Andrey Nailor, M.D.·Published 4 October 2008·15 min read
Key points
Let's contrast the family described above with one that is dealing with addiction.
The addict's behavior is often embarrassing and leads to embarrassing consequences, such as encounters with the law, lost jobs, or social ostracism.
Identifying the addiction as the cause of a particular difficulty means admitting that the addiction is present.
Blaming is also a symptom of the ban that is placed on strong negative emotions.
Let's contrast the family described above with one that is dealing with addiction. This family is also task oriented, but the primary task is different - it is no longer the promotion of the emotional growth and well-being of its members but has become one of dealing with the addiction and coping with the consequences of the addict's behavior.
To this end, a number of mechanisms develop. While the addict is trying to manipulate the family so that he or she can continue to use alcohol or drugs, the family is trying to manipulate the addict into stopping. The addiction has taken center stage, but the other tasks, such as raising children, making a living, and meeting physical and emotional needs, are still important and must be tended to somehow. The family develops a variety of ways of completing necessary tasks while being taxed by the addiction. But because addiction stresses the family's emotional resources, members often compromise by putting aside what appear to be less important needs in order to meet more pressing ones. These compromises lead to what addiction professionals call dysfunctional patterns of interaction.
The term "dysfunctional," though, should be be seen in the proper perspective. The ways in which various families cope with addiction are so similar that one wonders whether this is a "normal" way for a group or a family to adapt to the presence of an addiction. The dysfunctional nature of the patterns and coping skills tends to become more apparent when individuals raised in addicted families attempt to function in other settings, such as at school, on the job, or in relationships outside the immediate family. It is in those situations that the impairment in emotional and interpersonal functioning becomes most apparent.
The specific manifestations of the dysfunction in the addicted family depend on the circumstances even if the overall patterns are similar. Those circumstances might include the position of the addict in the family (spouse, parent, child), whether or not there is abusive behavior, how vital the addict's role is in the overall functioning of the family, and outside resources the family can use in adapting to the addiction.
In some families the dysfunction is subtle and in others it is quite blatant.
Nonetheless, there are some characteristics that are common to most addicted families. These include denial of the addiction and an emphasis on the appearance of normality to outsiders; a tendency to assign and displace blame; an unspoken ban on the expression of strong negative emotions, especially anger; confiict about how to deal with the addict's behavior, which may split the family into factions; problems with boundaries in relationships and between generations; difficulties with trust and intimacy; and the adoption of characteristic roles that reflect the pathological demands imposed by the addiction.
Denial of the Situation
Written and revised by
Andrey Nailor, M.D.
Our doctors write and review articles for accuracy and keep them up to date.
health.am provides general information, not medical advice. Always consult a qualified health professional about your own health.
The addict's behavior is often embarrassing and leads to embarrassing consequences, such as encounters with the law, lost jobs, or social ostracism. As we have seen, the addict develops a system of denial that allows for a disconnection between the memory of a negative consequence and the associated emotion. The family does much the same thing.
For all the turmoil caused by the family's frantic attempts to control the addiction, members also try their best to maintain appearances, to put their best foot forward. In the face of the addict's deteriorating behavior, families will go to great lengths to minimize and justify the situation and to present a positive image to the outside world. This is a family with a secret, and with a secret comes deception.
Facing the truth about the addiction is often just too painful. That would be the healthiest course of action in the long run, but it is not the one that many families take at first. What develops instead is an unspoken agreement that the truth about the addiction will not be discussed or revealed to outsiders. In some families this deception becomes so pervasive that family members themselves are unable to perceive that the addiction exists, and they proceed with life as though it is not present at all.
But one of the consequences of building a system of denial is that the family has to deal with the frequent crises that accompany addiction while ignoring a large chunk of reality - that of the addiction itself. If the alcoholic father loses his job, the family does not permit itself to recognize that it was because of the addiction to alcohol. It has to be someone else's fault. Enormous effort is sometimes expended on the wrong problem, while the family system continues to move toward disaster. It's not unlike what happened when the captain of the Titanic chose to ignore the icebergs. {pagebreak}
Blaming
Blaming is a symptom of the problem. Identifying the addiction as the cause of a particular difficulty means admitting that the addiction is present. But doing that risks revealing the secret that there is serious trouble in the family. So family members find others to blame when things go wrong. Parents blame the school system when their addicted teenager flunks out of school. The alcoholic blames the nagging spouse when a relapse occurs. One person in the divorce blames the other when the real reason that the marriage failed was addiction.
Parents send their addicted young adult child to psychiatrist after psychiatrist in an effort to cure the "chemical imbalance" that they believe has caused the addiction.
The "Don't Talk" Rule
Blaming is also a symptom of the ban that is placed on strong negative emotions. Addiction professionals refer to this as the "don't talk/don't feel" rule; it is another way in which the family adapts in an attempt to prevent the addiction from rocking the boat.
