ArticlePDF Available

Defining and Understanding Parentification: Implications for All Counselors

Authors:

Abstract

This article advances a balanced discussion of the extent to which varied outcomes are evidenced in adulthood after one has been parentified in childhood. Recommendations are provided that may help counselors avoid the potential overpathologizing of clients with a history of parentification. Suggestions for clinical practice are put forth for all counselors. Parentification is a ubiquitous phenomenon that most school, community, and family counselors as well as other human helpers face (Byng-Hall, 2002). That is, most counselors are likely to encounter both children and adults who have a history of parentification—a potential form of neglect (Boszormenyi-Nagy & Spark, 1973; Chase, 1999). What is parentification, and given its relationship with negative outcomes and behaviors, what can counselors do to avoid overpathologizing the client's signs, symptoms, and behaviors associated with parentification? This paper offers a review of what clinical practitioners and researchers have described in the literature. Subsequent to a brief review of the literature, suggestions regarding practice efforts directed toward clients who have experienced parentification are put forward.
Defining and Understanding Parentification:
Implications for All Counselors
Lisa M. Hooper
The University of Alabama
ABSTRACT
This article advances a balanced
discussion of the extent to which varied
outcomes are evidenced in adulthood
after one has been parentified in
childhood. Recommendations are
provided that may help counselors avoid
the potential overpathologizing of clients
with a history of parentification.
Suggestions for clinical practice are put
forth for all counselors.
Parentification is a ubiquitous
phenomenon that most school,
community, and family counselors as
well as other human helpers face (Byng-
Hall, 2002). That is, most counselors are
likely to encounter both children and
adults who have a history of
parentification—a potential form of
neglect (Boszormenyi-Nagy & Spark,
1973; Chase, 1999). What is
parentification, and given its relationship
with negative outcomes and behaviors,
what can counselors do to avoid
overpathologizing the client’s signs,
symptoms, and behaviors associated
with parentification? This paper offers a
review of what clinical practitioners and
researchers have described in the
literature. Subsequent to a brief review
of the literature, suggestions regarding
practice efforts directed toward clients
who have experienced parentification are
put forward.
Defining Parentification
Parentification is the distortion or lack
of boundaries between and among
family subsystems, such that children
take on roles and responsibilities usually
reserved for adults (Boszormenyi-Nagy
& Spark, 1973). That is, either explicitly
or implicitly, parents create an
environment that fosters caretaking
behaviors in their children that help
maintain homeostasis (i.e., balance) for
the family in general and the parent in
particular. Above and beyond
maintaining homeostasis for the family,
the responsibilities that are carried out
by the parentified child are traditionally
behaviors that provide the parent with
the specific emotional and instrumental
support that the parent likely did not
receive while he or she was growing up
(Boszormenyi-Nagy & Spark,1973;
Minuchin, Montalvo, Guerney, Rosman,
& Schumer, 1967). Thus, the child must
be emotionally available for the parent,
even though the parent is often
emotionally unavailable for the child,
which may engender a chronic state of
anxiety and distress in some emotionally
parentified children (Bowen, 1978;
Briere, 1992; Cicchetti, 2004). The
clinical literature has also reported that
the breakdown in the generational
hierarchy may rob the child of activities
that are developmentally appropriate; the
child instead participates in either
instrumental or emotional caregiving
behaviors directed toward parents,
siblings, or both that may go unrewarded
and unrecognized (Boszormenyi-Nagy
Defining and Understanding Parentification
& Spark,1973; Jurkovic, 1997; Kerig,
2005; Minuchin et al.,1967). Some
research and practitioners contend that to
fully understand the aftereffects of
parentification, the type of
parentification (i.e., emotional and
instrumental) experienced in the family
must be assessed (Jurkovic, 1997).
Emotional parentification is the
participation in the “socioemotional
needs of family members and the family
as a whole” (Jurkovic, Morrell, &
Thirkield, 1999, p. 94). Behaviors
described by Jurkovic and colleagues
include, “serving as a confidant,
companion, or mate-like figure,
mediating family conflict, and providing
nurturance and support” (p. 94).
Instrumental parentification is the
participation in the “physical
maintenance and sustenance of the
family” (Jurkovic et al., 1999, p. 94).
Behaviors described by Jurkovic and
colleagues include, grocery shopping,
cooking, housecleaning, and
performance of daily duties that involve
caring for parents and siblings” (p. 94).
Of significance to counselors and other
mental health practitioners, not all
children who are parentified will
experience negative aftereffects (Byng-
Hall, 2002; DiCaccavo, 2006; Earley &
Cushway, 2002; Tompkins, 2007). In
fact, approximately only one-fourth of
all children who experience neglect will
go on to experience negative aftereffects
(Alexander, 1992; Cicchetti & Toth,
1995; Golden, 1999; Toth & Cicchetti,
1996; West & Keller, 1991). The next
section takes a less myopic view of the
potential aftereffects of parentification
often reported in the literature. The
following section includes a brief review
of the research base of both negative and
positive outcomes associated with
parentification.
Understanding Parentification: The
Negative and Positive Effects of
Parentification
Established Negative Effects. Studies in
the last 30 years have established a
relationship between parentification and
later maladjustment. Researchers have
found linkages from early childhood
stress/trauma to child and parent factors
such as divorce (Wallerstein, 1985),
parental alcohol and drug use (Bekir,
McLellan, Childress, & Gariti, 1993),
disruption in attachment (Zeanah &
Zeanah, 1989), family discord, low
socioeconomic status (Boszormenyi-
Nagy & Spark, 1973; Minuchin et al.,
1967), depression, and attachment and
relational difficulties (Jones & Wells,
1996).
