By Kara Rubinstein DeyerinUsually, when we think about people opening a Pandora’s box by taking a direct-to-consumer DNA test, we’re thinking about NPEs (not parent expected)—people who learn through such a test that their parent(s) is not genetically related to them. But now donor-conceived (DC) people are wondering if when they test they’re opening a different sort of Pandora’s box.

The decision in a legal case called Teuscher vs NW Cryobank in January 2020 caused some members of the DC community to pause before spitting into that little vial. If you’re considering a test for your DC child (under the age of 18), it’s important for you to know the ruling should not affect your decision.

First, let’s talk about terms. NPE is used here to broadly to include anyone who learns their parent(s) is not their genetic parent(s). This can be due to donor-conception, adoption, a tryst, or an assault. The term DC is used here because it’s the most widely used, even though the term “donor” conceived is very problematic. Most DC people were not conceived by a donation. Assisted reproduction is an industry. People were paid for their sperm or eggs. A better term hasn’t emerged yet. “Donor” disguises the complex issues that arise from creating a human in this fashion. Maybe “dealer conceived” is better if we try to stick with the DC initials. But I digress.

A short overview of the facts of the Teuscher case: Danielle Teuscher gave birth to a daughter after conceiving with the use of sperm (Donor #2744) purchased from NW Cryobank. She specifically requested an open ID donor so her child at 18 years old could know who her genetic father was. When her daughter was four, Teuscher purchased a direct-to-consumer DNA test with 23andMe to learn about her daughter’s genetic health factors as well as her ethnicity. While men who sell their sperm to fertility clinics are asked questions regarding their genetics (health and ethnicity), there are plenty of examples of misinformation or omission of information. In today’s legal climate, there are no consequences for such actions. As a mother, Teuscher should be allowed to have access to all of her daughter’s medical information to make informed decisions about her daughter’s health.

When the results arrived, her daughter matched with a close relative, likely a grandmother, who indicated she was open to contact by her matches. When Teuscher reached out to the possible grandmother, the match responded that she was unaware of Teuscher’s daughter’s existence and requested no further contact. Teuscher did not contact the grandmother again.

Shortly thereafter, as reported here previously, Teuscher received a “cease-and-desist” letter from NW Cryobank. The company demanded she stop reaching out to the donor and his family, as this was in violation of her contract. To add insult to injury, it also informed her she would no longer have access to its sibling registry and the other vials of sperm she’d purchased for future use. NW Cryobank seized Teuscher’s stored sperm because it believed she had violated the terms of the contract by connecting with Donor #2744’s family and, therefore, the remaining terms of the contract were void. Teuscher sued NW Cryobank to ensure Donor #2744 remained classified as an Open ID, since that was the term under which she purchased that specific sperm. She also wanted to regain access to the stored sperm, to Donor’s #2744 medical updates, and to the sibling registry. This case was brought in Spokane, Washington in Federal Court because that’s where NW Cryobank is physically located.

On January 31, 2020, Judge Thomas Rice ruled on the case. He dismissed Teuscher’s claims for emotional distress and violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act for changing Donor #2744’s status after use of his sperm. However, the judge did not rule on claims for violations of the contract due to the seizure of the sperm Teuscher purchased for future use as well as all claims for wrongdoings against her daughter. This leaves the case open for Teuscher to argue for her daughter’s rights under the Consumer Protection Act and against what essentially is the seizure of her property. This case still is in the beginning stage and has many rulings to come. Once the judge has ruled on all claims made by Teuscher and her daughter, Teuscher may decide whether to appeal any of the rulings.

An appeal of the Consumer Protection Act ruling would benefit the DC community since NW Cryobank acted outside the scope of the contract by adding a penalty—the seizure of the stored sperm—that was not specifically outlined in the agreement. Leaving the verdict as is may embolden fertility clinics to add additional penalties for any similar breaches in the future.

Our legal system in the US is a common law system and, therefore, relies on court precedent in future decisions. When a person brings an action for breach of contract because one side added a penalty that was not enumerated in the contract, the judge will rely on previous judicial rulings with similar facts. Each side will cite prior cases to bolster its argument on why it should win. Both sides will also try and differentiate their cases from prior cases where the ruling does not support their arguments.