The "don't talk/don't feel" rule restricts what topics can be talked about and what emotions can be expressed. Eventually it restricts what emotions can be felt. It is not okay to openly discuss the father's escalating alcohol problem or the sister's drug problem. It is no longer permissible to be angry if something upsetting happens or sad if something bad happens or joyful if something great happens. All emotions are passed through a filter: if what you are feeling is consistent with the basic assumptions under which the family is operating, it is acceptable. Otherwise, you did not feel it.
{embed="ref/stat-menu-addiction3"}
The feeling and expression of anger are particularly distorted. In this type of family, it is not uncommon for hostile or angry behavior to be used mainly as a tool for manipulation rather than as the genuine expression of a feeling that could lead to a productive change in direction. Anger is also seen as dangerous because verbal or physical violence often occurs in addicted families. These families learn to walk on eggshells around the abusive person (who is often the addict, but not always). Family members may also be emotionally traumatized to the extent that even appropriate expressions of anger or conflict trigger anxiety and fear of upheaval or retaliation. Guilt-ridden addicts may wish to avoid any expression of conflict when they are not using the addictive substance.
If a relapse occurs, a belief may develop in the family that stress or discord has triggered the addict's behavior. Therefore it is more important to keep the peace than to express one's true feelings.
Many different reasons and usually years of experience reinforce the "don't talk/don't feel" rule. But the problem with suppressing strong negative emotions is that all other emotions are also suppressed. It's like trying to avoid seeing the color red - the only way to do so is to close your eyes and see no colors at all. Members of addicted families have a great deal of difficulty correctly identifying feeling states, and especially identifying the many subtle nuances of different feelings. Feelings and emotions begin to fall into two basic categories - okay and upset. Anger is often mistaken for anxiety or stress. Depression and sadness are experienced as irritability. This is a serious problem in the long run for all members of the family.
Our feelings and emotions help us navigate through relationships and situations. Like the sonar system in a submarine, we send out emotional signals, and we receive feedback which tells us in what direction to proceed. If the sensitivity of the system is damaged because of a "don't talk/don't feel" rule, then it won't be long before some type of interpersonal catastrophe occurs - a relationship on the rocks, a personality conflict at work, or other problems of coping.
Splits
As the addiction spirals out of control, the family attempts to regain equilibrium in any way possible. The addict is busy obtaining and using the addictive substance and recovering from the results. The family is busy with damage control and with trying to prevent the addict from continuing. As we have seen, loss of control over the use of the substance is part of the definition of addiction. So we can imagine that the family's efforts to control the addiction are likely to fail. Nonetheless, almost every family will try.
In the process of trying to control the addiction, two schools of thought will emerge in most families. Some people react to the threat of the family disintegrating, align with the addict's denial system, and then excuse, cover up, or attempt to compensate for the addiction. Others feel that the solution for both the addict and the family as a whole is to expel the addict from the family, cut off all resources, and force the addict to sink or swim. Of course, neither approach is likely to be successful in the long run, but the argument itself dissipates a good bit of tension in the family. It is an indirect but acceptable way of expressing negative feelings about the addict and his or her behavior.
On both sides, the basic assumption is the same - that it is possible, somehow, to find a way to control the addiction and fix the problem. People who have grown up in addicted families often respond to tension and conflict in outside situations by attempting to control others, and they may feel inappropriately responsible for the behaviors of others. Life in an addicted family is often unpredictable and chaotic, and this further reinforces the need that family members have to control others.{pagebreak}
Boundaries
When family members learn to deny reality, deflect blame, suppress emotions, and attempt to control the behavior of others, their relationships are profoundly affected. Healthy relationships have boundaries - a sense of where one's self ends and the other's begins. We can see, then, how boundaries become problematic for the addicted family. Blaming, for example, involves a blurring of personal responsibility.
The "don't talk/don't feel" rule is a boundary invasion. It is an external force that dictates your personal thoughts and feelings. What you feel and what you can say about it is no longer a private matter, but is subject to the control and censorship of others.
Boundaries also exist between generations. In the healthy family, there is a boundary between the parents as a couple and the children as a group. The parents discuss and experience some things that they do not share with the children and vice versa. These boundaries are one-directional. Certain things may be deliberately withheld from the children in order to protect them from stress and allow them to focus on their own growth and development. For example, while it is appropriate for a child's emotional needs to be brought to and met by the parents, it is not appropriate for the mother or father to come to the child with emotional needs, because that would burden the child, increase the child's anxiety level, and interfere with the child's development.
In the addicted family, the stress level is often so high that the children pick up on the parents' emotional distress and begin to feel responsible for fixing the family. It is not uncommon for at least one child, often the oldest, to assume the role of junior parent in order to relieve some of the pressure.
The parent-child roles may also be reversed. Children are exquisitely sensitive to emotional upset in the parents, and often a child will assume the role of emotional, or sometimes physical, caretaker for the addict or for another overburdened family member such as the addict's spouse. In both situations, the child's development is hampered. The child is forced to deny age-appropriate needs in the interest of the family's functioning and survival.
