General information about infielity that does not directly relate to private investigations but may be of value to our readers.

Infidelity can have serious consequences

by Ashley Henry

Does anyone find the following scenario familiar?

It’s a great party, you are having a girl’s or boy’s night out and the good times are flowing. Then out of nowhere you see this hottie who is making his/her way towards you. He or she starts a conversation or starts dancing a little suggestively with you. By now your brain is telling you that this is not right.

You have a boyfriend/girlfriend, but you just cannot seem to help yourself. Before you know what happens you have made a mistake that you cannot possibly take back. Although the situation might not be this simple, it is possible.

Cheating is a common problem in relationships, especially when you are young, hot and ready to have a good time. Being faithful to your significant other can be hard when there are so many people out there who can tempt you. No matter how you slice it though, cheating is wrong and it only looks bad for you. And more importantly, it hurts the person who is supposed to be closest to you.

If you have cheated on your boyfriend/girlfriend, there are a few things you need to evaluate about your relationship. If you actually cheated on him/her – whether it was just a kiss or more – then there is obviously something wrong in your relationship. You need to take a step back and examine why you cheated.

Did you cheat in a moment of anger to get back at your partner? If so, then there is a good chance you still love him/her; you just made a bad decision in the heat of the moment. If you cheated because you are unhappy or unsatisfied in your relationship though, then you have to ask yourself if you are in your relationship for the right reasons. If your current romantic partner is not making you happy then end the relationship with him/her.

Cheating will not solve the problems in your relationship – it will just create new ones – and it will not make you happy because you will be hiding it from people. It is best to just end your relationship before pursuing new ones.

If you do cheat, which is obviously not recommended, do not make excuses for why you did it.

If you choose to tell your partner – and you should – that you cheated, you need to explain the situation in a calm and humble manner. Do not accuse him/her of spurring you to cheat with their behavior act; like an adult and take responsibility for your actions. No one held a gun to your head and forced you to kiss the other person.

You chose to cheat and now you have to accept the consequences of your actions. Allow your boyfriend/girlfriend plenty of time to soak up what you have told him/her. He/she will definitely be mad, hurt and confused as to why you choose to hurt him/her that way. All you can do is explain yourself and, if they do not automatically end the relationship, beg for his/her forgiveness.

If your partner does choose to give you a second chance in your relationship, that is your chance to prove to him/her that you can be trusted despite past indiscretions. You have shattered that trust once and now you must earn it back. Be open with your boyfriend/girlfriend, with your feelings about the relationship and with what is going on in your life.

Talking about things that are bothering you can nip problems in the bud before they have a chance to get out of control. Give your partner time. Be patient with them when they question you and your intentions for a while. If you truly are sorry for what you have done and don’t stray again, your partner will come to realize that maybe you can be trusted.

The best advice I can give is don’t cheat, but if you do, be mature enough to own up to the penalties that come along with it. Cheating does not have to mean the end of a relationship.

Couples can survive and work through the mistrust in their own time. Just think long and hard the next time you are tempted and weigh the pros and cons before making a decision that will be with you the rest of your life.

Commentary – Adultery Is Killing the American Family

By Nathan Tabor (09/22/05)

We hear a lot of talk these days about the need to protect and strengthen
the traditional American family. Certainly, it is true that the institution
of marriage is under attack from every side. But the real threat comes from
the multitudes of couples that fail to honor their marriage vows.

Adultery is one of the most terrible “facts of life” in contemporary
America. If you watch the daily soap operas on TV ­ many of which are just
soft-core pornography ­ you might get the impression that there are more
people cheating on their spouses than remaining faithful. And you might be
right.

How many people have affairs? That¹s hard to say because not everybody will
answer honestly. But sex therapist Peggy Vaughan, author of “The Monogamy
Myth,” conservatively estimates that about 60 percent of married men and 40
percent of married women will have an affair at some time during their
marriage. Maggie Scarf, author of ³Intimate Partners,² basically agrees.

Since these books were written more than a decade ago, and since more women
are leaving the home and entering the workforce, the number of wives having
affairs may also have reached the 60 percent range.

