This art icle was downloaded by: [ Kylie Agllias] On: 30 March 2015, At : 02: 41 Publisher: Rout ledge I nform a Lt d Regist ered in England and Wales Regist ered Num ber: 1072954 Regist ered office: Mort im er House, 37- 41 Mort im er St reet , London W1T 3JH, UK Australian Social Work Publicat ion det ails, including inst ruct ions f or aut hors and subscript ion inf ormat ion: ht t p: / / www. t andf online. com/ loi/ rasw20 Disconnection and Decision-making: Adult Children Explain Their Reasons for Estranging from Parents a Kylie Agllias a School Humanit ies and Social Science, Universit y of Newcast le, Callaghan, NSW, Aust ralia Published online: 24 Mar 2015. Click for updates To cite this article: Kylie Agllias (2015): Disconnect ion and Decision-making: Adult Children Explain Their Reasons f or Est ranging f rom Parent s, Aust ralian Social Work, DOI: 10. 1080/ 0312407X. 2015. 1004355 To link to this article: ht t p: / / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 0312407X. 2015. 1004355 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTI CLE Taylor & Francis m akes every effort t o ensure t he accuracy of all t he inform at ion ( t he “ Cont ent ” ) cont ained in t he publicat ions on our plat form . However, Taylor & Francis, our agent s, and our licensors m ake no represent at ions or warrant ies what soever as t o t he accuracy, com plet eness, or suit abilit y for any purpose of t he Cont ent . Any opinions and views expressed in t his publicat ion are t he opinions and views of t he aut hors, and are not t he views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of t he Cont ent should not be relied upon and should be independent ly verified wit h prim ary sources of inform at ion. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, act ions, claim s, proceedings, dem ands, cost s, expenses, dam ages, and ot her liabilit ies what soever or howsoever caused arising direct ly or indirect ly in connect ion wit h, in relat ion t o or arising out of t he use of t he Cont ent . This art icle m ay be used for research, t eaching, and privat e st udy purposes. Any subst ant ial or syst em at ic reproduct ion, redist ribut ion, reselling, loan, sub- licensing, syst em at ic supply, or dist ribut ion in any form t o anyone is expressly forbidden. Term s & Downloaded by [Kylie Agllias] at 02:41 30 March 2015 Condit ions of access and use can be found at ht t p: / / www.t andfonline.com / page/ t erm sand- condit ions Australian Social Work, 2015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0312407X.2015.1004355 Disconnection and Decision-making: Adult Children Explain Their Reasons for Estranging from Parents Kylie Agllias* Downloaded by [Kylie Agllias] at 02:41 30 March 2015 School Humanities and Social Science, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia Abstract This article reports on a qualitative study of adult children who were estranged from at least one parent. Twenty-six Australian participants reported a total of 40 estrangements. Of these, 23 estrangements were initiated by the participant and 16 were maintained by the participant after being initiated by the parent or occurring after a mutual lessening of contact. Participants reported three core reasons for estrangement: (i) abuse, (ii) poor parenting, and (iii) betrayal. However, estrangement was predominantly situated in long-term perceived or actual disconnection from the parent and family of origin. Most participants had engaged in cycles of estrangement and reunification, using distance to assess the relationship and attend to their own personal development and growth across time. Estrangement was generally triggered by a relatively minor incident or a more serious act of betrayal considered to have been enacted by the parent. Keywords: Family Estrangement; Abuse; Conflict; Adult Children Intergenerational relationships are usually the longest and arguably the most important relationships experienced during the life span (Cooney, 1997). However, there are challenges inherent in long and intimate relationships, and the coalescence of intergenerational issues may be exacerbated by the emergence of four-generational living families. Adults are more likely to experience conflict and ambivalence with kin than with non kin (Fingerman et al., 2004). Van Gaalen and Dykstra (2006) suggested that balancing historical family experiences, with culturally scripted ideas about filial responsibility and personal needs and goals can be a source of tension. Despite this, the majority of families exhibit high levels of solidarity, as well as bidirectional and mutually beneficial care and support (Dykstra & Fokkema, 2011). Recent UK research (IpsosMORI, 2014) found that 8% of those surveyed (n = 2,082) were physically estranged from a family member, suggesting that social workers will encounter estranged clients in practice. For instance, there is a growing recognition of parental alienation connected to divorce, family court proceedings, and in child protection (Baker & Chambers, 2011; Friedlander & Gans Walters, 2010). Those working with older people and in palliative settings regularly witness the effects of estrangement on quality of support and end-of-life decision-making (Kramer et al., 2006; Peisah et al., 2006). Workers might see clients to specifically address the effects of family estrangement, but in many instances estrangement is intricately entwined with other experiences such as *Correspondence to: Dr Kylie Agllias, School Humanities and Social Science, University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia. Email: [email protected] Accepted 26 November 2014 © 2015 Australian Association of Social Workers Downloaded by [Kylie Agllias] at 02:41 30 March 2015 2 K. Agllias homelessness, drug and alcohol dependence, and poor mental health (Agllias, 2011; Short, 1996). Given the mounting evidence that estrangement contributes to a number of negative conditions ranging from traumatic responses to ongoing