Name of Concept

Family of Origin

Introduction

The term “Family of Origin” describes the family in which a person was raised. An individual’s family of origin is composed of the members, consanguine or not, who played a significant role in the early development (infancy and childhood) of the individual.

Theoretical Context for Concept

The idea of the family of origin is an ever-present concept in the clinical work of marriage and family therapists because the field rests upon a family systems perspective. A seminal idea of systems theory is that every individual is embedded in a multi-level system: The biological processes within the individual are nested within the nuclear family and extended family structures, which are, in turn, nested within a community and social context (Breunlin et al. 2001). Aristotle’s maxim that “the whole is larger than the sum of its parts” is often borrowed to explain the approach marriage and family therapists take to assess individual problems. “Where you fit in the family structure, as well as in the larger context, can influence your functioning, relational patterns and the type of family you form in the next generation” (McGoldrick et al. 2008, pp. 14–15).

Because the family of origin is seen as the crucible in which a person’s early emotional, physiological, and psychological development occurs, therapists seek to understand how these primordial roots may shape later-in-life intrapsychic and interpersonal functioning (Hovestadt et al. 1985). To answer this question, some therapists believe that expanding the direct system to include family-of-origin members in the therapy room is necessary to facilitate change for clients. Others believe that the work of differentiating from intergenerational influences necessitates the adult client to work with the therapist independent of his or her family of origin (Framo 1976).

Description

The family of origin is a concept that lies at the core of several therapy models and is an integral idea in the training and growth of therapists.

Application of Concept in Couple and Family Therapy

Given the systemic nature of the field, interest in a client’s family of origin is never far from the mind of a marriage and family therapist regardless of the therapist’s preferred model or theoretical orientation. That said, some models draw more heavily on family of origin ideas than others.

Murray Bowen’s Family Systems Therapy conceptualizes the family of origin as an emotional unit that behaves in patterned and predictable ways. It emphasizes the importance of “differentiation-of-self” and “de-triangulation” as interventions to free the individual from family-of-origin bonds that are constraining (Brown 1999). In a couples context, Bowenian therapists are interested in how the emotional legacy of one’s family of origin influences the dynamics and structure of adult intimate relationships. Bowen suggested that effective patterns of interactions in one’s family of origin correlate to individuals responding in an attuned way to the needs of their partners. When individuals come from families with poor interaction styles, their adult relationships tend to be undermined by emotional reactivity and anxiety (Sabatelli and Bartle-Haring 2003). Self-insight about how present-day patterns are linked to the past can lead to greater acceptance, understanding, and mutual respect between partners.

The most widely used technique of Bowen Family Systems Theory is the genogram. The genogram is a family-of-origin tree that therapists can build with their clients to map intergenerational processes and to illuminate family roles, relationships, and triangles (McGoldrick et al. 2008).

James Framo’s Intergenerational Family Therapy proposes an approach to therapy that encourages the individual or couple seeking therapy to invite key family-of-origin members, such as parents or siblings, to sessions. He believed that “Current marital, parenting, and personal difficulties are viewed, basically, as reparative efforts to correct, master, defend against, live through, or cancel out old, disturbing relationship paradigms from the original family” (Framo 1992, p. 2). According to Framo, insights about these past family-of-origin distortions can improve present day functioning and, therefore, these insights are best unearthed through an intergenerational convening.

The founder of Contextual Therapy, Ivan Boszormenyi-Nagy, was also interested in the intergenerational patterns of families. His model focuses on identifying the invisible loyalties within the family of origin and then creating positive ways to balance the family ledger. When there is a balance in the give-and-take between two people in a relationship, fairness and trust are experienced by both individuals. Contextual Therapy’s goal is to help clients move toward balance, fairness, and trust (Nichols and Davis 2017).

Application to training of Marriage and Family Therapists

Most marriage and family therapists encounter the term “family of origin” for the first time early in their training programs as part of the introspection process that trainees undergo to understand how their own families of origin and personal issues impact the work they do with clients in both positive and negative ways (Timm and Blow 1999). This introspection process, or “Self-of-the-therapist work,” is often integrated into coursework and is a focus in group supervision. Exercises such as genograms, family-of-origin interviews, timelines and nodal events, experiential activities, and self-of-the-therapist groups are some of the ways trainees might be asked to reflect on their own histories (Timm and Blow 1999).

Clinical Example

Molly and Grant, a newly married couple, sought therapy to address increasing conflict over the role that Molly’s family was playing in their relationship. Molly was one of seven children who grew up home-schooled with her siblings on a farm in rural Wisconsin. Grant was an only child to divorced parents and was raised almost exclusively by his mother in downtown St. Louis.

When Molly and Grant disagreed about something, such as how much credit card debt they were willing to tolerate, she would go to her family to complain about Grant. Her siblings would take her side on the issue and then put pressure on Grant to change his mind. Knowing how important Molly’s family was to her, and eager to foster successful relationships to his new siblings, Grant usually gave in. However, this pattern began to produce feelings of resentment in Grant which were bubbling to the surface. The couple’s arguments consisted of Grant telling Molly to leave her family out of their personal life and Molly calling Grant aloof and unappreciative of her family.

After getting to know the couple and building the alliance, the therapist worked with the couple to create a genogram to map their families of origin. Molly’s family of origin compared to Grant’s, in visual representation alone, conveyed Grant’s sense of disadvantage. It also served to make Molly more self-aware of the way she was enlisting muscle from her side to influence their marital decisions.

The therapist explored with Molly the possibility that her over-involvement with her siblings was preventing her from fostering closeness with her husband. The therapist hypothesized that Molly had low differentiation from her siblings, meaning she struggled to have a full sense of self after separating from her family of origin. This fusion with her family of origin was alienating her husband. For him, the alienation was a painful echo of his many childhood experiences of living outside of the “nuclear family” cultural norms.

The therapist offered the observation that each partner had been drawn to someone from a very different familial background and culture. The couple agreed that these differences were not simply tolerated – they were a large part of their initial attraction to one another. Part of their mutual attraction was grounded in wanting something different from each one’s own upbringing. Their love story was also a part of each one’s differentiation story. Put in this frame, Molly and Grant were able to renew their appreciation for each one’s family of origin. Continuing to use an integrative approach, the therapist offered the couple ready-to-use behavioral-based de-escalation and negotiation techniques to help them with conflict at home. In session, the therapist helped Molly and Grant practice decision-making as a dyad. The more they practiced, Molly began to trust that she did not need to involve her family in order to reach outcomes satisfactory to her. It took some time for Molly’s family to adjust to Molly becoming more private and autonomous but Molly realized she was no less important to them. Molly’s shift away from the safety of her family was a process that produced feelings of vulnerability. The therapist validated this throughout, effectively teaching Grant how to listen and acknowledge Molly’s experiences.

Cross-References