The effects of childhood parentification
can be long-lasting, multigenerational,
and deleterious, presenting over the
course of a lifetime (Chase, 1999;
Karpel, 1976; West & Keller, 1991). For
young adults, parentification can impede
“normal” development related to
relationship building, personality
formation, and other developmentally
critical processes (Burt, 1992; Goglia,
Jurkovic, Burt, & Burge-Callaway,
1992; Sessions & Jurkovic, 1986;
Wolkin, 1984). Valleau, Bergner, and
Horton (1995) found that children who
are parentified have significantly more
“caretaker characteristics” in adulthood
than do those children who are not
parentified. Similarly, Jones and Wells
(1996) found an association between
personality characteristics such as
“people pleasing” and adults who had
been parentified. Further, their study,
comprising 208 undergraduate students
The Alabama Counseling Association Journal, Volume 34, Number1, Spring 2008
35 Defining and Understanding Parentification
Defining and Understanding Parentification
from a large Midwestern university,
found that participants who were
destructively parentified as children
often relate to others in problematic,
overfunctioning, caretaking ways.
Domains like separating from the family
of origin, participating in age-
appropriate behaviors (Olson & Gariti,
1993), engaging in academic pursuits,
and developing self-esteem can also be
affected (Bekir et al., 1993; Chase,
Demming, & Wells, 1998). Other
aftereffects may include mental illness in
general, and depression, anxiety,
substance abuse, and dependence
disorders in particular. For example,
Chase et al. (1998) found relationships
between high levels of parentification
and academic achievement and parental
use of alcohol. These findings are
consistent with multiple studies that
have established a relationship between
parentification and alcohol use by at
least one parent or guardian (Bekir et
al.,1993; Goglia et al., 1992). Bekir et al.
concluded that adults who abuse alcohol
or drugs are often unable to perform
their parental duties and that, therefore,
the parentified child is often left to care
for self, siblings, and parents. Bekir et al.
also found that the parentified child is
often inclined to repeat the same
behaviors as an adult with his or her own
children. Borderline personality and
dissociative disorders, although rare, can
be evidenced in extreme cases of this
phenomenon (Cicchetti, 2004; Liotti,
1992; Wells & Jones, 2000; Widom,
1999).
As previously mentioned, neglect
such as parentification can be and often
is traumatic for a child as well as for the
adult he or she becomes (Aldridge,
2006; Alexander, 1992; Chase, 1999;
Jurkovic, 1998). Trauma is often
experienced when a situation or
environment is perceived as being
overwhelming, threatening, and too
much for the individual (Briere, 1992;
Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), or when a
chronically stressful situation becomes
unrelenting and the individual is unable
to adapt and cope with the experience in
a healthy functional way (Brewin,
Andrews, & Gotlib, 1993; Werner,
1990).
Parentification can therefore be
characterized as a traumatic event and an
adverse process, in accord with the
definitions and criteria put forward in the
family and trauma literature, that have
long-lasting effects experienced in
adulthood (Belsky, 1990; Briere, 1992;
Chase, 1999; Cicchetti, 2004). Further,
extant literature on parentification has
shown that the process is in fact adverse
for most children and that it can later be
linked to poor adult functioning. The
process of childhood parentification can,
in the adults those children become,
produce a fear of having children and/or
lead to the transmission of
parentification across many generations
(Boszormenyi-Nagy & Spark, 1973;
Bowen, 1978; Chase et al., 1998).
Potential Positive Effects
Because of the trauma often related to
the parentification process (e.g.,
significant distress, adversity,
dissociation, and even suicide [Jurkovic,
1997; Markowitz, 1994), research has
tended to focus on psychopathology and
other negative outcomes (Barnett &
Parker, 1998; Walker & Lee, 1998).
There is a dearth of research discussing
positive outcomes after childhood
parentification. One of the few studies to
do so, conducted by Jurkovic and Casey
The Alabama Counseling Association Journal, Volume 34, Number 1, Spring 2008
Defining and Understanding Parentification 36
Defining and Understanding Parentification
(2000), reported on the linkage between
emotional parentification and
interpersonal competence among Latino
adolescents. That study’s findings
suggested that higher levels of emotional
parentification are predictive of higher
levels of interpersonal competence. On
the other hand, adolescents who
experience low levels of emotional
parentification—in a family system in
which they perceive the parentification
process (i.e., the assignment of and the
responsibility to carry out parent like
duties) to be unfair—also experience
low levels of competence. Jurkovic and
Casey concluded that parentification has
the potential to promote competence.
Additionally, they suggested that
potentially critical to positive outcomes
after parentification is the degree to
which the child perceived the process to
be fair. In the context of a family system
where children have reported that the
parentification process was “fair” also
reported that their parent-like behaviors
and responsibilities did not go unnoticed
and they carried out those
responsibilities for brief periods of time.
Of significance, a family system absent
of parentification may prevent some
children of the skills and abilities they
could use across domains and
throughout their lives—although more
research is needed to clarify and support
this assertion. Towards this end, in
Thirkield’s (2002) study examining the
relationship between instrumental
parentification in childhood and
interpersonal competence in adulthood, a
significant positive linear relationship
was obtained. Thirkield also found a
positive relationship between age,
positive outcomes (operationalized as
interpersonal competence), and
instrumental parentification. Findings
from these studies (Jurkovic &
Casey,2000; Thirkield,2002) provide
preliminary support showing that (a)
benefits may be engendered by the
parentification process, and (b) benefits
may last over time.
In a more recent study conducted by
Walsh, Zvulun, Bar-On, & Tsur (2006)
they examined the extent to which the
parentification process may be
associated with positive factors among
adolescent immigrants. In their study
they found parentification was related to
positive outcomes such as high levels of
individuation and differentiation from
the family system. They also found
when adolescent immigrants and non-
immigrants perceived their roles and
responsibilities as fair and age
appropriate the outcome was positive:
sense of mastery and competence. Thus
they concluded the provision of parent-
like roles and responsibilities among the
study sample engendered individual
autonomy, self-mastery, and family
cohesion. McMahon and Luthar (2007)
also found a relationship between
psychosocial adjustment and
parentification. Of significance, and in
support of divergent findings related to
childhood parentification and adult
outcomes, McMahon and Luthar
contend this process and its associated
outcomes are multidetermined and
multifactorial, even in the context of
severe, long-standing levels of
parentification. For example, among
their study sample of children living in
poverty, the researchers failed to find a
significant, stable relationship between
parentification and poor outcomes.
