The Enabling Child

Carrying the burden of the family’s emotions

Disclaimer: Please remember that no description of roles or dynamics in a family system is universally accurate. Every person and family is unique, influenced by countless factors including genetics, trauma history, temperament, protective and risk factors, and the presence of supportive adults. Family roles and behaviors are best understood on a spectrum rather than as fixed categories. This article explores one possible pathway for the development of behaviors in children, not a definitive rule.

In a narcissistic family system, the enabling child frequently assumes the role of an emotional caretaker, aligning with a passive, avoidant, or otherwise conflict avoidant parent while attempting to manage or minimize the behavior of a dominant, emotionally volatile, or demanding caregiver (Pressman & Pressman, 1994; Kernberg, 1975). Early in development, this child learns that safety, belonging, and connection depend on maintaining family harmony, anticipating others’ needs, and prioritizing the emotions of parents over their own. While praised for being “mature” or “helpful,” such praise often reflects premature emotional responsibility rather than authentic self-development — a pattern widely referred to as parentification (Boszormenyi-Nagy & Spark, 1973; Jurkovic, 1997; Kerig, 2005).

Emotional Alliances and Adult Patterns

In families where one parent consistently enables or excuses harmful behavior by the narcissistic parent — due to fear, dependence, trauma history, suppression, or denial — the enabling child often forms an emotional alliance with this parent. This alliance may involve protective behavior toward both parents, efforts to maintain family peace, or attempts to regulate sibling behavior (Bowen, 1978). Even without explicit instruction, the child internalizes expectations of loyalty, emotional availability, and self-suppression to prevent conflict or rejection.

These patterns frequently persist into adulthood, manifesting as chronic emotional self-suppression, hypervigilance to others’ moods, guilt, and difficulty asserting boundaries (van der Kolk, 2014; Luthar & Brown, 2007). Many enabling children develop anxious-preoccupied attachment in adulthood, rooted in inconsistent or conditional emotional availability from caregivers (Ainsworth et al., 1978; Bowlby, 1988; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007). While outwardly competent or self-reliant, these individuals often struggle with fear of abandonment, over-functioning, enmeshment, and difficulty accessing their own emotional needs.

They may also experience emotional projection, where unacknowledged feelings are projected onto others and misinterpreted by the adult enabling child as empathy, reinforcing patterns of over-responsibility (Shipman & Zeman, 2001). During relational ruptures or perceived disconnection, emotional responses such as blame, withdrawal, or lability may arise — not as pathological instability, but as survival strategies encoded in the nervous system (van der Kolk, 2014).

Emotional Dysregulation and Trauma Responses

Adult enabling children often appear highly functional; however, when emotional safety is threatened, they may display intense emotional dysregulation, including panic, anger, or hyper-control. These reactions reflect unresolved developmental trauma rather than inherent pathology (Herman, 1992; Schore, 2009). The proximity of trigger and reaction can feel nearly instantaneous, complicating accurate situational assessment and perspective-taking. Long-term parentification and over-responsibility can also contribute to internalized shame, low self-esteem, and patterns of codependency, which persist into adult relationships (Wells et al., 1999; Flett et al., 2016).

Healing and Differentiation

Healing requires differentiation (Bowen, 1978) — the process of separating the self from the family’s projected roles and unhealthy dynamics. For the enabling child, this involves:

• Grieving the enabling role, which once provided identity, purpose, or attachment security (Jurkovic, 1997).

• Establishing emotional boundaries, learning to prioritize personal needs, values, and feelings.

• Restoring connection with the authentic self, including acknowledgment of vulnerability and ordinary human needs.

• Reconciling with their story of the enabling parent, recognizing the limitations of available attachment while detaching responsibility for the parent’s emotional regulation (Crittenden, 2008).

Therapeutic approaches that integrate trauma-informed care, somatic regulation, and attachment-based interventions can facilitate this differentiation and promote self-compassion (van der Kolk, 2014; Schore, 2009).

Integration and Recovery

Recovery for adult enabling children involves cultivating a new narrative in which differentiation is associated with self-respect, clarity, and relational authenticity, rather than guilt or betrayal. This process fosters autonomy, reciprocity, and the ability to maintain emotionally safe relationships. Healing entails integrating past survival strategies into adaptive adult functioning while reclaiming internal authority and emotional ownership. Healing also requires improved emotional literacy, self-insight, and cognitive restructuring to reduce emotional projection and increase self-awareness. By developing self-awareness and cultivating boundaries, adult survivors can transform the early pattern of emotional over-responsibility into healthy empathy, emotional intelligence, and relational competence.

References

Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Lawrence Erlbaum.

Boszormenyi-Nagy, I., & Spark, G. M. (1973). Invisible loyalties: Reciprocity in intergenerational family therapy. Harper & Row.

Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Parent–child attachment and healthy human development. Basic Books.

Bowen, M. (1978). Family therapy in clinical practice. Jason Aronson.

Crittenden, P. M. (2008). Raising parents: Attachment, parenting and child safety. Willan Publishing.

Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., & Heisel, M. J. (2016). Perfectionism and suicidality: Theory, research, and clinical strategies. Review of General Psychology, 20(3), 283–299.

Herman, J. L. (1992). Trauma and recovery: The aftermath of violence—from domestic abuse to political terror. Basic Books.

Jurkovic, G. J. (1997). Lost childhoods: The plight of the parentified child. Brunner/Mazel.

Kernberg, O. F. (1975). Borderline conditions and pathological narcissism. Jason Aronson.

Kerig, P. K. (2005). Revisiting the construct of the parentified child: Implications for clinical practice. Family Process, 44(2), 167–175.

Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. Guilford Press.

Pressman, C., & Pressman, J. (1994). The narcissistic family: Diagnosis and treatment. Jossey-Bass.

Schore, A. N. (2009). Right-brain regulation and infant mental health: A model for interdisciplinary collaboration. Zero to Three Journal, 30(1), 11–18.

Shipman, K. L., & Zeman, J. (2001). Socialization of children’s emotion regulation in maltreating families. Child Maltreatment, 6(3), 206–218.

van der Kolk, B. A. (2014). The body keeps the score: Brain, mind, and body in the healing of trauma. Viking.

Wells, M., Glickauf-Hughes, C., & Jones, R. (1999). Codependency and childhood parentification. American Journal of Family Therapy, 27(1), 63–71.