiving the injurer," (Enright & Reed 2009:1). The injured party must act on his or her commitment to fully forgive the one who had wronged them, in this case their romantic partner who had committed the infidelity and placed the relationship in danger in the first place. The injured party then really tries to understand the injurer as part of the human community, a community that involves all social interaction between individuals. Thus, the injured party sees the pain and suffering the injurer is going through as a response to committing the infidelity. After this recognition, the injured party can then work to forgive the injurer which "may or may not include a reconciliation," (Enright & Reed 2009:1). It is of no real importance at this stage whether or not the final outcome is that of recognition. At this stage, the most important thing is that the injured party begins to understand the injurer in a way that goes far beyond the context of the injury committed.

The final broad stage is the actual outcome of the therapy and efforts of the counselor to facilitate true and real forgiveness between a couple who has been affected by an act of infidelity. This last stage is that of the outcome, or deepening phase. In this period, "The emotional relief and new found meaning may lead to increased compassion for self and others," (Enright & Reed 2009:1). Thus, the injured individual is allowed to find solace in their position in the human community, which then supersedes their own individual dramas which includes the act of infidelity which had placed them in such turmoil to begin with. This is the stage where the injured party may or may not decide on reconciliation, but at this point it is not of great importance. What is important is that the injured party can feel empathy for the injurer and then move forward in a meaningful way. This is the point where counseling may cease, for the injured party has come to grips with the pain of the infidelity.

Literature Review

Enright's process model of forgiveness has been tested in numerous varying contexts which give clout to its success as a therapeutic tool. It has been used within a broad range of spectrums that go far beyond marital infidelity. In fact, most academic research utilizing the principles of the forgiveness process model has focused on other types of injuries other than marital infidelities.

One of the most difficult populations to work with is that of young children. Unfortunately in our imperfect world, children are innocent victims of a wide range of abuses that can cause the child to harbor almost unnatural feelings of resentment and anger towards their injurer.

This negative emotional response to injury can lead to serious behavioral ramifications later on in life which can then cause distress in their adult relationships. Thus, the forgiveness process model has been in used in therapy with young children in order to test its efficiency in helping such children forgive their injurers as a way to improve their quality of life, both as children and later as adults. A study conducted by Gambarao in 2002 was conducted "to effect emotional regulation with children," (Knutson 2008:195). Enright's model of forgiveness was found to be incredibly successful in helping children forgive their injurers and move past the harmful injury which could have previous caused them to harbor resentment and affect their adult lives.

However, children are not the only population to have been studied within the context of Enright's forgiveness process model. One of the many empirical studies to use Enright's model was that of Waltman's 2002 study which focused primarily on older adults. Waltman focused on adults who were of middle age or older in order to facilitate real and true forgiveness within adults who were nearing the end of their lives as a way to improve the quality of that remaining existence. This study incorporated forgiveness for a number of assaults which had caused the injured parties to harbor resentment which then affected their daily lives. The forgiveness process model was then successfully used as a method to help make peace with the injurers, who may or may not have been a part of the therapeutic process. Waltman's study showed favorable results in the lives of older adults, who were then able to become greater contributors to the human community with more empathy towards all types of people within that larger communal body.

Another major study actually did focus on married couples who were in the midst of an infidelity. A 2003 study conducted by Knutson focused on married couples who had experienced an act of infidelity which had proved incredibly damaging to the marital relationship. This is very similar to the context of the current body of research, but was very limited in its design. Although it found favorable results within the practice of the forgiveness model as a therapeutic practice, researchers admitted that their sample size was incredibly limited, which may have negative ramifications on the implementation of its findings. According to researchers, the sample population was largely limited to older couples of European descent, thus eliminating a large percentage of married couples who have also experienced the pain and harmful affects of infidelity. The sample size was also very small, leading researchers to believe that a larger and more diverse sample population would have produced stronger results which could have had much more of an impact on therapeutic practices within couple's therapy.

With these studies in mind, it is clear that more research is needed involving a younger and more diverse population of married couples. Research has shown that "These studies offer a starting point for future work to examine forgiveness and rumination variables in a fashion that allows for clear conclusions about their casual ordering and their unique contributions to mental health," (Worthington 2005:358). Thus, it is the aim of this research to provide real results on a younger and more ethnically diverse population which can then be used as a model for a larger therapeutic method for all types of couples, young and old, European and other. According to research more studies are necessary on younger couples, for "As yet, treatment-outcome studies on the use of forgiveness in couple's therapy are still scarce, although the concept of forgiveness is quite prominent in the clinical and theoretical literature," (Worthington 2005:409).

Therefore the population of this research will be of young adults of all races and ethnicities. Couples from ages 18-34 will incorporate the sample body of this research. It is also imperative that this sample boy include a variety of ethnicities and races, in order to provide broader finings that permeate beyond cultural boundaries. Typically, this population can include both students and working professionals who, other than being married are largely unattached. According to the 2000 U.S. Census, 58% percent of the population of those 18-34 were married by the year 2000 (Farley & Haaga 2000). However, almost less than half of that population had children within the mix of their family relations. The large lack of children within this age group allows researchers an interesting glimpse into a relationship with les attachments, and therefore less reasons for a couple to stay together after an act of infidelity. With no children present, a couple has that much less of a reason to work through an infidelity. Thus, this age group has less pressure to forgive from external sources, leaving the option for true forgiveness to be a pure decision of the individuals involved in the relationship.

Additionally, this population has a much different view of what constitutes an adulterous act than previous generations. Studies with older populations have focused purely on sexual acts outside the marriage. However, in today's technological world, infidelity can go far beyond sexual intercourse with a party outside of the marital relationship. Modern therapeutic research shows that "The crucial point that two people in a relationship may have different ideas about what constitutes an affair reminds the therapist that this is thorny territory," (Siebler 2007:117). According to consumer surveys, 82% of 18- to 34-year-olds are "comfortable with technology," (Moskalyuk 2004:1). This means that nearly 82% of the intended population of this study are capable of communicating with people outside their marriages with technology that goes far beyond phone communications. With so many new technological ways to interact with others outside of the family home, there are new ways of understanding what adultery is. Infidelity can now be construed as many more behaviors and practices beyond sexual intercourse with an outside party, "Computer sex, telephone sex, and email flirtations are all included within the ambit of adulterous relationships that violate the marital relationship," (Cossman 2006:274). And so, with this information prevailing, it is clear that infidelity for the purpose of this study must go far beyond actual sexual intercourse.

Methodology

Participants

This study will focus on participants between the ages of 18-34 who are currently within a married relationship that has been negatively affected by an adulterous act. These couples must have been married for a period of at least six months prior to the exposure of infidelity in order to participate within the study. This allows researchers the knowledge that the relationship was serious enough to warrant attempts at real forgiveness. This then gives clout to the internal validity of the study as well. If the study included couples who may have entered a marriage too soon or had not been in the marriage for long enough, there may be no need to focus on forgives, for the injured party may not be serious enough to want to forgive their injurer.

Measures

There are stages in which the validity and success of forgiveness within this research can be measured. In order to reach success in terms of this research, the therapists involved with the couples need to make comments on the passage of these fundamental stages. The stages will be broken into three categories, with the counselor recording the level of advancement as well as the time period it had taken to reach that stage, which can then be measures mathematically.