discussion

with lowq l*el ofself6tc.nr hieh lcvcls ofdepesion &d uielv, extqne sial
ielation, dd $v€F sen* of guilt.
239
The fifth hrloth$is of ih. 31udy that tpccul.t€s a decline in mdilal
satisfetion 6 6 coneqBce of infqtilily hs b4n co!6med foi infenil. sffiple bul
nol for f€rtil. smple. The bypoihesh slaied ihst infenile @upl€s expres less narital
elisf&lion thm rhat of fenile .ouplca, Tbe sloogcat .mpincd eviden@ lbr
validation ofth€ ht?otlstu for inf.nil. smplc com.! Iibm the siSnificet difrdena
b€tren inJertil€ ed fcritc's scorc on th. I.dex of Mdilal Satisfdlion (rabk 42)
tlis $8g€ns tEt inf€dile.oopl* hlvc low.r kndency to bc etisfied vilh ftdiag€s
lha fe.!l€ @upl€s. Tn ddon l. for $h fsding is quite logic.l @sin€d Mlh the
findilgs of nudy mndud.d by Bt$ovich dd Toh.la in l99l to ne!s@
pst h^rciat efects of kl*nliry *rb Mly4d rh.r infcnilc p.@N Epon les
@ .nh6r, lowr l*ls of mditat .rd sxual elisfedon, ald loF FlfslaD
Dirte$ aN.d by infatility h.y inpair f.nility by les$ing ndital and
sual satisfactio& afieting adv&lt th! fcq@cy ot *xutl @nla.ts ud my
impat the quality of spem h th. mal6. (T!s.lM-C!fi$ er .1. 1999). Anoihe.
fnding in thjs Fgard is rclated to exul dilfEcdon. Scxual ethf@lion will be lowet
in inledile coupl$ thm ih &rlile couplcs, w6 sixth hypoth6h of $e siudy which
@ swponed Gabl.
43). The hypothF's w4 madc in @oid&ce sirh vd zyl, s
lDdings (19871) abour i.fedile couples who report ihat lh€n i.ability to conceive hs
sious negaive efiecis on th.ir liv6. pani.ulaly theit Fxual ed Milal relations
'nE d@llnce of th€ ht?oth*G nighl b..n buled to the f&1(a indisted
in chaFd squd slisfedon) thlt th. najoniy of @uplas rcponed @nflici, low