Some resources if you are wondering about parentification and spousification

[brdgrl]

This is a long post, but I do think it may be useful for some posters; if you think it may be relevant to you, do have a look.

With some regularity, there are posts on this board from stepparents (usually stepmums, but then the board is mainly used by women) who are concerned about what they feel might be an unhealthy relationship between their DSC (usually their stepdaughter) and the DSC’s father. These posts are invariably met with hostility from people who see it as an attack on the DSC. In at least some of these cases, it may be that the poster is observing one of the processess known as spousification or parentification. Having some admittedly non-professional experience with the situation, I am creating this thread to both present a corrective to some ignorance being bandied about on the board, and to offer some resources to posters who may find them relevant.
It appears that people are very uncomfortable with the therapeutic concepts of parentification, spousification, and parent-child boundary dissolution. I suppose they are tough ideas to grasp for some, and so they have decided that these concepts are the creation of bloggers, evil stepmothers, and quacks.

It is very unfortunate, since understanding the concepts, and making a careful judgement, assisted by a professional, about their application to a family’s situation, can make a world of difference for the child involved. It is also wrong to suggest that these concepts somehow “blame” the child; in fact, if nothing else, they surely present an alternative interpretation, based on the idea that the child is NOT to blame, but the family dynamic. This is a very positive idea, as with help and effort, that dynamic can be altered.

The terms used by professionals are parentification and spousification (I've never heard mini-wife except on here myself, and I don't think it is a useful term; there are also clearly a lot of fools confusing it with the actual therapeutic concepts). I am not a professional myself and do not claim to have a practioner's knowledge, but that of someone who has experienced it and read about it. When it was suggested to us that FST might be a good approach, and that DSD had been 'spousified', that was the first I really knew about it. I don’t claim to be an expert, and that is why I am mainly just going to provide resources so that people can do their own research, as I have done. I will add that my DH and I found support in dealing with the issue from Relate and also from a private counsellor, and that was very useful.

Parentification is a widely recognized therapeutic concept, describing a very real dynamic that affects bereaved or fractured families. Those who have identified it and built therapeutic models around it are not quacks or bloggers or people with a degree they bought off the internet. They are highly respected professionals

If I may be permitted to summarize the concept, and with apologies to the professionals - the main issue is that the healthy boundaries of parent/child are lost. The child is treated as a peer and partner, rather than as a child. This often means that the daughter (or son because that happens too) takes over the role of the mother in terms of companionship and decision-making. Many times she also takes over adult responsibilities, such as domestic duties and childcare. Obviously there are many teenage girls who do housework and look after siblings, but this is more than that. It is about the role within the larger family structure and the emotional demands upon the child. Sometimes this happens, for instance, when the mother dies and the daughter tries to fill the gap left behind, especially where the father is not able to adequately maintain boundaries or meet the kids' emotional needs himself because of his grief. It also can happen in divorce or even within intact families.

In other cases, the DSD does not take on the adult household responsibilities, but does take on the role of social partner, and is given inappropriate decision-making powers or included in age-inappropriate activities.

These children suffer from the dynamic, even though it is superficially very satisfying to them. They generally lack good peer relationships, and may suffer from excessive perfectionism; they often feel a great deal of stress and may blame themselves for things that are outside of their control. There may be a strong affect on their ability to have healthy adult relationships. It can be very damaging not just to the child, but to other children in the home, and of course to the adult relationships as well.

None of those words suggest blame.

I think they do Happy and they are deeply negative. It is not a constructive way to talk about a stepchild is it?

Arsenic, it was claimed on another thread, as you ought to be able to check for yourself.
Caorunn, I suggest do some more research, or read the works in full. There are positives identified, but there is widespread agreement that it is not a healthy dynamic for the child.
i wonder if it only becomes an issue when an other adult becomes involved and resents the influence and control of the spousifed/parentified child.
None of the literature would support this. Much of it discusses children who do not have another adult in their life, and the effects on their self-esteem, emotional maturity, and ability to form adult relationships.

I am so very happy to hear you express respect for me, Arsenic, even if was accidental.