stress, to lack of instrumental support and isolation (Agllias, 2013), it is important to understand the reasons that some families estrange in order to provide relevant intervention. This paper reports on an Australian investigation that explored the experiences of 26 adults estranged from at least one parent. It follows on from a 2009/2010 investigation of older parents estranged from at least one adult child to extend knowledge about intergenerational estrangement, and potentially compare and contrast the experiences of the two generations (Agllias, 2013, 2015). This paper focuses on the adult child’s explanations for estrangement. It makes no claim about causation, rather offering a phenomenological examination of the adult child’s beliefs, ideas, and musings about their estrangement. It compares these to the explanations given by parents in previous studies, particularly those which offer clues about points for social work research and intervention. The Origins of Parent and Adult Child Estrangement There has been a steady increase in research into the later-life intergenerational family since the 1970s, including examinations of intergenerational solidarity, family support, conflict, and ambivalence. However, there is a dearth of literature, and particularly research, about family relationships that are considered solely problematic or cease altogether. “Family estrangement” is rarely defined or considered. Generally estrangement is characterised by some degree of physical distancing, and a significant lack of emotional intimacy and trust (Sucov, 2006). When all contact ceases this is referred to as a “physical estrangement” (Agllias, 2011). When family members are uncomfortable with each other and avoid or minimise contact, this is referred to as “emotional estrangement” (Agllias, 2011). One of the most commonly cited challenges to the adult child and parent relationship is the tension between connection and separateness throughout the life-course. Early family therapists suggested that it was important for the adult child to renegotiate and terminate the hierarchical boundary to the point where they achieved psychological equality with the parent and personal authority within their own lives (Williamson, 1981). Murray Bowen was the originator of the concept of “emotional cut-off”, which has similarities to the aforementioned definition of estrangement (Bowen, 1982). He suggested that estrangement was most likely to occur when the parent–child relationship was too emotionally fused or intense, where family expressions, beliefs, behaviours, and traditions were adopted and acted out automatically. In this schema, estrangement acts as a regulator of tension created by excessive fusion. In some instances triangulation, where a third party is recruited into the conflict between two parties, can temporarily relieve tension or exacerbate estrangement (Bowen, 1982). Research also confirms that excessive contact, support, and dependence can have negative effects on intergenerational relationships, especially when a parent’s health deteriorates, the adult child’s caregiving responsibilities increase, or when an estranged child resumes contact as a result (Fingerman et al., 2008; Peisah et al., 2006). Changes in marital status such as separation, divorce, or widowhood often cause stress in intergenerational relationships (Daatland, 2007; Doyle et al., 2010). Parental alienation, where one parent uses manipulative tactics to recruit a child to side with them Downloaded by [Kylie Agllias] at 02:41 30 March 2015 Australian Social Work 3 against the other parent continues to be viewed as a source of intergenerational disruption (Meier, 2009). Some theorise that life cycle transition periods, where individual needs and expectations might be incompatible, seem to make family relationships vulnerable (LeBey, 2001). Others suggest that estrangement is likely to occur when a member feels they have been betrayed by another or when ineffective patterns of communication and dispute resolution are established (LeBey, 2001; Sichel, 2004). Attachment theory proposes that people with avoidant attachment styles are most likely to withdraw from an attachment relationship at times of conflict (Fraley & Brumbaugh, 2007). While these theories and studies are important in highlighting areas for potential conflict, ambivalence, and estrangement, they may not capture the complexity of such a significant relationship breakdown. Agllias’s (2015) study of parents estranged by at least one adult child found that the development of estrangement was a long and complex process, and probably not directly attributable to one primary factor. Parents offered three core—but not mutually exclusive—explanations for their child deciding to estrange them: (i) the adult child made a choice between the parent and someone or something else, (ii) there was an inability to sustain an emotional connection due to disparate values and behaviours, and (iii) the adult child punished the older person for a perceived wrongdoing. However, most parents also pondered possible socio-historic contributors, including parental divorce, domestic violence, ill health, and family conflict. They described events across the child’s life span, “that could have been perceived as dangerous, lowering the parent’s worth, exploitative, or rejecting” (Agllias, 2015, p. 125), by the adult child. The study suggested a “complex interplay of long term factors— and particularly non-normative stressors—that appear[ed] to erode the relationship between parents and children and ultimately result in estrangement” (Agllias, 2015, p. 214). The most recent available estrangement research used in-depth narrative interviews to examine the communicative practices of adult children in the USA who had distanced themselves from a parent (n = 52) (Scharp et al., 2014). Scharp et al. (2014) examined the complex backstories told by participants in order to deconstruct their estrangement decision. They found