Americans have a schizophrenic attitude toward adultery. While 90 percent
admit that adultery is morally wrong, according to a Time-CNN poll, 50
percent say that President Bill Clinton¹s morals are “about the same as the
average married man.” While 35 percent think that adultery should be a
crime, 61 percent think it shouldn¹t.

Having an affair simply doesn¹t carry the social stigma that it once did.
According to “Playboy” magazine, 2 out of 3 women and 3 out of 4 men have
sexual thoughts about their coworkers, and about the same number follow
through on those libidinous impulses.

Why do husbands and wives cheat on their spouses? Psychologists cite
subjective issues like loss of love and feelings of alienation. Certainly
the media pressure of our sex-saturated society is a significant influence.
But a major factor is the easy availability of cheap and plentiful Internet
pornography.

Full Story

Get A Room

The Fort Worth Police Department is caught on tape with its captain down.

By PABLO LASTRA and JEFF PRINCE

At first glance, nothing seemed unusual on April 13 at Vandergriff Park in Arlington, just a typical weekday afternoon. Parents played with children, people walked dogs, squirrels looked for nuts, and a breeze blew through the trees. Oh, and some people were thinking about hot sex.

In a parking lot, a couple inside a black Crown Victoria kissed, unaware that their movements were being captured on video. The silent spectator was a Dallas private detective, who jotted notes about what the male and female “suspects” appeared to be doing and in what positions.

About 45 minutes later, a Hispanic woman stepped from the car wearing a white top and black miniskirt, and drove away in a Toyota Tercel. Her rendezvous partner, a tall black man, left in the Crown Victoria. The license plate number was easily tracked: It was a Fort Worth city vehicle driven by Fort Worth Police Capt. Duane Paul.

Private detective Danny Gomez, a former Dallas police officer, was videotaping the romantic encounter at the request of the woman’s husband, Rafael Gutierrez, who suspected she was having an affair. Gomez works for the tv show Cheaters, where philandering spouses are captured on camera and later confronted. It’s a tawdry show — and a popular one. Entering its fifth season this fall, the show regularly draws several million viewers in 200 U.S. markets and around the world. The episode with Paul is expected to air locally on Nov. 5.

Gomez had witnessed similar encounters between the couple in previous weeks. As his investigation unfolded, it became clear that Maria Gutierrez was having an affair, and the man she was seeing wasn’t an ordinary citizen — he was one of the few high-ranking African-American officials in Fort Worth Police Department history, an 18-year veteran who repeatedly has found himself in the middle of messy sexual troubles, from which he always seems to emerge unscathed. His horndog ways are much discussed among police troops, who question how he keeps climbing the career ladder despite rocky female relationships that spill over into the workplace.

Fort Worth Police Officer Malinda Spence accused Paul and another police officer of sexually harassing her in the late 1990s, resulting in a lawsuit against the city. The city — meaning taxpayers — paid dearly for that one: $200,000, according to court records.

The city, however, said paying the money wasn’t an admission of wrong-doing. The lawsuit appears to be Paul’s only alleged sexual indiscretion that has been documented in the public record, but other situations are much gossiped about among the ranks. Several police officers spoke off the record about other incidents, involving work-hour trysts, women who complained that Paul was harassing them, and a girlfriend who stormed into a police station and accused him of trying to seduce her daughter. The officers spoke sarcastically about Paul’s custom of speaking to new police academy recruits about ethics — including one such speech given just a few days prior to his being caught on tape by Cheaters.

The only result thus far of Paul’s actions, the officers complain, is that he has been transferred to a different unit or promoted. Some say Paul’s close relationships with former Police Chief Thomas Windham and current Chief Ralph Mendoza have meant that his transgressions have gone away quietly and his penalties have been minimal. Others say his indiscretions have hurt him and that he might have been a deputy chief by now.

Bottom line: “If Paul wasn’t protected,” one officer said, “he’d be fired already.”

