Skip to main content

Relational Justice: Addressing Gender and Power in Clinical Practices for Infidelity

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Socio-Emotional Relationship Therapy

Part of the book series: AFTA SpringerBriefs in Family Therapy ((BRIEFSFAT))

Abstract

Research has long shown that who has the affair, why an individual has an affair, and how couples respond once the secret is out are related to important socio-contextual variables that are seldom explicitly addressed in therapy sessions. In this chapter, we summarize our research findings on the reasons that most approaches to couple therapy for infidelity do not incorporate attention to gender and power. Then we describe the research-based Relational Justice Approach that addresses these concerns through five core components: (a) attention to power dynamics, (b) attunement to gender context, (c) creating space for alternate gender discourses, (d) pursuing relational responsibility of the more powerful partner, and (e) deepening experience of mutual support. Heavily influenced by Socio-Emotional Relationship Therapy (SERT), the Relational Justice Approach creates scaffolding for a therapeutic process that helps couples reorganize imbalances that limit mutuality and relational options in affair recovery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Case details in all clinical examples have been modified to protect client confidentiality.

References

  • Allen, E. S., & Baucom, D. H. (2004). Adult attachment patterns of extradyadic involvement. Family Process, 43(4), 467–488. doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.2004.00035.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Atkins, D. C., Baucom, D. H., & Jacobson, N. S. (2001). Understanding infidelity: Correlates in a national random sample. Journal of Family Psychology, 15, 735–749. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.15.4.735.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blow, A., & Hartnett, K. (2005). Infidelity in committed relationships II: A substantive review. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 31, 217–233. doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.2005.tb01556.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, E. M. (2005). Split self affairs and their treatment. Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy: Innovations in Clinical and Educational Interventions, 4, 55–69. doi:10.1300/J398v04n02_06.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glass, S. P. (2003). Not just friends: Rebuilding trust and recovering your sanity after infidelity. New York, NY: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, L. S., & Goldman, R. N. (2008). Emotion-focused couples therapy: The dynamics of emotion, love, and power. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Huenergardt, D., & Knudson-Martin, C. (2009). Gender and power as a fulcrum for clinical change. In C. Knudson-Martin & A. Mahoney (Eds.), Couples, gender, and power: Creating change in intimate relationships (pp. 337–361). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knudson-Martin, C. (2015). When therapy challenges patriarchy: Undoing gendered power in heterosexual couple relationships. In C. Knudson-Martin, M. A. Wells, & S. K. Samman (Eds.), Socio-emotional relationship therapy: Bridging emotion, societal context, and couple interaction. (pp. 15−26). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knudson-Martin, C., & Huenergardt, D. (2010). A socio-emotional approach to couples therapy: Linking social context and couple interactions. Family Process, 49(3), 369–384. doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.2010.01328.x.

  • Knudson-Martin, C., & Huenergardt, D. (2015). Bridging emotion, societal discourse, and couple interaction in clinical practice. In C. Knudson-Martin, M. A. Wells, & S. K. Samman (Eds.), Socio-emotional relationship therapy: Bridging emotion, societal context, and couple interaction. (pp. 1−13). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knudson-Martin, C., & Mahoney, A. R. (Eds.). (2009). Couples, gender, and power: Creating change in intimate relationships. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lammers, J., Stoker, J. I., Jordan, J., Pollmann, M., & Stapel, D. A. (2011). Power increases infidelity among men and women. Psychological Science, 22(9), 1191–1197. doi:10.1177/0956797611416252.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Loscocco, K., & Walzer, S. (2013). Gender and the culture of heterosexual marriage in the United States. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 5, 1–14. doi:10.1111/jftr.12003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moultrup, D. (2005). Undercurrents. Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy: Innovations in Clinical and Educational Interventions, 4, 31–40. doi:10.1300/J398v04n02_04.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olmstead, S. B., Blickup, R. W., & Mills, L. I. (2009). Helping couples work toward the forgiveness of marital infidelity: Therapists’ perspectives. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 37(1), 48–66. doi:10.1080/01926180801960575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheinkman, M. (2005). Beyond the trauma of betrayal: Reconsidering affairs in couples therapy. Family Process, 44(2), 227–244. doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.2005.00056.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Treas, J., & Giesen, D. (2000). Sexual infidelity among married and cohabiting Americans. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(1), 48–60. doi:10.2307/1566686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weingarten, K. (1991). The discourse of intimacy: Adding a social constructionist and feminist view. Family Process, 30, 285–306. doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1991.00285.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K. (2011). A socio-emotional relational framework for infidelity: The relational justice approach. Family Process, 50(4), 516–528. doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.2011.01374.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K., Galick, A., Knudson-Martin, C., & Huenergardt, D. (2013). Toward mutual support: A task analysis of the relational justice approach to infidelity. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 39(3), 285–298. doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.2012.00324.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K., & Knudson-Martin, C. (2013). Do therapists address gender and power in infidelity? A feminist analysis of the treatment literature. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 39(3), 271–284. doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.2012.00303.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 American Family Therapy Academy

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Williams, K., Kim, L. (2015). Relational Justice: Addressing Gender and Power in Clinical Practices for Infidelity. In: Knudson-Martin, C., Wells, M., Samman, S. (eds) Socio-Emotional Relationship Therapy. AFTA SpringerBriefs in Family Therapy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13398-0_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics