Well, like you said, he's only human. And in order to write about his own family's story in a compelling and provocative way, one has to have some journalistic

Well, like you said, he's only human. And in order to write about his own family's story in a compelling and provocative way, one has to have some journalistic thesis to offer, not just to give a matter-of-fact descriptive account. That requires reaching some conclusions and finding some closure on one's own first. Don't underestimate the psychological escape velocity required to overcome the pull of that which has been presented to you as normal--and which you believed in some measure to be normal--for much of your life, notwithstanding occasional misgivings and questions. That pull can persist well into middle age, and long after you've realised the problem intellectually. And of course, there are practical questions to consider, such as how such a revelation might tank one's career or credibility as a journalist. That might seem unprincipled, but remember that any moral position is diluted by one's own ongoing deliberations. Finally, writing about people who are still alive and who may be impacted by your story is an often overlooked source of sensitivity. Imagine how this story might have impacted Alex Tizon's own mother if published while she were still alive.