An internal police investigation is under way into Gutierrez’ complaint that Paul used a city car, on what appears to have been city time, to carry out his romances, said police spokesman Lt. Dean Sullivan. However, a lack of documentation regarding Paul’s prior activities, combined with strict civil service rules governing treatment of police officers, could limit the severity of the punishment. On the other hand, a “lack of moral character” clause in those rules could give Mendoza the authority to take stronger action. And Paul’s fellow officers are beginning to wonder whether the Cheaters episode might be his much-watched Waterloo.

Paul joined the Fort Worth police in 1987 after a lackluster scholastic and professional career. He attended Louisiana State University from 1984 to 1986 but earned miserable marks — including, perhaps prophetically, an F in a Marriage and Family Relations class. He dropped out after a half-dozen semesters, with a cumulative grade point average of 1.4, according to college transcripts in his police personnel file.

He went to work as a security guard but was fired for leaving his post without a supervisor’s permission. But then he joined the police department and seemed to have found his niche.

His commendation-packed personnel file shows a record of stellar accomplishments. His work evaluations are practically spotless, and Paul ascended through the ranks from officer to detective to sergeant to lieutenant and finally to captain with glowing praise. There’s only one note of admonishment in Paul’s public file from 1995, but details were unavailable.

After becoming a lieutenant in 2000, Paul served as department spokesman. His name was seen many times in the credits for the tv show Cops, which thanked him for his assistance during segments produced in Fort Worth.

Paul’s personnel file — or at least the portion released to Fort Worth Weekly — does not reveal his rumored sexual liaisons while on duty or the squabbles with girlfriends that flowed over into the workplace, but co-workers remember them well. They recall that a dentist who had been seeing Paul came in to complain to Internal Affairs that he was harassing her while on duty and in his city-issued car. Several police officers described “domestics” that occurred inside police substations, such as when a girlfriend arrived yelling and cursing, accusing Paul of making a pass at her 19-year-old daughter. “The mom raked his ass over the coals,” said an officer who worked with Paul at the time.

Paul was married in 1987, the same year he joined the department, but divorced five years later.

In 2000, Officer Malinda Spence, a nine-year police veteran, sued the city for sexual harassment. Spence stated in an affidavit that, having worked in the vice unit for three years, she was “far from hypersensitive to sexual commentary and actions.” She alleged that in 1997, her supervisor, then-Sgt. Duane Paul, repeatedly asked her if she wanted to “go for drinks in Dallas” after work. Paul even contacted her on the police radio while she was on patrol and asked to meet her when “most of the time there was no work-related reason for the meetings,” she said. The affidavit also mentioned that Paul spent an unusual amount of time on location at her calls. Spence testified she was uncomfortable with the situation and told Paul that there couldn’t be a romantic relationship between the two because she was married.

After that, Spence said Paul “began to hyper-scrutinize her work,” writing her up for “milking a call” when she responded to a traffic accident and waited for investigators to arrive. Another time, Paul disciplined Spence for leaving work five minutes early after finishing her lunch break, which coincided with the end of her shift. Spence told a supervisor that she had “no doubt that she was being treated this way because she shunned his affections.” After filing a sexual harassment complaint against Paul, Spence was transferred to a different unit. Still, Paul continued to retaliate, she said. On one occasion when Paul’s unit was under a heavy call load, she responded to a call in his district. Paul stated over the police radio that Spence was “not allowed in his district under any circumstances.” She testified that she was “humiliated” by that response.

Another officer was also named in the lawsuit. Spence accused Officer R.R. Nichols of kissing her without her consent after an arrest. Spence had borrowed Nichols’ handcuffs. Once they had booked the suspect, Spence said, Nichols approached her from behind and kissed her, saying that he was “charging her for the handcuffs.”

Spence, whose husband also worked in the department, complained to supervisors about Nichols and Paul. The complaints were dismissed. Instead, she came under investigation by Internal Affairs for allegedly filing false complaints of sexual harassment on Paul and Nichols, and the Internal Affairs officials recommended that she be indefinitely suspended — fired, for all practical purposes. A deputy chief reviewed the report but decided to suspend Spence for five days without pay. “The preponderance of the evidence … indicates that Spence was wrong in at least part of her allegation,” Spence’s captain wrote in his recommendation to the deputy chief. “Being wrong is not always the same as being untruthful.”

