UNCOVERING STRENGTHS OF

CHILDREN OF ALCOHOLIC PARENTS

John P. Walker
Robert E. Lee

ABSTRACT: Being a child of an alcoholic (COA) is neither a diagnosis

nor a psychosocial death sentence. Neither alcoholic families nor
COAs are monolithic. A variety of factors converge in developmental
trajectories resulting in diverse individual outcomes. Supportive rela-
tionships with non-substance using parents and siblings and appro-
priate levels of parentification all may enable a significant proportion
of COAs to enjoy high self-esteem, lack of problematic substance use,
and good adaptive capability. Therapists and clients should refrain
from looking at COAs through a deficit framework and instead should
look for evidence of relational resilience in alcoholic families of origin.
Such strengths-based assessments will increase therapeutic leverage
with COAs seeking treatment for a range of presenting problems.
KEY WORDS: Children of Alcoholics (COA); parentification; relational resilience; fam-
ily strengths.

An estimated 28 million people in the United States grow up with

at least one parent who is abusing or dependent upon alcohol (Russel,
Henderson, & Blume, 1985). These children often are characterized in
the clinical literature in a particularly narrow way. Referred to as
"COAs" (Children of Alcoholics), they are described as if COA were a
diagnosis (e.g., Black, 1982; Black, Bucky, & Wilder-Padilla, 1986;

John P. Walker, MA, is Program Director of Youth Emergency Services for Indi-
anapolis, IN. Robert E. Lee, PhD, is clinical director of the doctoral marital and family
therapy specialization, Department of Family and Child Ecology, Michigan State Uni-
versity. Reprint requests should be sent to John P. Walker, 711 South East Street,
Indianapolis, IN 46225; e-mail John @ kidwrap.org.

Contemporary Family Therapy, 20(4), December 1998

C 1998 Human Sciences Press, Inc 521
522

CONTEMPORARY FAMILY THERAPY

Wegscheider, 1981; Woititz, 1983). Therapeutic programs and self-

help groups are offered to deal with the wide range of psychological
and relational problems said to be characteristic of that population.
"Adult children of alcoholics guess at what normal behavior is ...
have difficulty following a project from beginning to end . . . judge
themselves without mercy . . . constantly seek approval and affirma-
tion . . . are super responsible . . . are extremely loyal . . ." (Woititz,
1983, p. 4).
The authors wish to caution clinicians against the tendency to
pathologize COAs. A deficit framework will inhibit both COAs and
clinicians from discovering strengths and resources during assess-
ment and treatment. Despite the poignant descriptions of psychoso-
cial maladaptation, "definitive" books, specialized therapies, and self-
help groups, a large subpopulation of COAs demonstrate adequate
functioning in a variety of domains of psychosocial development and
do not have problems with substances.
This paper will compare characteristics commonly associated
with COAs in the clinical literature with results from a comprehen-
sive literature review of studies of adequately functioning COAs. The
findings, interpreted through the concept of relational resilience and
the lenses of strengths-based family therapy theories (structural and
contextual), will be used to shed light on developmental trajectories
leading to positive adjustment outcomes. The paper will conclude
with assessment guidelines that lead to greater therapeutic leverage
for family therapists treating COAs entering treatment with any pre-
senting problem.

COA AS A "DIAGNOSIS"
In the 1970s and 1980s the clinical and popular literature began
painting a bleak picture of children of alcoholics, one of general mal-
adaptation and psychosocial impairment (Sher, 1991). Some of the
more commonly cited problems were an inability to form intimate,
trustworthy relationships, the tendency to engage in denial and self-
blame, the inability to express individual needs and emotions, and
the tendency to be over-controlling in relationships (Black, 1982;
Brown, 1988; Cermak, 1986).
Perhaps because of this early trend in the clinical and popular
media to pathologize COAs, empirical research first focused on identi-
fying characteristic dysfunctions. More than 50% of COAs were found
 523

JOHN P. WALKER AND ROBERT E. LEE

to have adjustment disorders (e.g. Herjanic, Herjanic, Penick, Tomel-

leri, & Armbruster, 1977; Moos & Billings, 1982) and internalization
symptoms such as anxiety, low self-esteem, and depression (Anderson
& Quast, 1983; Hughes, 1977; Potter & Williams, 1991; Tarter,
Hegedus, Goldstein, Shelly, & Alterman, 1984). Externalizing behav-
iors also were associated with being a COA: hyperactivity (Cantwell,
1975; Hawkins, Catalano, & Miller, 1992); conduct disorder, opposi-
tional behavior, delinquency, and school problems (Chassin, Rogosch,
& Barrera, 1991; Deutsch, Dicicco, & Mills, 1982; Miller & Jang,
1977; Sher, Walitzer, Wood, & Brent, 1991). When these occurred in
childhood they were associated with alcohol problems and antisocial
behavior later in life (e.g., Zucker, Fitzgerald, & Moses, 1995). Re-
search also found that many families with substance abusing parents
were characterized by low cohesion, emotional constriction, hostility,
high levels of conflict, difficulty adapting to stress, and poor problem
solving skills (Clair & Genest, 1987; Filstead, McElfresh, & Anderson,
1981; Jacob & Leonard, 1988; Moos & Billings, 1982; Moos & Moos,
1984).
One of the most commonly cited risks for children of alcoholics
was the development of problems with alcohol and drugs later in life.
(For a review see Sher, 1991). Results from twin, adoption, and ani-
mal studies underscored how the complex relationship between envi-
ronment, development, and biology transacted to place adolescents
and young adults with alcoholic parents among the highest risk
groups for developing substance abuse problems (Zucker, et al., 1995).
Approximately 30% of alcoholics had at least one alcoholic parent
(Cotton, 1979). COAs were more likely than non-COAs to begin drink-
ing at earlier ages and escalate in their alcohol use during adoles-
cence (Colder, Chassin, Stice, & Curran, 1997). Moreover, risk for
COAs was found to go beyond alcohol use to include marijuana (Chas-
sin, Rogosch, & Barrera, 1991; Sher et al., 1991; Wright & Heppner,
1993), amphetamine, and cocaine use (Johnson, Leonard & Jacob,
1989). Gender differences also were found. In general, men were at
higher risk than women (Berkowitz & Perkins, 1987; Bohman, Sig-
vardsson, & Cloninger, 1981; Chassin, Curran, Hussong, & Colder,
1996; Harburg, DiFranceisco, Webster, Gleiberman, & Schork, 1990;
Schissel, 1993). In fact, males who exhibited conduct disordered be-
haviors and had fathers with a diagnosis of anti-social personality
disorder and some type of chemical dependency appeared to be at
highest risk for problems with substances (Zucker, Ellis, Bingham, &
Fitzgerald, 1996).
524
CONTEMPORARY FAMILY THERAPY

WELL ADJUSTED COAS

Despite the substantiated risks for COAs, a significant number
do not become substance abusers as adults (Fingarette, 1988; Havey
& Dodd, 1993; Ullman & Orenstein, 1994) or develop the "characteris-
tic" pathologic symptoms, traits, and behaviors (Benson & Heller,
1987; Woodside, 1988). For example, psychological disorders are
found in a much smaller number of COAs than previously believed
(Hawkins, et al., 1992; el-Guebaly & Offord, 1979; West & Prinz,
1987), and studies are beginning to show that the psychosocial func-
tioning of many COAs is comparable to controls (Jacob & Leonard,
1986; Wright & Heppner, 1993).
Therefore, instead of focusing on those children who fared badly,
and the families from which they came, social scientists (e.g., Burk &
Sher, 1988; Dumka & Roosa, 1993; Sher, 1991; Werner, 1986) began
to look at COAs who were well adjusted and the family contexts from
which they came.
Studies found that there were apparently well-adjusted COAs
who, in contrast to symptomatic COAs, scored high on measures of
self-esteem and internal locus of control (Werner, 1986; Keane, 1983),
had the ability to reframe negative experiences in a positive light,
and reported less depression (Clair & Genest, 1987). Moreover, al-
though the clinical literature asserted that COAs experience difficulty
forming intimate relationships (e.g., Black, 1982; Brown, 1988; Cer-
mak, 1986), empirical evidence found that well adjusted COAs sought
out emotional support from informal and formal peer groups during
childhood (Fergusson & Lynskey, 1996; Selnow & Crano, 1986), ALA-
TEEN during adolescence (Callan & Jackson, 1986; Hughes, 1977),
friends during adulthood (Ohannessian & Hesselbrock, 1993), and
spouses throughout married life (Bennett, Wolin, Reiss, & Teitel-
baum, 1987). In fact, some COAs actually may have a significantly
greater capacity for intimate relationships than non-COAs (Barnard
& Spoentgen, 1987).
COAs do not necessarily develop substance use problems. To the
contrary, many demonstrate low levels of alcohol use or abstain alto-
gether. Some abstain because they fear they will become alcoholics
themselves and they have seen the negative consequences of their
parents drinking (Harburg, et al., 1990; Chassin, & Sher, 1990).
Others do not become alcoholic because they attend self-help groups
(Callan & Jackson, 1986). The incidence of alcohol abuse also is de-
creased when COAs have a greater internal locus of control (Springer
 525

JOHN P. WALKER AND ROBERT E. LEE

& Gastfriend, 1994), daughters do not identify with their alcoholic

fathers (Brook, Whiteman, Gordon, & Brook, 1986), and sons do not
perceive their alcoholic fathers to be in a position of power (McCord,
1988; Ullman & Orenstein, 1994).
Many COAs may even fare better than predicted by pessimistic
clinicians because their families have become stronger in an attempt
to cope with the challenges of addiction. Despite the picture conveyed
by some, COAs actually may function more independently of their
parents than do controls (Wright, 1992; Wright, Frank, & Pirsch,
1991). Likewise, marital and family therapists recognize that there is
not a single kind of alcoholic family. Families are more diverse than
that, and are experienced differently by the individual members
(Bowen, 1966). Empirical evidence has found that when COAs come
from a family with strong emotional bonds and a warm, supportive
environment, they are less prone to psychiatric diagnoses such as
conduct disorders and depression (Roosa, Dumka, & Tein, 1996; Re-
ich, Earls, & Powel, 1988), and are more empathetic with and caring
to family members in distress (Devine & Braithwaite 1992). Some
studies found that when there was not a perception that the alcohol-
ism was a threat to the adolescent's well-being, non-drinking parent-
adolescent subsystem could actually buffer adolescents from develop-
ing anxiety and depression (Braithwaite & Devine, 1993; Keane,
1983). Moreover, some alcoholic families may even prepare offspring
to cultivate supportive relationships outside the home (Werner, 1986).

THE CONCEPT OF RESILIENCE

The above findings—well-adjusted COAs and strengths in COA
families of origin—hint at the heterogeneity of families with chem-
ically dependent parents while underscoring the concept of resilience.
Therapists should not be distracted from strengths based assess-
ments when they learn that their clients have grown up in substance
abusing environments. To the contrary, therapists can use models of
resilience and the research on well adjusted COAs to uncover
strengths that can be used in treatment for a range of presenting
problems that are not necessarily related to substance abuse.
The concept of resilience grew out of the field of developmental
psychopathology (Cicchetti & Garmezy, 1993) and has historically
used the individual as the principal unit of analysis. However, more
recent models of resilience utilize family systems concepts and ecolog-
526

CONTEMPORARY FAMILY THERAPY

ical frameworks to understand processes leading to adaptive out-

comes (e.g., Cohler, Stott, & Musick, 1995; Egeland, Carlson, &
Sroufe, 1993; Walsh, 1996). Theoretical constructs from a develop-
mental systems perspective, such as plasticity, multiple developmen-
tal trajectories, fusion, and transacting contexts have been instru-
mental in building and refining models of resilience (e.g., Ford &
Lerner, 1992; Staudinger, Marsiske, & Baltes, 1995) and are useful in
explaining the wide range of diversity found in family functioning and
COA adjustment (West & Prinz, 1987). A probabilistic, rather than a
deterministic, view of development helps account for heterogeneity in
resilient and maladaptive behaviors that COAs can potentially ex-
hibit (Zucker et al., 1995). The relative plasticity of human develop-
ment plays an integral role in producing several developmental tra-
jectories for COAs and helps explain why some offspring are more
resilient than others (Ford & Lerner, 1992). The degree to which
members of alcoholic families can intentionally and unintentionally
alter each other and their contexts depends on who has an instru-
mental role in producing adaptive outcomes.
Family therapists and their clients are handicapped when patho-
logically-based frames of reference guide assessment and treatment
(Minuchin & Fishman, 1981). This tendency leads to mutual con-
structions of a limited reality. Specifically, when dealing with COAs
assessment should be approached from the standpoint that alcoholic
families have reservoirs of strengths that the therapists and clients
must recognize and tap. Clinicians need to begin the assessment pro-
cess assuming that families and/or specific subsystems have the po-
tential to respond to addiction with great diversity by utilizing the
collective strengths of their members.
The concept of relational resilience is an important tool in a
strengths-based interview. The family is considered to be the source
of resilience, rather than resilience being an inborn trait or a product
of individual initiative (Walsh, 1996; Hawley & DeHaan, 1996). From
this perspective, clinicians need to assess for resilience as a systemic
quality that is embedded in the process of interdependent relation-
ships. It is a phenomenon that lies within the quality of family rela-
tionships and can be forged through adversity (Walsh, 1996). Instead
of simply assessing for the etiology of dysfunction, clinicians need to
obtain a detailed account of how relational resilience has been culti-
vated in marital, parental, parent-child, and sibling subsystems. Spe-
cific characteristics of relational resilience include affirming belief
systems, effective communication patterns, and relationships that are
 527

JOHN P. WALKER AND ROBERT E. LEE

flexible, cohesive, and adaptive. Resilient families collectively cope

with distal risks, such as poverty (Masten, Best, & Garmezy, 1990),
while parent, adolescent, and sibling subsystems cope with more im-
mediate familial stressors, such as substance abuse. Hence, a re-
silient family is one that is able to adapt and, ultimately, even pros-
per from crises (Hawley & DeHann, 1996; Walsh, 1996).

IMPLICATIONS FOR ASSESSMENT AND TREATMENT:

ASSESSING FOR FAMILY SUPPORT AND POSITIVE
CARETAKING FUNCTIONS
Resilient alcoholic families adapt to stressors by utilizing re-
sources, developing new strengths, and reorganizing family relation-
ships to minimize the destructive impact of crises. Three areas of re-
search—strengths within sibling and parent-child subsystems, and
parentification—explore how families can reorganize to protect COAs
from the risks associated with parental substance abuse and depen-
dence. Findings from these research domains can help therapists in-
crease their therapeutic leverage when COAs present with various
problems.

The Hidden Strengths of Siblings

Although the strengths of sibling subsystems are often over-
looked during assessment and treatment (Minuchin & Fishman,
1981), brothers and sisters can be a potential built-in resource to cope
with alcohol-related and other sources of stress. Clinicians should ex-
plore the challenges that siblings have encountered while growing up
in alcoholic families (for example, heightened conflict) because they
have the potential to encourage lifelong relationships characterized
by relational resilience. Often a sibling is the only family member not
using substances and who is able to be emotionally accessible to other
siblings on a relatively consistent basis. Some researchers speculate
that siblings from alcoholic families may even have more positive in-
teractions that facilitate stronger bonds than siblings from non-sub-
stance abusing families (Reich, et al., 1988). In fact, research has
found that COAs are more likely to seek out support from siblings
across the life-span (Children of Alcoholics Foundation, 1992; Holden,
Brown, & Mott, 1988; Werner and Smith, 1992), interact with one
another more than they do with their parents (Davis, Stern, & Van-
528

CONTEMPORARY FAMILY THERAPY

deusen, 1978), and play a protective role in the preventing substance

abuse during adolescence (Brook, Whiteman, Gordon, & Brenden,
1983; Johnson, Bryant, Strader, Bucholtz, Berbaum, Collins, & Noe,
1996; Needle, McCubbin, Wilson, Reineck, Lazar, & Mederer, 1986).
Therefore it seems prudent for therapists to make efforts to hold sib-
ling sessions and identify the protective dynamics of these relation-
ships. Siblings can be an excellent source of support to COAs who are
struggling to abstain from substances, cope with loss, depression, or
insecurity, or handle diverse stressors.

The Protective Aspects of Parent-Child Subsystems

Therapists also should look for the natural resources found in the
relationship between COAs and their non-substance-abusing parents.
Supportive parent-child relationships have been identified as the sin-
gle most important protective process operating to produce resilient
outcomes across several, diverse populations at risk (Cicchetti & Gar-
mezy, 1993; Garmezy, 1985; Masten, Best, & Garmezy, 1990; Radke-
Yarrow & Brown, 1993; Rutter, 1990). In fact, lacking an intimate
relationship with at least one parent was a more reliable predictor of
maladjustment than parental alcoholism per se (Braithwaite & De-
vine, 1993). COAs who had emotionally satisfying and supportive re-
lationships with non-substance-abusing parents had the social and
academic competence needed to compensate for the negative effects of
parental alcoholism, other family problems (Obuchowska, 1974; Seil-
hamer, Jacob, & Dunn, 1993), and the influence of drug using peers
(Brook, Brook, Gordon, Whiteman, & Cohen, 1990). Accordingly,
these COAs also had higher self esteem than those lacking such a
parental relationship (Masini, 1996).
Most studies that specifically explored the mediating role of the
non-using parent on competent COA functioning found that parental
support appeared to have a significant, protective impact across the
life-span (Braithwaite & Devine, 1993; Jacob & Leonard, 1986; Mas-
ini, 1996; Obuchowska, 1974; Roosa, Tein, Groppenbacher, Michaels,
& Dumka, 1993; Werner & Smith, 1992). For example, several studies
(Andrews, Hops, & Duncan, 1997; Blanton, Gibbons, Gerrard, Conger,
& Smith, 1997; Brook, et al., 1990; Johnson, et al., 1996; Kandel &
Andrews, 1987) found that supportive parent-adolescent relationships
decreased the incidence of COA substance abuse. In fact, secure rela-
tionships with non-substance-using, emotionally stable parents, with
conventional attitudes and beliefs, appear to be among the most pow-
 529

JOHN P. WALKER AND ROBERT E. LEE

erful protective influences in preventing substance abuse and antiso-

cial behaviors (Brook, et al., 1990; Drake & Valiant, 1988; Hawkins,
at al., 1992; Werner, 1986).
Research has found that positive parent-child subsystems can
ameliorate the stress associated with alcoholism for both children and
parents and, when augmented by good marital adjustment, can lead
to positive mental health profiles for both children and the non-sub-
stance-abusing parent (Roosa, et al., 1993). In return, positive parent-
child relationships also may help a parent tolerate the stress of an
alcoholic partner (Dumka & Roosa, 1993). Therefore, therapists
clearly need to look for relational resilience within parent-child sub-
systems. Family of origin sessions might be an invaluable part of
treatment because parent-child relationships characterized by rela-
tional resilience in childhood may offer a natural support network to
help clients through stressful transition points throughout the family
life cycle (Carter & McGoldrick, 1988).
In light of the foregoing, prudent therapists will remember to
look for evidence of relational resilience in COA families of origin.
That is, therapists should explore the extent to which these families
have been able to utilize existing resources (i.e., sibling-sibling and
parent-child relationships, and parental) to mediate the deleterious
effects of parental drinking problems and other stressors.

The Importance of Context in Distinguishing Constructive

Adaptive Traits from Pathology
Conducting strengths-based assessments of COAs requires thera-
pists to recognize that protective factors are not necessarily positive
experiences (Rutter, 1985) and may even deceptively appear to be
symptoms of pathology. Behaviors traditionally regarded as dysfunc-
tional (e.g., enmeshment and parentification) may actually be positive
ways in which family systems handle the risks associated with famil-
ial alcoholism. Therapists need to be cautious of their tendency to
automatically pathologize certain individual and relationship char-
acteristics because the context of any given variable will dictate
whether or not it is a risk factor or protective (Rutter, 1985). For ex-
ample, some of the most important protective qualities of any parent-
child relationships are the stability of attachment over (Farber &
Egeland, 1987; Rutter, 1985), emotional accessibility of the parent
(Egeland et al., 1993), and a sense of warmth and acceptance between
parent and child (Garmezy, 1985). Ironically, the clinical literature
530
CONTEMPORARY FAMILY THERAPY

claims that these parent-child characteristics are symptomatic of

enmeshment and cause a host of problems for COAs. However, an
extremely close bond between a COA and a non-substance abusing
parent may be more constructive than the term enmeshment tradi-
tionally connotes. The tendency to pathologize close relationships as
enmeshment might be because COAs have been viewed as survivors
of destructive familial forces (e.g., Wolin & Wolin, 1993). It may also
be because the pejorative term "enmeshment" has been used to de-
scribe a parent-child relationship that is apparently more interde-
pendent than warranted by a child's developmental stage. Clinicians
need to help the family assess whether the non-substance-using par-
ent-adolescent subsystem is "enmeshed" or if it is a supportive one
that ultimately protects against the development of substance abuse,
depression, anxiety, and a host of other psychosocial disorders. The
therapist of a COA should ask: "Does (or did) the relationship func-
tion to facilitate coping and competence in the presence of stress?"

Parentification: Positive Caretaking Functions

Research has confirmed the clinical speculation of parent-child
role-reversals in families with alcoholic parents (Goglia, Jurkovic,
Burt, & Burge-Callaway, 1992). That in turn has been considered evi-
dence of family dysfunction (e.g., Hecht, 1979; Barnard, 1994). How-
ever, the term is often misused without determining if there has been
an appropriate shift of parental responsibilities onto a capable child
(for example, Boyd-Franklin, 1989, talks about a "parental" child) or
if the child has been in charge of an adult's physical and emotional
well being (Boszormenyi-Nagy, & Spark, 1984). Many clinicians as-
sume that parentification is a symptom of enmeshment and do not
look for constructive functions. However, findings from empirical
studies indicate that "role-reversals" in alcoholic families may actu-
ally accelerate the individuation process (Wright, Frank, & Pirsch,
1991), lead to adaptive behavioral functioning (Beardslee & Po-
dorefsky, 1988), and lead to increases in children's self esteem (Boyd-
Franklin, 1989; Potter & Williams, 1991).
A more careful exploration of the context in which parentification
occurs is often warranted in the case of substance abusing families.
The clinician who assesses for relational resilience in families with
parentified youth attempts to pinpoint how a reciprocal exchange of
benefits has led to adaptive outcomes for more than one family mem-
ber. For example, a family with alcoholism may have one parent who
 531
JOHN P. WALKER AND ROBERT E. LEE