Discussion
Given the overwhelming findings
regarding negative outcomes, counselors
The Alabama Counseling Association Journal, Volume 34, Number1, Spring 2008
37 Defining and Understanding Parentification
Defining and Understanding Parentification
may be inclined to delimit their
therapeutic encounters to investigations
that look for the negative outcomes often
seen among this population (DiCaccavo,
2006; Earley & Cushway, 2002; Kerig,
2005). This potential overpathologizing
among counselors (Barnett & Parker,
1998; Hooper, 2007) could result in
missed opportunities to uncover
exceptions, that is, when positive skills
and coping strategies are experienced.
Consistent with a wellness, strength-
based counseling framework, counselors
should assess for clients’ strengths—if
any—derived from the parentification
process and infuse them into the
counseling and treatment planning
process. Therefore, the advantage of the
application of the counseling wellness
framework—as compared to a deficit or
medical model framework—is that it
allows for the explication of differential
outcomes—both negative and positive—
associated with parentification
(DiCaccavo,2006; Hooper,2007;
Jurkovic, 1997; Mayseless , et al.,
2004).
In the case of potential neglect, such as
parentification, many factors, as
previously described, may contribute to
the same event or process leading to
divergent outcomes. For example,
parentification can be perceived as
traumatic, as stressful but not traumatic,
or as a regular, even an anticipated
cultural event in the course of daily
living (Walsh, et al., 2006). To this end,
a large body of trauma literature has
suggested that the number of stressors
has more to do with the outcome or
aftereffects than does a particular
stressor itself (Waller, 2001). Thus, in
the case of parentification, the number of
stressors may influence the outcome
exhibited in both childhood and
adulthood.
Also, as asserted in the parentification
literature (Chase, 1999; Jurkovic, 1997,
1998; Minuchin et al., 1967), how long
the stressor was related to providing
caregiving to the parent and sibling is
also a contributing factor for those
children who carry out the parentified
role in their family of origin. Those who
perform this role for short periods of
time may perceive the role as less
overwhelming, stressful, or traumatic
than will others (Byng-Hall, 2002;
Saakvitne & Tennen, 1998; Tedeschi &
Calhoun, 1995). Finally, from a
developmental perspective, older
children are likely to feel more equipped
to take on the caregiving role than
younger children, thereby influencing
growth or distress outcomes associated
to the parentification process.
All counselors should consider the
following points when working with
clients who have a history of
parentification.
1. First, consider that not all clients who
are parentified experience negative
sequlae that are often reported in the
clinical and research literature (Barnett
& Parker, 1998; Byng-Hall, 2002;
Jurkovic, 1997; Jurkovic & Casey, 2000;
McMahon & Luthar, 2007; Thirkield,
2002; Tompkins, 2007).
2.Consider how long the parentification
process has been going on. The resultant
aftereffects may be different for clients
for whom the process is brief and
temporary as compared to long and
chronic (DiCaccavo, 2006; Tompkins,
2007). Shorter brief episodes of
parentification may foster competency
and self-efficacy in the client rather than
The Alabama Counseling Association Journal, Volume 34, Number 1, Spring 2008
Defining and Understanding Parentification 38
Defining and Understanding Parentification
pathological, poor outcomes (McMahon
& Luthar, 2007).
3.Consider the age of the client. The
aftereffects are likely to be different for
a younger child who is parentified as
compared to an older adolescent
(Kaplow & Widon, 2007; Walsh et al.,
2006).
4.Determine if the parentification
process is delimited to instrumental,
emotional, or both. The research
suggests emotional parentification may
be more deleterious than instrumental
parentification (Hooper, 2007;
McMahon & Luthar, 2007; Tompkins,
2007).
5.Consider the cultural and familial
context in which the client is embedded.
For example, how do the family and
people who adopt the client’s culture
perceive the parentification process
(Jurkovic, et al., 2001; Walsh, et al.,
2006)? Is the parentification process
culturally expected and valued?
6.Consider using a questionnaire to
capture the level, type, and perceived
fairness of parentification (e.g., Jurkovic
& Thirkield, 1998, for child and adult
instruments).
7.Examine to what extent the client feels
the parentification process is “fair.”
Again, research suggests if the process is
perceived to be “fair” then it is often
associated with fewer negative outcomes
(Jurkovic, et al., 1999).
8.There may be strengths engendered by
the parentification process (Hooper,
2007; Tompkins, 2007). Thus it may be
helpful to explore both positive and
negative aspects of the parentification
process.
9.Involve the family if possible.
Education may be all the family needs to
help the client and family restore or
reestablish the appropriate boundaries
where the child (if working with a child
or adolescent) has a safe, appropriate
context to grow, learn, differentiate, and
thrive (Walsh et al., 2006).
10.Consider a referral. Depending on the
context in which a counselor works, and
the extent and level of adversity
associated with the parentification
process, specific trauma-based
counseling (Calhoun & Tedeschi, 1999)
may be indicated.
Summary
Counselors and researchers have long
demonstrated a clear awareness of the
deleterious effects of parentification in
general (Chase, 1999; Jurkovic, 1997;
Mayseless, Bartholomew, Henderson, &
Trinke, 2004). On the other hand, and at
the same time, Barnett and Parker
(1998) concurred with Boszormenyi-
Nagy and Spark (1973) that it may in
fact be maladaptive to avoid or miss out
on any parental roles in the family of
origin—in that many lessons for
adulthood and parenthood are derived
from family-related roles and
responsibilities (i.e., parentification)
during childhood. Recently, Barnett and
Parker (1998) have questioned whether
parentification leads to early competence
or childhood deprivation. Similarly, one
of the “founding fathers” (Boszormenyi-
Nagy) of the construct of parentification
reminded counselors, theorists,
researchers, and the like that “the term
describes a ubiquitous and important
aspect of most human relationships. It is
suggested that parentification should not
be unconditionally ascribed to the realm
of ‘pathology’ or relational dysfunction.
The Alabama Counseling Association Journal, Volume 34, Number1, Spring 2008
39 Defining and Understanding Parentification
Defining and Understanding Parentification
It [parentification] is a component of the
regressive core of even balanced,
sufficiently reciprocal relationships”
(Boszormenyi-Nagy & Spark, 1973, p.
151)
AUTHOR NOTE
Correspondence regarding the
manuscript should be directed to: Lisa
M. Hooper, Ph.D., Department of
Educational Studies in Psychology,
Research Methodology, and Counseling,
The University of Alabama, Box
870231, Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35487-
0231. Email: lhooper@bamaed.ua.edu
REFERENCES
Aldridge, J. (2006). The experiences of
children living with and caring for
parents with mental illness. Child Abuse
Review, 15, 79-88.
Alexander, P. C. (1992). Application of
attachment theory to the study of sexual
abuse. Journal of Consulting & Clinical
Psychology, 60, 185-195.
Barnett, B., & Parker, G. (1998). The
parentified child: Early competence or
childhood deprivation. Child Psychology
& Psychiatry Review, 3(4), 146-154.
Bekir, P., McLellan, T., Childress, A. R.,
& Gariti, P. (1993). Role reversals in
families of substance abusers: A
transgenerational phenomenon. The
International Journal of the Addictions,
28(6), 613-630.
Belsky, J. (1990). Parental and
nonparental child care and children’s
socioemotional development: A decade
in review. Journal of Marriage, 52, 885-
903.
Boszormenyi-Nagy, I., & Spark, G.
(1973). Invisible loyalties: Reciprocity in
intergenerational family therapy.
Hagerstown, MD: Harper & Row.
Bowen, M. (1978). Family therapy in
clinical practice. New York: Jason
Aronson.
Brewin, C., Andrews, B., & Gotlib, I.
(1993). Psychopathology and early
experience: A reappraisal of
retrospective reports. Psychological
Bulletin, 13(1), 82-98.
Briere, J. (1992). Child abuse trauma:
Theory and treating of the lasting
effects. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Burt, A. (1992). Generation boundary
distortion: Implications for object
relations development. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Georgia State
University, Atlanta, GA.
Byng-Hall, J. (2002). Relieving
parentified children’s burden in families
with insecure attachment patterns.
Family Process, 41, 375-388.
Calhoun, L. G. & Tedeschi, R. G.
(1999). Facilitating posttraumatic
growth: A clinician’s guide. Mahwah,
NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum.
Carver, C. (1998). Resilience and
thriving: Issues, models, and linkages.
Journal of Social Issues, 54(2), 245-267.
The Alabama Counseling Association Journal, Volume 34, Number 1, Spring 2008
Defining and Understanding Parentification 40
Defining and Understanding Parentification
Chase, N. (1999). An overview of
theory, research, and societal issues. In
N. Chase (Ed.), Burdened children (pp.
3-33). New York: The Guilford Press.
Chase, N., Demming, M., & Wells, M.
(1998). Parentification, parental
alcoholism, and academic status among
young adults. The American Journal of
Family Therapy, 25, 105-114.
Cicchetti, D. (2004). An odyssey of
discovery: Lessons learned through three
decades of research on child
maltreatment. American Psychologist,
59, 4-14.
Cicchetti, D., & Toth, S. (1995). A
developmental psychopathology
perspective on child abuse and neglect.
Journal of American Academy of Child
Adolescent Psychiatry, 34, 541-565.
DiCaccavo, A. (2006). Working with
parentification: Implications for clients
and counselling psychologists.
Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory,
Research and Practice, 79, 469-478.
Earley, L., & Cushway, D. J. (2002).
The parentified child. Clinical Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 7, 163-178.
Goglia, L., Jurkovic, G., Burt, A., &
Burge-Callaway, C. (1992).
Generational boundary distortions by
adult children of alcoholics: Child-as-
parent and child-as-mate. The American
Journal of Family Therapy, 20, 291-299.
Golden, O. (1999). The federal response
to child abuse and neglect. American
Psychologist, 55, 1050-1053.
Hooper, L. M. (2007). Expanding the
discussion regarding parentification and
its varied outcomes: Implications for
mental health research and practice.
Journal of Mental Health Counseling,
29(2), 322-337.
Jones, R., & Wells, M. (1996). An
empirical study of parentification and
personality. The American Journal of
Family Therapy, 24, 145-152.
Jurkovic, G. J. (1997). The plight of the
parentified child. New York: Brunner
Mazel Inc.
Jurkovic, G. J. (1998). Destructive
parentification in families: Causes and
consequences. In L. L’Abate (Ed.),
Family psychopathology (pp.
237-255). New York: The Guilford
Press.
Jurkovic, G. J., & Casey, S. (2000,
March). Parentification in immigrant
Latino adolescents. Presentation in G. P.
Kuperminc (Chair), Proyecto Juventud:
A Multidisciplinary Study of Immigrant
Latino Adolescents, symposium
conducted at the meeting of the Society
for Applied Anthropology, San
Francisco, CA.
Jurkovic, G. J., & Thirkield, A. (1998).
Parentification questionnaire.
(Available from G. J. Jurkovic,
Department of Psychology, Georgia
State University, University Plaza,
Atlanta, GA 30303)
Jurkovic, G. J., Morrell, R., & Thirkield,
(1999). Assessing childhood
parentification: Guidelines for
researchers and clinicians. In N. Chase
(Ed.), Burdened children (pp. 92-113).
New York: The Guilford Press.
The Alabama Counseling Association Journal, Volume 34, Number1, Spring 2008
41 Defining and Understanding Parentification
Defining and Understanding Parentification
Kaplow, J. B. & Widom, C. S. (2007).