While there are many ways to differentiate this verdict, going to court is expensive. If Teuscher appeals her case and wins, this would let fertility clinics know they must remain strictly within the terms of the contract. In addition, NW Cryobank changed the donor’s designation after the contract was signed. If a seller in any other type of business acted in such a manner, it would be considered an unfair business practice.

So why did the judge’s ruling lead people to wonder whether DC children younger than 18 could still legally take a direct-to-consumer DNA test? Many are afraid of repercussions from the fertility clinic if they purchase tests for their DC children. The heart of the ruling is the judge’s discussion of whether Teuscher’s contract was unconscionable. A contract is unconscionable if it is so one-sided that one party has no real bargaining power or if some part of the contract is so unjust that it shocks the sensibilities of the court and society. Right to Know believes a contract such as that offered Teuscher is unconscionable.

Here’s what the judge had to say.

First, consider the bargaining power side of the discussion. The judge indicated that while Teuscher may have lacked bargaining power, the contract was simple, she had time to review it, she didn’t have to purchase the sperm, and she could purchase sperm elsewhere. Because she had a “meaningful” choice, could have consulted an attorney, and chose to enter into the contract, the judge found the contract was not unconscionable due to one-sided bargaining power. His discussion of the issues shows how little he understands infertility and the fertility industry. This could be pointed out in future cases to differentiate his ruling.

Those who are unable to conceive but who desire to have children may go to great lengths and spend thousands of dollars to find a way to have a child. Teuscher didn’t have a choice about whether to use fertility services because she wanted to have a child and was unable to do so without such services. Most, if not all, fertility contracts utilize the same language, restrictions, and penalties in their contracts. If Teuscher indeed had purchased her sperm from another fertility clinic, the contract likely would have been the same. This means consumers/buyers have no real choice when deciding to use the services of a fertility clinic. We must educate our lawmakers so they have a meaningful understanding of these issues.

If any part of Teuscher’s contract is so unfair that we as a society would say it goes against the public good, it would be considered unconscionable and, therefore, void. We are making humans here. A person has the right to know their genetic identity and history. In the world of adoption, over the years we’ve come to understand it’s in the best interest of children to know they are adopted as well know their genetic identities. Why should this be any different for DC children? The judge does not understand the psychological ramifications of not knowing where you come from.

The judge states, “The promise to honor the donor’s privacy interests is clearly reasonable given the contact.” But is it? Anyone who’s taken a direct-to-consumer DNA test knows you can figure out who matches are with little effort because even if your father hasn’t done a DNA test, it’s likely his uncle’s cousin has. With this information, you can determine your own matches. The court obviously does not understand this shift. And neither do fertility clinics. For the health and well-being of the child, we must move toward “open” use of sperm and eggs, because it is no longer possible to remain anonymous—that cat’s out of the bag.

The ruling states a DC child can discover genetically relevant medical information without seeking ancestry or other information that would destroy anonymity. Clearly, the judge does not understand how these tests work. You cannot separate medical and ancestral information. What is ancestral information? Teuscher’s daughter’s ethnicity? Clearly she should be entitled to this information. It’s likely the judge meant knowing who her relatives are when he referred to “ancestral information.” If a fertility clinic tries to rely on Judge Rice’s opinion here, opposing counsel should be able to easily differentiate the new case from Teuscher’s, since the judge’s language and use of terminology is not clear.

The judge’s ruling finds that Teuscher should not have reached out to the grandmother match since she agreed to not contact Donor #2744 directly or indirectly, but she had every right to the genetic information available. This means if you have a DC child, you can use a direct-to-consumer DNA test for your child. However, you cannot reach out to their relative matches. Remember, it’s only the parent(s) who are parties to fertility contracts, not the children. When a child is younger than 18, the parent is legally responsible for the child’s actions. When DC children become 18, they can reach out to any matches.

If we think Teuscher should have the right to reach out to her daughter’s relatives, then we need to change the laws to reflect this. At this time, the fertility industry remains relatively unregulated. There are no consequences for donor or fertility clinic fraud, which leaves DC children and their parents—as well as anyone seeking services from a fertility clinic—vulnerable. If someone lies about the color of a car they are selling, it’s not that big a deal. But if a seller lies about a medical problem and then sells his sperm and creates a child who develops a medical issue, that is a big deal. Parents using fertility services must have access to accurate information and all of the information our technologically advanced society can provide regarding donors and assurances they are receiving the agreed-upon goods.

