brains and hearts drain in dysfunctional families (the relationship between ethics and family life)
— Why I Decided to Leave my Family —
The role of a scapegoat in a dysfunctional family is to inform the other members of their problems and how to resolve them
Dysfunctional Families
In modern psychology, a dysfunctional family refers to a family in which patterns of behaviors, interactions, and relationships among its members are significantly impaired or defective, leading to negative consequences. Dysfunctional families’ unhealthy dynamics can cause emotional, psychological, and even physical troubles for the members involved.
In these families, the rejection of ethical values and lack of empathy are common characteristics that significantly impact its dynamics and the well-being of its members, leading to a variety of adverse outcomes, including brain and heart drain when scapegoats leave to seek alternatives that reward merit and integrity.
In contrast, thriving families with a strong ethical foundation tend to nurture an environment that promotes well-being, retains, and even attracts talented and ethical individuals.
In dysfunctional families, unethical behavior is normalized or even encouraged. Family members view deceit, manipulation, and disregard for others’ feelings as acceptable ways to achieve personal goals or maintain control. Ethical values such as empathy and compassion are often ignored or even considered weaknesses, leading to a lack of emotional support and understanding. Dysfunctional families prioritize individual self-interest over the well-being of others, overshadowing cooperation and mutual respect in the pursuit of personal gain, leading to conflicts and power struggles. Acts of kindness, care, and consideration for others’ well-being are lacking in dysfunctional families. Instead, hostility, criticism, and indifference mark their interactions.
Love and acceptance within the family are conditional on meeting specific expectations or behaviors, making family members feel pressured to conform to certain roles or behaviors, which undermines their authentic selves. Family members use manipulation and guilt as tools to control each other’s actions or emotions, overlooking ethical considerations in favor of manipulating others to serve their own interests. Personal boundaries are not respected, and family members steal private property and intrude on each other’s personal space, emotions, or decisions without considering individual autonomy or privacy. The absence of ethical values and integrity makes it extremely difficult to build trust among members. Broken promises, lies, stealing, and betrayal erode the foundation of trust and weaken family bonds. This perpetuates negative patterns within the family. Unresolved conflicts, emotional distance, and a lack of communication become ingrained and continue to impact future interactions.
Growing up in an environment that devalues ethical behavior deteriorates the mental health of family members, causing them feelings of unworthiness, anxiety, depression, and insomnia and greatly increasing the risk of developing personality disorders, eating disorders, and other types of serious mental health issues.
Lack of Communication
Lack of communication is a common characteristic of dysfunctional families. Due to unresolved conflicts, past trauma, and ingrained negative patterns, dysfunctional families have significant communication barriers to effectively express and understand other’s feelings, needs, and concerns, which makes it almost impossible to have open and honest conversations among family members.
This is why dysfunctional families almost always try to avoid conflicts or difficult conversations. Rather than directly addressing issues and engaging in open communication, family members resort to silence treatments, denial, or other avoidance tactics, which exacerbate underlying problems and prevent resolution.
Unresolved conflicts cause tension to simmer beneath the surface, but family members fear confrontation and the potential negative consequences that may arise from engaging in conflict due to past experiences of conflict turning into violent and hurtful interactions. Avoiding conflict allows family members to temporarily escape the discomfort of facing these issues directly. They may desire harmony in their relationships, but lacking healthy communication tools for resolving conflicts constructively—they simply don’t know how to have a difficult, serious, grown-up conversation—they settle for a semblance or appearance of false harmony and peace instead, which consist of ignoring or downplaying their problems, making their resolution impossible. Because dysfunctional families prioritize maintaining a positive public image, their desire to protect the family’s reputation is stronger than their wish to heal, which leads to concealing conflicts and difficulties from outsiders and reinforces their avoidance of conflict resolution.
Not taking responsibility for their actions or their role in contributing to those family conflicts provides them with temporary relief by sidestepping uncomfortable discussions, but it leads to the buildup of unresolved issues, making the long-term impact even more damaging (short-term gain, long-term pain).
In dysfunctional families, individuals are discouraged or forbidden from expressing their emotions openly, which leads to emotional suppression, where family members hold back their true feelings to avoid confrontation or displeasing others. As a result, important emotional needs go unaddressed, creating a sense of emotional distance and disconnection. Family members struggle to actively listen to each other by interrupting, dismissing, or minimizing each other’s concerns and using guilt, shame, or other manipulation techniques as a means of control, making it challenging for members to express themselves authentically without fear of negative consequences, which hinders effective communication and understanding.
Instead of communicating effectively, they rely on implicit or non-verbal communication, assuming that others can intuit their needs or feelings, which leads to misunderstandings and confusion as different people interpret non-verbal cues differently. They also rely on triangulation. which is when one family member (often a parent or caregiver) involves a third person, typically a child or a child-like adult, in conflicts or issues between two other family members. This third person becomes the “triangle” point, caught in the middle of the conflict without having any control or say in the matter. Triangulation creates stress, confusion, and emotional turmoil for the person being triangulated, and instead of resolving conflicts, it makes them worse. Triangulation is common in dysfunctional families, making direct communication between relevant parties almost impossible.
