Suzanne Degges-White, Ph.D., a professor at Weber State University in Utah, offers a clinical perspective on family estrangement that diverges significantly from the statistical and geographical focus of existing reporting. Her analysis, published in a November 2026 article in Psychology Today, shifts the narrative from the passive suffering of abandoned parents to an active, albeit difficult, process of reconciliation rooted in psychological humility. Degges-White argues that the primary barrier to healing is not necessarily the estrangement itself, but the parent's inability to abandon the defense of their own intentions. The doctor notes that few experiences match the pain of being cut off by a loved one, yet the suddenness of this break often takes parents by complete surprise. While some adult children announce their intentions directly, others employ subtler methods, such as ceasing to respond to calls, texts, or emails—a phenomenon often described as being 'ghosted.' In the wake of such silence, parents tend to engage in relentless rumination, replaying recent interactions in an obsessive attempt to identify the cause of the breakdown. In contrast to the parent's confusion, the explanations provided by adult children who have decided to leave their families-of-origin are frequently explicit. These individuals describe years of fraught relationships, driven by deep frustration that their parents consistently failed to understand or validate the distress they caused. Degges-White highlights that adult children often reach a breaking point when their attempts to communicate their needs and experiences are ignored or dismissed, prompting them to simply walk away. The estrangement becomes entrenched when parents persistently demand explanations without receiving the openness their children originally sought. A core challenge in these conflicts is the subjective nature of memory. Degges-White explains that when multiple witnesses recount an event, each person will likely provide a slightly or markedly different version of what happened. Each participant firmly believes their memory is accurate, creating competing realities that make conflict resolution exceedingly difficult. This divergence means that 'truth' in a family dispute is often relative to the perspective of the observer. This subjectivity creates significant hurdles when adult children perceive their relationship with a parent differently than the parent does. For many adults, accepting that their childhood or past experiences were viewed differently by their parents is emotionally taxing. There is often a resistance to acknowledging that their own upbringing or relational history may not align with the parent's self-perception or narrative of their parenting. Degges-White emphasizes that while parents generally strive to do what is best, their strategies may not always be experienced as appropriate or safe by the child. Parents may operate exclusively within their own perspective, unaware that their actions have been perceived negatively. This disconnect allows the estrangement to deepen, as the parent fails to recognize the validity of the child's lived experience. Once a child has severed contact, they hold the power to decide whether reconciliation occurs. However, before considering a return to the relationship, most estranged adult children need one crucial element: their parent must demonstrate a genuine understanding of the impact their behavior had on them. Children need the space to share their experiences without the parent immediately intervening to deny the reality the child asserts. Taking a defensive stance is counterproductive and rarely furthers understanding. The doctor advises parents to recognize that intentions and impacts are not synonymous. No matter how benevolent a parent's intentions may have been, they cannot erase the hurtful impact of their actions. When an adult child expresses a willingness to resolve an impasse, they require validation of their feelings, not immediate defense. Parents often fall into predictable defensive patterns when confronted with their child's account of events. Responses commonly include denying the child's memory ('They're remembering it wrong'), insisting the child will never understand ('They just won't understand why I did what I did'), or refusing to accept responsibility for past actions ('I won’t take the blame for something that happened decades ago!'). Degges-White asserts that these reactions do not heal ruptures; instead, they guarantee that the situation will worsen. Acknowledging that one's actions were perceived differently than intended can be unsettling and induces fear that validating a child's feelings is equivalent to accepting blame. However, Degges-White argues that seeking to understand a child's viewpoint leads to a fundamentally different, more constructive path than seeking to defend one's own past. Accepting the existence of multiple valid realities is a pivotal step toward changing the dynamic. To move forward, parents are encouraged to seek self-reflection. When parents request guidance on how to listen and validate, they often exhibit hesitation, fearing that not defending themselves equates to admission of guilt. Degges-White suggests parents ask themselves reflective questions: What emotions arise when the child shares concerns? What pain might they most need acknowledged? What are the implications of acknowledging that pain? Adult children do not seek minimization or logical explanations for their distress; they need their parents to validate that their experiences are real and acceptable. The focus must shift from proving the parent correct in historical disputes to understanding the emotional harm caused. This requires a profound change in communication style. Ultimately, while parents may deeply desire reconnection, the outcome is never guaranteed. The estranged child retains the agency to choose reconciliation or to maintain distance. Degges-White concludes that for parents hoping to rebuild ties, the focus must shift from feeling understood to understanding the child. If a parent refuses to listen without rebuttal or denial, the probability of reconciliation drops precipitously. True understanding begins only when humility replaces the need to be right. Degges-White points out that while statistics are scarce, the demand for psychological support reveals the scale of the issue. Parents must navigate the 'silent breakup' not by finding answers to 'why,' but by learning 'how' to live with the loss and potentially how to open the door for future reconciliation through empathy. The article serves as a counterpoint to reports focusing solely on the static pain of abandonment. It introduces a therapeutic framework for active engagement, suggesting that the 'verlassene Eltern' phenomenon may be mitigated if parents can overcome their ego and engage with the child's perspective. This psychological approach contrasts with the community-based support found in self-help groups mentioned in previous reporting. While support groups provide shared grief, clinical therapy focuses on the specific interpersonal mechanics required to potentially restore the bond. Degges-White's work is part of a broader discourse on family dynamics, highlighting that estrangement is often a two-sided dynamic of misunderstanding rather than a one-sided rejection. [1]
- Categories:
- Society
