Secret Shame—Male Infertility and Donor Conception in the Wake of Retrospective Legislative Change

Historically, sperm donation was shrouded in secrecy to protect the normative family and the perceived vulnerability of infertile men. However, openness about donor conception is increasingly encouraged, in acknowledging that donor-conceived people may benefit from having access to information about their biogenetic origins. Since 2017 in the state of Victoria, Australia, donor-conceived people have been able to access previously anonymous donor records. Drawing on interviews with 17 donor-conceived adults who have come to know their donor through the new laws, this article explores the impact of finding out about the donor on relationships with mothers and fathers, and points to the persistent effects of stigma and shame about donor conception within families. Most of the donor-conceived participants were told about their donor conception in early adulthood. The age range for time of disclosure was mid-teens to early 40s. Most reported that their fathers did not want them to know. In some cases, mothers had disclosed, but sworn them to secrecy. Sensitivity to fathers’ feelings fostered a desire among participants to maintain secrecy about his infertility, especially in relation to wider family and friendship networks. Our findings revealed that secrecy about men’s infertility is heavily reliant on women’s emotional labor to protect ageing infertile fathers’ sense of manhood. Coupled with fathers’ overt resistance to openness, intergenerational secret keeping is perpetuated in families. Laws supporting openness potentially exacerbate the historical stigma associated with male factor infertility in a culture that continues to conflate virility, fertility, and masculinity.

The Morality of a Married Double Life

This chapter focuses on the diversity of people living life-changing doubt and their still-religious spouses. It highlights the distinctive experiences and implications for men and women in double life marriages. It talks about double lifers that elaborated and navigated a changing morality influenced by liberal values, often in conflict with the ultra-Orthodox morality of their still-religious spouse and children. The chapter looks into the tension between revelation and secret keeping for people living double lives that meant choosing between self-fulfilment and comfortable familiarity, as well as between individual truth and protection of their family. It also reviews how double lifers secretly began violating the religious laws and obligations under the very noses of their still-religious spouses all the while appearing as ultra-Orthodox men and women to friends, family, and their communities.

To Whom Do We Confide Our Secrets?

Although prior work has examined secret keeping, no prior work has examined who gets told secrets. Five studies find compassion and assertiveness predict having secrets confided in oneself (as determined by both self- and peer reports), whereas enthusiasm and politeness were associated with having fewer secrets confided. These results bolster suggestions that interpersonal aspects of personality (which can fit a circumplex structure) are driven by distinct causal forces. While both related to agreeableness, compassion (empathy and desire to help) predicts being confided in more, whereas politeness (concern with social norms and social rules) predicts being confided in less. Likewise, while both related to extraversion, assertiveness (having the agency and drive to help) predicts being confided in more, whereas enthusiasm (positive sociality) predicts being confided in less.

Associations Between Secret-Keeping and Quality of Life in Older Adults

This study examined the effects of secrecy on quality of life in a sample consisting of older adults (>50 years; N = 301). Three key components of secrecy were examined with the Tilburg Secrecy Scale-25 (TSS25; possession of a secret, self-concealment, and cognitive preoccupation). The TSS25 distinguishes between the tendency to conceal personal information (self-concealment) and the tendency to worry or ruminate about the secret (cognitive preoccupation), thereby enabling investigation of the effects of secrecy on quality of life in detail. Confirming previous findings in younger samples, we found a positive effect of possession of a secret on quality of life, after controlling for both TSS25’s self-concealment and cognitive preoccupation. This suggests that keeping secrets may have a positive association with quality of life in older adults as well, as long as they do not have the tendency to self-conceal and are not cognitively preoccupied with their secret.

Wanna Hear a Secret?: The Burden of Secret Concealment in Personal Relationships From the Confidant's Perspective

The current study assessed the burden associated with secret-keeping from confidants’ perspective. We proposed a cognition-affect-relationship model to explicate the interrelations between intra- and interpersonal consequences of confidants’ secret concealment. A total of 231 participants (Mage = 32.6 years) completed a survey on their experiences in keeping secrets for a close relational partner. A path model was conducted to test all hypotheses simultaneously. Results indicated that secret importance, valence, and negative face threat served as indicators of cognitive burden regarding secret-keeping. As predicted, cognitive burden was positively associated with negative affect. In addition, negative affect mediated the association between cognitive burden and relationship satisfaction, whereas secret characteristics were directly related to relational distancing. Overall, examining confidant burden provides insights on how secret-keeping might affect individuals and their relationships.