Due to power imbalances within dysfunctional families, some members, especially the scapegoats, have well-founded fears of expressing their concerns or grievances due to a history of retaliation or rejection by other family members. Scapegoats do not receive validation for their thoughts and emotions, and when they share their feelings, they are dismissed or invalidated, feeling unheard and unimportant.
Enablers play a key role in perpetuating this scapegoat role, as, although they seem to mediate between parties to try to maintain peace, they do it in a way that prevents open and honest dialogue that can lead to resolution by harassing the scapegoat into silence. The enabler’s role is antithetical to the scapegoat’s role: to uphold a facade of normalcy in the dysfunctional family. They downplay, deny, or excuse harmful behavior, often from a narcissistic or abusive parent or sibling, to prevent the embarrassment and social stigma that might come if the family’s dysfunction became public knowledge. The enabler tries to perpetuate unhealthy patterns through collective denial, exacerbating the scapegoat’s desire to uncover the truth.
Lack of communication and the avoidance of conflict in dysfunctional families often require professional intervention, such as family therapy or counseling. Family therapy in a safe and supportive environment, where family members can openly express their thoughts, feelings, concerns, and needs, is a way to learn healthy communication skills and work toward resolving conflicts constructively, but it requires a willingness to change and a commitment to open and honest communication from the family members, which is fundamental for the family’s healing to begin and to create a more compassionate, functional, and thriving family dynamic.
Scapegoating
“No one is more hated than someone who speaks the truth.” (Atributed to Socrates by Plato)
Scapegoats are assigned by the family leader, usually a pathologically narcissistic individual, to bear the blame for the family’s problems and shortcomings. The scapegoat is chosen to be the scapegoat due to his higher level of independence and critical thinking, which sets him apart from other family members who are more compliant or enmeshed in the family’s dysfunction. Because they are ostracized and blamed for issues beyond their control, scapegoats frequently experience isolation within the family, which leads them to a sense of emotional detachment or distancing from the family and helps them see through their manipulative tactics, question the family’s toxic dynamics, and seek alternatives.
Scapegoats often possess strong resilience and a sense of ethics, empathy, fairness, and personal integrity and are therefore determined to stay true to ethical values. This makes them much less likely to compromise their principles to appease the family leader or obey unethical orders to maintain an appearance of harmony within the dysfunctional family. Instead, scapegoats are painfully aware of the dysfunctional and abusive dynamics within the family, piercing through the manipulation to clearly see the injustice directed at them and others, feeling a burning desire for change and healthier family dynamics in accordance with justice, compassion, and the courage to resolve conflicts. Scapegoat’s refusal to blindly follow the abusive leader and their commitment to ethical principles correlate with a strong desire to break free from the toxic environment.
Adhering to ethical values, refusing to accept undeserved blame, and maintaining their sense of self are survival mechanisms for us scapegoats. By not succumbing to the manipulative tactics of the family, we preserve our sense of self-worth and protect our mental health and well-being amid the family’s destructive dynamics. This refusal to conform to the dysfunctional family dynamic is a threat to the status quo. Our resistance to accept undeserved blame and play into the family’s destructive patterns challenges the dysfunctional family’s control and dominance. This is why we scapegoats are viewed as the “problem child”, and are falsely accused of being responsible for disrupting the family’s dysfunctional dynamics and their fake harmony. Then, dysfunctional family members feel entitled to project their own faults, insecurities, and negative traits onto us to try to avoid taking responsibility and direct attention away from their unethical behavior.
Understanding the dynamics of scapegoating in dysfunctional families and its impact on the mental health of their members is a good starting point for breaking free from the cycle of abuse and seeking healing and support outside the dysfunctional family system. Professional counseling, therapy, and the study of modern psychology and the philosophy of ethics can be instrumental in helping dysfunctional family members recover from their emotional wounds and build healthier relationships based on sound ethical values.
Forms of Abuse
The emotional and psychological forms of abuse inflicted on the scapegoat by his family are known as silent treatment, projection, emotional withholding, gaslighting, invalidation of feelings, guilt-tripping and emotional blackmail. I will explain each of those types of abuse in simple terms.
The silent treatment
The silent treatment is a form of passive-aggressive emotional abuse and is used in dysfunctional families to express dislike, contempt, and punishment through nonverbal gestures by maintaining verbal silence. The term originated with the penitentiary reforms of 1835. Initially conceived as an alternative to physical punishment, it evolved into “a weapon of psychological torture”, denying prisoners speech, identity, and connection.
In a dysfunctional family, abusers employ the silent treatment to control and manipulate victims by withholding communication, inducing guilt, and forcing a dependence on their approval. Healthy relationships rely on communication. The silent treatment disrupts communication, prevents issue resolution, and escalates conflicts. The uncertainty causes stress and anxiety and deteriorates self-esteem. It can make the scapegoat powerless and overly focused on pleasing the abuser. Trust is eroded, damaging emotional connections.