has been disabled by chemical dependency and another parent who

generally distressed and spread thin handling manifold responsi-
bilities. An older parentified child may have taken on appropriate
child rearing tasks with regard to younger siblings who allowed their
senior to be effective. This flexibility of roles could give relief to the
non-substance-abusing parent who in turn is able to be more emo-
tionally and instrumentally available to the other family members.
The caretaking child may learn how to be nurturing and independent,
engage in prosocial behaviors, and experience an increase in self-es-
teem and satisfaction through being an active agent in a crisis and
his or her significant giving to parents and family (Boyd-Franklin,
1989; Heatherington, Stanley-Hagan, & Anderson, 1989; Nardi, 1981;
Weiss, 1979; Wilson & Orford, 1978).
Family therapy theorists (e.g. Minuchin & Fishman, 1981; Bos-
zormenyi-Nagy, Grunebaum, & Ulrich, 1991) and cross-cultural zor-
menyi-Nagy, Grunebaum, & Ulrich, 1991) and cross-cultural studies
(Weisner & Gallimore, 1977; Ainsworth, 1967) have maintained that
some degree of parentification can have benefits for the child and can
even be essential for healthy family functioning. According to contex-
tual family therapy theory children receive from parents more than
they give, and therefore children are relieved and empowered when
they are able to pay their parents back by caring for them in some
appropriate way (Goldenthal, 1993). Structural family therapy theory
(Minuchin & Fishman, 1981) in turn emphasizes that families' roles
must be flexible enough to allow them to adapt to novel stressors.
Some parentification may be a healthy adaptation in the face of
alcoholism and a sign of relational resiliency. That is, giving capable
children appropriate amounts of parental responsibility may benefit
the entire family system. They themselves may develop greater levels
of individuation, conventionality (including deidealization of the sub-
stance abusing parent), and ultimately reduce the risk of perpetuat-
ing substance abuse to the next generation (Black, 1982; Deutsch,
1982; Wegscheider, 1981). The parentified COA who has an idealized,
emotionally supportive relationship with a nonalcoholic parent may
be less likely to develop problems with substances, because he or she
is less likely to emulate the alcoholic parent's behavior (Brook, et al.,
1986; Harburg, et al., 1990). A recent study found that poor parent-
adolescent relationships actually inhibited adolescent substance use
when parents were using marijuana, alcohol, or tobacco (Andrews,
Hops, & Duncan, 1997).
Therapists will want to acknowledge and appreciate COAs' par-
532
CONTEMPORARY FAMILY THERAPY

entified roles in their families. Therapists need to be sensitive to the

constructive functions that parentification can serve when COAs are
not overwhelmed with that role. Although some degree of parentifica-
tion may indicate a family's relational resilience, therapists also
should not be naive. Role reversals can be exploitative if the child's
role is not supported, periodically relieved, or reciprocated by paren-
tal figures (Goglia et al., 1992). Responsibilities associated with a par-
entified role must be within the child's developmental competencies
and the parents or siblings in the parentified relationship must as-
sume complementary, facilitating roles with the parentified child
(Mika, Bergner, & Baum,1987). The therapist also will need to assess
whether or not the family met (and meets) the parentified individual's
emotional needs. A parentified relationship is a hierarchical arrange-
ment with an unequal distribution of power that places the child in a
"one-up" position with his or her sibling or parent. Hence, therapists
must assess whether or not parentified COAs have sources of emo-
tional support other than the individuals with whom they play a par-
entified role. Emotional support from extended kinship, older sib-
lings, or another parent in a non-parentified relationship may have
functioned to protect the parentified individual from becoming over-
burdened with parental, sibling, and/or spousal responsibilities.

DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

In general, future research needs to identify developmental tra-

jectories, rather than generic protective variables, that lead to adap-
tive outcomes among COAs. Such a developmental-contextual ap-
proach appreciates the complexity of human life. Having said that,
however, those trajectories will undoubtedly include consistent par-
ent-child relationships that protect against the development of prob-
lematic substance use and other adaptive problems among COAs. The
nature of these relationships needs to be carefully specified and pro-
cess level variables identified. The senior author (JPW) predicts that
parentification with an alcoholic parent, deidealization of that parent,
and an emotionally supportive, idealized relationship with a non-
problematic substance using parent will be positively associated with
conventional thinking and behavior, non-problematic substance use,
and ego strength in COAs.
In addition, sibling subsystems are one of the most promising, yet
under-investigated areas, in resiliency research with COAs. Sibling
 533

JOHN P. WALKER AND ROBERT E. LEE

studies are needed to find out if parentification with brothers and

sisters leads to conventional belief systems, non-problematic use of
substances, and ego strength.
It is clear from the foregoing, however, that being a COA is nei-
ther a diagnosis nor a psychological death sentence. Neither alcoholic
families nor COAs are monolithic. A variety of factors converge in
developmental trajectories resulting in diverse individual outcomes.
A significant population of COAs enjoy good mental health, including
positive self esteem, lack of problematic substance use, and good
adaptive capability. There are aspects of being a COA, in some kinds
of alcoholic families, that may encourage these positive ends. COAs
seeking treatment and their therapists need to appreciate this if, in
the face of stress, they are to co-edit a promising story.

REFERENCES
Ainsworth, M. D. (1967). Infancy in Uganda. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.
Anderson, E., & Quast, W. (1983). Young children in alcoholic families: A mental health
needs-assessment and an intervention/prevention strategy. Journal of Primary
Prevention, 3, 174-187.
Andrews, J. A., Hops, H., & Duncan, S. C. (1997). Adolescent modeling of parent sub-
stance use: The moderating effect of the relationship with parent. Journal of Fam-
ily Psychology, 11, 259-270.
Barnard, C. P., & Spoentgen, P. A. (1987). Children of alcoholics: Characteristics and
Treatment. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 3(4), 47-65.
Barnard, C. P. (1994). Resiliency: A shift in our perception? American Journal of Fam-
ily Therapy, 22, 135-144.
Beardslee, W. R., & Podorefsky, D. (1988). Resilient adolescents whose parents have
serious affective and other psychiatric disorders: Importance of self understanding
and relationships. American Journal of Psychiatry, 145, 63—69.
Bennett, L. A., Wolin, S. J., Reiss, D., & Teitelbaum, M. A. (1987). Couples at risk for
transmission of alcoholism: Protective influences. Family Process, 26, 111-129.
Benson, C. S., & Heller, K. (1987). Factors in the current adjustment of young adult
daughters of alcoholic and problem drinking fathers. Journal of Abnormal Psychol-
ogy, 96, 305-312.
Berkowitz, A. D., & Perkins, W. H. (1987). Recent research on gender differences in
collegiate alcohol use. College Health, 36, 123-129.
Black, C. (1982). It will never happen to me. Denver: M.A.C. Printing and Publications.
Black, C., Bucky, S. F., & Wilder-Padilla, S. (1986). The interpersonal and emotional
consequences of being an adult child of an alcoholic. International Journal of Ad-
dictions, 21, 213-231.
Blanton, H., Gibbons, F. X., Gerrard, M., Conger, K. J., & Smith, G. E. (1997). Role of
family and peers in the development of prototypes associated with substance use.
Journal of Family Psychology, 11, 271-288.
Bohman, M., Sigvardsson, S., & Cloninger, R. C. (1981). Maternal inheritance of alco-
hol abuse. Archives of General Psychiatry, 38, 965-755.
Boszormenyi-Nagy, I., & Spark, G. M. (1984). Invisible loyalties. New York: Brunner/
Mazel.
534

CONTEMPORARY FAMILY THERAPY

Boszormenyi-Nagy, I., Grunebaum, J., & Ulrich, D. (1991). Contextual therapy. In A.

