You have been rehearsing the conversation. Probably in the car, probably at night, and probably with better lines than you will ever actually deliver. Part of you wants to look this person in the eye and make them account for what they did. Another part suspects that the confrontation will not go the way it does in your head, that they will deny it or twist it or cry, and you will walk away feeling worse than you do now. So you are stuck between two fears, the fear of saying nothing and the fear of saying it badly.
I have had a great many of these conversations, and I have watched a great many more from the outside. Whether you should confront the person who betrayed you is a real question with a real answer, and the answer depends on what you are trying to get out of it. Some confrontations are necessary and clarifying. Some are a way of handing the person a second chance to hurt you. I want to help you tell the difference before you pick up the phone, because once the words are out you do not get them back.
First Decide What You Actually Want
Most people who ask me this question have not answered the prior one, which is what they want the confrontation to produce. If you want them to admit it, that is one kind of conversation. If you want an apology, that is another. If you want to understand why, that is a third. And if what you really want is for them to feel what you felt, that is a fourth, and I will tell you now that it is the one that almost never works. People who betray others are usually well practiced at not feeling the weight of it.
So sit with it and be honest. Write down the outcome you are hoping for in one sentence. Then ask whether this person, based on everything you know about them, is capable of giving you that outcome. If the answer is no, the confrontation is not about them at all. It is about you needing to say something out loud, and there are better and safer places to do that than across the table from the person who already showed you what they will do with your vulnerability.
When You Should Confront the Person Who Betrayed You
Confrontation makes sense when the relationship has a future you are willing to consider, and when the person has shown at least some sign of being able to hear hard things. If you are married to them, work beside them daily, or share a family with them, silence is not really an option, because unaddressed betrayal in a continuing relationship does not stay still. It grows. In those cases the conversation is a necessary step toward either rebuilding or a clean ending, and you owe it to yourself to have it.
It also makes sense when you need information to make a decision. Sometimes you do not know the full extent of what happened, and the only person who does is the one who did it. In investigations I learned that a direct question, asked calmly and without theater, often gets more than an accusation does, because the person is deciding in real time how much you already know. If there are facts you need in order to protect yourself or others, a controlled conversation may be the only way to get them, and that alone can justify it.
When You Should Not
Do not confront someone who has a history of turning conversations into weapons. If every disagreement you have ever had with this person ended with you apologizing for something, you already know how this one goes. Do not confront someone who has more power in the situation than you do until you have thought carefully about what they can do with what you say. David never confronted Saul in the throne room. He spoke to him from a safe distance, across a valley, where Saul could hear him and could not reach him. That was wisdom, and it cost David nothing in courage.
Do not confront anyone while the anger is still fresh enough to write the script for you. I have watched people walk in with a legitimate grievance and walk out having said something they will spend years regretting, because they let the hurt speak instead of the judgment. And do not confront when the relationship is already over and you are only seeking a sense of closure from them. Closure that depends on another person cooperating is not closure. It is one more thing they can withhold from you, and they will.
How to Do It If You Decide To
Choose the setting deliberately. Private, neutral, and with a clear way to leave. Do not do it at a family gathering, in a shared office, or anywhere you would feel trapped if it went badly. Bring a short statement of what you know, in specific and factual terms, and lead with that. Say what happened as you understand it and what it cost you. Do not lead with a question that invites them to deny, because you will spend the rest of the conversation arguing about facts instead of dealing with them.
Then stop talking and let them respond. Watch closely, because their first response is the most honest thing you will get. Do they own it or do they immediately explain it? Do they ask what you need or do they tell you what you got wrong? Are they more upset about what they did or about being confronted with it? You are collecting evidence about who they are, and the doctrine I have always worked by is that trust should be tested, not assumed. This conversation is a test. Grade it fairly, and decide before you go in what a passing grade would look like.
What to Do With the Answer
If they own it fully and accept that you will be cautious for a long time, you have something to work with, and the confrontation was worth it. If they deny it against clear evidence, you have also learned something valuable, which is that this person will lie to your face when the stakes are high, and you should plan accordingly. If they turn it around and make you the problem, that is your answer too. Joseph tested his brothers not to punish them but to learn what they had become, and he did not decide anything until the tests were done.
Whatever they say, do not make a decision in the room. Thank them for the conversation if you can, leave, and let a few days pass. Talk it over with someone steady who has no stake in the outcome. Then decide what level of access this person gets going forward, and hold to it. The confrontation is not the end of anything. It is the beginning of a period of watching, and what they do over the following months will tell you far more than anything they said that day.
If You Decide to Stay Silent
Choosing not to confront is a legitimate decision and not a cowardly one, as long as it is a decision and not an avoidance. You still need to deal with what happened, so do it elsewhere. Write the letter you will never send and say everything in it. Tell the whole story to a pastor or a counselor or a friend who can hold it. Set the new boundaries quietly and firmly, and let the person discover them through your conduct rather than your announcement. Some of the strongest people I know never said a word to the one who betrayed them. They simply changed the locks and went on living.
Go Deeper
If the person you are thinking about confronting is a leader over you, and you are weighing how to speak to them without handing them the means to hurt you further, I wrote a book about how David handled exactly that with Saul. It covers what he said, what he refused to say, and where he chose to stand when he said it: The Spirit of Saul.
Commissioner William Epps is an author and security leadership consultant with a background in law enforcement, fire service, private security, and federal government. His books are published through E.P.P.S. Method Publishing Co.
Leave a Reply