Of course, I think all of these points are addressed both in my first two posts and - much more importantly - in the actual resources.

Do try to unclench something brd, at least experimentally.

You are assuming too much.

Yes sorry, only part way through reading that and had to give up for the day.

But wanted to ask about the synonym thing.

Goodnight.

brdgrl and garlic you may find this interesting

link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10826-007-9184-8

A 2007 paper on the possible positives. I do not have the time this morning to find a free access copy or synopsis for you but perhaps you have journal access?

Sounds like this ties in well with Transactional Analysis theory of Parent/Adult/Child relating. Really interesting reading brdgrl.

In our Western Cultures - we allow our children to be children - as such making them adults before their time is frowned upon.

Speaking again from personal experience my SD is well aware she has been inappropriately parented - a lot of golden child type bhaviours are also presented by mum.

SD says she is never going to forgive her mother for destroying her childhood - but she never challenges her mother on it despite now actually being an adult.

Yes, it does look interesting. Here is the abstract which you linked to already; I will probably read the piece in full. I have done a fair bt of reading on post-traumatic growth, for reasons not directly related to this, and I think it is probably worth pointing out that in most work on post-traumatic growth, and as this abstract hints, it is focused on finding the positives in otherwise awful situations.

For those who may not be familiar with the term, a straight-forward definition from wikipedia - "Post-traumatic growth or benefit finding refers to positive psychological change experienced as a result of the struggle with highly challenging life circumstances."

To put it simply, parentification is being looked at in this work as traumatic. Post-traumatic growth is about the positives that can be attained through the process of healing,

Another very good work on posttraumatic growth you might enjoy actually reading (if that is the word) is Stephen Joseph's What Doesn't Kill Us Makes Us Stronger, which I thought was very readable and compelling. He has a short piece here www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-joseph/what-doesnt-kill-us-post_b_2862726.html which also explains about post-traumatic growth.

I am not sure you have made the point you think you were making

So thank you for this.
--------

Abstract (linked to above)

"While most of the existing literature has focused on the risks associated with parentification, we examined the potential benefits (i.e., posttraumatic growth) associated with parentification. Predictors of posttraumatic growth explored in our study included: attachment, differentiation of self, parentification, and resiliency. Partial support was found for the predictor variables leading to posttraumatic growth, with resilience emerging as the strongest predictor; resilience explained 14% of the variance in posttraumatic growth. These findings suggest that future research might explore additional resiliency factors that explain positive psychological outcomes related to childhood parentification."

Thank you again, Caorunn. - here is another piece by Lisa Hooper (first author on this and the resource you provided above). Handily, one can read he full paper, here - guru.louisville.edu/parentification/uploads/1/8/9/9/18990327/hooper-confirmatory.pdf

The abstract:

Aims:
The primary aim of the study was to confirm the five-factor structure of Tedeschi and
Calhoun’s (1996) Posttraumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI). A secondary aim of this study was to
explore the potential usefulness of the PTGI among populations that experience parentification – a
common form of childhood neglect and adversity.
Method:
The PTGI was administered to a sample of 143 college students with a history of various
levels of parentification.
Results:
The resulting data were subjected to confirmatory factor analysis. The goodness-of-fit indices
for the five-factor model indicated a moderate fit with the current sample. However, a five-factor, 18-
item model produced a more optimal fit than Tedeschi and Calhoun’s five-factor, 21-item PTGI.
Conclusions:
The study’s findings suggest that the PTGI appears to be a useful assessment inventory
for mental health practitioners in measuring globally the resources an individual might have following
the adversity of parentification.

A small excerpt:
"Parentification is the adversity selected for this study because it is a common
phenomenon and because it is known to produce life-altering and enduring adverse mental
health consequences (Boszormenyi-Nagy & Spark, 1973; Jones & Wells, 1996; Jurkovic,
1997; Minuchin, Montalvo, Guerney, Rosman, & Schumer, 1967). Among these enduring
consequences are potential psychological abandonment of a child by a parent (Minuchin
et al., 1967), impaired attachments (Alpert, Brown, & Courtois, 2000; Hooper, Marotta, &
Lanthier, 2008), substance abuse (Anderson, 1999), and other psychological disorders (Jones
& Wells, 1996; Jurkovic, 1997). Such deficient environments and age-inappropriate roles and
responsibilities have been described as potentially traumatic in their consequences."