Trust and Intimacy
In this family where boundaries shift, roles are reversed, emotions are censored, and tension, chaos, and unpredictability are part of daily life, it is almost impossible for family members to develop a solid sense of trust. People often do not do what they say they will do. Situations change abruptly and without apparent reason. The emotional climate of the home is never predictable, and much depends upon whether or not the addict has used the addictive substance.
{embed="ref/stat-menu-addiction3"}
Since emotions are suppressed or denied, family members are unable to accurately tune into one another's needs. They cannot be trusted to respond consistently or in understanding and empathic ways. In short, relationships are experienced as basically treacherous and stressful. It is no wonder that a person from an addicted family has difficulty experiencing intimacy with others.
Roles
The power of addiction as a molding force in a family is illustrated by the observation made by many addiction professionals that certain stereotypical roles appear in the addicted family. The reason is that these roles are necessary in order for the family to continue on an even keel in the face of the addiction and the multitude of ways in which it distorts the way the family functions.
The chief role that is seen in most addicted families, including addicted couples, is that of the enabler. The enabler, often the spouse, gradually takes over the responsibilities that the addict is failing to assume. At the same time, there is an escalating effort to try to control the addict's behavior and return to the way life used to be, or to the way the enabler thinks it should be. But the enabler unwittingly allows the addiction to continue by protecting the addict from negative consequences. This is an entirely unintended result. The enabler's behavior is motivated by love for the addict and for the family and by a wish to help and to compensate for the addict's mistakes. But as the addiction progresses, as it inevitably will, the enabler gets caught in many impossible binds.
For example, the addict may be spending most of the weekly paycheck at the bar on the way home from work on Friday night. If the bills aren't paid, the lights and water eventually get turned off, and the family is evicted from the home. These negative consequences might motivate an addict to seek treatment. But while the addict is experiencing these negative consequences, the whole family is suffering as well. {pagebreak}
The enabler makes a logical choice and gets a job so that the bills will be paid despite the addict's behavior. This not only shields the addict from negative consequences but also protects the family as a whole.
The enabler may begin to resent the addict's irresponsibility, but, when anger is expressed directly, the addict's response is often to blame the enabler. "If you would get off my back I wouldn't need to drink" is an example. The more the enabler attempts to control the addict's behavior, the worse it gets, or so it seems. The addiction is actually going to progress with or without the enabler's help. But the enabler feels overly responsible, trapped, and increasingly angry, without the ability to express or sometimes even acknowledge that anger.
Roles that are frequently found among the children in an addicted family include the family hero (or banner carrier), the scapegoat, the lost child, and the mascot. Each of the roles serves to deflect and manage the high level of stress, tension, and anger that lies under the surface in addicted families.
The family hero, or banner carrier, is frequently the oldest child, and is a driven high achiever. This child, who often assumes the role of junior parent or caretaker, reassures the family, through public success, that things are still okay. The scapegoat, usually the second child, provides a ready target for blaming. Just as the family hero can do no wrong, the scapegoat can do no right. The lost child escapes the tension in the family by withdrawing into fantasy and will sometimes assume a caretaker role in order to merit attention. The mascot responds to the tension in the family by becoming the court jester but sacrifices the opportunity to be taken seriously and to be understood, especially when painful events take place.
{embed="ref/stat-menu-addiction3"}
These roles are consistently found in addicted families to a surprising degree, even across cultural and lifestyle lines. It is important to note, however, that a role often has little to do with the natural proclivities of the child playing it. The child responds to the stresses and forces within the addicted family system, and this shapes both behavior and self-concept. These children never learn to accurately identify emotional needs or develop a secure sense of self, and, as adults, are often highly sensitive to the emotional climate in a particular situation, but at the same time are unable to accurately sense inner emotions and needs. The concept of loving others and being loved is often understood at the level of meeting dependency needs rather than at the level of a true interest in the well-being of the other.
In other words, someone from this type of family will feel most secure in a relationship in which the other person has some kind of dependency need that allows for a sense of connectedness. When that dependency decreases, the relationship feels less secure, and anxiety levels go up. In a healthy relationship, on the other hand, increasing maturity and independence lead to a deepening of intimacy. From an emotional standpoint, people from addicted families are really marching to a different drummer. It's therefore not surprising that such people often end up marrying an addict or someone from an addicted family or a person with some type of emotional dependency.
In the mid-to-late 1980s, codependency was a popular topic in mental health circles. The concept of codependency arose from the study of the dynamics of the families of alcoholics and addicts, and contains the elements that we have discussed. Codependency is not a diagnosis in and of itself, but it is often found in the relational style of people who develop problems with depression and anxiety. It reflects a tendency to become emotionally invested in relationships with people who are not functioning independently, such as addicts. Although we generally think of the enabler as the one who is codependent, this style of relating is shared by all members of the addicted family, including the addict. In fact, it is not uncommon to see a reversal of roles once the addict enters recovery, with the addict now invested in the emotional dependency of the enabler.
With therapy, counseling, and time, family members can learn to become more sensitive to their own feelings and emotional needs. Once this occurs, it is possible for them to learn to tolerate more distance and emotional independence without undue anxiety and without needing to invade boundaries and attempt to exert control.
News
News
News