Still, Spence said in her affidavit that it became obvious to her that her reputation in the department now preceded her: She said a male officer called her a bitch, and other officers failed to come to her assistance on potentially dangerous calls, including a gang fight, because they thought she was a troublemaker.

The department and the city contended that Spence had been disciplined for good cause and that her allegations were unfounded. Yet the city settled the case in October 2002 without taking it to trial. The city declined to release performance evaluations of Paul from 2001, when the lawsuit was in court, but no reason for this was given. There is no record of any disciplinary action against Paul in the time frame of Spence’s accusations. Spence left the department three months after settling her lawsuit and has been an officer in Colleyville since April 2004.

Since then, other officers said, various other complaints against Paul regarding his involvement with women while on duty have been investigated by IA, but none led to any punishment that showed up in his record.

After he came under investigation in connection with the Cheaters controversy, Paul was transferred from his East Side command and into Criminal Investigations — a desk job. “Paul wasn’t happy about it because it took away his freedom,” one officer said. “The chief had to do something that looked like he was getting to the bottom of things. It’s not uncommon for him to hand down discipline that’s not really discipline.”

Paul later took an extended medical leave but has since returned to duty. He had previously declined to talk to the news media about the Cheaters footage when articles first appeared. When contacted by the Weekly on Tuesday, Paul asked what the story would cover. Told that it would include his career, the internal investigation, Spence’s lawsuit, and allegations by other officers about his domestic troubles spilling over into police stations, Paul declined comment.

Chief Mendoza did not return calls from the Weekly seeking comment. Police Lt. Dean Sullivan said an internal administrative investigation into Paul is continuing. “After the pertinent facts, details, and witnesses are interviewed, the case will be assembled and presented for a chain of command review,” he said. “The chief of police will receive the case and make a decision based on those facts. Any other elaboration or release of information on this matter would be inappropriate until the case disposition and chief’s recommendation are presented to the city of Fort Worth Civil Service Commission.”

Paul’s co-workers are unwilling to discuss the situation on the record. As a division captain, Paul is among a handful of top administrators, and few subordinates want to cross him, especially since he has long been viewed as the Teflon man — nothing ever sticks to him. But many were willing to speak off the record.

“He probably would have been the next deputy chief,” a police officer said. “But with this one, there is no way. The city council is yelling for his head. That puts Mendoza in a bad light.”

A parade of unfaithful spouses caught in the act and then confronted while cameras roll makes Cheaters, locally produced and shot, similar to The Jerry Springer Show but without the “and so we learned” moment at the end — unless the lesson is that cheating is bad. It’s the kind of show where the host gets stabbed in the stomach by an angry cheater and the cameras follow the bloody confrontation all the way to the ambulance as the credits roll. Creator and executive producer Bobby Goldstein has a habit of talking about his show in grand terms, going so far as to compare it to art. And who would know art better than a guy who hangs a portrait of himself in the lobby of the Cheaters office, appearing as the image of a Vegas-era Elvis, complete with pompadour and muttonchops?

But Danny Gomez takes his job seriously. As detective for the show, it’s his duty to trail suspected cheaters and videotape their trysts. As jobs go, it can be tedious. Much of the time it involves following people doing everyday stuff. But the job intensifies tenfold when a couple is caught in flagrante.

Gutierrez approached Gomez in March, after he and his wife had argued and she left the house, taking their son with her and later filing an assault charge against her husband. The argument had started when Gutierrez accused her of having a lover — and now he wanted Gomez to find out if he was right. Gomez, who works independently in addition to working for Cheaters, reassured the jealous husband that he would find out if something was going on behind his back. Gutierrez paid Gomez $2,000 on March 29.

It didn’t take the detective long to gather evidence. The day after being hired, Gomez followed Maria Gutierrez to a central Arlington park. The detective videotaped her getting into the parked black Crown Victoria with an “unknown black male.” Gomez’ report began, “Detective can observe some physical movement and contact in the vehicle.” Thirty minutes later, the report says, “Detective Gomez can only see one head at this time.”

The video shows Paul lying back on the seat. For most of the video, Maria Gutierrez is not visible. After an hour and a half, Maria emerged from the vehicle.

