Alcoholism: Piecing Together Research to Consider Single

Parent Households

THESIS:

There is very little research available on alcoholism

related specifically to a single parent within a single

parent household. Therefore, it is pertinent to discuss the

factors related to alcoholism and single parenthood

separately in order to piece together the sociological

effects and implications of this particular phenomenon.

Factors to be discussed include alcoholism, alcoholism and

communication in families, the single alcoholic, wellness in

single parent households, and children of alcoholics. The

dynamics within each category will also be discussed, as

well as my own suggestions for new directions to consider

while studying alcoholism in single parent households and

the effects of alcoholism on children both long and short

term.

1

I: WHAT IS ALCOHOLISM? CRITERIA FOR DIAGNOSIS

The prevalence of alcoholism is high in numbers. In

fact, the only illnesses that are higher in number are

mental illness, heart disease, and cancer (Scott, 1970).

There are many definitions of alcoholism that can be found

in a variety of media and issued from a variety of studies:

The American Medical Association defines ‘alcoholics’

as ‘those excessive drinkers whose dependence on

alcohol has attained such a degree that it shows a

noticeable disturbance or interference with their

bodily or mental health, their interpersonal relations,

and their satisfactory social and economic functioning.

(Scott, 1970)

In order to discuss alcoholism in any respect,

alcoholism must first be diagnosed. There are many factors,

both minor and major, that may contribute to an alcoholic’s

diagnosis, which directly relate to the familial and

interpersonal problems that may arise due to this illness.

2

Within these factors, there are a few major criteria:

physiological dependency, behavioral, and psychological and

attitudinal (Estes, 1982).

Physiological Dependency:

Physiology deals with the function of organisms and

their parts. The physiological dependency of an alcoholic

relates to the biology specific to their need for alcohol.

The most common manifestation of physiological

dependency is demonstrated in withdrawal symptoms. These

symptoms consist of tremors, hallucinations, seizures, and

delirium (Estes, 1982). Further symptoms include nausea and

sweating (MC 2012).

Another common form of physiological dependency is

found in the growing tolerance of alcohol within the

alcoholic’s body. This then forces the alcoholic to increase

the amounts of alcohol consumed to create the desired effect

of the liquor on the individual’s mind and body (Estes,

1982).

3

Lastly, physiological dependency is found in alcohol-

associated illnesses. This includes, but is not limited to,

alcoholic hepatitis, Laennec’s cirrhosis, pancreatitis in

the absence of cholelithiasis, and chronic gastritis (Estes,

1982). It is also common that the alcoholic drink despite

these physical health problems, persisting even in the face

of liver disease (WebMD 2012).

Behavioral:

Behavioral patterns are fairly recognizable among those

who know alcoholics and maintain personal relationships with

them. Morning drinking, frequent car accidents, and

illegitimate medical excuses from work are just a few of

these behavioral patterns. Repeated attempts at abstaining

from alcohol are also noteworthy, and directly relates to

the physiological dependency criteria of withdrawal syndrome

(Estes, 1982).

In addition to these, there are more extreme behavioral

signs that plague the alcoholic and those who surround him

or her. Rage is a common symptom; random outbursts and

4

threats of suicide are not irregular. The alcoholic also

engages in desperate attempts to relieve anxiety.

Telephonitis, or lengthy telephone calls at inconvenient

times and places with ulterior motives, is one such method

of relieving anxiety that is commonplace among these

individuals (Estes, 1982).

Psychological and Attitudinal:

The alcoholic may engage in negative banter, including

complaints about their spouse, job, or friends. Empty and/or

genuine threats of divorce may also take place. Within the

intermediate home and among the alcoholic’s relations with

the outside world, resentment, jealousy, and paranoia are

prevalent. The probability of preoccupations with suicide,

increased isolation, and bouts of crying related to

depression are high (Estes, 1982).

II: ALCOHOLISM IN FAMILIES: A GENERAL OVERVIEW

5

According to Edward M. Scott (1970), “the typical

alcoholic has two problems.”

The first is “The Disease,” or “an abnormal reaction to a

normal substance: tissue tolerance, adaptive cell

metabolism, loss of control, and so forth.” The second

problem has to do with mental and emotional health, or “that

an individual… would keep drinking in spite of the problems

it causes, must have some mental or emotional problem… that

in spite of his intellectual awareness, his emotions ‘drive’

him to continue.” It is this second problem that pinpoints

the strain of communication within an alcoholic family,

causing a breakdown of norms and emotional imbalances

(Estes, 1982).

