The parents who never were
Grief over an illusion of a functional upbringing
In an earlier article entitled A ‘psychological death’: Absent parents and the sense of loss” (Misrachi, 2019), I discussed ‘psychological death’ (Kaplan, 1995), i.e., where a parent is simultaneously physically present and psychologically absent in the context of mental illness. Here I specifically address a type of grief which tends to follow and accompany the witnessing and experiencing of a psychological death of a parental figure. In my clinical practice experience, this is a profound and deeply felt yet well-hidden sense of internal loss which I have called a grief over an illusion.
So what is a grief over an illusion? This type of unique grief has previously been alluded to (e.g., Shengold, 1989; Misrachi, 2012) but few have researched or explored it in any purposeful or direct way. It appears to begin with “unutterable feelings of grief for the parent who is there but not there” (Miller, 1996, p.633), i.e., a psychological death. However, the relationship to the parent who is physically present but otherwise absent usually feels to the offspring as if it is reciprocal when it never really was to begin with. Effectively, it is an illusion. But a necessary one. Why? The family is a caregiving system created to be the child’s primary source of safety and stability. When that gets threatened, it leaves the child no choice but use the only thing left within their control, their imagination. That is, to have a sense of safety and security via a well-constructed illusion. Furthermore, they are not the sole authors of this illusion. The general community and current government policies ‘co-author’ this illusion. They build and reinforce it via written and unwritten policies (Misrachi,2012; 2017).
The illusion begins to break down when signs, symptoms or the collective impact over time of a psychological death are progressively and increasingly hard to ignore. But this period can take years, sometimes decades. It’s important to note that the illusion of a reciprocal relationship in this context will unlikely be dispelled until well into adulthood. Previous to this point of conscious realisation and the dismantling of the illusion, such individuals do not give up. That is, they seem to persevere well into adulthood until failures clearly outweigh any hope for change. This may be due to the imperative of attachment needs in the pre-adult brain and the consequences of developmental trauma (e.g., Blaustein & Kinniburgh, 2019).
It needs to be kept in mind that, in the context of someone who grew up with a mentally ill parent, there appears to be two different types of grief which need to be distinguished: (1) grief that accompanies the realisation of a psychological death of the parental figure; and (2) the subsequent grief over the dispelling of the illusion that a psychologically healthy relationship ever existed in the first place. The loss of the illusion manifests in acute sadness that permeates and travels beyond noticing a psychological death. Daily interpersonal interactions with the parental figure can act as an intermittent and rude reminder that there is a ‘psychological death’ present. This reminder, albeit painful and at times frustrating for the recipient, can fruitfully function to dilute the illusion that their parental figure is and will be psychologically available to the adult child’s needs (Misrachi, 2012).
How people operate under this illusion before it is dispelled is not always obvious to either the person carrying the illusion or to others. Social psychologist Janoff-Bulman’s (1992) work on ‘shattered assumptions’ may contribute to an understanding of how this type of illusion may operate. She proposed that experiencing traumatic events can change how individuals view themselves and their world. Her theory concerns the impact negative events have on three inherent assumptions: (1) overall benevolence of the world; (2) meaningfulness of the world; and (3) self worth. Trauma can result when cumulative experiences introduce a discrepancy in whatever information we previously held about a significant relationship and which we took for granted. In this instance, the individual may think or assume: ‘Everybody knows parents always care, love and protect their offspring. Therefore, my parents did or do the same’. But when such a closely held, fundamental world view gets shattered, the person cannot immediately integrate such significant new information into their previously held world view as it constitutes a type of unacknowledged trauma and therefore requires a level of readiness.
To quote the Viennese scholar Michael Polanyi, “we can know more than we can tell” (1967, p.4). In the context of this article, what the person thinks, knows or assumes may not be able to be described, i.e., they might be unable to articulate their previously held illusion with any great accuracy until some time has elapsed. In a sense, this could be understood as a person’s pre-logical phase of knowing or Polanyi’s notion of ‘tacit knowledge’ (Smith, 2003). In other words, what may be easily grasped and articulated by others might not be so for the person holding on to the illusion, who remains magnetically connected to their parental figure. Some may wonder what is wrong with remaining connected in this way to a parent with whom there is only the illusion of a reciprocal relationship? What harm could come of it? The psychologically absent parent might not be physically abusive toward their child but we know “[n]eglect is at least as damaging as physical or sexual abuse in the long term” (Gilbert, et al., 2009, p.68) and has a relatively high prevalence rate compared to other types of child maltreatment (Mulder, et al., 2018). Therefore, the traumatic consequences of neglect, “especially emotional neglect, must be rated as equally serious as other forms of child maltreatment” (Bullock, Stanyon, Glaser & Chou, 2019, p.209). For the adult child in this scenario, it may be too threatening to adopt too quickly an alternative world view to their assumed reality. This could be due to various reasons ranging from the subtle to the more obvious, e.g., various fears may kick in, such as losing what they have always known, of being lonely, socially isolated or having an overall sense of feeling fragile (Tzouvara, Papadopoulos & Randhawa, 2015).
For the carrier of the illusion, change requires well timed work. They are more likely to be resistant to any change if any new world view is prematurely introduced. When awareness finally cracks open, they often find themselves grieving but without necessarily using the word “grief” to describe their emotional state. This could be due to grief intermingling with shame (Dearing & Tangney, 2011). It is also disenfranchised and well-hidden from their internal and external worlds (Doka, 1989).
Helpers of those under the spell of such an illusion have work to do. For instance, they need to build in psychological safety as a top priority (Kezelman & Stavropoulos, 2019a; 2019b). While it may seem as if the holder of the illusion is on the brink of processing new data about something so fundamental to their existence and sense of belonging, it may not necessarily be the case. This is why safety is always a prerequisite in this area of work. A fine balance exists between shining the light on a new reality vs. allowing them to decide and signal when they are ready. The decision ‘when ready’ to embark on a dramatic shift to what was previously taken for granted may not be clear-cut. It may initially be unconscious. Therefore, shining the light on an alternative reality should not be attempted without trauma informed (Kezelman & Stavropoulos, 2019a; 2019b) one-to-one or peer professional supervision (Scaife, 2019). For example, before raising an individual’s self awareness about their grief over an illusion, decide first whether it is even necessary at that particular time. Sometimes there is no need. One person while weeping said: I can’t believe it… all these years I thought my [mum/dad] was there for me, yet they clearly weren’t. How can I be so fucking dumb!? Their painful insight was already enough to deliver the message or insight that they were hanging on to a (necessary) illusion. This usually happens when it becomes clear to them that their illusion had reached its use-by-date. That is, its function or purpose had allowed them to attach to their primary caregiver while they had dependency needs — even if and while their caregiver kept generating various types of threats (Bowlby, 1988). This needs to be sensitively explained and re-framed in a communication style they are familiar with to empower them in a realistic way via appropriately timed psycho-education. Here’s one possible way of responding to the person quoted above. Feel free to use your own words, while keeping safety in mind:
“No, you were not ‘dumb’. Quite the contrary. You were very clever. Back then it was totally necessary for your survival to believe that they were there for you. As a child with a terrific imagination, you had to cling to that illusion. It was a necessary illusion. But now you have choice. Now your task is different: To grieve the loss of this essential illusion. Saying goodbye to this well-devised but faithful crutch will not happen overnight. But now you are not alone. You have someone to support you through this unique type of grief. It needs to be a gentle process. Go slow…”.
This article was originally published in Mind Cafe, Nov/Dec, 2019, Issue 56.
REFERENCES:
Blaustein, M.E., Kinniburgh, K.M. (2019). Treating Traumatic Stress in Children and Adolescents: How to Foster Resilience through Attachment, Self-Regulation, and Competency. (2nd Ed.) The Guilford Press.
Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base. London: Routledge.
Bullock, L., Stanyon, M., Glaser, D., Chou, S. (2019). Identifying and Responding to Child Neglect: Exploring the Professional Experiences of Primary School Teachers and Family Support Workers. Child Abuse Review, 28(3), May/June 2019. Pages 209–224.
Doka, K. J. (1989). Disenfranchised grief: Recognising hidden sorrow. Lexington, MA: Lexington Press.
Dearing, R. L., & Tangney, J. P. (Eds.). (2011). Shame in the therapy hour (1st ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Gilbert, R., Spatz, C., Browne, K., Fergusson, D., Webb, E., Janson, S. (2009). Burden and consequences of child maltreatment in high-income countries. The Lancet, 373(9657), 68–81.
Janoff-Bulman, R. (1992). Shattered Assumptions: Towards a new psychology of trauma. Publ. Simon & Schuster Inc.
Kaplan, L. J. (1995). No voice is ever wholly lost. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Kezelman C.A. & Stavropoulos P.A. (2019a) Practice Guidelines for Clinical Treatment of Complex Trauma. Blue Knot Foundation.
Kezelman C.A. & Stavropoulos P.A. (2019b) Complementary Guidelines to Practice Guidelines for Clinical Treatment of Complex Trauma. Blue Knot Foundation.
Miller, F. E. (1996). Grief therapy for relatives of persons with serious mental illness. Psychiatric Services, 47(6), 633–637.
Misrachi, S. (2012). Lives Unseen: Unacknowledged Trauma of Non-Disordered, Competent Adult Children of Parents with a Severe Mental Illness (ACOPSMI). Department of Social Work Melbourne School of Health Sciences Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences.
Misrachi, S. (2017). Dewy-Eyed Policy-Makers: Do they Participate in Rather than Prevent Transmission of Trauma? Mind Cafe, December Issue 36, p.6–8.
Misrachi, S. (2019). A ‘psychological death’: Absent parents and the sense of loss. Mind Cafe, September Issue 54, p.6–8.
Mulder, T.M., Kuiper, K.C., van der Puta, C.E., Geert-Jan J.M. G.J.M. Stams., Assink, M. (2018). Risk factors for child neglect: A meta-analytic review. Child Abuse & Neglect,77, 198–210.
Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension. Garden City, N.Y., Anchor Books.
Scaife, J. (2019). Supervision in Clinical Practice: A Practitioner’s Guide. Publ. Routledge.
Shengold, L. (1989). Soul murder: The effects of childhood abuse and deprivation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Smith, M. K. (2003). Michael Polanyi and tacit knowledge. The encyclopedia of informal education.
Tzouvara, V., Papadopoulos, C., Randhawa, G. (2015). A narrative review of the theoretical foundations of loneliness. British Journal of Community Nursing, 20(7), 329–334.