Age of onset of child maltreatment
predicts long-term mental health
outcomes. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 116(1), 176-187.
Karpel, M. (1976). Intrapsychic and
interpersonal processes in the
parentification of children.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 38,
365. (UMI No. 77-15090)
Kerig, P. (2005). Revisiting the construct
of boundary dissolution: A
multidimensional perspective. Journal of
Emotional Abuse, 5. 5-42.
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984).
Stress, appraisal, and coping. New
York: Springer Publishing.
Liotti,G.(1992). Diorganized/disoriented
attachment in the etiology of the
dissociative disorders. Dissociation, 4,
196-204.
Markowitz, F. (1994). Family dynamics
and teenage immigrant: Creating the self
through the parents’ image.
Adolescence,29, 151-161.
Mayseless, O., Bartholomew, K.,
Henderson, A., & Trinke, S. (2004). I
was more her mom than she was mine:
Role reversal in a community sample.
Family Relations, 53, 78-86.
McMahon, T. J., & Luthar, S. S. (2007).
Defining characteristics and potential
consequences of caretaking burden
among children living in poverty.
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,
77(2), 267-281.
Minuchin, S., Montalvo, B., Guerney,
B., Rosman, B., & Schumer, F. (1967).
Families of the slums. New York: Basic
Books.
Olson, M., & Gariti, P. (1993). Symbolic
loss in horizontal relating: Defining the
role of parentification in
addictive/destructive relationships.
Contemporary Family Therapy, 15(3),
197-208.
Saakvitne, K. W., & Tennen, H. (1998).
Exploring thriving in the context of
clinical trauma theory: Constructivist
self-development theory. Journal of
Social Issues, 54, 279-300.
Sessions, M. W., & Jurkovic, G. J.
(1986). The parentification
questionnaire. (Available from Gregory
J. Jurkovic, Department of Psychology,
Georgia State University, University
Plaza, Atlanta, GA 30303)
Tedeschi, R. G., & Calhoun, L. G.
(1995). Trauma and transformation.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Thirkield, A. (2002). The role of fairness
in emotional and social outcomes of
childhood filial responsibility.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA.
(UMI No. 3036391)
Tompkins, T. L. (2007). Parentification
and maternal HIV infection: Beneficial
role or pathological burden. Journal of
Child and Family Studies, 16, 113-123.
The Alabama Counseling Association Journal, Volume 34, Number 1, Spring 2008
Defining and Understanding Parentification 42
Defining and Understanding Parentification
Toth, S. L., & Cicchetti, D. (1996).
Patterns of relatedness, depressive
symptomatology, and perceived
competence in maltreated children.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 64(1), 32-41.
Valleau, P. M., Bergner, R. M., &
Horton, C. B. (1995). Parentification and
caretaker syndrome: An empirical
investigation. Family Therapy, 22, 157-
164.
Walker, J. P., & Lee, R. E. (1998).
Uncovering strengths of children of
alcoholic parents. Journal of
Contemporary Family Therapy, 20(4)
521-533.
Waller, M. A. (2001). Resilience in
ecosystemic context: Evolution of the
concept. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 71(3), 290-297.
Wallerstein, S. S. (1985, March-April).
The overburdened child: Some long-
term consequences of divorce. Social
Work, 116-123.
Walsh, S., Shulman, S., Bar-on, Z., &
Tsur, A. (2006). The role of
parentification and family climate in
adaptation among immigrants in Israel.
Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16,
321-350.
Werner, E. E. (1990). Protective factors
and individual resilience. In S. Meisels
& J. Shonkoff (Eds.), Handbook of early
childhood intervention. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Wells, M., & Jones, R. (2000). Childhood
parentification and shame-proneness: A
preliminary study. American Journal of
FamilyTherapy,28(1),19-28.
West, M. L., & Keller, A. E. (1991).
Parentification of the child: A case study
of Bowlby’s compulsive care-giving
attachment pattern. American Journal of
Psychotherapy, 45, 425-431.
Widom, C. S. (1999). Posttraumatic
stress disorder in abused and neglected
children grown up. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 156(8), 1223-1229.
Wolkin, J. (1984). Childhood
parentification: An exploration of long-
term effects. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Georgia State University,
Atlanta, GA. (UMI No. 912254)
Zeanah, C. H., & Zeanah, P. D. (1989).
Intergenerational transmission of
maltreatment: Insights from
attachment theory and research.
Psychiatry, 52, 177-196.
The Alabama Counseling Association Journal, Volume 34, Number1, Spring 2008
43 Defining and Understanding Parentification
... The formation of attachment to a primary caregiver is considered to be one of many key tasks in child development (Bowlby, 1958), and any process which can negatively influence attachment, such as parentification, warrants investigation. In actuality, the majority of research on parentification has examined a vast array of potential outcomes in adulthood (Earley & Cushway, 2002;Hooper 2007aHooper , 2007bHooper , 2008Hooper, Marotta, & Lanthier, 2008;Jones & Wells, 1996;Katz, Petracca, & Rabinowitz, 2009;Mayseless, Bartholomew, Henderson, & Trinke, 2004), or the effects of parentification on the mental and behavioral well-being of children (Earley & Cushway, 2002;Jacobvitz, Hazen, Curran, & Hitchens, 2004;. ...
... Specifically, parentification has been shown to impede identity development and personality formation and to affect interpersonal relationships, including those with one's own children. It has also been found to be associated with later attachment issues, mental illness, psychological distress, masochistic and narcissistic personality disorders, substance abuse, and one's academic and career choices (Earley & Cushway, 2002;Hooper, 2007aHooper, , 2008Hooper et al., 2008;Jones & Wells, 1996;Katz et al., 2009;. However, researchers have speculated that in some instances, emotional and instrumental parentification may prove beneficial for individuals in adulthood. ...
... However, researchers have speculated that in some instances, emotional and instrumental parentification may prove beneficial for individuals in adulthood. Specifically, parentification can lead to greater interpersonal competence and stronger family cohesion, as well as higher levels of individuation, differentiation from family, and selfmastery and autonomy when the child experiences a low level of parentification and when the efforts of the child are recognized and rewarded by adult figures (Hooper, 2007b(Hooper, , 2008. ...