“There was kissing and hugging,” Gomez said. Beyond that, it was hard to tell exactly what went on.

Read Full Story

Gay Affair is Not Adultery!

A Vancouver woman went to court on Tuesday to fight for a divorce after her husband had a gay affair that is not recognized by Canada’s justice system as adultery, nor as grounds for a speedy split, officials said.

Shelley Pickering, 44, had been married nearly 17 years when she found out last year that her husband was having an affair with a younger man. The couple split and she filed for an immediate divorce, said a justice department spokesman.

Canada requires couples to separate for one year before they are granted a no-fault divorce, unless adultery or cruelty is involved.

Her spouse admitted to the fling in an affidavit, but a provincial Supreme Court judge refused to grant them an immediate divorce because Canada’s common law definition of adultery does not include homosexual relationships. This, despite the legalization of gay marriages by Canada’s parliament last month.

The current Canadian definition of adultery — sex between a man and a woman not married to each other that includes penetration and when either is married to someone else — dates back to English church-based courts.

Pickering appeared in court with her lawyer on Tuesday to argue that the definition of adultery should be broadened to include same-sex affairs.

The Canadian government is backing her petition “to ensure that the divorce act is interpreted in a manner that is consistent with the recent changes to our marriage laws,” justice department spokesman Christian Girouard said.

“It’s a logical step to having a civil marriage act,” he said.

Prime Minister Paul Martin’s minority Liberal government passed the contentious legislation after the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in December that proposed changes to the marriage laws from “a man and a woman” to “two people” would not contravene the country’s constitution.

Cybersex – is it cheating?

Hello Goldilocks,
Thought of you all of last night. Hope you were thinking of me.
Love u lots – yesterday was great. Tons of love
Magic boyl

If this note fell out of your wife’s jacket pocket, how would you feel? And if you found it in her e-mail Inbox?

What is infidelity?

Twenty years ago people were sure about what constituted infidelity. A husband seen in a restaurant with his secretary, pink lipstick on his collar, strange silent phone calls, unexplained absences.

Now, with the advent of the Internet age, you don’t even have to leave the comfort of your home for your dalliances. Neither does your partner or spouse. But does the romantic message in the Inbox wreak the same kind of havoc as the lipstick on the collar?

Is an Internet affair like the real thing?
Judging by the number of letters from jealous and desperate, neglected partners to agony columns in magazines and on the Internet, the answer to this is a resounding Yes.

What is it that makes partners jealous and frustrated? “Three things”, says Cape Town psychologist, Ilse Pauw. “Firstly, feeling neglected and overlooked by your partner; secondly, having your partner share intimate details with an outside person and thirdly, watching your partner’s focus switching from your relationship to one with some idealised online character.”

The argument that people use who are involved in online dalliances, whether explicitly sexual or not, is that they are not real and that they are not really important to them.

Yet, they tend to react fairly strongly when their real-life partners demand an end to their cyber affairs. The point is not how the person involved views or rationalises their situation, but how the person feels whose life is affected negatively by this.

The end results are the same
And whether your wife is salivating online or is out with an old boyfriend, your situation is very similar. You are lonely, you feel your emotional and sexual needs are unmet and you are landed with the bulk of household chores and babysitting duties.

The attraction of online relationships is that they remove the difficulties people have with face-to-face communication and also allow people to recreate themselves in a world of fantasy.

Shy people can become bold and forthright; fat, bald and unattractive 50-year-olds can become gym instructors with washboard stomachs and dowdy housewives can be transformed into sex kittens at the click of a button.

Sexual hang-ups can be overcome as cybersex is a lot less threatening and intimate than the real thing. You also have the option to go offline at any time you want to, which is not a possibility in real life.

It’s ironic that we had to build million dollar machines to do something as natural as sex says futurist Howard Rheingold. He also predicts the use of teledildonics – full body sensory suits which allows lovers to meet in cyberspace and make virtual long distance love.