Let’s not forget what we are talking about—the creation of human beings. We must do better as a society. We must work to change our laws to ensure the DC community has access to all relevant information and that there are consequences for failures to disclose, for providing false information, and for improper handling of specimens.

So, go ahead and open a Pandora’s box. See if you should be wearing lederhosen or a dashiki and find out what those health reports have to say.By Kara Rubinstein Deyerin, co-founder of Right To Know, a nonprofit organization that educates the public and professionals on the complexities of the intersection of genetic information, identity, and family dynamics. It advocates for people whose genetic parent is not their supportive parent—not the person who raised them or their legal parent.

Tell us little about yourself apart from your adoption journey and your podcast/genetic genealogy work?

I am a wife and mother of two. I’m currently on my fifth career. I made my living as an actress/singer for most of my life. That slowed down in my forties, so, needing a creative outlet, I went to beauty school and got a cosmetology license. I’d always been a genealogy hobbyist, but the advent of direct-to-consumer DNA testing changed my world and heralded a whole new skill set.

And the impossible question: Can you summarize your own adoption journey? 

I always knew I was adopted and was always implicitly aware of the general mismatch between me and my adoptive family. To be clear, that doesn’t mean I didn’t love and appreciate them. It means I spent my life feeling like I was “other” than those around me, and it was emphasized by the general consensus that I should try harder to blend in and not be my own person. I found my biological mother in my early twenties and it was quite uneventful and stress free. My parents were supportive of this effort and even reached out to my biological mother in solidarity.

Years later, after having my own children, I realized I needed to complete my search and began an arduous and often shocking journey into identifying my paternal family. It became an obsession. As has always been my way, if those around me told me that something was impossible, I leaned in to prove otherwise. Being hypervigilant is a common thread among adoptees and it has pretty much dominated my motivations in life. (For the full story, please listen to the first 20 or so episodes of my podcast “CutOff Genes.” Caveat: Genetic genealogy is relatively new and always evolving, and the testing sites update their platforms regularly. That said, some of the earlier episodes may contain content that’s no longer relevant.)

Can you describe your services as a genetic genealogist?

I work mostly with adoptees, donor-conceived individuals, and NPEs (not parent expected). They must take a DNA test first, and I usually insist on Ancestry.com because of the size of its database and the superior tree building and research capabilities. If/when I identify who they are looking for, I will usually ask them to write a letter to said family member that I then send. I almost always ask the client to write a letter briefly summarizing their life and their reason for reaching out.

Because of my personal experience I feel that I add an extra level of insight and understanding for all parties involved in the adoption triad.

How did your own experience influence your desire to help people find their families?

My experience taught me that the treatment of adoptees is (mostly) cruel, archaic, and exclusive. My desire is to help as many people as I can and fight for equality for all humans.

When you became interested, how did you go about training yourself to be able to use DNA to find families?

I learned in the trenches, if you will. In my own case, circumstances arose that established that the only way I was going to find my own truth was through DNA. There were so many resources online, as well as search angels willing to help and talk me through it. By the time I had my answer, I had a solid foundation in the technique. From there I spent a couple of years as a search angel, volunteering my time to find answers for other adoptees. Interestingly, my first few cases were for distant DNA cousins to me. In every case, I was able to solve the mystery, sometimes confirming how they are connected to me.  About a year and a half ago, I reached out to a Los Angeles-based private investigator, Jay Rosenzweig, whose company Birthparentfinder.com specializes in finding birth family. He’d used DNA, but not to the full extent and with the capabilities I have. He brought me on and I was soon able to prove that genetic genealogy was vital to the success of a search company. I’ve solved more than 70 cases for that company as well as more than 100 independently in the four years since starting this work.

To what extent, if any, do you advise or counsel clients or potential clients about the process, perhaps to manage expectations or prepare them for any emotional repercussions?

This is so important to me. As I said before, I think my insight is what sets me apart from a lot of other searchers. My experience has taught me to reserve judgment for biological families who have a tendency toward rejection. It’s important to remember that trauma was involved for the parent in addition to the trauma that’s inherent in being an adoptee. Much of the time, biological mothers experienced something that they thought must be unique to them. I often counsel by recommending reading material (such as The Girls Who Went Away) to begin the healing and help them understand they don’t need to feel the shame that was instilled in them so many years ago.

