Blaming
Blaming is a symptom of the problem. Identifying the addiction as the cause of a particular difficulty means admitting that the addiction is present. But doing that risks revealing the secret that there is serious trouble in the family. So family members find others to blame when things go wrong. Parents blame the school system when their addicted teenager flunks out of school. The alcoholic blames the nagging spouse when a relapse occurs. One person in the divorce blames the other when the real reason that the marriage failed was addiction.

Parents send their addicted young adult child to psychiatrist after psychiatrist in an effort to cure the “chemical imbalance” that they believe has caused the addiction.

The “Don’t Talk” Rule
Blaming is also a symptom of the ban that is placed on strong negative emotions. Addiction professionals refer to this as the “don’t talk/don’t feel” rule; it is another way in which the family adapts in an attempt to prevent the addiction from rocking the boat.

The “don’t talk/don’t feel” rule restricts what topics can be talked about and what emotions can be expressed. Eventually it restricts what emotions can be felt. It is not okay to openly discuss the father’s escalating alcohol problem or the sister’s drug problem. It is no longer permissible to be angry if something upsetting happens or sad if something bad happens or joyful if something great happens. All emotions are passed through a filter: if what you are feeling is consistent with the basic assumptions under which the family is operating, it is acceptable. Otherwise, you did not feel it.

The feeling and expression of anger are particularly distorted. In this type of family, it is not uncommon for hostile or angry behavior to be used mainly as a tool for manipulation rather than as the genuine expression of a feeling that could lead to a productive change in direction. Anger is also seen as dangerous because verbal or physical violence often occurs in addicted families. These families learn to walk on eggshells around the abusive person (who is often the addict, but not always). Family members may also be emotionally traumatized to the extent that even appropriate expressions of anger or conflict trigger anxiety and fear of upheaval or retaliation. Guilt-ridden addicts may wish to avoid any expression of conflict when they are not using the addictive substance.

If a relapse occurs, a belief may develop in the family that stress or discord has triggered the addict’s behavior. Therefore it is more important to keep the peace than to express one’s true feelings.

Many different reasons and usually years of experience reinforce the “don’t talk/don’t feel” rule. But the problem with suppressing strong negative emotions is that all other emotions are also suppressed. It’s like trying to avoid seeing the color red - the only way to do so is to close your eyes and see no colors at all. Members of addicted families have a great deal of difficulty correctly identifying feeling states, and especially identifying the many subtle nuances of different feelings. Feelings and emotions begin to fall into two basic categories - okay and upset. Anger is often mistaken for anxiety or stress. Depression and sadness are experienced as irritability. This is a serious problem in the long run for all members of the family.

Our feelings and emotions help us navigate through relationships and situations. Like the sonar system in a submarine, we send out emotional signals, and we receive feedback which tells us in what direction to proceed. If the sensitivity of the system is damaged because of a “don’t talk/don’t feel” rule, then it won’t be long before some type of interpersonal catastrophe occurs - a relationship on the rocks, a personality conflict at work, or other problems of coping.

Splits
As the addiction spirals out of control, the family attempts to regain equilibrium in any way possible. The addict is busy obtaining and using the addictive substance and recovering from the results. The family is busy with damage control and with trying to prevent the addict from continuing. As we have seen, loss of control over the use of the substance is part of the definition of addiction. So we can imagine that the family’s efforts to control the addiction are likely to fail.
Nonetheless, almost every family will try.

In the process of trying to control the addiction, two schools of thought will emerge in most families. Some people react to the threat of the family disintegrating, align with the addict’s denial system, and then excuse, cover up, or attempt to compensate for the addiction. Others feel that the solution for both the addict and the family as a whole is to expel the addict from the family, cut off all resources, and force the addict to sink or swim. Of course, neither approach is likely to be successful in the long run, but the argument itself dissipates a good bit of tension in the family. It is an indirect but acceptable way of expressing negative feelings about the addict and his or her behavior.

On both sides, the basic assumption is the same - that it is possible, somehow, to find a way to control the addiction and fix the problem. People who have grown up in addicted families often respond to tension and conflict in outside situations by attempting to control others, and they may feel inappropriately responsible for the behaviors of others. Life in an addicted family is often unpredictable and chaotic, and this further reinforces the need that family members have to control others.