that estrangement was complex and historically derived, with narratives consistently including participant experiences of past and current parental abuse and indifference. Backstories included periods of distancing and reconciliation, where adult children felt pressure from distal expectations or proximal relationships, to maintain the parental bond. The catalyst for estrangement was either an internal decision to estrange or an external event that came as the “last straw” (Scharp et al., 2014). An online survey gathered information from a mismatched sample of estranged parents (n = 546) and children (n = 352) (Carr et al., in press). The researchers hypothesised that estranged relationships would exhibit a lack of perspective-taking, so participants were asked what they believed to be the reason for their estrangement for comparative purposes. While survey responses were open ended, the researchers only recorded one primary attribution for each respondent, so it is possible that the complexity of estrangement is underrepresented in the study findings. The three most common attributions by parents were “objectionable relationships”, where the parent believed the child estranged due to third party influence (28.6%), “divorce” and parental alienation (13.2%), and “toxicity” explained as constant disrespect from the adult child (8.3%). Adult children’s most frequent attributions were “toxicity” including hurt, 4 K. Agllias Downloaded by [Kylie Agllias] at 02:41 30 March 2015 disrespect, and cruelty from the parent (22.4%), feeling “unsupported or unaccepted” by the parent (14.8%), and “abuse” either perpetrated by a parent or another party (13.9%). Similarities can be seen between Agllias’s (2015) and Carr et al.’s (in press) parental sample where third-party influence and impacts of divorce both featured. There are also similarities between Scharp et al.’s (2014) study and Carr et al.’s (in press) where abuse and elements of toxicity and feeling unsupported featured in both adult child samples. Methodology The study of family estrangement is relatively complex and under researched, so an exploratory qualitative design was employed to understand how participants defined, explained, experienced, and made meaning of the phenomenon. Due to previous research that showed that estranged parents were often unsure of the reason for estrangement and the possibility that adult children might have very different perspectives to the parent sample, it was important to approach the study without priori assumptions about their responses. Ethics clearance was granted from the University of Newcastle Ethics Committee in February 2012, which operates in accordance with the Australian National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research, 2007 (Australian Government, 2007). Ethical considerations included the potential of participants to have adverse reactions while telling their estrangement story, and measures were employed to identify vulnerability, reduce retraumatisation during the interviews, and ensure adequate referral pathways were available if required. Possible study limitations included the retrospective collection of data, making it susceptible to participants’ lapses of memory and prosocial reporting of personal choices and actions. Sampling and Recruitment Radio and print media were used to recruit adult children with a current experience of estrangement from at least one parent. Participants were informed that they would be asked to detail their history and daily experience of estrangement to advance understandings of this phenomenon. Twenty-six participants, who were estranged from 40 parents were recruited from New South Wales and Victoria (in this study parents relates to biological or adoptive parents, as participants did not speak about being estranged from step-parents). There were 20 women and six men, including one couple (who were estranged from both parents respectively). Participants were aged between 30 and 55 years with a mean age of 44. Data Collection In-depth interviews were conducted with 26 participants initially. Interviews commenced with a grand-tour question, and participants were encouraged to guide the interview in the direction most useful to them, with primarily clarifying and probing questions throughout. A preliminary data analysis report was forwarded to each participant approximately six months later. At this time participants were invited to participate in a second in-depth interview to discuss further developments in their estrangement and “member checking” also occurred at this time. A second in-depth interview was conducted with six participants. Of the participants who did not participate, the majority replied to the invitation and stated that they were satisfied with the preliminary findings Australian Social Work 5 but had nothing further to add. Free-text diaries were offered to participants who wished to record additional data between interviews and two participants used the diaries during this period. Data were collected between March and December 2012. Downloaded by [Kylie Agllias] at 02:41 30 March 2015 Data Analysis Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed alongside diary entries, using the NVivo software package (QSR International Pty Ltd, 2012). Interpretive phenomenological analysis, guided by the work of Smith, Flowers, and Larkin (2009) and van Manen (1990), was used throughout the project to explore and understand the estrangement experience and the meanings ascribed to it. Emergent themes were analysed in each data source before connections and comparisons were made across the entire data set. Findings The study findings offer a phenomenological examination of the adult child’s beliefs, ideas, and musings about their estrangement. Participants reported 40 current estrangements from parents (23 mothers and 17 fathers) at the time of the first interview. Of these, 23 estrangements were initiated by the participant and 16 were maintained by