I also counsel my clients to expect the worst but hope for the best. Every case is its own entity. Often, time is needed for individuals to process this revelation—weeks, months, or years. It’s not for me to force reunion or “out” anyone. At the same time, I believe that the other children of biological parents (if adults) are not off limits as a last resort. They deserve to know that they have unknown family as well.

What are some of the most common issues clients voice and how do you help them?

I often hear “I just want them to love me.” That’s not a healthy attitude, though understandable. It’s important to realize that it’s out of the ordinary for a stranger to love another stranger simply because there’s a genetic connection. Love is certainly something that can develop, but should never be expected. Clients need to establish exactly what their expectations are and keep them low. Anything beyond that is a bonus. For me, the most important thing is for everyone to know their origins and gain knowledge of why they exist.

Do you advise them about how to make contact? What strategies do you recommend?

My PI boss has a different strategy than I do. He believes that no adoptee should reach out personally without an intermediary. He also tends to cold call people. He’s very successful at this technique, but I’m generally not comfortable doing it myself. If that’s what the client wants, I usually have Jay do it. The first time I was hung up on by a biological mother, I really took it personally and it took the wind out of my sails. I realized that sometimes you only get one chance to reach out, and if it doesn’t go well the door may be closed for good. I recommend snail mail (especially when reaching out to older biological family). As I said before, I ask clients to write a heartfelt letter introducing themselves, providing some info about their lives and what their goals are in this endeavor. It’s important that they express that they are no threat to any family and are willing to allow the contact to call the shots. Including a photo is often a good idea as it puts a face to this human that you are related to. I usually write a cover letter introducing myself and giving a brief explanation of how I arrived at my conclusion. I always offer to elaborate by phone if further explanation is required.

Under what circumstances do you act as an intermediary? 

If that is what the client requires, I will always do so. It’s part of the service. Sometimes people (on both sides) are not comfortable with a stranger being involved. I always present arguments for both sides and let the client determine what is best. Sometimes I learn facts about the biological family that inform me as to what may be the best way to proceed. Incidentally, that earlier case where the mother hung up on me was salvaged. I called her back immediately and left a voice mail telling her that her daughter had just wanted to thank her. She called back the next day and apologized. I acted as an intermediary for several months in that case. That particular mother was terrified of the rest of her family finding out, and her husband did not want their adult kids to know. Yes, I feel that that is an outrageous expectation for any man to put on his wife, but I digress. Anyway, a few months later, the mother was still sending messages through me and I had to tell her that I simply couldn’t work for them for the rest of my life. I explained to her that her behavior was probably making her daughter experience a second rejection, and the daughter was well aware of how to contact her directly if she so desired.  She understood and they began talking directly.

In cases in which you’re not able to locate birthparent, are there similar challenges that block success? Are there issues other than a lack of close matches?

Yes!  The biggest challenge—and the most difficult to explain to clients when I’m at a roadblock—is that if there is pedigree collapse, endogamy, or simply an NPE within a family, my job becomes exponentially more difficult. I take cases based upon the level of the matches, but it’s not uncommon to find out that those higher matches are also adopted or have a misattributed parentage event in their family that they themselves were not aware of. I can usually build a tree based on a match tree with just a couple of names in it, but if I build a substantial tree by using traditional genealogy methods and I am unable to connect that tree to any of the other matches, that match is no longer helpful.

Are most clients for whom you’ve found family ultimately glad they searched or are there some who have regrets? 

As far as I know, no one has had regrets. I think this has to do with managing your expectations. Most people realize that just knowing the facts makes it worthwhile. I know, for me, I feel more connected to the earth as a result of knowing.

Do clients follow up with you—that is, do they tell you about their reunions?

Yes! Some of them have been interviewed on my podcast.

Do you work independently in addition to with an agency? 

I work independently if that’s how someone has reached out to me. I actually prefer to work with the agency because I don’t enjoy the sales aspect of a business. But if someone is a listener or a reader and they reach out directly I can work directly with them.

What advice do you have for people who are unable to avail themselves of professional services? What tools or resources might they find most helpful? 

There are several Facebook groups (DNA Detectives, Search Squad) that have members who are search angels. That’s where I learned everything I know now. Blaine Bettinger has some great books and, of course, my podcast is a great, if I do say so myself, especially for newbies.

What mistakes, if any, do people often make when searching for family on their own?

