Dear Amy: I have been engaged for almost a year. My fiancé works out of town, and we travel back and forth to visit each other.
On my most recent visit, I found strange stuff in the house. All of my clothes were hidden in the house and the clothes on hangers were badly creased and looked like they had been stashed somewhere, then moved back into the closet.
The bed pillows were strongly scented of perfumed hair oil and I discovered strands from a woman's hair weave (definitely not mine) when I was sweeping the house.
When I confronted him about everything, he denied that anything was going on, but I don't have closure about it. I feel like I have been betrayed and lied to.
I have been thinking of inviting him to take a lie detector test so that I can have closure on this matter. Please let me know what I should do.
You imply that there is some uncertainty here that you think a polygraph could clear up (it wouldn't).
You don't need a polygraph to establish that your guy has been entertaining someone other than you at home.
You've found abundant physical evidence.
I suggest you take a break from this relationship while he figures out how to establish his innocence, innocent intentions and/or provide guarantees about his future behavior, without the use and expense of a lie detector. At the very least, let the polygraph be his idea. He can worry about closure, while you are living your life.
Dear Amy: I am writing with regard to "Conflicted," who wanted his wife to take a lie detector test so he could confirm whether she had been unfaithful to him. You addressed the consequences to the letter writer, his wife and their relationship. But this left the misimpression that any time someone doubts another person's word, the matter can be conclusively resolved by submitting to a polygraph test. It is not that simple.
I am a lawyer with a lot of experience representing individuals who have taken lie detector tests as part of the process of getting a security clearance. The polygraph cannot tell if someone is lying. It is just a machine that measures breathing, sweating and heart rate. The Supreme Court held that its results are not admissible in court.
There are many false positives and many false negatives.
— Elizabeth in D.C.
Dear Elizabeth: Thank you for clarifying.
Contact Amy Dickinson via email at email@example.com, follow her on Twitter @askingamy or "like" her on Facebook.