So why are they called ‘virtual’ affairs then?
The word ‘virtual’, though, still implies something which is not real even though it resembles the real thing. But if a spouse leaves a 10-year marriage and children for the ‘perfect’ online partner, chances are that the union was about to topple anyway, says Ann Landers, probably the world’s most famous agony aunt.

And generally ‘perfect’ online partners turn out to be everything but in real life. They also suffer from bad moods, have halitosis and insufferable family members, debt and sick children.

What to do if your partner’s online affair is driving you crazy:

* Remember that it is your partner’s behaviour, not yours, causing the problem.
* Stress how your partner’s behaviour is making you feel. Concentrate on your feelings
* Constant nagging and recriminations will just serve the purpose of making the online partner appear more attractive
* Don’t try and get even by getting yourself an online partner – it will only give your partner more reason to continue with hers
* Don’t let your partner minimise your feelings of anger and jealousy by insisting that you are overreacting
* Insist that you share the same e-mail address, as this will limit the lascivious nature of his or her e-mails
* If all else fails, you can always get online yourself and chat with ‘magic boy’ yourself. It is possible that she does not even know that you exist. A few hard facts about ‘Goldilocks’ might serve to dampen his fervour.

If your partner is completely unable to comprehend your point of view, it might be time to hit the road and find someone who will have a real relationship with you.

– (Susan Erasmus, Health24)

Texas l DJs expose infidelity over the air

WESLACO TX — A Valley radio station is doing its part to ID cheating husbands, even taking it to the airwaves.

WESLACO — Suspicious women are now using a local radio station to catch their cheating husbands.

DJs at Wild 104 came up with a way to catch cheaters. It’s called War of the Roses, and its become wildly popular among Valley listeners.

It all starts with an innocent phone call:

“Good morning! This is John Flores from red roses.com. I’m just calling to tell you you’ve just won a free dozen roses!”

The suspected cheater then gets a chance to choose who he wants to send the roses to, as his jilted lover stands by and listens.

In this case, Robert opts to send flowers to someone named Lisa, and his wife, Lori, is not amused.

“Robert, who in the (expletive) is Lisa?”

Sputtering, Robert claims she is just a friend…

The drama plays out over Valley airwaves every morning, and so far, only one husband has chosen to send the roses to his wife.

DJs say they have a long waiting list of women who want to test their men. It makes for good ratings, but not everyone is thrilled with the rose hoax.

“I’ve gotten a few threats, in fact a couple of the calls, the guys say they know where the station is,” said Wild 104 personality Johnny O. “They know where I work at and ‘just wait ’til I see you,’ you know. ‘you’ve ruined this marriage’ and I’m like, wait a minute, its not me.”

Johnny says the station has recruited more security, but so far there are no plans to yank War of the Roses.

DJs call it a service…real people airing out their dirty laundry on air.

“All of them have been legit,’ Johnny O said. ” We don’t want to stage anything or do anything that’s fake.”

Johnny added they are planning a sequel to War of the Roses: a field trip with all the wives, for a ladies night out on the town.

Control alt divorce – how internet affairs can ruin your marriage

Online affairs are increasingly leading to divorce, marriage counsellors warn.

By Jordan Baker
August 20, 2005

The president of the Australian Association of Relationship Counsellors, Eric Hudson, said there had been a significant rise in the number of couples separating as a result of cyber infidelity, a view backed by family lawyers. Virtual affairs might not involve physical contact, but a growing body of research suggests partners are taking them as seriously as the offline kind.

“It’s the betrayal of intimacy and the betrayal of trust,” said Mr Hudson. “It’s like the Monica [Lewinsky] and Bill [Clinton] question. ‘Did you have sex?’ is not the issue. It’s ‘Have you betrayed my trust?’.

“I have heard stories of people taking overseas trips to meet the person they’re having an affair with, to make some kind of personal contact. Then it moves into your classic affair dynamics.”

Telltale signs, according to the web-based Centre for Online Addiction, are changes in sleep patterns, a demand for privacy, ignoring household chores and a declining investment in the primary relationship. Monica Whitty, an Australian psychology lecturer at Queens University in Belfast, said websites such as friendsreunited.com.au had increased the potential for online affairs, as had sites set up specifically for cheating, such as meet2cheat.com.au.
AdvertisementAdvertisement

Because it was easier to separate online relationships from the outside world it was easier to justify them, she said.

