The revelation that undercover police officers engaged in long-term intimate relationships has met with widespread outcry, triggering a public inquiry and substantial compensation payments from the Metropolitan Police. But whilst the involvement of state actors might make these cases especially egregious, such Systematically Deceptive Relationships, are far from the exclusive domain of ‘spy cops’. Historically, bigamy laws helped to deter Systematically Deceptive Relationships, with the aim of protecting women from the reputational harm of extramarital sex. While our changing social norms regarding cohabitation and divorce have decreased the chances of ending up in a bigamous relationship, they have simultaneously increased the chances of ending up in a Systematically Deceptive Relationships.

This talk defends a pluralist account of the wrongness of Systematically Deceptive Relationships, looking beyond the wrong of nonconsensual sex that often preoccupies existing discussions. I argue that when the harms of Systematically Deceptive Relationships pass a threshold, there is a (defensible) reason to criminalise their infliction. Helen then considers whether such legislation can avoid overcriminalisation of deception in intimate relationships.