the participant after being initiated by the parent or occurring after a mutual lessening of contact, while one was initiated by the parent to the dissatisfaction of the participant. The majority of participants (n = 14) were estranged from both parents; nine from their mother only, and three from their father only. There were 36 physical estrangements and four emotional estrangements. Physical estrangements ranged from one month to 39 years, with the average lasting around 8.5 years. Long-term emotional disconnection was also a component of many participant’s lives, with 18 out of 26 participants saying they were emotionally estranged from at least one parent during childhood (accounting for 25 estrangements). Five female participants, who were estranged from their mother only, had also experienced at least one period of physical estrangement from their father. One female participant had begun to reconcile with her father at the time of the second interview, and no longer classified herself as estranged from him. Four participants were estranged from a parent at the time of their death and these estrangements are counted in this data. The participants in this study attributed their estrangement to a number of negative parental characteristics and parental behaviours enacted throughout their lives that impacted on and eroded the trust and goodwill in the intergenerational bond. These were categorised under three primary themes: (i) abuse, (ii) poor parenting, and (iii) betrayal. It was unusual for estrangement to occur after one incident of perceived abuse, conflict, or betrayal. Rather, the majority of participants suggested that their current estrangement was foregrounded by a long-term sense of disconnection from their parent or parents or periods of physical separation during childhood. Most engaged in cycles of estrangement and reunification over decades, where they examined and experimented with the relationship as well as “being alone”. It was most often in response to a relatively minor incident or an act of betrayal that occurred during a period of reunification, that the participant ultimately concluded that the negative or destructive elements of the relationship were immovable. At this point they made a decision to initiate estrangement, or not to attempt reunification, in order to protect themselves. Participants said that across these cycles and over time they tended to shift their attention and energy away 6 K. Agllias Downloaded by [Kylie Agllias] at 02:41 30 March 2015 from the parental relationship towards personal and nuclear family health, wellbeing, and growth, which made it easier to live with the estrangement. A minority of participants had estranged from a parent after one incident of perceived conflict or betrayal (accounting for eight estrangements). Another small group of participants stated that they had a long-term physical estrangement from a parent that originated in childhood and remained intact after a brief encounter or the participant’s refusal to meet (accounting for three estrangements). Only one participant stated that he was dissatisfied with the estrangement, never felt parental disconnection, and had not experienced abuse, betrayal, or poor parenting. He hoped for recontact. It is important to note that this participant’s story was much more consistent with data and findings reported in the initial study, where estrangement was attributed to third party interference, so it will not be reported on further in this paper (Agllias, 2015). Long-term Disconnection Childhood disconnection was mentioned by the majority of participants as a backdrop to the estrangement decision. Sometimes participants explained the disconnection in relation to early attachment experiences or a feeling that their parent had nothing emotional to offer them as a child. Participants often described childhood disconnection as a feeling that they did not “belong” to this family: “I always said my whole time that I lived at home, I don’t belong to this family… .I’ve got to be adopted” (Karen, Interview; pseudonyms have been used to ensure participant confidentiality). Childhood disconnection was recognised as a distinct lack of attention or presence by the parent or parents. In some instances, disconnect was a direct result of the parent being physically absent from the child’s life, sometimes from birth but usually after relationship breakdown or divorce. Some participants also spoke of being prevented from seeing nonresidential parents: “[My mother] made it harder and harder and harder for us to see him. Coincidentally if he’d have access we’d be out and he’d arrive at the door and we’d be gone….Dad disappeared completely over those years” (Debbie, Interview). Disconnection was often experienced as “being the odd one out” as children started to grow and reach adulthood, and participants often spoke about feeling like they didn’t “fit in”. They spoke about seeing things differently to their parents and this was often related to values, beliefs, and ideas about issues such as religion, prioritising an education, de facto relationships, and work ethic. In adulthood, disconnection was often highlighted by the parent’s disinterest in grandchildren and the absence of family stories. Participants found this disconnection and lack of “sharing” particularly difficult in certain key periods of their lives; for example, getting married, or when pregnant: “I have no connection to my family. My kids have been doing the family tree and I’m going what was my mother’s surname, what was her maiden name? I have no idea” (Karen, Interview 1). Three Core Contributors to Estrangement When participants were asked why they estranged from parents they offered three core reasons that were rarely experienced singularly: abuse, poor parenting, and betrayal. Disconnection formed the background to abuse, poor parenting, and betrayal, either stemming from, or contributing to, these issues. Downloaded by [Kylie Agllias] at 02:41 30 