“But when I put these items to individuals, things like cybersex and hot chatting were considered to be almost as bad as sexual intercourse. They were rated really highly as acts of betrayal.”

Damien Tudehope, a lawyer and NSW spokesman for the Australian Family Association, has seen marriages break up because of internet infidelity.

“I have got one [case] where a previously pretty happily married couple is now divorced because she found someone else on the internet,” he said.

“It is an increasing trend.”

Technology is catching up with cyber-cheats. Suspicious spouses are using spy software, available online from the United States, to monitor their partners’ emails, messages and keystrokes.

In some cases, internet affairs have ended in disaster: Joe Korp, who took his life last week while facing an attempted murder charge, met his mistress, Tania Herman, in an internet chatroom. She said he had brainwashed her into choking his wife and leaving her for dead.

Is emotional infidelity cheating?

By CAROLYN SUSMAN
Cox News Service
Monday, August 15, 2005

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — Well, it was about time.

Were we really supposed to believe that the reason Jen and Brad split was that she didn’t want to have his babies?

Get real.

When Jennifer Aniston finally let her truth be known, she was honest: Brad Pitt “emotionally exited” the marriage months ago when he met Angelina Jolie.

Although Aniston chooses to believe there was no sexual relationship when her husband first met Jolie, she told Vanity Fair that he just wasn’t there for her anymore.

He was gone emotionally. He didn’t even attend the final taping of “Friends,” her long-running sitcom.

There’s a term for that kind of fracture — emotional infidelity.

Miami Beach psychotherapist M. Gary Neuman even wrote a book on the subject in 2002, “Emotional Infidelity” (Random House.)

“When we think ‘affair’ we think sex,” Neuman has said. “But an emotional affair can be just as dangerous to a marriage. When a spouse places his or her primary emotional needs in the hands of someone outside the marriage, it breaks the bond of marriage just as adultery does.”

Those fun e-mails you send to your friends and not your spouse? That could be emotional infidelity, even if the e-mail goes to someone you’re not emotionally involved with.

Why? Because, Neuman believes, you’re directing a special energy elsewhere that should go toward spicing up your marriage.

And you could also be opening the door to a romp on an African beach, which is where Pitt and Jolie eventually ended up.

But heck. The Internet has made emotional infidelity a daily occurrence for some because of easy access and relative secrecy. And so has the workplace — whether it’s an office or movie set. People have lots of opportunities to seek emotional comfort from the person at the next desk or from someone who shows up online at the same time each day.

With today’s technology, you can be “chatting” online with someone and using a Web cam while your spouse is in the kitchen dicing celery.

No big deal? Or is it?

“It was for me,” says Susan (not her real name) of West Palm Beach.

“I noticed we were talking less and less, especially about important issues. And he was spending more and more time on the computer and away from home.”

Eventually, she found copies of messages between her husband and his online “lover.” He swore they never met in person, but it was still devastating.

“He was telling her about me and I couldn’t take it,” she says.

Even though her husband said there had been no physical contact, that didn’t matter to her. She felt betrayed.

Like Brad Pitt, her husband was directing his emotional needs toward someone else and being less available to help and support his wife.

That’s the classic definition of an emotional affair, says Dr. Deborah Layton-Tholl, a psychologist.

“The person is making a decision to change their primary relationship, going from the spouse to someone else.

“The emotional affairs don’t have to become physical. If it’s interfering with the primary relationship, you can categorize it as an affair that can do harm. The other person in the marriage is feeling they’re being rejected.”

And secrecy is a magic ingredient in this mix, the way it would be with any affair.

That’s why author and therapist Neuman — who is also a rabbi — tells his wife of 18 years about everyone he meets or talks with. The couple have set specific rules to avoid falling into the emotional affair trap.

“You really do have to draw the line and talk about it openly with your spouse, what you are comfortable and uncomfortable with,” he says.

It’s hard to keep a marriage going, especially when there are difficulties. But when all the conversation at home is about bills, kids and money, and all the fun, fascinating stuff is being directed outside your relationship, you are cheating and your marriage is in trouble, Neuman says, whether or not there is any sex going on.