... 이처럼 맞벌이 부모가 일과 가정에서 다양한 역할을 한꺼번에 수행하며 어려움을 느낄 때 나타날 수 있는 아동의 경험을 잘 설 명할 수 있는 변인은 부모화(parentification)이다 (Chee et al., 2014;Grollman & Sweder, 1988 (Hooper, 2008 (Chase, 1999;Earley & Cushway, 2002 (Jurkovic, 1997;Sheldon et al., 2018;Wong et al., 2015). (King, 1998;King & Emmons, 1990 (Chase, 1999;Emmons & Colby, 1995 (Emmons & King, 1988;Hooper, 2008;Robinson, 1998 (Chase, 1999;Rohner & Lansford, 2017 (Grollman & Sweder, 1988;Jeon et al., 2018;Robinson, 1998 (Park & Park, 2014;Suk & Kim, 2022 (Jeon et al., 2018;Mongrain & Vettese, 2003;Shen & Wang, 2019 (Reis & Shaver, 1988;Uchida et al., 2022 (Emmons & Colby, 1995;Uchida et al., 2022;Yu & Chung, 2023 (Chase, 1999;Grollman & Sweder, 1988 ...
... 이처럼 맞벌이 부모가 일과 가정에서 다양한 역할을 한꺼번에 수행하며 어려움을 느낄 때 나타날 수 있는 아동의 경험을 잘 설 명할 수 있는 변인은 부모화(parentification)이다 (Chee et al., 2014;Grollman & Sweder, 1988 (Hooper, 2008 (Chase, 1999;Earley & Cushway, 2002 (Jurkovic, 1997;Sheldon et al., 2018;Wong et al., 2015). (King, 1998;King & Emmons, 1990 (Chase, 1999;Emmons & Colby, 1995 (Emmons & King, 1988;Hooper, 2008;Robinson, 1998 (Chase, 1999;Rohner & Lansford, 2017 (Grollman & Sweder, 1988;Jeon et al., 2018;Robinson, 1998 (Park & Park, 2014;Suk & Kim, 2022 (Jeon et al., 2018;Mongrain & Vettese, 2003;Shen & Wang, 2019 (Reis & Shaver, 1988;Uchida et al., 2022 (Emmons & Colby, 1995;Uchida et al., 2022;Yu & Chung, 2023 (Chase, 1999;Grollman & Sweder, 1988 ...
Article
This study aimed to examine the effect of parentification on the smartphone dependency of upper elementary school children in double-income families and to verify whether ambivalence over emotional expression and loneliness sequentially mediates the relationship between parentification and smartphone dependency. The participants were 311 upper-elementary school students (4th to 6th graders; 126 boys, 40.5%) in double-income households residing in Seoul, Gyeong-gi, and Incheon. The data were collected through an online self-report questionnaire completed by the participants and were analyzed using SPSS 26.0 and Mplus 8.7 software. The results can be summarized as follows. Firstly, the direct effect of parentification on the smartphone dependency of the children from double-income families was statistically insignificant. Secondly, ambivalence over emotional expression mediated the effect of parentification on smartphone dependency, while loneliness did not. Lastly, parentification influenced smartphone dependency through the sequential mediating channel of ambivalence over emotional expression and loneliness. In conclusion, these findings indicate that interventions for smartphone-overdependent children from double-income families should place emphasis on children’s psychological difficulties attributed to parentification. Specifically, this study highlights the importance of alleviating the levels of ambivalence over emotional expression and loneliness to address the issue of children’s smartphone dependency in double-income families, suggesting possible involvement and support at both household and societal levels.
... On the other hand, contextual family theorists intimated that parentification might be necessary at certain times for every child to learn to identify future roles and responsibilities (Boszormenyi-Nagy & Spark, 1984). In fact, Hooper (2008) argued, a family system without the experience of parentification may deprive some children of the skills and abilities they could generalize across life domains throughout their lives. Attachment theorists have viewed parentification through the internal working models children develop through experience and have suggested that outcomes are highly differentiated, and may range from high functioning individuals as to those who develop skewed relationships in adulthood (Hooper, 2007b). ...
... Also, given the findings on Emotional Parentification in the present study, it may be valuable to use narratives from a qualitative study to gain a better understanding of how Emotional Parentification is manifested. Differences in Emotional Parentification across genders likewise necessitate future research Prior research has identified both positive and negative correlates of parentification (Baggett et al., 2015;Hooper, 2008;Jones and Wells, 1996;Titzmann, 2012). Given the significance of parentification as an adaptive process among Jamaican families, it is important that the process be explored and understood within the cultural context. ...
Article
The lives of adolescents and youth in Guatemala are marked by diversity – economic, ethnic, gender, and place of residence, urban or rural. Although Guatemala has been described as collectivist, a more valid unfolding of cultural values shows that the cultural influences on Guatemalan adolescents and youth include familism, spirituality and religiosity, gratitude and reciprocity, and gender role ideologies that stem from the constructs of machismo and marianismo. The two major ethnic identities, Ladino and Indigenous Maya, are subject to ethnic stereotypes and disparities with Indigenous youth dis- advantaged with respect to economic condition, educational opportunities, and health. Like other youth around the world, Guatemalans are increasingly exposed to technology and globalization, influences that may be altering their views and expectations for the future. The risks faced by Guatemalan youth include early pregnancy, migration, and violence, both gang-related and gender-based. Many interventions are aimed at improving the lives of adolescents and youth in Guatemala. Those programs should be consistent with community goals and should be thoroughly evaluated by multiple meth- ods. Many of the same challenges and risks are faced by adolescents living in the diverse conditions of the Caribbean region, including ethnic, gender, and economic disparities, exposure to violence, and inappropriate or une- valuated interventions. Because the everyday lives of youth and adolescents reflect their cultural values and specific socioeconomic conditions, addressing those challenges requires careful attention to the culture and contexts of the life spaces of the youth.