Inflicting emotional pain is a common abuser’s trait, which gives her control, manipulation, and belittlement. The silent treatment combines with other abuses, contributing to a cycle of tension, mistreatment, and, only when the abuser needs the scapegoat for something—maybe for money, a place to stay, or to abuse somebody else—reconciliation.
According to Harriet B. Braiker (2004), there are three different types:
“1. “Silent Treatment in Your Presence” involves a cold, expressionless facade in the victim’s presence.
2. “Silent Absent Treatment” features unexplained disappearances, demonstrating the abuser’s power and indifference.
3. “Selective Silent Treatment on Certain Issues” limits communication to trivial matters, and yes-or-no answers, eroding trust and making the scapegoat feel isolated.”
The silence is supposed to mean contempt and control, and it is a deliberate attempt to make the scapegoat feel worthless, submissive, and fearful. It succeeds in making him confused, frustrated, anxious, depressed, or, in one word, traumatized. It is especially harmful in dysfunctional families, where abusers use it to torture their scapegoat. The silent treatment is a particularly cruel form of manipulation and a sign of an abusive personality. While occasional space for reflection is normal, deliberately using the silent treatment to hurt, control, or manipulate is abusive.
Projection
A defense mechanism often observed in dysfunctional families where individuals attribute their own unwanted or unacceptable feelings, traits, or behaviors onto the scapegoat.
Dysfunctional family members project their own insecurities, failures, fears, or any negative trait onto the scapegoat, and then they use such projection to justify their abuse and make the scapegoat the target of criticism and blame. Often, they project unconsciously, without even being aware of it. This leads to misunderstandings and conflicts and perpetuates unhealthy family dynamics. Projection hurts the dysfunctional family more than the scapegoat by enabling their own unhealthy behaviors and attitudes; instead of addressing and working through their own issues, they continue projecting them onto the scapegoat, preventing their own personal growth and change.
Emotional withholding
Occurs when one or more family members intentionally withhold emotional support, connection, or validation from the scapegoat, which leads to feelings of neglect, isolation, and emotional distress for the scapegoat. Emotional withholding is a form of emotional manipulation and can have significant negative effects on the scapegoat’s well-being and the overall family dynamic.
A family that is emotionally withholding avoids showing affection, warmth, or care towards the scapegoat. This includes withholding hugs or other physical touch or verbal expressions of love and intentionally ignoring the scapegoat’s attempts to communicate or connect, often avoiding conversations or interactions altogether. This can also include not acknowledging the individual’s accomplishments, feelings, or experiences.
The emotionally withholding family downplays the scapegoat’s achievements and dismisses his emotions, using silence as a way to control or manipulate the scapegoat, giving him the silent treatment, or refusing to engage in communication unless certain conditions are met, such as behaving in a specific way or fulfilling their expectations. Instead of providing comfort or understanding, the emotionally withholding family shifts blame onto the scapegoat, making him feel responsible for the lack of emotional connection. This leads to feelings of loneliness, isolation, and emotional distress. The scapegoat can internalize the message that his emotions and needs are not important, eroding his self-esteem and self-worth, making him question his value and significance within the family, and increasing barriers to honest and open expression of emotions.
Gaslighting
A manipulative tactic in which a family member distorts or denies reality, making the scapegoat doubt his own perceptions, memories, and sanity. Gaslighting is used as a means of exerting control and power over the scapegoat, causing him to question his reality and causing emotional and psychological harm. It can be a particularly damaging form of emotional abuse, leading the scapegoat to feel confused, helpless, and uncertain about his own experiences.
Invalidation of feelings
A harmful pattern of behavior in unethical family environments where one person dismisses, belittles, or undermines the feelings, emotions, and experiences of the scapegoat. It consists of a constant belittling, mocking, or undermining of the scapegoat’s opinions and sometimes even tastes. In addition, the scapegoat’s feelings are continuously dismissed, ignored, or ridiculed, damaging communication within the family and making it difficult for members to express themselves honestly and openly. It reflects a lack of empathy and understanding for the person’s emotions, escalates conflicts, and has significant negative effects on the individual’s well-being and the overall family dynamic, leading to emotional distress, anxiety, and depression.
Guilt-tripping
Another manipulative tactic commonly used within dysfunctional families. It involves using guilt as a means of controlling or influencing another person’s behavior, decisions, or emotions. In a guilt-tripping dynamic, one family member (often a parent or caregiver) seeks to elicit feelings of guilt in another family member to get them to do what the guilt-tripper wants. Guilt-tripping can generate feelings of anxiety, resentment, and low self-esteem. Victims of guilt-tripping may find it challenging to set healthy boundaries, make decisions based on their own needs, and assert themselves.
Emotional blackmail
Yet another manipulative tactic common in dysfunctional families. It involves using fear, guilt, obligation, or other negative emotions to control or manipulate another person’s behavior. Emotional blackmail often creates a sense of pressure and coercion, making the victim feel trapped and obligated to meet the demands of the blackmailer. Emotional blackmail affects the scapegoat’s emotional well-being and self-esteem in a way that can lead to a cycle of dependency and fear, making it difficult for the scapegoat to assert their own needs and make choices based on their best interests.