March 2015 Australian Social Work 7 Abuse The majority of participants cited “abuse” as core to their decision to estrange from one or both parents. They described significant physical, sexual, and emotional abuse that was perpetrated by their parent(s) primarily in childhood, but sometimes into adulthood: “Very traumatic childhood; basically, beaten by my father; verbally abused and beaten by my mother. My mum’s an alcoholic. She used to over-sexualise us as children” (Tracey, Interview). However, many of the participants who stated that estrangement was connected to abuse had experienced abuse at the hands of someone other than the estranged parent. For them, abuse was often linked to betrayal. They suggested that their parent betrayed them because they failed to protect them, they minimised, overlooked, or colluded in the abuse. In other instances the estrangement stemmed from the period when the child or adult child disclosed sexual abuse and was not believed by their parent or received a response that was inappropriate or inadequate for the situation. Additionally there were a few cases where participants estranged from their parent after discovering that the parent or the parent’s partner had physically or sexually assaulted another member of their family. Again, the subsequent estrangement from a nonperpetrating parent was often explained as a result of that parent’s denial of the situation. The majority of participants also described emotional abuse that ranged from the most commonly cited “name calling” and belittling to manipulative mind games and bullying. Emotional abuse was also often connected to denigrating the other parent, telling the child that they weren’t planned or wanted, or that other parent didn’t love them. Rita stated, “I was a filthy, ugly little slut. Who would ever look at you. Even your own father hates you” (Interview). Poor Parenting While disconnection and abuse constitute poor parenting by themselves, participants described other behaviours that they considered “poor parenting”. They spoke of authoritarian parenting styles, where parents were demanding and highly critical of the child. Shaming, scapegoating, and favouritism were commonly mentioned. Attention and affection were often conditional on adherence to the opinions and demands of the parent: “I had to say the things that she wanted to hear, I had to think the things that she wanted me to think, I had to be there for her on her demand” (Tina, Interview). Parentification was common, with many participants saying that they were responsible for housework and childcare beyond the normal expectations of childhood. Cynthia said: “I was the house cleaner. I did everything… .It had to be perfect… .Can you imagine how terrified I was every time I did anything in that house?” (Interview). Parentification was also marked by inappropriate sharing of emotional and relationship issues, or the child holding onto secrets. Parents were regularly perceived as using their children for extra emotional and physical support: “[I] had to watch her… .She tried to overdose numerous times and that. So you had to kind of—I’d stand in the doorway” (Karen, Interview). In adulthood participants denoted poor parenting as a lack of parental support as well as a lack of interest in, or disconnection from, their family. Participants often perceived poor parenting originating from adults who they described as self-centred, attention seeking and demanding, or absent across their lifespan. They described parents who were often manipulative, dishonest, and powerful, although some suggested this was fuelled by feelings of inadequacy. A small group also described the parent as weak or 8 K. Agllias Downloaded by [Kylie Agllias] at 02:41 30 March 2015 powerless in some areas and particularly relationships (e.g., against an abusive partner or parent). Betrayal Although childhood abuse would seem to be the ultimate betrayal, participants identified additional acts of betrayal across the lifespan that contributed to their decision to estrange. Betrayal was often associated with family secrets and lies that, once exposed, contributed to participant disbelief, pain, and embarrassment. Acts of betrayal ranged from small acts of rejection to long-held secrets and significant acts of sabotage. Teenagers and adults were often dismayed that important information was kept from them: “They said that [my dad] ran away…. But he didn’t, he went to gaol, but I didn’t know until…I was, maybe 25, I didn’t know why and that pissed me off too” (Lori, Interview). Sometimes the betrayal might have been a cruel public slight or being overlooked for a family event. Sometimes it was enacted by taking something from the participant, an invasion of privacy or a perceived act of selfishness. In adulthood, betrayal often took the form of the parent undermining the participant’s relationships with others. This was particularly so for the participant’s romantic or marital relationships where the parent might side with the participant’s partner, collude with them in custody cases, or attempt to have sexual relationships with them. Often betrayal was “discovered” in adulthood, although it had been committed during or since childhood. For example, Brenda found out that her mother had used her childhood health condition to gain favours and commit fraud. Laura discovered that her father had been having affairs in her teenage years but in adulthood also learned that he had a second family. Cycles of Estrangement and Reunification The majority of participants described years and decades of assessing their relationships with parents as well as cycles of estrangement and reunification. They spoke about the frustration associated with craving family or belonging while needing relief from a relationship imbued with abuse, poor parenting, and betrayal. Many described times when they felt so worn down by the demands of the parent that they needed distance to evaluate the relationship and to regroup. It was almost like the participants were experimenting with being alone at the same time as gathering strength for the next reunification. (Note, the term reunification here is not cognisant with its usage in practice. Rather, it refers to a period after estrangement when participants said they resumed speaking to the parent and there was minimal overt conflict. However, there was no recognition or resolution of previous issues). They also described pressure, either from their internal expectations of self or from others (particularly from partners), to reunify with parents. Pressure was felt most acutely when the participant discovered that their parent was unwell, alone, or in need. These pressures would often need to be balanced or justified against their need to feel healthy and well: “I felt like maybe I should ring my mum because my sister went to visit her and she said she’s a size 20 and is very unwell… .The guilt started to creep in because I’m the eldest” (Donna, Interview). When participants had experienced long-term physical and emotional disconnection from a nonresidential parent they often felt a need to reconnect as an adult, while others Downloaded by [Kylie Agllias] at 02:41 30 March 2015 Australian Social Work 9 thought it best to leave alone. As Lori explained: “I just thought everyone else knows what their dad looks like and I know nothing about him…I just didn’t want to die and not know what my own dad looks like” (Interview 1). Participants were often very guarded or cautious during periods of reunification or at family events. However, experiences of feeling rebuffed or silenced, as well as poor parenting, abuse, and betrayal that occurred during periods of reunification, often added to the mounting evidence that the relationship was unbalanced or unhealthy. In these situations, participants said they became increasingly aware that the relationship was taking its toll either on their own mental health or their relationships with others (particularly the time it took from parenting their own children). They spent a lot of time thinking about the consequences of remaining in the relationship or estranging. Participants often demonstrated empathy for their parent, being acutely aware that abuse, poor parenting, and betrayal were fuelled by a number of precursors including; mental health and substance abuse issues, divorce, large and often reconfigured families, and periods of crisis. Additionally, many participants pondered the quality of childhood experienced by their own parents, suggesting that migration, war time deprivation, child abuse, and poverty contributed to their experiences in the family of origin and beyond. However, they felt that these experiences were not enough to excuse bad behaviour, and that the parent was ultimately responsible for the way they responded to their child. Nothing Will Change Participants did not take the decision to estrange lightly. Over time—and for many, cycles of estrangement and reunification—they described personal growth, an increased clarity about the relationship dynamics, increased distancing, and a developing understanding that they had little power to change the parent: Just that moment—it’s like aha, the penny dropped. Up to that point I’d been making decisions that took me further and further away from the family…decision by decision by decision we just got further and further away. (Brenda, Interview 1) For participants who estranged early in their teenage or young adult lives, sporadic or accidental contact, as well as news from other members of the family, usually fortified their belief that nothing would change and justified their estrangement decision. At some point participants in cyclical relationships decided that nothing would change, that their relationship with the parent was beyond repair. Estrangement often resulted after a minor incident or act of betrayal that signified the relationship was immovable. Even if this realisation was not enough for them to make a decision to estrange entirely, or even when they did not initiate the estrangement, participants generally decided to take control of the relationship. They put boundaries in place and estranged emotionally, reduced physical contact, or maintained the parent’s estrangement. Discussion This research supports growing evidence that estrangement is not only a complex phenomenon, but one that develops over time. Estrangement should be viewed as a process, rather than an event. Adult children reported long-term disconnection and multiple examples of perceived abuse, poor parenting, and betrayal experienced in their Downloaded by [Kylie Agllias] at 02:41 30 March 2015 10 K. Agllias family of origin and across their lifetime, aligning with the initial study (Agllias, 2015) where parents posed a variety of possible contributors to the final estrangement event. Complexity may also contribute to the confusion parents have reported about their adult child’s decision to estrange (Agllias, 2015; Carr et al., in press). It appears that the parent often perceives the adult child as estranging over something unimportant or trivial and they regularly report that they are unsure of the actual cause (Agllias, 2015; Carr et al., in press). However, this study suggests the adult child has often harboured experiences and feelings of hurt and rejection for long periods and estrangement is not enacted without forethought. This poses questions about the communication of dissatisfaction in estranged relationships. Are adult children ineffective in communicating their problems with the relationship, are parents ineffective in hearing their concerns, or are there even more complex issues of power, control, and societal norms contributing? The findings are highly consistent with similar qualitative research, which also identified abuse and disconnection as core to adult child relationship dissatisfaction and subsequent distancing or estrangement (Scharp et al., 2014). The findings are also consistent with Carr