“It’s much more about what’s in the heart than the sex.” he points out.

Carolyn Susman writes for the Palm Beach Post.

One in 25 Dads Isn’t Biological Father, British Study Shows

Aug. 11 (Bloomberg) — One in 25 dads may unknowingly be raising another man’s child, according to a study by British researchers published in next month’s issue of the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

Researchers at John Moores University in Liverpool, England based their findings on a review of medical and social science research spanning more than 50 years. They determined that rates of paternal discrepancy, or PD, where a father is not the biological parent of his child, range from 0.8 percent to as much as 30 percent, with a median of 3.7 percent.

PD is generally a result of unprotected sex and multiple partners and typically associated with a woman having an affair outside marriage. The number of cases recorded is rising because of an increase in situations in which genetic discrepancies can be detected such as organ donation, male infertility treatment, screening for diseases and DNA profiling during police, judicial and emergency investigations, researchers said.

“Our approach to PD cannot be simply to ignore this difficult issue but must be informed by what best protects the health of those affected,” the study’s lead author Mark Bellis of the John Moores University’s Center for Public Health said in the study.

Finding out that a child being raised as biological progeny is actually sired by another man can affect the father’s health, the child’s, his partner’s and the biological parent’s health, Bellis said.

The number of paternity testing in North America and Europe has been soaring. The rates more than doubled to 310,490 between 1991 and 2001 in the U.S., according to the study.

Fathers unsure whether a child is their own may visit a clinic or order a testing kit via the internet, and provide samples such as cheek swabs, hair follicles from themselves and the child in question.

“Given developing roles for individual’s genetics in decisions made by health services, private services, for example, insurance, and even in personal lifestyle decisions, the dearth of intelligence on how and when PD should be exposed urgently needs addressing,” Bellis said in the study.

About a third of pregnancies are unplanned, and about one in five women in long-term relationships has had an affair in the U.K., according to the study.

Women Unite In Cyberspace To Expose Cheating Men

What if you could log on to a web site, type in a guys name and immediately find out if he’s cheated on his wife, girlfriend or significant other before you date, marry or otherwise commit to him? By logging on to a new web site, www.DontDateHimGirl.com, any woman can! Created by women in Miami, the innovative site allows users to post pictures and ‘cheat sheets of alleged philandering men in cyberspace for all to see. The information goes directly into a search engine that can be accessed, free of
charge, by any woman, anywhere in the world, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Today, cheating is rampant. According to statistics published in 2003 by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, 22% of all men cheat.

Dr. Scott Haltzman, a noted psychiatrist estimates those statistics to be even higher. According to Dr. Haltzman, by age 45, two out of every five married men, or 40%, have had at least one affair.

An Internet site, USMarriageLaws.com, touts even more alarming cheating stats. According to the site, 85% of women who feel they have a cheating spouse are correct and 70% of women don’t know about their husband’s affairs.

What’s a woman to do when faced with these sobering statistics? By typing a guy’s name into the database on DontDateHimGirl.com, a woman can pull up a man’s picture and cheat sheet. Who has he cheated on in the past? Is he cheating now? DontDateHimGirl.com helps women find answers before they make a big mistake–dating a cheater.

‘This site is changing the way women date. It’s revolutionizing the dating game and giving women an advantage they’ve never had before, said Tasha Joseph, spokesperson for the Web site. Think about this. You’re a woman about to go on a date with a guy. It takes a second to type the man’s name into the search engine and find out if he’s been reported for cheating by another woman. Is that man a cheater? Find out by logging on to DontDateHimGirl.com.

The site also features informative articles and a forum for women to vent their frustrations, exchange stories and find support. An advice column, ‘Ask Your Girl’, gives women solid advice on matters of the heart. Registered members can also reserve a copy of the forthcoming novel, ‘How to Catch a Cheating Man’, a hilarious look at what can happen when a man gets caught cheating on a woman.

Membership is free when you register online at www.DontDateHimGirl.com. Men can also post their side of the story free of charge on the site.