Leaving the family: the escaping goat
Scapegoats face unrealistic expectations within a dysfunctional family. They are expected to shoulder responsibilities beyond the capacity of anyone in the family while receiving neither acknowledgement nor support but just criticism and sabotage. Emotional and psychological abuse in the family can become unbearable for scapegoats. As a means of self-preservation, we choose to distance ourselves from the family to protect our well-being.
It’s truly challenging when you’re faced with the realization that the people you thought you could trust and rely on, especially your own siblings, are not acting in a way that is ethical or upholding the values a family is supposed to have, like trust and mutual support. Experiencing a breakdown in your family relationship can be deeply hurtful and can bring about feelings of loss, confusion, and disappointment. Leaving a dysfunctional family is a difficult and courageous decision for scapegoats, a step toward breaking free from the cycle of abuse and finding other families that value ethical behavior and will help to heal from the emotional wounds caused by unethical family dynamics to build a more fulfilling life outside the toxic environment.
This often triggers an increase in hatred from dysfunctional family members, including an intensified smear campaign in which family members project their own negative traits and behaviors onto the scapegoat in an attempt to validate their mistreatment and confirm their negative beliefs. The scapegoat’s departure threatens their narrative and raises the possibility of exposing the family’s dysfunction to outsiders, prompting them to amplify negative traits or behaviors attributed to the scapegoat, frantically searching for reasons to justify their mistreatment of the scapegoat in a desperate attempt to convince themselves of the necessity of their inmoral actions, deflect their blame, avoid feelings of guilt and shame, and control the narrative.
The main drive of the dysfunctional family's enhanced smear campaign—blaming the scapegoat for all their problems—is their strong need to keep their established roles and dynamics, protect their own self-image, and justify the abuse. And when the scapegoat’s departure disrupts this structure, members feel an urge to defend and uphold their roles. By vilifying the scapegoat, they hope to validate their past mistreatment of the scapegoat and shift the focus away from their own behaviors and choices, which would allow them to avoid introspection and accountability and thereby maintain their family’s dysfunctional structure. This intensified smear campaign creates a sense of unity among family members and a collective belief that their mistreatment of the scapegoat was justified, reinforcing their bonds and solidifying their allegiance to each other.
The family’s belief that the mistreatment of the scapegoat was justified involves dehumanization and rationalization. Family members manage to convince themselves that the scapegoat somehow deserves mistreatment due to perceived flaws, personal tastes, private life, or supposed behavior. This dehumanization enables them to justify their mistreatment as a necessary response to the scapegoat’s supposed shortcomings. As family members continue to reinforce negative beliefs about the scapegoat, their capacity for empathy and understanding diminishes. This erosion of empathy makes it easier for them to view the mistreatment of the scapegoat and others as justified, as they become more and more desensitized to abuse in general in order to justify their own abusive behavior, reflecting a disturbing willingness to compromise ethical principles in favor of maintaining dysfunctional dynamics to avoid feelings of guilt and shame.
The sense of family unity formed around their distorted belief in justified abuse further reinforces toxic patterns within the family. It validates the notion that manipulation, emotional abuse, stealing, violence, and general mistreatment are acceptable means of dealing with challenges, disagreements, or differences, which prevents family members from engaging in meaningful self-reflection, taking accountability for their actions, and seeking healthier ways to interact and communicate.
This creates resistance to the idea that the family dynamic needs to heal and individual members need to confront their own chosen roles and behaviors to finally learn that upholding empathy, compassion, and respect is essential for justice in our society, even when dealing with the worst criminals. Families that care about each other and understand their feelings create strong bonds and talk openly. Compassion encourages us to do the right thing. When we protect our kindness and humility, empathy guides us to grow and learn from each other. Real fairness, which comes from empathy, is to inquire and look at why things happen to find good answers. When we feel empathy and treat everyone with respect and understanding, we feel better about ourselves instead of hurt. Hurting others doesn’t just affect them; it also hurts us emotionally, messes with our minds, and makes us less healthy overall.
Mental health consequences of justifying the abuse
“And everybody feels so determined
Not to feel anyone else’s pain
(You know that) No one’s making no commitments
To anybody but themselves
Hidin’ behind closed doorways
Tryin’ to get outside, outside of empty shells”(Van Morrison, “Saint Dominic’s Preview”)
To believe in the acceptability of manipulation, emotional abuse, and mistreatment as methods of dealing with challenges has serious consequences for the mental health of dysfunctional family members. Let’s compare it with the effects that embracing the ethical principles of preserving dignity and upholding empathy, compassion, and understanding has on a healthy, ethical family.