Gurman & D. P. Kniskern (Eds.), Handbook of family therapy, Vol. II (pp. 200-
238). New York: Brunner/Mazel.
Bowen, M. (1966). The use of family therapy in clinical practice. Comprehensive Psychi-
atry, 7, 345-374.
Boyd-Franklin, N. (1989). Black families in therapy: A multisystems approach. New
York: Guilford Press.
Braithwaite, V, & Devine, C. (1993). Life satisfaction and adjustment of children of
alcoholics: The effects of parental drinking, family disorganization and survival
roles. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 32, 417-429.
Brook, J. S., Whiteman, M., Gordon, A. S., & Brenden, C. (1983). Older brother's influ-
ence on younger sibling's drug use. Journal of Psychology, 114, 83-90.
Brook, J. S., Whiteman, M., Gordon, A. S., & Brook, D. W. (1986). Father-daughter
identification and its impact on her personality and drug use. Developmental Psy-
chology, 22, 743-748.
Brook, J. S., Brook, D. W., Gordon, A. S., Whiteman, M., & Cohen, P. (1990). The psy-
chosocial etiology of adolescent drug use: A family interactional approach. Genetic,
Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 116, 111-267.
Brown, S. (1988). Treating children of alcoholics: A developmental perspective. New
York: John Wiley & Sons.
Burk, J. P., & Sher, K. J. (1988). The "forgotten children" revisited: Neglected areas of
COA research. Clinical Psychology Review, 8, 285-302.
Callan, V. J., & Jackson, D. (1986). Children of alcoholic fathers and recovered alcoholic
fathers: Personal and family functioning. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 47, 180—
182.
Cantwell, D. (1975). Familial-genetic research with hyperactive children. In D. Cant-
well (Ed.), The hyperactive child: Diagnosis, management, and current research
(pp. 93-105). New York: Spectrum.
Carter, E. A., & McGoldrick, M. (Eds.). (1988). The changing family life cycle: A frame-
work for family therapy. New York: Gardner Press.
Cermak, T. L. (1986). Diagnosing and treating co-dependence. Minneapolis: Johnson
Institute Books.
Chassin, L. Rogosch, F., & Barrera, M. (1991). Substance use and symptomatology
among adolescent children of alcoholics. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100,
449-463.
Chassin, L., Curran, P. J., Hussong, A. M., Colder, C. R. (1996). The relation of parent
alcoholism to adolescent substance use: A longitudinal follow-up study. Journal of
Abnormal Psychology, 105, 70-80.
Children of Alcoholics Foundation Inc. (1992). Report of the forum on protective factors,
resiliency, and vulnerable children. New York: Author.
Cicchetti, D., & Garmezy, N. (1993). Prospects and promises in the study of resilience.
Development and Psychopathology, 5, 497-502.
Clair, D., & Genest, M. (1987). Variables associated with the adjustment of offspring of
alcoholic fathers. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 48, 345-355.
Colder, C. R. Chassin, L., Stice, E. M., & Curran, P. J. (1997). Alcohol expectancies as
potential mediators of parent alcoholism effects on the development of adolescent
heavy drinking. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 7, 349-374.
Cohler, B. J., Stott, F. M., & Musick, J. S. (1995). Adversity, vulnerability, and re-
silience: Cultural and developmental perspectives. In D. Cicchetti & D. Cohen
(Eds.), Developmental psychopathology, Vol. 2: Risk, disorder, and adaptation (pp.
753-800). New York: Wiley & Sons.
Cotton, N. S. (1979). The familial incidence of alcoholism: A review. Journal of Studies
on Alcohol, 40, 89-116.
Davis, P., Stern, D., & Vandeusen, J. (1978). Enmeshment-disengagement in the alco-
 535