... This increases anxiety, stress, and distress (L. M. Hooper, 2008;Schore, 2002). ...
... There is scant retrospective data on the contribution of parentification in childhood to PTSD symptoms as reported in adulthood (L. Hooper, 2007;L. M. Hooper, 2008). However, childhood emotional abuse and neglect have been associated with PTSD symptoms in adulthood (Chen et al., 2021;Chirichella-Besemer & Motta, 2008;Fung et al., 2020). Previous studies have documented associations between emotional abuse (Brodski & Hutz, 2012;Chen & Qin, 2020;Musetti et al., 2021) and boundary dissolution in child ...
Article
Emotional abuse and neglect and boundary dissolution in caregiver-child relationships are considered risk factors for the emergence of psychopathology as well as impairments in children’s self-system. The current study examined the associations between emotional abuse, neglect, and various types of boundary dissolution experienced during adolescence on young adults’ current narcissistic vulnerability, narcissistic grandiosity, and PTSD symptoms. A community sample of 686 young adults who self-reported experiences of emotional abuse and neglect and boundary dissolution as adolescents completed a series of questionnaires online. A mediation model incorporating parentification, triangulation, psychological control, and narcissistic pathology was used to examine the contribution of emotional abuse, emotional neglect, boundary dissolution, and narcissistic pathology to participants’ PTSD symptoms. The results indicated direct effects between emotional abuse and PTSD symptoms and between boundary dissolution and PTSD symptoms. An indirect effect was found between boundary dissolution and PTSD symptoms via the mechanism of narcissistic pathology. These findings underscore the need for clinicians to be aware of the adverse effects of emotional abuse and boundary dissolution in childhood on PTSD symptoms, and the potential adverse effects of boundary dissolution on the self-system.
... Linear regression results (stepwise method) for the level of personality disintegration and identity disorder (explained variables) and the level of parentification and its dimensions in the past and present, the sense of injustice in the past and present, and the capacity for mentalization and its aspects (explanatory variables). Indeed, emotional parentification is considered to be the most debilitating; in many groups of parentified adults, it was found to be associated with higher levels of exhaustion (Titzmann, 2012) and a sense of constant tension (Hooper, 2008) than instrumental parentification, which in turn was more likely to result in a sense of self-satisfaction (Titzmann, 2012). The sense of injustice, resulting from the child/ adult's assessment of how fair were the exchanges taking place between him or her and the parents in a given situation, is a factor considered by Jurkovic (1997) to determine the destructive consequences of role swapping in the family. ...
Article
Full-text available
The aim of the research was to answer the question about the association between the intensity of parentification and the level of personality integration and mentalization capacity in individuals from families with alcohol use disorders and from families in which one parent had a chronic somatic disease. The level of personality integration is taken as an indicator of mental health. It was assumed that individuals from both groups have similar levels of personality integration because their parents experienced significant limitations in adequately performing parental roles but significantly differed in their ability to mentalize their own actions and function in the social relationships of others. Group and method: The group of respondents included 35 adults from families with alcohol use disorders and 30 from families with a chronic somatic disease. The study was conducted online. The following tools were used: Children of Alcoholics Screening Test (CAST) (Pilat, Jones, 1985, Polish translation: Test dla dzieci z rodzin z problemem alkoholowym, Hołda, Janus, Kaleńczuk, 2021), Filial Responsibility Scale for Adult (FRS-A) (Jurkovic, Thirkield, 1999, Polish adaptation: Skala synowskiej odpowiedzialności dla dorosłych, Publicewicz, Oleszkowicz, 2020 and own translation, 2021), The Mentalization Scale (MENTS) (Dimitrijević, Hanak, Dimitrijević, Marjanović, 2018, Polish adaptation: Skala mentalizacji, Jańczak, 2021), Short Self-Report for the Assessment of DSM-5 Level of Personality Functioning for Personality Disorders: The Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale (SFS) (Gamache, Savard, Leclerc, Côté, 2019, Polish adaptation: Łakuta, Cieciuch, Strus, Morey, 2022). Results: Individuals from families with a somatic disease and those from families with alcohol problems were found to differ in the intensity of parentification and its dimensions, as well as in their sense of injustice resulting from having to take on the parental role in the family. They show similar levels of personality disintegration (with the exception of identity disorders) and mentalization abilities. In both groups, individuals show a higher ability to mentalize other people’s mental states than their own. The predictors of the personality disintegration level across the study group were found to be the overall mentalization capacity and the sense of injustice in the past. Conclusion: The compared groups of adults from families with alcohol use disorders and a chronic somatic disease differed in the intensity of various aspects of parentification and the sense of injustice resulting from having to take on the parental role in the family. Predictors of the personality disintegration level across the study group turned out to be the overall mentalization capacity and the sense of injustice in the past. Key words: parentification, personality integration, mentalization, family with alcohol use disorder, family with a somatic disease
... Dziecko doświadczające tego rodzaju parentyfikacji może funkcjonować jako powiernik rodziców, jedyne ich wsparcie, towarzysz, mediator w rodzinnych konfliktach, partner (mate-like figure), wychowawca (providing nurturance) ( Jurkovic i in. 1999;Hooper 2008a;Hooper 2008b;Schier 2015). ...