Endorsing harmful behaviors leads to a decline in empathy for others. Over time, dysfunctional family members become desensitized to the pain they inflict on others, which hinders their ability to connect emotionally with those around them. Relying on manipulation and mistreatment as conflict resolution tactics strains relationships. The isolation resulting from fractured connections contributes to feelings of loneliness, emptiness, and a lack of purpose. Maintaining a facade of manipulation and emotional abuse requires constant effort and vigilance, which leads to heightened stress, insomnia, and anxiety as they navigate a web of lies and deceit. Despite their outward display of strength, dysfunctional family members who resort to harmful tactics experience underlying guilt and shame for their actions. These feelings erode their self-esteem and well-being. The normalization of harmful behaviors, such as engaging in manipulation and emotional abuse, leads to heightened stress, depression, and a general deterioration of well-being. Adopting harmful strategies perpetuates a cycle of negativity in relationships and interactions. This continuous loop of harm and retaliation creates a toxic environment that further damages mental health.
On the other hand, being loyal to ethical principles like honesty, fairness, and courage, as healthy families do, creates genuine connections with others. This heightened empathy contributes to stronger relationships and a deeper sense of belonging, forming an environment of trust, open communication, and mutual respect. Enjoying good relationships has a protective effect on mental health, which contributes to overall well-being. Also, it eliminates the need to maintain deceitful facades. This reduction in stress contributes to a more relaxed and balanced mental state. Upholding ethical values and treating others with compassion and understanding boosts self-esteem and self-worth. Healthy conflict resolution methods aid in developing positive coping mechanisms and equipping us to handle challenges in constructive ways. Reducing negative impacts on mental health contributes to a sense of purpose, satisfaction, and fulfillment, enhances emotional resilience and mental fortitude, and creates a positive feedback loop in relationships. This loop reinforces healthy communication patterns and nurtures mental well-being, which allows individuals to be catalysts for positive change within their communities.
Family members who believe in the acceptability of manipulation, emotional abuse, and mistreatment risk a range of negative consequences for their mental health, including decreased empathy, insomnia, guilt, neurological and anxiety disorders, nightmares, and disrupted relationships. Conversely, those who choose to uphold empathy, compassion, and understanding experience enhanced empathy, positive relationships, reduced stress, heightened self-esteem, and improved mental health and well-being. Understanding and compassion not only benefit individual mental health but also contribute to a healthier and thriving family and society.
Famous scapeG.O.A.T.s (Greatest Of All Time)
They were scapegoated for challenging dysfunctional moral values, knowledge, and established authorities. Their willingness to question and critique the status quo often led to their being targeted by those who sought to maintain the existing power structures and belief systems.
Socrates (469–399 BCE)
A classic case of this phenomenon. His death exemplifies scapegoating: he was charged with corrupting the youth by challenging and questioning the moral values, traditional beliefs, and knowledge of that time in Athenian society. Socrates aimed to reveal societal dysfunctions by empowering the critical thinking of his fellow citizens, which led to his trial and eventual execution. By attempting to expose dysfunction, he faced accusations from a flying monkey and a sentence from an abusive leader. While enablers worked to maintain a facade of normalcy, ignoring the grave injustice.
Hypatia of Alexandria (c. 360–415 CE)
A prominent philosopher and mathematician in ancient Alexandria. Her support for Neoplatonism and her teachings challenging traditional beliefs led to her being targeted by political and religious factions, resulting in her violent death.
Giordano Bruno (1548–1600)
His cosmological theories, which included the idea of an infinite universe with many worlds, contradicted religious dogma and were considered heretical by the Catholic Church. He was arrested, tried for heresy, and eventually burned at the stake.
Galileo Galilei (1564–1642)
Galileo’s support for heliocentrism and his observations using the telescope challenged the geocentric model of the universe and the prevailing religious views of his time. He was accused of heresy by the Catholic Church and subjected to house arrest.
Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677)
Spinoza’s radical philosophical views, including his rejection of traditional religious beliefs and his emphasis on rationalism, led to his excommunication from the Jewish community and condemnation by religious authorities.
Mary Wollstonecraft (1759–1797)
Her advocacy for women’s rights and gender equality challenged dysfunctional moral values based on traditional views of women’s roles. Her writings, including “A Vindication of the Rights of Woman,” were met with criticism and backlash.
Alfred Wegener (1880–1930)
Wegener proposed the theory of continental drift, suggesting that continents were once part of a single supercontinent and had drifted apart over time. His idea was met with skepticism and rejection from the scientific community, and he faced criticism and ridicule. It wasn’t until much later that the theory of plate tectonics provided strong evidence for his ideas.
Rachel Carson (1907–1964)
Carson was an ecologist and author who wrote the influential book “Silent Spring,” which highlighted the dangers of pesticide use and its impact on the environment and human health. Her work led to increased awareness about the need for environmental conservation, but she faced criticism and attacks from the chemical industry and its supporters.
Margaret Sanger (1879–1966)
Sanger’s advocacy for birth control and women’s reproductive rights challenged societal norms and religious beliefs. She faced legal and social backlash, including being accused of promoting immorality.
Barbara McClintock (1902–1992)
McClintock was a geneticist who conducted pioneering research on maize genetics. She discovered transposons, or “jumping genes,” which were initially met with skepticism and disbelief. Her work was largely ignored for years, and she faced resistance from the scientific establishment. However, her contributions were eventually recognized, and she was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1983.
Rosa Parks (1913–2005)
Known as the “Mother of the Civil Rights Movement,” Parks refused to give up her seat on a segregated bus in Montgomery, Alabama. Her act of defiance sparked the Montgomery Bus Boycott and became a symbol of resistance against racial segregation and injustice.
Julian Assange (1971)
Assange’s work, particularly the publication of classified documents related to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, diplomatic cables, and other sensitive materials, exposed misconduct, corruption, and human rights abuses, leading to legal and political scapegoating. Assange was accused of aiding and abetting espionage. He was arrested by British authorities in 2019.
Julian Assange’s work with WikiLeaks played a significant role in exposing the complicity of the mass media in enabling dysfunctional states and their militaries by covering up critical information. Through the release of classified documents and other materials, Assange and WikiLeaks revealed instances where mainstream media outlets had failed to adequately investigate and report on important issues, often due to political pressures and corporate interests, highlighting how powerful institutions gaslight the public to influence their opinion with their media narratives, leading to mass manipulation and a lack of transparency and accountability. By providing direct access to leaked documents, WikiLeaks bypassed traditional media gatekeepers and allowed the public to form their own judgments based on unfiltered information.
How do I expect my family to react to this article?
1. How does a healthy family usually react to accusations of dysfunction and attempts to be educated by one of their members?
In a healthy family, if one member expresses concerns or criticism about the family dynamics or behavior, the reaction would typically be characterized by open communication, empathy, and a willingness to listen and reflect. Instead of immediately dismissing or ignoring the concerns, the family members would be open to discussing the issues that have been raised. They would be willing to engage in a constructive conversation to better understand each other’s perspectives, approaching the conversation with empathy and respect for the person expressing their concerns. They would acknowledge that everyone’s feelings and viewpoints are valid and worth considering. Instead of getting defensive or agressive, they would actively listen to the person’s point of view. They would ask questions to gain a deeper understanding and seek clarification to avoid misunderstandings.
A healthy family would be willing to reflect on their behavior and dynamics to see if there are any areas that could be improved. They would consider whether any of the concerns raised have merit and if there are changes that could be made for the betterment of the family unit and, instead of becoming confrontational, they would approach the situation as a collective effort to create positive change, open to working together to address any issues and make improvements. If the concerns raised are complex or deep-seated, they might consider seeking the guidance of a family therapist or counselor. This step demonstrates a commitment to growth, healing, and improving relationships.
A healthy family would always continue to support and validate each other, even when discussing difficult topics. They would recognize that addressing dysfunction or challenges is an ongoing process and that everyone’s efforts are important. They would never resort to silent treatments or smear campaings.
Healthy families are not immune to challenges or disagreements, but their approach to resolving conflicts is characterized by understanding, communication, and a genuine desire to strengthen their bonds.
2. How does a dysfunctional family usually react to attempts to be educated by their scapegoat?
When the scapegoat in a dysfunctional family attempts to educate other family members about the dysfunctional family's roles and dynamics, their reactions are usually denial, defensiveness, anger, minimization, blame-shifting, willingful misinterpretations, closing ranks, and, in short, a strong reluctance to change. They refuse to acknowledge the existence of dysfunction or downplay its significance as a protective mechanism to avoid confronting uncomfortable truths. Feeling threatened by the scapegoat’s attempt to shed light on the dysfunction, they lash out in response, reacting with anger and hostility. Some family members minimize the scapegoat’s concerns and dismiss them as exaggerations or misunderstandings. They try to trivialize the issues raised in an attempt to maintain the status quo. Instead of acknowledging their own role in the dysfunction, family members shift the blame onto the scapegoat, accusing the scapegoat of being overly sensitive, causing trouble, bringing shame to the family, or trying to create division within the family.
They might try to gaslight the scapegoat by distorting facts, denying past events, portraying the scapegoat as irrational, or outright dismissing the scapegoat’s attempts to educate them, saying things like “he’s overreacting” or “he’s reading too much into things.” Family members avoid engaging in discussions about dysfunction altogether. They might change the subject, walk away, or refuse to participate in conversations about the family’s dynamics, prioritizing loyalty to the dysfunctional family system over acknowledging the issues, due to the pressure to conform to the family’s narrative and reject any attempts at change. In some cases, the family might shun the scapegoat for challenging the status quo. This isolation is intended to pressure the scapegoat into silence and compliance.
Attempting to educate family members about dysfunctional dynamics is usually met with resistance, not just due to fear of the unknown or discomfort with breaking away from established patterns, as change requires confronting painful truths and restructuring relationships, which can be daunting, but mainly because these dynamics serve a purpose within the family system, their dysfunctional roles serve as defense mechanisms to avoid addressing deeper issues and traumas.
When the scapegoat tries to educate their family and is met with anger and denial, it can be incredibly frustrating and disheartening. This reaction underscores the complex and entrenched nature of dysfunctional family dynamics and the challenges of bringing about change. Often, it takes a willingness on the part of multiple family members to acknowledge the dysfunction and work collectively towards healthier dynamics, which is not easy to achieve.
3. How would I like my family to react to this article?
By attempting to educate my family members about their dysfunctional dynamics and roles, I ideally hope for a supportive and constructive reaction. I would appreciate family members who are willing to listen with an open mind, without immediate defensiveness, and who are genuinely interested in understanding this perspective. A supportive reaction would involve family members acknowledging these concerns and validating my feelings, including recognizing the pain and struggles that I have experienced within the family and engaging in a respectful and productive dialogue about the dysfunctional dynamics. It would be great if they became willing to engage in discussions without resorting to blaming or dismissive behaviors.
Ideally, family members will be open to self-reflection and introspection, considering their own roles in the dysfunction and being willing to acknowledge any harmful behaviors they might have exhibited. I hope they will respond with empathy and compassion, understanding the emotional toll that dysfunctional family dynamics can take. Compassionate responses would show a willingness to support and validate my scapegoat’s experience, helping me feel seen and heard. A positive reaction would involve family members expressing a commitment to changing dysfunctional patterns. They would be willing to work together to create healthier family dynamics and address underlying issues. In cases where family members have contributed to the mistreatment, a sincere apology and accountability for their actions would be meaningful, as it would demonstrate a willingness to take responsibility for past behaviors. Supportive family members would be open to seeking professional guidance, such as family therapy or counseling, to address and resolve the dysfunctional dynamics, showing a commitment to finding solutions and healing. My ultimate desire is for my family to work towards unity and reconciliation. This involves a collective effort to mend relationships, rebuild trust, and create a healthier family environment.
My deepest wish is for my family to respond with understanding, empathy, and a genuine desire to heal and improve, showing a willingness to acknowledge the dysfunction, take responsibility for their actions, and work together towards a more compassionate and supportive family life.
amazing luck
I must be the luckiest
man in the worldover and over again
finding myself in situations
that have wrecked so many
so many other lives
and yet I managed
to come out of them
unscathedof course I had to deal with
anxiety, depression and
the worst of all: insomnia
a result of the PTSD
that came with
living through those situationsbut it helped me it
helped me so much
as it drove me
drove me to learn
psychology, philosophy
neurology, and theories of the
mind and its emotionsit helped me grow
it brought me here
brought me safe thus far
had amazing luckit made me stronger
now I hear the birdsongs
the rustling of the leaves
clearer than ever beforethe sun is just not enough
we also need some rain
to feel this rainbow inside
Leaving a dysfunctional family is often a difficult and courageous decision for scapegoats, but it is a necessary step toward breaking free from the cycle of abuse and finding environments that value and nurture their positive qualities. If a scapegoat not only leaves a dysfunctional family but also educates himself in fields like philosophy, psychology, therapies, and family dynamics, it reflects a remarkable commitment to personal growth, healing, and understanding. This proactive approach empowers him to break free from abuse and become a catalyst for positive change in his own life and others’. He evolves into a resilient, empowered, and knowledgeable individual.
The act of writing this article requires introspection, research, and critical thinking, which contribute to ongoing personal growth and development. By sharing personal experiences and insights that raise awareness about dysfunctional family dynamics and personality disorders, this article has the potential to positively impact readers’ lives, especially those facing similar challenges, leading them to healthier family dynamics, improved mental health, and stronger relationships. By discussing these issues openly, this scapegoat contributes to breaking stigma, fostering dialogue, and reducing shame and isolation. It also allows me to reclaim the narrative and have agency over the story, which is empowering even after years of being misrepresented and misunderstood by my dysfunctional family. Incorporating writing into my healing journey demonstrates my commitment not only to my own growth and well-being but also to the growth and well-being of others.
If, in addition, this scapegoat also tries to reach out to family members — including those who participated in the abuse — with compassion, understanding, and the intention of helping them heal through my articles and the wisdom gained from years of suffering and study, it showcases an extraordinary level of empathy, resilience, and altruism. It has the potential for healing and transformation for my family, challenging the cycle of dysfunction by offering an alternative approach, promoting the possibility of breaking generational patterns of abuse, and encouraging a shift towards more rational family dynamics and healing, which includes taking responsibility for their actions and their role in family dynamics, as accountability is a crucial step towards healing and reconciliation. By sharing the knowledge I’ve acquired through years of study, I provide them with resources to explore and understand the dynamics that contributed to the dysfunction, so they can seek their own paths to healing and initiate a process of healing within. While acknowledging my own growth and achievements, my focus remains on the well-being of those I care about, even if they were once a source of pain and abuse. My example shows that transformation is possible, individuals can take control of their own healing journey, and I’m committed to the well-being of the family as a whole, regardless of past conflicts.