JOHN P. WALKER AND ROBERT E. LEE

holic family. In F. A. Seixas (Ed.), Currents in alcoholism, Vol. 4 (pp. 15-27). New
York: Grune & Stratton.
Devine, C., & Braithwaite, V. (1992). The survival roles of children of alcoholics: Their
measurement and validity. British Journal of Addiction, 88, 69-78.
Deutsch, C., DiCicco, L., & Mills, D. J. (1982). Services for children of alcoholic parents.
Alcohol and health monograph No. 3. Prevention, intervention, and treatment: Con-
cerns and models. Rockville, MD: NIAAA.
Deutsch, C. (1982). Broken bottles, broken dreams. New York: Teachers College Press.
Drake, R. E., & Valiant, G. E. (1988). Predicting alcoholism and personality disorder in
a 33-year longitudinal study of children of alcoholics. British Journal of Addiction,
83, 799-807.
Dumka, L. E., & Roosa, M. W. (1993). Factors mediating problem drinking and
mothers' personal adjustment. Journal of Family Psychology, 7, 333-343.
Egeland, B., Carlson, E., & Sroufe, L. A. (1993). Resilience as process. Development and
Psychopathology, 5, 517-528.
el-Guebaly, N., & Offord, D. (1979). On being the offspring of an alcoholic: An update.
Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 3, 148—157.
Farber, E. A., & Egeland, B. (1987). Invulnerability among abused and neglected chil-
dren. In E. J. Anthony & B. Cohler (Eds.), The invulnerable child (pp. 253-288).
New York: Guilford Press.
Fergusson, D. M., & Lynskey, M. T. (1996). Adolescent resiliency to family adversity.
Journal of Child Psychiatry, 37, 281-292.
Filstead, W., McElfresh, O., & Anderson, C. (1981). Comparing the family environ-
ments of alcoholic and "normal" families. Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education,
26, 24-31.
Fingarette, H. (1988). Heavy drinking: The myth of alcoholism as a disease. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Ford, D., & Lerner, R. (1992). Developmental systems theory: An integrative approach.
Newbury, CA: Sage Publications. Garmezy, N. (1985). Stress-resistant children:
The search for protective factors. In J. E. Stevenson (Ed.), Recent research in devel-
opmental psychopathology (pp. 213-233). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Goglia, L. R., Jurkovic, G. J., Burt, A. M., & Burge-Callaway, K. G. (1992). Genera-
tional boundary distortions by adult children of alcoholics: Child-as-parent and
child-as-mate. American Journal of Family Therapy, 20, 291-299.
Goldenthal, P. (1993). Contextual family therapy: Assessment and intervention pro-
cedures. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.
Harburg, E., DiFranceisco, W., Webster, D. W., Gleiberman, L., & Schork, A. (1990).
Familial Transmission of alcohol use: II. Imitation of and aversion to parent drink-
ing by adult offspring. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 51, 245—256.
Havey, M. J., & Dodd, D. K. (1993). Variables associated with alcohol abuse among self-
identified collegiate COAS and their peers. Addictive Behaviors, 18, 567-575.
Hawkins, D. J., Catalano, R. F., Miller, J. Y. (1992). Risk and protective factors for
alcohol and other drug related problems in adolescence and early adulthood: Impli-
cations for substance abuse prevention. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 64-105.
Hawley, D. R., & DeHann, L. (1996). Toward a definition of resilience: Integrating life-
span and family perspectives. Family Process, 35, 283-298.
Heatherington, M. E., Stanley-Hagan, M., & Anderson, E. R. (1989). Marital transi-
tions: A child's perspective. American Psychologist, 44, 302-312.
Hecht, M. (1979). Children of alcoholics are children at risk. American Journal of Nurs-
ing, 73, 1764-1767.
Herjanic, B., Herjanic, M., Penick, E., Tomelleri, C., & Armbruster, R. (1977). Children
of alcoholics. In F. A. Seixas (Ed.), Currents in alcoholism, Vol. 2 (pp. 445-455).
New York: Grune & Stratton.
Holden, M. G., Brown, S. A., & Mott, M. A. (1988). Social support network of adoles-
536

CONTEMPORARY FAMILY THERAPY

cents: Relation to family alcohol abuse. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol
Abuse, 14, 487-498.
Hughes, J. M. (1977). Adolescent children of alcoholic parents and the relationship of Ala-
teen to these children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 45, 946-947.
Jacob, T. & Leonard, K. (1988). Alcoholic-spouse interaction as a function of alcoholism
subtype and alcohol consumption interaction. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 97,
231-237.
Jacob, T. & Leonard, K. (1986). Psychosocial functioning in children of alcoholic fathers,
depressed fathers, and control fathers. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 47, 373-380.
Johnson, K., Bryant, D., Strader, T., Bucholtz, G., Berbaum, M., Collins, D., & Noe, T.
(1996). Reducing alcohol and other drug use by strengthening community, family,
and youth resilience. Journal of Adolescent Research, 11, 36-67.
Johnson, S., Leonard, K. E., & Jacob, T. (1989). Drinking, drinking styles, and drug use
in children of alcoholics, depressives, and controls. Journal of Studies on Alcohol,
50, 427-431.
Kandel, D., & Andrews, K. (1987). Processes of adolescent socialization by parents and
peers. International Journal of the Addictions, 22, 319-342.
Keane, J. (1983). Factors related to the psychological well-being of children of alco-
holics. Paper Presented to the National Alcoholism Forum, Houston, TX.
Masini, B. E. (1996). Paternal alcohol abuse and psychological functioning of adoles-
cents: An investigation of moderating variables. Paper presented at the conference
for The Society on Research on Adolescence, Boston, MA.
Masten, A. S., Best, K. M., & Garmezy, N. (1990). Resilience and development: Contri-
butions from the study of children who overcame adversity. Development and Psy-
chopathology, 2, 425-444.
McCord, J. (1988). Identifying developmental paradigms leading to alcoholism. Journal
of Studies on Alcohol, 49, 357-362.
Mika, P., Bergner, R. M., & Baum, M. C. (1987). The development of a scale for the
assessment of parentification. Family Therapy, 14, 229-235.
Miller, D. & Jang, M. (1977). Children of alcoholics: A 20-year longitudinal study. So-
cial Work Research and Abstracts, 13, 23-29.
Minuchin, S. & Fishman C. (1981). Family therapy techniques. Cambridge, MA: Har-
vard University Press.
Moos, R. & Billings, A. (1982). Children of alcoholics during the recovery process: Alco-
holic and matched control families. Addictive Behaviors, 7, 155-163.
Moos, R. H., & Moos, B. S. (1984). The process of recovery from alcoholism: Comparing
functioning in families of alcoholics and matched control families. Journal of
Studies on Alcohol, 45, 111-118.
Nardi, P. M. (1981). Children of alcoholics: A role-theoretical perspective. Journal of
Social Psychology, 115, 237-245.
Needle, R., McCubbin, H., Wilson, M., Reineck, R., Lazar, A., & Mederer, H. (1986).
Interpersonal influences in adolescent drug use: The role of older siblings, parents,
and peers. International Journal of the Addictions, 21, 739-766.
Obuchowska, I. (1974). Emotional contact with the mother as a social compensatory
factor in children of alcoholics. International Mental Health Research Newsletter,
16, 2-4.
Ohannessian, C. M., & Hesselbrock, V. M. (1993). The influence of perceived social
support on the relationship between family history of alcoholism and drinking be-
haviors. Addiction, 88, 1651-1658.
Potter, A. E., & Williams, D. E. (1991). Development of a measure examining children's
roles in alcoholic families. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 52, 70-77.
Radke-Yarrow, M., & Brown, E. (1993). Resilience and vulnerability in children of mul-
tiple-risk families. Development and Psychopathology, 5, 581-592.
Reich, W, Earls, F., & Powel, J. (1988). A comparison of the home and social environ-
 537

