Formal Disclosure vs. Trickle Truths

 

The difference between a Formal Disclosure and a Trickle Truth Disclosure lies in how information is shared—specifically regarding sensitive or damaging truths, such as infidelity, addiction, or past misconduct.

🔹 Formal Disclosure

Definition: A Formal Disclosure is a structured, intentional, and complete revelation of previously hidden or harmful information—usually done in one session or process, often with professional guidance (e.g., therapist, attorney, polygraph examiner).

Key Features:

Used In:

🔹 Trickle Truth Disclosure

Definition: A Trickle Truth Disclosure is when the person reveals the truth slowly over time, often only when confronted with evidence or pressure. It is usually unstructured and reluctant.

Key Features:

Common Triggers:

🔸 Example Comparison:

Scenario: A partner admits to infidelity.

💥 Why It Matters:

Why is a Trickle Truth Disclosure so damaging? 

A trickle truth disclosure—where someone reveals the truth slowly, in bits and pieces, often only when confronted—is particularly damaging because it erodes trust on multiple levels. Here’s why it hits so hard:

1. Repeated Betrayals

Each new “truth” feels like a fresh betrayal. The person who was hurt may begin to feel that the deception is ongoing, even if the discloser claims to be honest now.

2. Creates a Pattern of Dishonesty

When the truth is revealed in fragments, it suggests that the person is still hiding something. It becomes hard to tell whether the “full story” has ever truly been told.

3. Prolongs Pain and Uncertainty

Instead of processing one painful moment, the person on the receiving end is forced to relive the betrayal over and over again. The emotional rollercoaster becomes exhausting and destabilizing.

4. Undermines Rebuilding Efforts

In relationships where healing is possible, transparency is key. Trickle truth makes rebuilding trust almost impossible because it constantly shifts the foundation.

5. Feels Manipulative

It often seems like the person disclosing is only doing so to protect themselves—not out of remorse. This self-serving behavior intensifies feelings of disrespect and invalidation.

Disclosure and Divorce:

When divorce and disclosure intersect, it creates an especially fragile and emotionally complex situation. Both processes are deeply charged in their own right, and few people have the emotional bandwidth to navigate them simultaneously. The betrayed partner is often experiencing intense waves of anger, grief, and confusion while seeking truth and closure. Meanwhile, the partner who betrayed may be facing guilt, fear, shame, and sadness. In the midst of divorce, it is understandably difficult for either person to remain emotionally grounded enough for disclosure to be genuinely healing.

Legal issues can also complicate this process. Even in “no-fault” states, information shared in a disclosure could potentially be used in divorce proceedings. This possibility often leads to hesitation, omission, or distortion of details, which makes full and honest disclosure less likely. Unfortunately, partial or poorly timed disclosures can be profoundly damaging—reopening wounds and deepening mistrust for both the betrayed and the betraying partner. For someone already enduring the pain of separation, hearing incomplete or self-protective information can feel like a second betrayal.

Divorce also changes the emotional and psychological landscape in which disclosure occurs. A meaningful disclosure is not simply about recounting behaviors; it’s about demonstrating authentic accountability, recognizing the pain caused, and communicating empathy and understanding. However, reaching an emotional space where that level of honesty and compassion can be offered—and received—can be challenging during divorce.

In these cases, it is important to hold a compassionate and safe environment for the betrayed partner, allowing them to feel validated and supported while exploring what they hope a disclosure might provide now that the marriage is ending. Simultaneously, the partner who acted out can work on emotional regulation and readiness for genuine ownership. With careful support and timing, disclosure can serve as a step toward integrity and closure for both individuals.

That said, disclosures that occur during divorce carry significant risks. Fear of legal consequences or emotional overload may lead to partial, defensive, or distorted disclosures that inadvertently cause additional harm. For the betrayed partner, this can retraumatize rather than heal. For the betraying partner, the vulnerability necessary for full transparency may feel unsafe or impossible in the midst of legal and emotional turmoil.

As Bill Herring has observed, the betrayed partner deserves the truth, even during a divorce. In practice, however, post-divorce disclosures are rare. Disclosures have occurred during active divorces, but these required clear structure, mutual readiness, and legal guidance to ensure both parties understood the potential implications.

In some rare instances, once the legal and emotional intensity of divorce has settled, a post-divorce disclosure can provide clarity, meaning, and resolution rather than further harm. Timing, safety, and intention are crucial. When facilitated with professional care and a deep respect for both individuals’ emotional states, disclosure—whether during or after divorce—can still foster truth, validation, accountability, and a sense of closure.

Podcast Episodes: