Josh Coleman on the Roadmap to Healing Family Estrangement

Josh Coleman on the Roadmap to Healing Family Estrangement

by Lawrence Rubin
Renowned clinician and author, Joshua Coleman shares insights on healing family estrangement gleaned from working with impacted families, especially adult children and parents.

PSYCHOTHERAPY.NET MEMBERSHIPS

Get Endless Inspiration and
Insight from Master Therapists,
Members-Only Content & More


 

Lawrence Rubin: I’m here today with Joshua Coleman, a psychologist in private practice in the San Francisco Bay area, and a senior fellow with the Council on Contemporary Families. He’s the author of numerous articles and book chapters, and has written four books, the most recent of which is The Rules of Estrangement. Welcome, Josh.  
Joshua Coleman: Thank you for having me. Pleasure to be here.

The Face of Family Estrangement

LR: I’ll just jump out of the gate by asking you, why do you describe estrangement within families as an epidemic?
JC: Well, there’s a variety of reasons for that. One is, and I don't know about you in your practice, but in the past few years, my practice, as well as those of my colleagues, has become flooded by clients dealing with this estrangement. Another reason comes from a recent survey by Rin Reszek at Ohio State, who found that 27% of fathers are currently estranged from a child. That’s a new statistic. While we haven’t really been tracking these statistics, non-marital childbirth is also a big cause of estrangement, which is 40% currently compared to 5% in 1960.

Divorce is also a very big pathway to estrangement, especially in the wake of more liberalized divorce laws. When you look at the effect of divorce on families once there’s been a divorce, the likelihood of a later estrangement goes way up. This is especially so when you add social media as an amplifier, our cultural emphasis on individualism, influencers talking about the value of going ‘no contact’ after the divorce, and family conflict around politics, especially in the recent election. All these point to a rise in family estrangement, particularly parental.   
LR:
in the past few years, my practice, as well as those of my colleagues, has become flooded by clients dealing with this estrangement
I know the there is a historical rise in divorce. Is there a parallel rise in estrangement with the rising divorce rate?
JC: I don’t think it’s a 1 to 1 relationship, but I think both occur in the culture of individualism, which prioritizes personal happiness, personal growth, protection and mental health. Prior to the 1960s, people would get married to be happy, but more often for financial security, particularly for women as a place to have children. But today, people get married or divorced based on whether that relationship is in line with their ideals for happiness and mental health and the like.

The relationships between parents and adult children are constituted in a very similar way, people don’t stay in touch or close to their parents unless it’s in line with their ideals for happiness and mental health. It’s what the British sociologist Anthony Giddens calls pure relationships. Those are relationships that became purely constituted on the basis of whether or not they were inline with that person’s ambitions for happiness and identity. So, it’s a parallel process. I don’t think it’s completely dependent on divorce because there’s many pathways to estrangement. 
LR:
if the adult child cuts off the parents, they also cut off access to the grandchildren which can cause marital tensions for couples that are still married
Why is estrangement so different from other problematic family dynamics?
JC: Because of how disruptive it is to the adult parent and because of the cataclysmic nature of event and its consequences for the rest of the family. Once there’s an estrangement, it isn’t just between that adult child and that parent. It also can cause one set of siblings, or one sibling, to ally with the parent, another with the adult child. Typically, if the adult child cuts off the parents, they also cut off access to the grandchildren which can cause marital tensions for couples that are still married. So, it’s really a cataclysmic event in the whole family system.
LR: In your clinical experience, are there identifiable risk patterns for the eventuality of estrangement? 
JC: Divorce is a huge risk, especially when it is accompanied by parental alienation, where one parent poisons a child against the other parent. Untrained or poorly trained therapists sort of assume that every problem in adulthood that can be traced back to a traumatic childhood experience. There seems to be no shortage of those therapists who think everything that is problematic in adulthood is due to some kind of family dysfunction or trauma.