JOHN P. WALKER AND ROBERT E. LEE

ments of children of alcoholic and non-alcoholic parents. British Journal of Addic-

tion, 83, 831-839.
Rogosch, F., Chassin, L., & Sher, K. J. (1990). Personality variables as mediators and
moderators of family history risk for alcoholism: Conceptual and methodological
issues. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 51, 310—318.
Roosa, M. W., Tein, J., Groppenbacher, N., Michaels, M., & Dumka, L. (1993). Mother's
parenting behavior and child mental health in families with a problem drinking
parent. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 55, 107-118.
Roosa, M. W., Dumka, L., & Tein, J. (1996). Family characteristics as mediators of the
influence of problem drinking and multiple risk status on child mental health.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 24, 607-624.
Russel, M., Henderson, C., & Blume, S. (1985). Children of alcoholics: A review of the
literature. New York: Children of Alcoholics Foundation.
Rutter, M. (1985). Resilience in the face of adversity: Protective factors and resistance
to psychiatric disorder. British Journal of Psychiatry, 147, 598-611.
Rutter, M. (1990). Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. In J. Rolf, A.
Masten, D. Cicchetti, K. Nuechterlein, & S. Weintraub (Eds.), Risk and protective
factors in the development of psychopathology (pp. 181-214). New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Schissel, B. (1993). Coping with adversity: Testing the origins of resiliency in mental
health. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 39, 34-46.
Seilhamer, R. A., Jacob, T., & Dunn, N. J. (1993). The impact of alcohol consumption on
parent-child relationships in families of alcoholics. Journal of Studies on Alcohol,
54, 189-198.
Selnow, G. W., & Crano, W. D. (1986). Formal v. informal group affiliations: Implica-
tions for alcohol and drug use among adolescents. Journal of Studies on Alcohol,
47, 48-52.
Sher, K. J. (1991). Children of alcoholics: A critical appraisal of theory and research.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Sher, K. J., Walitzer, K. S., Wood, P., & Brent, E. E. (1991). Characteristics of children
of alcoholics: Putative risk factors, substance use and abuse, and psychopathology.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100, 427-448.
Springer, S. A., & Gastfriend, D. R. (1994). A pilot study of factors associated with
resilience to substance abuse in adolescent sons of alcoholic fathers. Journal of
Addictive Diseases, 14( 2), 53-66.
Staudinger, U. M., Marsiske, M. & Baltes, P. B. (1995). Resilience and reserve capacity
in later adulthood: Potentials and limits of development across the life span. In D.
Cicchetti & D. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology, Vol. 2: Risk, disorder,
and adaptation (pp. 801-810). New York: Wiley & Sons.
Tarter, R., Hegedus, A., Goldstein, G., Shelly, C., & Alterman, A. (1984). Adolescent
sons of alcoholics: Neuropsychological and personality characteristics. Alcoholism:
Clinical and Experimental Research, 8, 216-222.
Ullman, A. D., & Orenstein, A. (1994). Why some children of alcoholics become alco-
holics: Emulation of the drinker. Adolescence, 29, 1—11.
Walsh, F. (1996). The concept of resilience: Crisis and challenge. Family Process, 35,
261-281.
Weisner, T. S., & Gallimore, R. (1977). My brother's keeper: Child and sibling caretak-
ing. Current Anthropology, 18, 169—190.
Weiss, R. S. (1979). Growing up a little faster: The experience of growing up in a single-
parent household. Journal of Social Issues, 35(4), 97—111.
Wilson, C. & Orford, J. (1978). Children of alcoholics: Report of a preliminary study and
comments on the literature. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 39, 121-142.
Wegscheider, S. (1981). Another chance: Hope and health for the alcoholic family. Palo
Alto: Science and Behavior Books.
538

CONTEMPORARY FAMILY THERAPY

Werner, E. (1986). Resilient offspring of alcoholics: A longitudinal study from birth to

age 18. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 47, 34-40.
Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (1992). Overcoming the odds: High risk children from
birth to adulthood. London: Cornell University Press.
West, M. O., & Prinz, R. J. (1987). Parental alcoholism and childhood psychopathology.
Psychological Bulletin, 102, 204-218.
Wolin, S. J., & Wolin, S. (1993). The resilient self: How survivors of troubled families
rise above adversity. New York: Villard Books.
Woititz, J. G. (1983). Adult children of alcoholics. Pompano Beach, FL: Health Commu-
nications, Inc.
Woodside, M. (1988). Research on children of alcoholics: past and future. British Jour-
nal of Addiction, 83, 785-792.
Wright, D. M., & Heppner, P. P. (1993). Examining the well-being of nonclinical college
students: Is it useful to know about the presence of parental alcoholism? Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 40, 324-334.
Wright, V. C. (1992). Late adolescent children of alcoholics: Autonomy and relatedness
in their relationships with their parents. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michi-
gan State University, East Lansing, MI.
Wright, V. C., Frank, S. J., & Pirsch, L. A. (1991). The implications of father's alcohol-
ism for separation / individuation during late adolescence. Unpublished Manu-
script.
Zucker, R. A., Fitzgerald, H. E., & Moses, H. D. (1995). Emergence of alcohol problems
and the several alcoholisms: A developmental perspective on etiologic theory and
life course trajectory. In D. Cicchetti & D. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psycho-
pathology, Vol. 2: Risk, disorder, and adaptation (pp. 677-711). New York: Wiley &
Sons.
Zucker, R. A., Ellis, D. A., Bingham, R. C. & Fitzgerald, H. E. (1996). The development
of alcoholic subtypes: Risk variation among alcoholic families during the early
childhood years. Alcohol Health and Research World, 20, 46-54.