In my opinion, the biggest mistake (and I made it myself) is to lead with the fact that you are adopted, NPE, or donor conceived. This often sends up red flags for people who don’t want to throw a relative under the bus, even if they have no idea how they are related to you. Also, asking matches if they know someone who gave up a baby is rarely effective. These are usually deep secrets within families, and anyone beyond a parent or sibling would likely not be privy to such information. I think the best approach is to mention that you’re trying to understand your DNA and build your family tree. Asking them to share the names of all four of their grandparents and their birth dates and locations is the most effective way to build a tree for them.

When and why did you decide to start the “Cutoff Genes” podcast?

Oh boy. Here we go. Four years ago there was an event within my adoptive family that was traumatic and resulted in even more trauma for me and my immediate family. This event brought to the forefront the narrative of “the ungrateful adoptee” and how that lie can be used to manipulate a situation to benefit those who use it against an adoptee. For legal reasons I can’t really go into any more detail. Suffice it to say that I was traumatized to a level that some days I didn’t think I would be able to go on. I knew I had to do something to take me out of my thoughts and provide a service for others like me. A podcast was the most obvious choice for me. I had wanted to do it for a while, but the thought of taking on something so time consuming was overwhelming, and I have terrible attention deficit disorder. Anyway, when all of this was eating at my life, I realized that I had nothing to lose by putting something out there, at the same time using my background as a performer to satiate my creativity and feel like something positive could come from the trauma. I connected with my old friend Richard Castle and, originally, my friend Renee Colvert, who has her own successful podcast (“Can I Pet Your Dog?”). The result was this thing that people come for the info, but stay for the relationships and rapport. We’ve just released our 102^nd episode.

What do you love most about doing the podcast?

I love having a gab fest with Richard (my producer and co-host). Rich is a musician and songwriter, so he gets to be the voice of the listener. He asks me questions that probably a lot of the listeners are thinking as well. Also, I adore our listeners!  We have a Facebook group that’s very active and lots of friendships have formed there. We very much have a conversation with our listeners, and they often provide content and insight for the show.

What’s surprised you as you’ve done these shows? 

Rich and I tend to go off on tangents. Sometimes it’s a classic television or musical theater riff—we met doing a production of “My Fair Lady” almost 35 years ago—and other times we get into a “pun-fest.” We crack ourselves up and, what was surprising to us both, was that our listeners seem to love that part of the show as well. This is somewhat serious subject matter, and we often talk about unimaginable pain. We do our best to balance the mood. I’m very much a fan of alternative comedy and I wanted to model the feel of “CutOff Genes” on of some of my favorite comedy podcasts. I always say “I’ll have to laugh or I’ll cry.”

What kind of feedback do you get? 

All kinds!  When I first started the podcast, I was clear that I am not a scientist and it’s entirely possible that I may misspeak. I sometimes cringe when people describe me as an expert, because there are people within the science community and the science behind DNA that probably take exception to that. The fact is, I am not a scientist, but I’m proud to say I am very good at what I do. I always encourage listeners to reach out with corrections or clarifications, and they do not disappoint!

Follow the podcast on Twitter @cutoffgenespod, and join its private Facebook group.

By B.K. JacksonIf keeping a secret—or being a secret—feels detrimental to your physical or mental health, it’s not your imagination. The expression “toxic secrets” is neither hyperbole nor a figure of speech. Researchers increasingly are learning that secrets place a profound burden on mental and physical health.

It appears it’s neither the secret itself nor the act of concealing it in social situations that contributes to the burden, but rather it’s the psychic energy secrecy requires. It’s a pain that plays out in private. Researchers at Columbia University who have been studying the effect of secrets found that the degree to which secrets affect well-being is related to the frequency with which the mind wanders to them, suggesting that it’s the ruminating about secrets that’s damaging. This was true regardless of the significance or importance of the secret. Any secret that’s preoccupying—frequently turned over and over in the mind—researchers discovered, diminishes wellbeing. In other words, it’s not keeping secrets that hurts, according to Michael Slepian, PHD, lead researcher of the Columbia studies, “it’s having them.”

And what most causes people to obsess about their secrets? In a study called “Shame, Guilt, and Secrets on the Mind,” published in the journal Emotion, Slepian* and his colleagues surveyed 1,000 participants about feelings of shame and guilt associated with their secrets. They also asked survey respondents how often they thought about and concealed their secrets each day in the prior month. Perhaps surprisingly, study participants spent less time concealing than they did dwelling on their secrets, and it was shame rather than guilt that caused the greatest amount of daydreaming about secrets.