Article
Full-text available
Artykuł ma charakter koncepcyjno-badawczy. Celem naukowym było przeanalizowanie możliwości zestawienia dwóch konceptów: współuzależnienia oraz parentyfikacji w rodzinie. Przedmiotem rozważań uczyniono zatem zależnościowe mechanizmy rodzinne uruchamiane w sytuacjach problemowych i kryzysowych, a służące utrzymaniu jej funkcjonalności. Artykuł stanowi uzupełnienie dotychczasowych badań nad zjawiskiem odwracania ról w rodzinie oraz silnego ich osadzania w zależnościowych układach rodzinnych. Egzemplifikację dla czynionych tu refleksji stanowiły analizy autobiograficznych wywiadów narracyjnych zrealizowanych przy zastosowaniu techniki zaproponowanej przez Fritza Schützego. Retrospektywne i przyjmujące pespektywę całożyciową postrzeganie parentyfikacji oraz procesów rodzinnych pozwoliło na wskazanie symptomów współuzależnienia obecnych w odwróconym porządku ról rodzinnych: odpowiedzialności, zależności i przyjmowanych obowiązków. Zgodnie z adaptacyjnym modelem, także tutaj pełnią one funkcję adaptacyjną, mającą jednakże charakter dysfunkcyjny i często destrukcyjny dla samej jednostki. Teoretycznym tłem w podjętych rozważaniach uczyniono teorię systemową, która jednocześnie stała u podstaw konstruowania pojęcia „parentyfikacji”. Refleksje i końcowe wnioski prowadzą do postulatu poszerzania perspektywy rozpoznawania i analizowania doświadczeń zależnościowych w rodzinie.
Article
Full-text available
Walt Disney Animation Studios is the animation studio responsible for creating some of the most beloved Disney films ever made and continues to expand with the production and release of more films exploring and prioritizing diversity, including their promise to "honor heritage through animated films". Encanto is a popular animated children's movie released in 2021 by Walt Disney Animation Studios surronding a family with magical powers that live in rural Colombian. This movie promises to deliver diversity and accurately portray not only the setting but the people of Colombia, visually, emotionally and intellectually. However, media has been misaccurately representing Hispanic people, specifically women for decades, including Disney films. This paper explores how each woman in the film is represented in relevance to traditional women values embeded in Colombian culture, and how their emotional process throughout the film either enforces stereotypes already created and portrayed in American media, or establishes relevancy and validity once compared to real Colombian values.
Article
Objective Young-onset dementia (YOD) has significant impact for the affected person, but also has far-reaching effects on the family. Additionally, biological relatives have an increased genetic risk of developing the condition themselves. This review aimed to identify the psychological and social impacts of YOD in the family, for asymptomatic relatives. Methods A systematic review of key databases for empirical studies about the lived experience of biological relatives at risk for YOD was performed. Data was collated and interpreted via narrative synthesis. Results The majority of the nineteen included studies were qualitative and explored the experiences of children with a parent with YOD. Five themes were developed: (1) Onset of YOD disrupts family functioning (2) Emotional impact is significant and varied (3) Uncertain future (due to uncertainty of diagnosis, care-giving responsibilities, and their own increased genetic risk) (4) Lack of visibility in health care and society (5) Coping strategies include physical/cognitive distancing, and emotion-focused coping. Conclusion Our findings demonstrate a diagnosis of YOD significantly impacts the lives of relatives, yet their experiences and needs often go unnoticed. Practice Implications We present a practical framework of questions and strategies for care of relatives, mapped to the self-regulation model of genetic counselling.
Article
An attachment theory framework is applied toward understanding the emergence of depressive symptomatology and lower perceived competence in maltreated and nonmaltreated children. Hypotheses that maltreated children with nonoptimal patterns of relatedness evidence elevated depressive symptomatology and lower competence, whereas nonmaltreated children with optimal or adequate patterns of relatedness exhibit the least depressive symptomatology and higher competence, were confirmed. Additionally, differentiations between maltreated children with and without optimal or adequate patterns of relatedness emerged, suggesting that relatedness may mitigate against the adverse effects of maltreatment. Moreover, sexually abused children with confused patterns of relatedness evidenced clinically significant depressive symptomatology. Results are discussed with regard to mechanisms that contribute to adaptation or maladaptation in children with negative caregiving histories.
Article
This article addresses distinctions underlying concepts of resilience and thriving and issues in conceptualizing thriving. Thriving (physical or psychological) may reflect decreased reactivity to subsequent stressors, faster recovery from subsequent stressors, or a consistently higher level of functioning. Psychological thriving may reflect gains in skill, knowledge, confidence, or a sense of security in personal relationships. Psychological thriving resembles other instances of growth. It probably does not depend on the occurrence of a discrete traumatic event or longer term trauma, though such events may elicit it. An important question is why some people thrive, whereas others are impaired, given the same event. A potential answer rests on the idea that differences in confidence and mastery are self-perpetuating and self-intensifying. This idea suggests a number of variables whose role in thriving is worth closer study, including personality variables such as optimism, contextual variables such as social support, and situational variables such as the coping reactions elicited by the adverse event.
Article
The current study, utilizing a group of 197 undergraduate students, found that childhood parentification is associated with shame-proneness in adults (when the shared variance with guiltproneness is controlled). Parentification, the reversal of parent and child roles, requires a premature identification with the parent(s)' expectations and needs, at the expense of the development of the child's true talents and gifts, often leaving the child feeling ashamed of the true self's unrewarded strivings. This finding is linked theoretically to an earlier study that found a relationship between childhood parentification and both narcissistic and masochistic personality characteristics (Jones & Wells, 1996). A secondary finding supported a predicted relationship between guilt and shame. Clinicians are encouraged to attend to the possibilities of these connections when planning and executing treatment plans with parentified adults.
Article
Foreword - Lucy Berliner Preface - David Finkelhor Introduction PART ONE: INCIDENCE OF CHILD ABUSE Type and Forms of Child Maltreatment PART TWO: THE LONG-TERM IMPACTS OF CHILD ABUSE: INTEGRATION OF RESEARCH AND THEORY Long-Term Impacts of Child Abuse I Psychological Responses Long-Term Impacts of Child Abuse II Behaviors and Relationships PART THREE: EXPLORING THE SOLUTION: ABUSE-FOCUSED PSYCHOTHERAPY Philosophy of Treatment Parameters of Treatment I Process Issues Parameters of Treatment II Intervention Approaches Special Issues in Abuse-Focused Therapy Summary Appendix The Child Maltreatment Interview Schedule