Another pathway to estrangement is when the adult child married somebody who’s troubled and says, “choose them or me.” Mental illness in the adult child is also potentially destructive. And last, when parents have been doing something much more psychologically destructive over the years, certain adult children just don’t know any other way to feel separate from the parent beyond cutting them off.  
LR: Before we move forward, can you give us a clear definition of estrangement?
JC:  It’s when there is little to no contact. If we’re just thinking of the parent-adult child relationship where there’s little to no contact, and underlying is some kind of, complaint or disruption in the relationship, the adult child is typically the one initiating the estrangement. They determine that it’s better for them not to be in contact with the parent or to grossly limit the contact. Maybe they send a holiday card or something, otherwise they have no contact with their parent.
LR: t's a complete cut off.
JC: Complete cut off, or a nearly complete cut off. Exactly. 
LR:
the adult child may not be as motivated to solve the problem as the parent is
And is the focus of your clinical work mostly on estrangement between adult children and their parents?
JC: Typically, because they’re the ones who are reaching out to me. Occasionally, I’ll have siblings reach out to me, but more typically it’s the parents who are estranged. From their perspective, they’re the ones who are in much more pain. The adult child may have cut off the parent because of their pain, but by the time the parent reaches me, the adult child has concluded that it is in their best interest to estrange their parent. So, the adult child may not be as motivated to solve the problem as the parent is.
LR: Do you have estranged grandparents reaching out to you? 
JC: Yeah, and a lot of grandparents say, ‘look, I could probably tolerate estrangement from my child, but not from my grandchildren.’ This feels intolerable, particularly for those who have been actively involved with their grandchildren, as many of these grandparents have been.
LR: This “grandparent alienation syndrome” must be particularly tormenting for them. Have you experienced different cultural manifestations of estrangement?
JC: The data from the largest study, which was by Rin Reczek at Ohio State, found that, for example, Black mothers were the least likely to be estranged. White fathers are the most likely to be estranged. Latino mothers are also less likely to be estranged than White mothers. Fathers in general are very much at risk for estrangement regardless of race.

There’s relatively low estrangement in Latin American families as well as Asian American families. And similarly, within Asia, we assume that there’s not a lot of estrangement because the culture of filial obligation is still quite active. So, estrangement tends to predominate in those countries and cultures, like ours, that have high rates of individualism and preoccupation with one’s own happiness and mental health.  

Detachment Brokers

LR: That’s interesting. So, there’s a parallel between estrangement and the value particular cultures place on either individualism or commutarianism.
JC: Exactly. Some are much more communitarian, emphasizing the well-being of the family and the group, while others are much more individualistic, like we are here. The sociologist Amy Charlotte calls American individualism ‘adversarial individualism,’ which is the idea that you become an individual through an adversarial relationship with your parent, or you rebel against that. But not all cultures have that kind of adversarial positioning as the way that you become an adult.
LR:
estrangement tends to predominate in those countries and cultures, like ours, that have high rates of individualism and preoccupation with one’s own happiness and mental health
You had mentioned earlier that some therapists can actually make things worse.
JC: I think that all therapists want to do good, but some simply don’t think through all of the factors. We have to not only think about the person in the room, but also the related people, because estrangement is a cataclysmic event that affects many beyond the person sitting in front of you. Grandchildren are involved and get cut out from their grandparents’ lives. Siblings typically get divided into those who support the estrangements and those who don’t. It’s also very hard on marriages.

It’s easy to get sidetracked into focusing on the mental health of the adult child who is cutting off their parent(s) in the name of self-care and self-protection. We have a rich language in our culture around individualism, but a poverty of language that’s oriented around interconnectedness, interdependence, and care.

It’s easy to pathologize someone’s feelings of guilt or responsibility for a parent that may just be a part of their own humanity. By giving them the language and moral permission to cut off a parent without doing due diligence on whether or not that parent really is as hopeless as their client is making them to be, contributes to this kind of atomization.

Therapists can contribute to the tearing apart of the fabric of the American family, acting as accelerants to that process. We become what the sociologist Allison Pugh calls detachment brokers in her book, Tumbleweed Society. When we support clients’ absolute need or desire to estrange their parents due to their need for happiness and personal growth, we help them detach from the feelings of obligation, duty, responsibility that prior generations just assumed one should have.   
LR:
we become what the sociologist Allison Pugh calls detachment brokers
Do you ever encourage or facilitate estrangement as a solution?
JC: The same way that I would never lead the charge into divorce with a couple with minor children because of the long-term consequences, I wouldn't charge ahead with estrangement either. But I do try to help the person to do their due diligence on the parent. Let’s say the parent who is completely unrepentant and constantly shames the adult child about their sexuality, their identity, who they’ve married, or what their career is every time that adult child is around the parent. It’s sort of hard for me to ethically say, “give them a chance!”

But I do think it’s our responsibility to ask them: what other relationships will be impacted if you decide to go no contact, is there some way to sort of have some kind of a relationship where you are protected from their influence, or why don’t we think about why is it so hard on you? A newly reconciled adult child recently suggested to me that, ‘if the adult child is insisting that your parents are the ones that need to change to have a relationship, maybe you’re the one that needs to change.’ I liked that because I don’t think everybody has to stay involved with their parents.

I do think parents have a moral obligation to address their children’s complaints and empathize with them and take responsibility. Just like the adult children have a moral obligation to give their parents a chance. I work with parents every day who are suicidal or sobbing in my office, and that really gives you a different view of this.  
LR:
I do think parents have a moral obligation to address their children’s complaints and empathize with them
I imagine the most deeply wounded adult children are the most difficult ones to work with around reconciliation. Can countertransference enter the clinical frame at that juncture?
JC: There have been a few occasions where the adult child was so self-righteous and contemptuous of the parent, despite the parent’s willingness to make amends for their so-called crimes––which were more on the misdemeanor side than the felony side––they remained unforgiving. Even when the parent showed empathy and took responsibility in the ways that I insist that parents do, the adult child remained in this very censorious, self-righteous, lecturing place.

There haven’t been very many times when I felt provoked on the parent’s behalf, but there have been a couple times where the adult child was earnest, open and vulnerable, and the parent was not willing to do some basic things at the request of the adult child, like accepting basic limits. The parent was insistent. I just felt like you can’t have it both ways. I remember thinking, ‘You can want to have your child to be in contact with you, but you’re going to have to accept the limits that your child is setting, otherwise, I can’t really encourage your child to stay in contact with you in the way that you want me to.’ The transference is worked on both sides of the equation.  

A Roadmap for Change

LR: Is there a roadmap for healing estrangement as you suggest in your book?
JC: Typically, if the parent has reached out to me for the reasons I was just saying, the roadmap begins with taking responsibility and the willingness to make amends. I ask that they try to find the kernel, if not the bushel of truth in their child’s complaints.

They can’t use guilt or influence or pressure in the way that maybe their own parents might have used with them, and they can’t explain away their behavior. They have to show some dedication to reconciling. It must come with some sincerity. The challenging part for parents is often that they can’t really identify with what they’re being accused of, particularly since emotional abuse is the most common reason for these estrangements.

A lot of parents say, ‘wow, emotional abuse, I would have killed for your childhood.’ The threshold for what gets labeled as emotional abuse is much lower for the adult child than it is for the parents. So, a lot of the roadmap for the parent is just accepting that difference and learning how to understand why the adult child is labeling it as such and not really debating it with them or complaining about it. Instead, that roadmap includes a way to empathize with that and understand that those are the most key aspects.  
LR:
the threshold for what gets labeled as emotional abuse is much lower for the adult child than it is for the parents
What about when the road to reconciliation has been damaged by physical/sexual abuse?
JC: You have to go there if you have any chance of healing the relationship. If a parent is lucky enough to get an adult child in the room after that child being a victim of more serious traumas on the parents part, the parent has to be willing to sit there and face all the ways that they have failed their child and how much they hurt and wounded them.

And it’s not an easy thing to do, typically, because hurt people hurt people. There is high likelihood that the parent who did the traumatizing was traumatized themselves, but if anything is going to happen, it’s going to be because the parent can take responsibility and do a deeper dive and not sweep it under the rug. And that’s very hard work, especially for the adult child who must expose themselves.  
LR:
I tell parents that this is not marriage therapy
Would you work with the adult child separately from the parent and then together by collaborating with all the players in the same room?
JC: Typically, I will meet with each side separately because I want to see what the obstacles are, what each person’s narrative is, assuming that I think everybody’s ready to go forward, I’ll bring everyone together. I usually don’t keep them separate for more than one session, but not everybody is ready to go forward at the same time. If I think that people are sort of ready to engage, then I’ll do a session separately and then everybody together.

I tell parents that this is not marriage therapy. The therapy is around helping the adult child feel like their parent is willing to respect their boundaries and accept versions of their narrative sufficiently that they feel more cared about and understood. It’s not going to be as much about the parent getting to explain their reasons or decisions, at least not early into the therapy. If therapy goes on long enough, and people are healthy enough to have that conversation, then it can happen. But it doesn’t always.   
LR: What do you consider to be a successful outcome, and at what point do you say that’s enough for now?
JC: I think when they’ve all had enough time outside of therapy, and they were able, to debrief if there was conflict, and if I feel confident that they have the tools to walk them themselves through the conflict and resolve it. I try to help each person set realistic goals and let them know that they are going to make mistakes going forward. The goal isn’t to be perfect, but instead to communicate around feelings and taking each other’s perspectives so all members feel safe and skilled enough to overcome whatever conflict arises. I don’t want anyone feeling discouraged and helpless.
LR: What protective factors do you look for when working with estrangement? The glimmers of hope that you search for with your therapeutic flashlight?
JC: The biggest one is a capacity for self-reflection on the part of both the parents and the adult children. In the parent, I look for a willingness to take responsibility, the capacity for non-defensiveness, vulnerability, and tolerance for hearing their child(ren)’s complaints without being completely undone. For the adult child, I look for acknowledgment that what they’ve done is difficult for the parent, and that their own issues might have contributed to their decision to estrange them.

I look for an adult child to say things like, ‘I acknowledge that I was a really tough kid to raise,’ ‘I’ve been a tough as an adult,’ ‘I can give as well as I get,’ or ‘I know that I have an anger issue.’ Those help me, as the therapist, to feel like, ‘okay, you’re not just here to blame and shame the others.’ It’s about a willingness and ability to come to a shared reality, which is important for these dynamics.  
LR:
I’ll keep working with people as long as they want to get somewhere. I don’t usually fire clients
At what point might you suggest stopping with a client?
JC: I’ll keep working with people as long as they want to get somewhere. I don’t usually fire clients. But, for example, if I have an adult child who is just insisting that their parent has to change, and it’s clear to me that the parent has changed as much as they’re going to, my goal would be helping them shift towards radical acceptance, rather than to keep beating their head against the wall. And similarly with a parent, if their adult child is just not willing to reconcile, then it isn’t useful for the parent just to keep trying and banging their head against the reconciliation wall either.
LR: Recognizing not only your own limitations, but those that the family system brings to you.
JC: Exactly! I think an important part of our work is to help people to radically accept what they can’t change and influence. As painful as that is to reckon with.
LR: What does radical acceptance mean in this context? 
JC: The term came from Marsha Linehan who developed Dialectical Behavior Therapy. It’s not sort of a soft acceptance, but instead a deep dive that you have to do. She has a great quote that says, ‘the pathway out of hell is your misery.’ It’s a great quote because you must first acknowledge that you’re miserable and accept it and maybe not even hope for change.

But it does mean you have to acknowledge that you’re currently in hell. And unless you can really accept that reality, nothing good is going to come of it. The other saying that I like that comes from mindfulness or Buddhism is that pain plus struggle equals suffering. That the more you fight against the pain, the more you’re going to suffer. So, I think those are useful concepts.  
LR: In this context, at what point does grief and loss work enter the clinical frame?
JC: Grief work is really part of it. Even if I can’t facilitate a reconciliation, it is important helping parents to feel like, ‘yeah, I think you’ve turned over every stone here.’ At that point, it is important to help them accept it and focus more on their own happiness and well-being, and on other relationships. This would include working on self-compassion while mourning the loss of the relationship that may never be.
LR:
even if I can’t facilitate a reconciliation, it is important helping parents to feel like, ‘yeah, I think you’ve turned over every stone here
In closing, Josh, can someone who’s trained in individual therapy do this kind of work?
JC: If you are an individual therapist, you can’t just sort of suddenly start doing couples therapy. You have to have some facility at keeping two subjectivities in your mind at the same time. You know, being able to, to speak to both people in a way that shows that you’re neutral, even when you’re temporarily siding with one person over the other. I think it’s important to have a sociological framework for this part. You also need to set your own limits and boundaries. Doing family work is a very different sort of orientation and requires a unique skill set.
LR: On that note, I’ll say thanks. Josh, I appreciate the time. 
JC: It was my pleasure, Lawrence.


©Psychotherapy.net, 2025
Bios
Joshua Coleman Joshua Coleman, PhD, is a psychologist in private practice in the San Francisco Bay Area and a Senior Fellow with the Council on Contemporary Families, a non-partisan organization of leading sociologists, historians, psychologists and demographers dedicated to providing the press and public with the latest research and best practice findings about American families. He is the author of numerous articles and chapters and has written four books: The Rules of Estrangement (Random House); The Marriage Makeover: Finding Happiness in Imperfect Harmony (St. Martin's Press); The Lazy Husband: How to Get Men to Do More Parenting and Housework (St. Martin's Press); When Parents Hurt: Compassionate Strategies When You and Your Grown Child Don't Get Along (HarperCollins). His website is www.drjoshuacoleman.com/.  

Joshua Coleman was compensated for his/her/their contribution. None of his/her/their books or additional offerings are required for any of the Psychotherapy.net content. Should such materials be references, it is as an additional resource.

Psychotherapy.net defines ineligible companies as those whose primary business is producing, marketing, selling, re-selling, or distributing healthcare products used by or on patients. There is no minimum financial threshold; individuals must disclose all financial relationships, regardless of the amount, with ineligible companies. We ask that all contributors disclose any and all financial relationships they have with any ineligible companies whether the individual views them as relevant to the education or not.

Additionally, there is no commercial support for this activity. None of the planners or any employee at Psychotherapy.net who has worked on this educational activity has relevant financial relationship(s) to disclose with ineligible companies.
Lawrence Rubin Lawrence ‘Larry’ Rubin, PhD, ABPP, is a Florida licensed psychologist, and registered play therapist. He currently teaches in the doctoral program in Psychology at Nova Southeastern University and retired Professor of Counselor Education at St. Thomas University. A board-certified diplomate in clinical child and adolescent psychology, he has published numerous book chapters and edited volumes in psychotherapy and popular culture including the Handbook of Medical Play Therapy and Child Life: Interventions in Clinical and Medical Settings and Diagnosis and Treatment Planning Skills: A Popular Culture Casebook Approach. Larry is the editor at Psychotherapy.net.

Lawrence Rubin was compensated for his/her/their contribution. None of his/her/their books or additional offerings are required for any of the Psychotherapy.net content. Should such materials be references, it is as an additional resource.

Psychotherapy.net defines ineligible companies as those whose primary business is producing, marketing, selling, re-selling, or distributing healthcare products used by or on patients. There is no minimum financial threshold; individuals must disclose all financial relationships, regardless of the amount, with ineligible companies. We ask that all contributors disclose any and all financial relationships they have with any ineligible companies whether the individual views them as relevant to the education or not.

Additionally, there is no commercial support for this activity. None of the planners or any employee at Psychotherapy.net who has worked on this educational activity has relevant financial relationship(s) to disclose with ineligible companies.