et al.’s (in press) most common adult child attributions for estrangement; parental toxicity, lack of parental acceptance and support, abuse, and parental self-centredness. This study also confirmed Scharp et al.’s (2014) research about the cyclical nature of estrangement and reconciliation, as well as pressures to reunify. Periods where participants were reunified—but often harbouring unacknowledged or ill feelings—are interesting considering research that shows ambivalent relationships are associated with more distress and poorer psychological wellbeing than aversive ties (Fingerman et al., 2008; Uchino, 2004). This deserves further consideration in light of participant claims that estrangement serves to increase their health and wellbeing. In this study adult children all pointed towards the parent as the reason for the estrangement. This may indicate that samples were skewed, with adult children more likely to participate in estrangement research if they perceived themselves to be wronged. However, it is important to note that participants in this study were not solely complainants, with many feeling guilt and shame about the estrangement, as well as many who demonstrated empathy towards the parent and problematic issues in their lives. Additionally, if this sample is to be considered alongside Scharp et al.’s (2014) larger sample, then other explanations and implications should be considered. Parents may not know the extent to which adult children perceive historic acts of abuse, poor parenting, or betrayal. Indeed, many parents in the initial sample (Agllias, 2015) recognised that their parenting was flawed or compromised by external factors. In other cases, parents may continue to protect themselves through denial of their past and current behaviours. Practice Implications In relation to abuse-related intervention, it does appear that adult children may be willing to forgive parents who acknowledge their behaviours and take corrective action. This has implications across the lifespan, where early intervention would seem to be most effective in preventing abuse, encouraging sound parenting and honest intergenerational interactions. In later-life family interventions, this would require helping parents to understand their child’s reality, as well as education about the long-term implications of historical acts. Downloaded by [Kylie Agllias] at 02:41 30 March 2015 Australian Social Work 11 More generally, the personal reality of each estrangement story should be acknowledged and respected, but the differing perspectives should not be ignored or underestimated. Research suggests that when estranged individuals initially attend counselling they primarily desire the other person to change or for a swift reconciliation to occur (Agllias, 2011). At this point, examining alternate perspectives may simply be lost on a distressed client with one goal in mind. However, acknowledging and attending to issues of grief and loss are imperative to developing a trusting therapeutic alliance, where the reality or desirability of reconciliation can be examined. Ultimately, it is the client’s decision whether they wish to reconcile, reach out to the other or live with the estrangement intact. However, transgenerational theory, which emphasises the communication and acquisition of beliefs, practices, and behaviours across generations, suggests that: “changing a kinship’s perceived history should be as powerful a change as directly changing behaviour” (Lieberman, 1998, p. 203). Long-term therapeutic goals that encourage an empathic examination of the other side of the story (including intergenerational culture, patterns, and myths), a realistic evaluation of change capacity, and an acknowledgment of past wrongdoings (where applicable), have great potential to increase personal growth and contribute to more informed decisions about the estrangement status. Indeed, family therapists have long suggested that dealing with issues in the family of origin will also have beneficial effects on current relationships (Framo, 1976). Research Implications At this stage, two primary groups have been examined in depth—parents who have been estranged by their children (Agllias, 2011, 2013, 2015) and children who have decided to distance or estrange parents (Scharp et al., 2014 and this study). This leaves two intergenerational groups that have not been represented: parents who have estranged their adult children and children who have been estranged by a parent and still wish to reconcile. Additionally, a number of contributors to estrangement have been purported by participants across four reputable studies (Agllias, 2015 and this study; Carr et al., in press; Scharp et al., 2014), which now provides a sound basis for a quantitative examination to test frequencies and relationships between attributions. Conclusion This study supports previous findings that estrangement is not a random or momentary act, but a final recognition that primarily negative relationship dynamics are immovable. The adult children in this study said that long-term disconnection framed their lessening contact with parents who they perceived to be abusive, poor parents, or disloyal. Explanations for estrangement differed to those in a study of parents estranged from their children, who offered more externally derived explanations. This suggests a communicative disparity, and offers potential places for social work intervention across the lifespan. Acknowledgements The author would like to thank the participants for their thoughtfulness and commitment to advancing our understandings of family estrangement. 12 K. Agllias Downloaded by [Kylie Agllias] at 02:41 30 March 2015 References Agllias, K. (2011). Every family: Intergenerational estrangement between older parents and their adult children. (PhD thesis) University of Newcastle, Unpublished. Agllias, K. (2013). The gendered experience of family estrangement in later life. Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, 28, 309–321. doi:10.1177/0886109913495727 Agllias, K. (2015). Difference, choice and punishment: Parental beliefs and understandings about adult child estrangement. Australian Social Work, 68(1), 115–129. doi:10.1080/0312407X.2014. 927897 Australian Government. (2007). Australian code for the responsible conduct of research: Updated March 2014. Retrieved from http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/guidelines/publications/e72 Baker, A. J. L., & Chambers, J. (2011). Adult recall of childhood exposure to parental conflict: Unpacking the black box of parental alienation. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 52(1), 55–76. doi:10.1080/10502556.2011.534396 Bowen, M. (1982). Family therapy in clinical practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Jason Aronson. Carr, K., Holman, A., Stephenson-Abetz, J. J., Koenig Kellas, J., & Vagnoni, E. (in press). Giving voice to the silence of family estrangement: Comparing reasons of estranged parents and adult children in a non-matched sample. Journal of Family Communication. Cooney, T. M. (1997). Parent–child relationships across adulthood. In S. Duck (Ed.), Handbook of personal relationships (pp. 451–468). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Daatland, S. O. (2007). Marital history and intergenerational solidarity: The impact of divorce and unmarried cohabitation. Journal of Social Issues, 63, 809–825. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2007. 00538.x Doyle, M., O’Dywer, C., & Timonen, V. (2010). “How can you just cut off a whole side of the family and say move on?” The reshaping of paternal grandparent–grandchild relationships following divorce or separation in the middle generation. Family Relations, 59, 587–598. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2010.00625.x Dykstra, P. A., & Fokkema, T. (2011). Relationships between parents and their adult children: A West European typology of late-life families. Ageing and Society, 31, 545–569. doi:10.1017/ S0144686X10001108 Fingerman, K. L., Hay, E. L., & Birditt, K. S. (2004). The best of ties, the worst of ties: Close, problematic and ambivalent social relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 792–808. doi:10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00053.x Fingerman, K. L., Pitzer, L., Lefkowitz, E. S., Birditt, K. S., & Mroczek, D. (2008). Ambivalent relationship qualities between adults and their parents: Implications for well-being of both parties. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 63, 362–371. doi:10.1093/geronb/63.6.P362 Fraley, R. C., & Brumbaugh, C. C. (2007). Adult attachment and preemptive defenses: Converging evidence on the role of defensive exclusion at the level of encoding. Journal of Personality, 75(5), 1033–1050. Framo, J. (1976). Family of origin as a therapeutic resource for adults in marital and family therapy: You can and should go home again. Family Process, 15, 193–210. doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1976. 00193.x Friedlander, S., & Gans Walters, M. (2010). When a child rejects a parent: Tailoring the intervention to fit the problem. Family Court Review, 48(1), 98–111. doi:10.1111/j.1744-1617. 2009.01291.x IpsosMORI. (2014). Family estrangement survey for Stand Alone. Retrieved October 28, 2014, from https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3456/Family-estrangement-su rvey-for-Stand-Alone.aspx Kramer, B. J., Boelk, A. Z., & Auer, C. (2006). Family conflict at the end of life: Lessons learned in a model program for vulnerable older adults. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 9, 791–801. doi:10.1089/ jpm.2006.9.791 LeBey, B. (2001). Family estrangements: How they begin, how to mend them, how to cope with them. Atlanta: Longstreet Press. Lieberman, S. (1998). History-containing systems. Journal of Family Therapy, 20, 195–206. doi:10.1111/1467-6427.00080 Meier, J. S. (2009). A historical perspective on parental alienation syndrome and parental alienation. Journal of Child Custody, 6, 232–257. doi:10.1080/15379410903084681 Downloaded by [Kylie Agllias] at 02:41 30 March 2015 Australian Social Work 13 Peisah, C., Brodaty, H., & Quadrio, C. (2006). Family conflict in dementia: Prodigal sons and black sheep. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 21, 485–492. doi:10.1002/gps.1501 QSR International Pty Ltd. (2012). NVivo qualitative data analysis software (Version 10). Scharp, K. M., Paxman, C. G., & Thomas, L. J. (2014). “It was the straw that broke the camel’s back”: The estrangement backstories adult children tell about distancing themselves from their parents. Manuscript under review. Short, P. (1996). No-one to turn to: Estrangement and need in kinship economies. Paper presented at the 5th Australian Family Research Conference, Melbourne. Sichel, M. (2004). Healing from family rifts: Ten steps to finding peace after being cut off from a family member. New York, NY: McGraw Hill. Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretive phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research. Los Angeles: Sage. Sucov, E. B. (2006). Fragmented families: Patterns of estrangement and reconciliation. Jerusalem: Southern Hills Press. Uchino, B. N. (2004). Social support and physical health: Understanding the health consequences of relationships. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. doi:10.12987/yale/9780300102185.001.0001 Van Gaalen, R. I., & Dykstra, P. A. (2006). Solidarity and conflict between adult children and parents: A latent class analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 947–960. doi:10.1111/j.17413737.2006.00306.x van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Michigan: The Althouse Press. Williamson, D. S. (1981). Personal authority via termination of the intergenerational boundary: A new stage in the family life cycle. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 7, 441–452. doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.1981.tb01398.x