When it comes to family secrets brought to light by DNA testing, there may be shame on both sides of the equation—on the secret keeper and the secret discoverer. And the secret discoverer often is pressed to become a secret keeper. NPEs who have uncovered family secrets through DNA tests frequently feel consumed and shamed by those secrets, making them particularly vulnerable to the ill-effects of secrecy. Many of us have been asked, or feel obligated, to keep secrets surrounding our conception. In most cases, those who ask us to keep secrets do so out of shame about actions they took many years ago and fear that exposure of those actions will deepen their shame and bring it into the light. And those who feel obligated not to expose another’s shame often have been made to feel shame themselves. Further, feelings of worthlessness, smallness, and powerlessness and a history of a traumatic experience, say researchers, make people more likely to feel shame. It’s a perfect storm for NPEs, pointing to the need to address the harm that may be associated with secrecy.

“It hurts to keep secrets,” Slepian writes in Scientific American. “Secrecy is associated with lower-well-being, worse heath, and less satisfying relationships. Research has linked secrecy to increased anxiety, depression, symptoms of poor health, and even the more rapid progression of disease,” he continues. In addition, attention to one’s secret can cause diminished attention where it’s needed, such as on one’s work tasks, resulting in reduced efficiency and performance. And a study by Ahmet Uysal and Qian Lu found that self-concealment is associated with chronic and acute pain.

It’s not surprising, Slepian concludes, that it’s exhausting to maintain secrecy. He and his colleagues looked at the way in which secrets are experienced as physical burdens and how that affect perception of physical tasks. They found that people preoccupied with secrets feel as if they’re being weighed down. They perceive hills to be higher and distances to be longer than they are. In another study, his team looked at the link between secrets and fatigue. “Thinking of one’s secrecy serves as a reminder that the secret conflicts with one’s social goals, highlights one’s social isolation with regard to the secret, and results in an unpleasant subjective experience of fatigue,” they concluded. “Thus, secrecy—the commitment to conceal information from others—can be fatiguing even during moments when one is not engaging in active concealment.” Much of that fatigue, they found, was linked with social isolation.

And ruminating about secrets, Slepian adds, providers a constant reminder of one’s complicity in secrecy, causing the secret holder to feel disingenuous, inauthentic, and socially isolated.

It’s probably safe to say there’s a cost both to keeping and revealing secrets. When pondering whether to keep a secret concerning your origins, a strong argument is that it’s your story to tell. Keeping it to yourself not only prevents you from feeling authentically yourself, but also may diminish your self-esteem. Living inauthentically is associated with reduced life satisfaction. A second compelling argument is that not telling may be damaging to your health. Relieving yourself of the burden of the secret is likely to cause you to ruminate on it less, thus relieving the strain.

If you’re weighing whether to reveal a secret or are debating with yourself about whether you’re entitled to reveal it, it’s important to consider the effect it’s having on your physical and emotional health. But while sharing one’s secrets may be a boon to mental and physical well-being, it’s also necessary to be mindful of, and work to mitigate, the potential damage revelation of secrets can cause. It requires planning and sensitivity to avoid rupturing relationships—a consequence that can have still further repercussions to your mental and physical health—and you might benefit from the help of a counselor before broadly revealing your secret.

In a future article, we’ll look at experts’ advice about deciding when and how to reveal secrets and strategies for reducing harm. In the meantime, however, consider that even disclosing to one trusted individual may relieve you of the burden of your secret, according to Slepian’s research. “Confiding a secret,” he explained in Scientific American, “can feel cathartic and relieving. But mere catharsis is not enough. When confiding a secret, what is actually helpful is the conversation that follows. People report that when sharing a secret with another person, they often receive emotional support, useful guidance, and helpful advice.” It just takes that one conversation, he insists, to ease your mind. Consider first the consequences of sharing to even one person, and if you do share, be sure it’s to someone you believe will be discreet, understanding, and supportive.

Writing on MentalHelp.net, Allan Schwartz, PhD, LCSW, says, “I’ve always maintained that there are few secrets that are so dangerous that they cannot stand being brought out into the open, where they suddenly lose the evil and dark air that once surrounded them.”

*Learn more about research by Slepian and his colleagues at www.keepingsecrets.org. Take a brief survey in order to access the research.

Read more about secrets here.