Mental health articles

Incest As a Symptom of Family Pathology
Another repository for blame is the family itself. This conceptualization is most often
found in the early literature on family systems theory in which incest was viewed as a
homeostatic device that maintained equilibrium within the family (Carper, 1979).
Central to this hypothesis was the concept of circular causality in which each member was said to contribute to the maintenance of the incestuous behavior and to join in a
“conspiracy of silence” (Cohen, 1983, p. 155). The mother's abdication of her role as
the father’s sexual partner was generally implied as the crux of the family's problem, and some authors believed that the mother purposefully colluded to maintain the
incestuous relationship (Kadushin & Martin, 1988). Others believed that incest was a dysfunctional attempt to ward off the fear of family annihilation or that it was an
expression of the father's anger at his wife (Cohen, 1983; Hoorwitz, 1983). Kadushin
and Martin (1988) forward this family systems theory perspective:
Father-daughter incest is a manifestation of a disturbed family equilibrium and occurs in response to an effort to establish an adaptation that is functional…. The family in
which incest occurs is likely to be an enmeshed, socially isolated, one in which
intergenerational and parent-child role boundaries are vaguely defined and
permeable … .A family experiencing marital conflict is maintained intact by the reallocation of sexual-affectional role in incest. The female child is sacrificed… on the
altar of family stability…. Participants share the feeling that incest is preferable to
family breakdown….[and] all participants have a vested interest in guarding against
disclosure….Secondary gains experienced by the daughter reinforce any reluctance to
discontinue the relationship….She has a special status…And, there is the secondary gain
in sexual pleasure….A further secondary gain… is considerable enhancement of her
power…. Positive satisfactions in secondary gain increases [sic] the incentives to
continue the relationship. (pp. 298-302)
Finally, Alexander (1985) contends that:
Much can be understood about the occurrence of incest if it is viewed in the context of a
relatively closed system. Incest should not be viewed as an end in itself; but simply as a
behavior symptomatic of a family that is isolated from the environment; that is avoidant
of the differentiation of roles, functions, and individual members; and that uses the
incest behavior as just one more means to avoid the growth and change that is inherent
in adolescents seeking outside contacts and eventually leaving home. (p. 82)
The historical conceptualization of sexual abuse developed within family
systems theory has little empirical support. Furthermore, families of incest cannot be
clearly differentiated from other families in which victims of other types of child sexual abuse live or families with other types of dysfunction. Consequently, family
systems theorists have yet to explain what is unique about families in which incest occurs compared to those in which it does not occur. This theory and its lack of supporting empirical data are evaluated further in Chapter 7, “Intrafamilial Abuse.”

Tags: pathology, symptom