Communication, The Shattered Ideal:

It is a well-known stereotype that the alcoholic can be

a hurtful individual to their spouse and children, whether

the abuse is physical or verbal. It is this abuse, this

untrustworthy behavior, that causes the alcoholic’s family

and friends to build up defenses, sometimes in the form of

6

silence. This silence is a mechanism to protect an

individual from a situation that has proved hurtful in the

past, manifesting in a reluctance to share oneself with the

alcoholic for fear that they will use one’s vulnerabilities

to mock or discourage (Estes, 1982).

Silence enables relationships to continue, and can be

seen as positive by both parties for a time. It makes the

situation “tolerable” if there is no communication to bring

about an argument. According to Estes (1982), it is in this

relationship that “communication efforts are mainly attempts

to control the other person’s behavior through down-grading,

avoidance, or blaming… Marital partners in the throes of

alcoholism often use knowledge of the other’s vulnerable

areas to express animosity rather than to empathize.”

However, the strategy of silence within the alcoholic

family can only persist for so long. Eventually, there is a

build up of unspoken feelings, which lead to “explosive

expressions of pent up anger,” and can also manifest in the

form of physical violence (Estes, 1982).

7

III. THE SINGLE ALCOHOLIC

“Presumably, therapists place the single alcoholic in

groups with married alcoholics” (Scott, 1970). However,

there have been implications that there are differences

between married and single alcoholics, as evidenced by a

study conducted by Scott (1970).

This study consisted of a single group of seven men and

three women. Within this group, during therapies it was

revealed that none of them had a good relationship with

their parents. According to Scott (1970), “in the therapy of

single alcoholics, there are some singularly difficult

dynamics to be worked through apart from the patient’s

cessation of drinking.”

In addition to drinking, Scott (1970) found that

neuroticism, loneliness (“alcoholism is an attempt to form a

relationship with the self and others”), and fear of

rejection (related to the relationship between the alcoholic

and their parents) were all factors that must be addressed

in the healing process of the single alcoholic.

8

The single alcoholic’s attitude fluctuated “between

self-indulgence, disregard of others, punitive, and self-

destructive measures… toward the self.” Scott (1970)

concluded that the alcoholic must be confronted with the

sources of their behavior to take steps toward maturity.

IV. THE SINGLE-PARENT HOUSEHOLD: WELLNESS

It has been proven through various studies that the

health of a single parent is much less positive than that of

a married parent. Whether the parent is male, female,

widowed or divorced/separated, this has been a recurring

truth (Hardey, 1991).

According to Hardey (1991), “existing evidence on the

health of lone parents suggests that there may be three

important dimensions to their experience of health and

illness.”

The first dimension is a restatement of fact: Single

mothers and fathers are more likely to experience illness

than those mothers and fathers who are coupled. The second

9

dimension suggests that gender difference factors into the

type, rates, and severity of health among parents. The third

and final dimension states that variation among lone parents

and their health or lack thereof may be explained by the

situation in which they entered into single parenthood

(Hardey, 1991).

The study suggests “the reasons for differences in the

health of lone mothers and fathers lay in differences in

their marital histories, in their socioeconomic

circumstances, and in the nature of their roles as parents”

(Hardey, 1991).

V. CHILDREN OF ALCOHOLICS

There are many areas notable of discussion when

considering children of alcoholics, from the general norms

of these children, these children as adults, the role of

alcohol-specific socialization, and the unique phenomenon of

sons of alcoholic fathers. Each dynamic deals directly with

the parent/child relationship, and is a large factor in

10

determining the effects of alcoholism within familial

groups.

General:

According to Reich (1997), alcoholism tends to run in

families, and children of alcoholics are four times more

likely to become alcoholics later in life. In fact, studies

have indicated that children tend to imitate the alcoholic

behaviors of their parents, especially that of their fathers

(Van der Vorst, 2005).

There have been many studies conducted over the decades

to explain this phenomenon. In the 1950’s and 60’s, studies

suggested “psychosocial explanations, such as poor

parenting, lack of good role models, and impoverished home

life. Research performed in the 1970’s, however, also has

investigated heritable components in the familial

transmission of alcoholism” (Reich, 1997). Such research of

heritable evidences of alcoholism will be discussed later in

this section.

11

Despite the proofs of genetics when considering

alcoholism between children and parents, it is obvious that

environmental factors play a large role in the socialization

and susceptibility of children to alcoholism. According to

Reich (1997), examples of environmental factors include

“maternal drinking during pregnancy, temperament and

personality traits of parents and children, psychopathology

in the parents and children, geographic location, family and

community environment, religious involvement, academic

failure, and association with deviant peers.”

While children of alcoholics experience a wide array

of opposing forces both externally and internally, they are

generally adaptable at a young age to dealing with a parent

who abuses alcohol. This adaptability is a mechanism of

survival, and they learn ways of coping through their

experiences. They appear to be well adjusted on the surface

(Estes, 1982).

There are three role patterns consistent with children

who live with alcoholic parents. These roles are the

12

“responsible one,” the “adjuster,” and the “placator”

(Estes, 1982).

Alcoholism In Adult Children of Alcoholics:

The coping mechanisms described above may diminish,

sometimes in the late teens or early twenties. The child

finds that these defenses no longer work, which can result

in psychological breakdown through loneliness, depression,

“inability to maintain intimate relationships, and

unexpressible anger” (Estes, 1982).

Furthermore, these children as adults experience

increased risks for psychiatric disorders such as those

listed above, antisocial symptoms and anxiety, eating

disorders such as anorexia nervosa and bulimia, and even

schizophrenia. They also exhibit less communicative

knowledge, more problems forming relationships, both

intimate and within the self, lower academic achievement,

and an increased risk of marrying an alcoholic (Cuijpers &

Smit, 2001).

13

Role of Alcohol-Specific Socialization, As Studied by Van der Vorst:

Van der Vorst (2005; 2006) defines alcohol-specific

socialization as “setting rules about alcohol use,

expressing disapproval of drinking or talking about alcohol

use.” Parental control, or having strict rules related to

the use of alcohol, has been a determining factor of

children’s alcohol use. It has also been proven in studies

that parents who allowed their child to drink within the

home are more likely to have children who use alcohol

outside of the home two years later (Van der Vorst, 2005;

2006).

However, not all parents view strict rules about

alcohol as necessary. Factors that may influence this belief

are how the parents were raised and their own behavior

regarding alcohol usage. Van der Vorst (2006) wrote of these

norms, which may explain a parent’s attitude toward

drinking:

Theoretically, Turner (1991) argued that a distinction

should be made between injunctive and descriptive

norms. Injunctive norms refer to norms related to

14

behavior which people approve or disapprove, and

descriptive norms refer to modeling, which means that

one person imitates the behavior of another (Graham,

Marks, & Hansen, 1991).

Van der Vorst (2006) goes on to write that parents tend

to have injunctive norms concerning alcohol use, and that

these are based on social or cultural norms, or even on

their own experiences with drinking.

Another determining factor in whether or not the child

drinks is the regard the child has for the parent as an

authoritative figure. Those who did not respect their parent

as an authoritative figure are four times more likely to use

and abuse alcohol than those who listen to their parents.

Therefore, even if a parent is proactive in teaching the

child about alcohol and its dangers, their words are less

likely to influence the child who does not see the parent

respectively. However, communication between parent and

child about alcohol use, whether only one or both of the

parents are non-users, has proven generally ineffective and

15

not a determining factor in the likelihood that a child will

or will not drink (Van der Vorst, 2005).

Recently alcohol-specific socialization has been

studied within siblings. Siblings may respond differently to

alcohol-specific socialization, and these studies explore

why. According to Van der Vorst (2005), “parents might be

less restrictive regarding drinking of older adolescents

than of younger adolescents. This, in turn, might have

differential effects on the drinking behaviour of siblings.”

Another theory concerning this is a matter of the

perspectives of both parent and child. While the parent may

think they have strict rules regarding the consumption of

alcohol, the child’s opinion of this may differ. If the

child sees the rules as more lax than the parent, they are

likely to disregard alcohol as an important substance to

avoid (Van der Vorst, 2005).

Sons of Alcoholic Fathers:

“It is well established that the elevated risk in

[Adult Children of Alcoholics] (especially the sons of

16

alcoholic fathers) of becoming alcoholics themselves is

partly due to genetic factors” (Cuijpers & Smit, 2001).

In a study conducted by Begleiter, Porjesz, and Bihari

(1987), auditory brainstem potentials were recorded to note

any delay in brainstem transmission between those sons with

alcoholic fathers and those without. It has been proven that

alcoholic adults experience increasing delays in brainstem

transmission, and the objective of this study was to prove

whether or not sons of alcoholic fathers experience this

same delay genetically. The group of sons of alcoholics used

in this study had never been exposed to alcohol or any

substance use themselves to ensure a more genuine outcome

concerning brain activity (Begleiter, Porjesz, & Bihari,

1987).

Begleiter, Porjesz, & Bihari (1987) wrote:

Our findings indicate that the auditory brainstem

potentials obtained from sons of alcoholic fathers do

not differ significantly from those obtained from

matched control subjects. Both the individual peak

latencies and the brain stem transmission time are

17

quite similar in the high risk individuals and normal

controls.

Therefore, this study concluded that the brain delays

experienced by alcoholic fathers are not genetically

heritable, and are probably the result of prolonged alcohol

use in the individual. This is not to say that genetic

factors are not influences on a son’s alcohol use, but that

the effects on the brain may not be genetically passed on to

offspring (Begleiter, Porjesz, & Bihari, 1987).

VI. PIECING IT ALL TOGETHER: NEW DIRECTIONS FOR RESEARCH

Because alcoholism in single parent households has

little research to explore, I have found it necessary to use

the research available over the underlying factors of

alcoholism in families as a platform to build a picture of

future research. There is much more to consider than the

research at hand, but this research may be used to

hypothesize and direct new studies supportable by

experimental evidence.

18

Alcoholism, according to Scott (1970) is a disease.

Operating under this premise of alcoholism as an illness,

and the increased risk of single parents to experience

illness (Hardey, 1991), I hypothesize that alcoholism risks

will be increased within a single parent household. Because

of this, the implications on the psychosocial effects are

great, both on the single parent and the child. The single

alcoholic’s tendency to lack a good relationship with their

parents (Scott, 1970), may also cause the child of the

single alcoholic to experience not only the bad parent/child

relationship, but also the emotional and social insecurities

of the elder alcoholic.

Children are more likely to imitate the drinking habits

of their fathers (Van der Vorst, 2005; Cuijpers & Smit,

2001), and single fathers are less likely to report a long

term illness (Hardey, 1991), therefore I also have a theory

that alcoholism in single parent households where the father

is the guardian are more likely to result in an alcoholic

child, generally a son (Cuijpers & Smit, 2001).

19

It is the breakdown of communication within the

alcoholic family (Estes, 1982) which may result in less

alcohol-specific socialization between parent and child (Van

der Vorst, 2005; 2006), especially between that parent who

is a user of alcohol. This is because the user of alcohol is

less likely to speak to their child about the dangers of

early substance abuse (Van der Vorst, 2005).

Another factor I have considered in reference to the

single parent alcoholic home is the psychological effects on

the child or children. Perhaps role patterns used as

survival mechanisms, such as the roles of the “responsible

one,” the “adjuster,” and the “placator” (Estes, 1982), will

be more common in non-dual parent households. This may be

due to the fact that the child has become the only option

for his or her own survival, and there is no second parent

to lend support.

Furthermore, in single parent households, and even dual

parent households, there is another key element to consider

when studying the family dynamics between parents and

children. I believe alcohol-specific socialization may

20

differ between siblings, not only because of age, but also

because of gender-role socialization. The bouts of violence

and outbursts of rage typical of an alcoholic home (Estes,

1982), may adversely affect brothers and sisters. The female

child may become frightened and withdrawn, while the male

may become defiant and deviate from the alcoholic’s need to

control, or even vice versa. This defiance could

theoretically be a cause of sons imitating the alcoholic

patterns of their fathers (Van der Vorst, 2005; Cuijpers &

Smit, 1991).

A final direction for research when considering

alcoholism in single parent households is the study of

single parents who have experienced the death of a spouse.

According to Hardey (1991), those single parents who

experienced the death of their marital partners were at

greater risk for prolonged illness. Still presuming

alcoholism is a disease (Scott, 1970), I have assumed that

alcoholism in single parents who have experienced the death

of a spouse, especially young parents left with young

21

children, will experience a greater risk for alcoholism than

those single parents who have been divorced or separated.

VII. CONCLUSION

To conclude, there is little research on alcoholism in

single parent households, though the research that is

available on individual factors may be used to theorize and

direct new lines of research. These factors include

alcoholism, alcoholism and communication in families, single

alcoholics, wellness in single parent households, and

children of alcoholics. Within each category, there is an

array of topics that can be discussed and debated, and a

variety of experiments that have been conducted. When

connecting these various topics of research, I have

determined that they are platforms that may lead to new

lines of research involving alcoholism in single parent

households. I have been inspired to consider some new

directions in research, including the gender-role

socialization of siblings regarding alcohol-specific

22

socialization and the study of single parents who experience

the death of a spouse, resulting in alcoholism.

23

24