Normally if there is a bereavement the child is looked after by adults who try and take on the role of the parent. These can be friends or other family members. What you are talking about is where a parent uses their child as a substitute partner, theres probably an element of neglect in there as youre not allowing a child to reach their full potential which is the main job of any parent and one of the five ECM outcomes, 'be mentally and emotionally healthy'.

I have seen it happen over two generations, now 3, nobody leaves home unless its very nearby, they are all friends, none of them can form healthy relationships outside the family.

I don't think there's even any harm in an 'outsider' recognising it and seeking to help reduce the inapporpriate bond and reform a healthier one.

But as much as some people who don't like the connotations of the phrase 'mini-wife' are ignorant of it, so too are the stepmothers (mothers only in my experience) who place ALL of the blame on the child by calling the child names and not wanting her around.

If there is an inappropriate relationship the blame lies solely with the adult who formed it, not the child.

Im not getting the subtext here. Parents are just adults who share genes and bonds with the child. You can only be a step parent when you have bonded with the child. Thats the priority, and it is up to the step parent to make that work. If those around the step parent are obstructing that by forming a peer relationship that should be exposed and the obsreucting parent shpuld be made aware of what they are doing to the child. Real life is so complicated though and I think if you are in this situation the most healthy thing tp so is step away from the family for a while.

It's not up to the stepparent to bond with the SDC - it is up to the parent and the stepparent together. It is impossible to create the bond without the parent's cooperation.

Of course its up to both of them but if the parents are obstructing the step parent has little choice but to keep away if intervention becomes disruptive. Time tells all and the child will grow up to understand what happened and why eventually, bu you cant force a parent to enable this kind of bonding. You can encourage it, but if it causes tok much instability then its not worth the intervention.

Just at a stepparent would point out nits and help to deal with them, a 'good stepparent' has a role to play in this too,.

\Moreover, this is a family dynamic, with impacts on the entire unit, including every member of the stepfamily. That is why this under the broad heading of family therapy. FST and similar approaces look at the family as a system.

Spousification, is recognised amongst child-care professionals, though rarely refered to in that way.

However, it's not a behaviour that often springs up unilaterally by a child. It's more often than not part and parcel of an ongoing abusive relationship...

So if a step mother thinks she spots it, then it's not a difficult behaviour by the child that needs addressing. What the SM has spotted, is that her partner is abusing his daughter!

Only on MN have I seen it refered to as something inherently problematic in a child. If a daughter is behaving as a mini-wife, then the partner must be also behaving as Daddy-husband!

Awareness of a psychological/emotional issue is never enough to solve it; it takes behavioural changes and, usually, collaboration.

I thought this thread was about identifying the 'mini-wife' problem as an emotional error by the bio parent? The maladaptive behaviours may be mostly displayed by the child, but it's not the child's fault as she has only a child's understanding. She's not equipped, either, to comprehend or repair the problem - again, because she is a child.

As nomoretether points out, this ties in perfectly with Transactional Analysis. The step parent could go a long way towards altering the maladaptive dynamic by staying in Adult (not Parent!) mode whenever the 'mini-wife' shows up, treating the child as a Natural Child and the partner as an Adult.

The Wikipedia page on TA is good, but overly complicated. The book itself is a very easy read, and entertaining.
This website gives a decent overview.

Only on MN have I seen it refered to as something inherently problematic in a child.

This is what happens in everyday life, though. Unfortunately.

I'm mulling your post over Bonsoir but I think I would disagree. I feel it was because I bonded with dsd despite her parents that she ended up living with me 2 years after I left her Dad.

I think your example neatly proves my point!

TheWordFactory - IMO SDC do use their parents' separation as a means of obtaining more control and decision-making power and muscling in on adult authority and can be the instigators of this. My DSS1 has very strong tendencies in that direction - ones we have always been aware of and keep in control. It is certainly not instigated by his parents or stepparents!

Great post, WordFactory