Dear Stephen,

I was upset when I read your post about Elizabeth Edwards. I don’t understand how you can say that her husband shouldn’t be selfless when she’s going through stage-four breast cancer. I wonder if you know what it’s like to be diagnosed with something like that, and then to find out that your husband has been lying to you. It was outrageous what he did to her. I don’t think it’s too much to expect that when you are diagnosed with a terminal illness, your husband should be there for you, one hundred percent. I wonder too if your take on this is influenced by the fact that you are a man. What do you think?

–Concerned about Elizabeth

Dear Concerned,

Thanks for your honesty, and for taking the time to bring this up with me. I can see how my take on the Edwards situation can be seen as insensitive. Maybe it would be better (and still accurate) to say it this way: if you’re in a relationship in which you’ve both promised to be monogamous, then having sex with someone else is a violation, and a painful one. You’re now forcing your spouse to deal with what you’ve done, and whether or not she decides to work with you on a long, painful process of reconciliation, she has to cope with this one way or another. You have behaved unethically. You have harmed your spouse. Even if Elizabeth Edwards had been cancer-free and fully healthy, this would have been a serious harm. Her life-threatening illness only deepens the sadness and anger she feels right now.

Having said all that, I must say this: no matter what your spouse has done, and no matter how ill you are, you yourself are an adult in a relationship (at least for now), and your own ethical codes are still operating. Elizabeth Edwards made promises to her husband on the same day he made promises to her. I wasn’t there of course, and I don’t know what their vows were, but I’ll hazard a guess that she promised something in the neighborhood of “respect, trust, help, and care for” him (I borrowed that from a vow I’ve taken myself). Now, imagine that he hadn’t had an affair and they were just dealing with her illness. She said that because she was ill, it was she who “needed a selfless partner.” To my ears, that sounded like her illness relieved her of the obligation to (using my example) respect, trust, help, and care for him. I may be wrong–she may not have been saying that at all. But if this is what she meant when she said that seriously ill people need a “selfless” partner, it strikes me as going a step too far.

Finally, I’ll just say it this way: when I’m on my deathbed, as far as I am able, I intend to continue honoring the vows I’ve taken and commitments I’ve made to the people I love. Elizabeth Edwards may also feel this way. It’s just that her words led me to think otherwise.

Update: A quick note about vows and ethics. After what happened, Elizabeth Edwards could have chosen to leave her husband and get a divorce. Many people (myself included) would understand this choice and think that it was reasonable. If she left him, this would not be (in my view) unethical. Sometimes marriages end this way, despite the promises that were made. One person honestly decides that the marriage cannot continue. It’s not for me to say that they’re wrong about that. The ethics come into play in the “how” of deciding to divorce, and the “how” of separating and divorcing. If it’s done in a flip way, or a vengeful way, then we’ve got some ethical problems. But honest discernment that leads to an end of a relationship is not, in and of itself, unethical. Quite the opposite!

Like This Article? Please Bookmark It