References and further reading
“The Hidden Power of Being the Scapegoat in Dysfunctional Families” https://www.elephantjournal.com/2020/11/to-the-outsiders-scapegoats-emotionally-abused-your-power-is-being-different-claire-boyce/
“Scapegoating in families: An investigation” https://www.proquest.com/openview/211a6a2ad8ab31d9725ae7c5dd1d1dd2/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
“Scapegoating: A Dysfunctional Family System” https://www.innerbonding.com/show-article/4595/scapegoating-a-dysfunctional-family-system.html
“How the Scapegoat is Gang Bullied by their Family” https://www.marytoolan.com/blog/how-the-scapegoat-is-gang-bullied-by-their-family
“The Plight of the Scapegoat in a Dysfunctional Family” https://medium.com/invisible-illness/the-plight-of-the-scapegoat-in-a-dysfunctional-family-3c2195123d58
“Dynamics of Scapegoating in Family Systems” http://sillimanjournal.su.edu.ph/index.php/sj/article/view/72
“Family Roles, Family Dysfunction, and Depressive Symptoms” https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1066480720973418
“Combating the scapegoat in family therapy: Selected strategies” https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15426432.1981.10383383?journalCode=wzst20
“What Happens When a Scapegoat Leaves a Family?” https://unfilteredd.net/what-happens-when-a-scapegoat-leaves-a-family/
“The Blameless Burden: Scapegoating in Dysfunctional Families” https://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/blameless-burden-scapegoating-in-dysfunctional-families-0130174
“The Scapegoat Child: Effects and Lasting Pains” https://psychcentral.com/health/scapegoat-child
“How Toxic Families Choose a Child to Scapegoat” https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/tech-support/202104/how-toxic-families-choose-child-scapegoat
“10 Rules of Families that Scapegoat” https://www.scapegoatrecovery.com/2022/08/05/10-rules-of-families-that-scapegoat/
“Family Scapegoat: Signs, Effects, & How to Cope” https://www.choosingtherapy.com/family-scapegoat/
“What Does It Mean to Be the Family Scapegoat?” https://www.verywellmind.com/what-does-it-mean-to-be-the-family-scapegoat-5187038
“Dysfunctional Family Characteristics” https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4899-5970-6_3
“Dysfunctional Family Systems” https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-61416-4_4
“Scapegoating” https://mds.marshall.edu/co_faculty/14/
“Of scapegoats, strawmen, and scarecrows” https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00926792
“The Operative Mechanism in Family Scapegoating” https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/j062v03n02_04
“Rejected, Shamed, Blamed. Help and Hope for Adults in the Family Scapegoat Role” https://books.google.es/books?hl=en&lr=&id=yk9FEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT3&dq=scapegoating+in+dysfunctional+families&ots=lW1yvecHIL&sig=NP9LwS3geYq30Lcn1xdMfPx02Vw#v=onepage&q=scapegoating%20in%20dysfunctional%20families&f=false
“Qué le sucede a nuestro cerebro cuando mentimos”: https://www.thejoint.com/california/chula-vista/eastlake-31125/202872-what-happens-to-brain-when-we-lie#:~:text=Lying%20Changes%20the%20Brain&text=The%20researchers%20said
“Lo que la deshonestidad le hace a tu cerebro”: https://ethicalleadership.nd.edu/news/what-dishonesty-does-to-your-brain-why-lying-becomes-easier-and-easier/
“Cómo mentir lleva a nuestros cerebros por “la calle de la amargura””: https://neurosciencenews.com/lying-emotion-psychology-5345/
“Mentir no te estira la nariz, pero te roba capacidad intelectual”: https://www.snexplores.org/article/lying-brain-power-prefrontal-cortex-truth-telling
“Mentir causa cancer”: https://dailytrust.com/can-lying-cause-cancer/
“What is Mental Health”: https://www.samhsa.gov/mental-health
“About Mental Health”: https://www.cdc.gov/mentalhealth/learn/index.htm
“Mental Health Problems — An Introduction”: https://www.mind.org.uk/information-support/types-of-mental-health-problems/mental-health-problems-introduction/about-mental-health-problems/
“Mental Health”: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-strengthening-our-response
“The Concept of Mental Pain”: https://karger.com/pps/article/82/2/67/282677/The-Concept-of-Mental-Pain
“Mental Pain and Suffering: The “Universal Currencies” of the Illness Experience”: https://karger.com/pps/article/89/6/337/283221/Mental-Pain-and-Suffering-The-Universal-Currencies
Lyubomirsky, S., et al. (2005). “Why are some people happier than others? The role of cognitive and motivational processes in well-being.” American Psychologist, 56(3), 239–249. doi: 10.1037/0003–066X.56.3.239
Post, S. G. (2005). “Altruism, happiness, and health: It’s good to be good.” International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 12(2), 66–77. doi: 10.1207/s15327558ijbm1202_4
Lyubomirsky, S., et al. (2005). “Benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success?” Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 803–855. doi: 10.1037/0033–2909.131.6.803
Aknin, L. B., et al. (2013). “Prosocial spending and well-being: Cross-cultural evidence for a psychological universal.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(4), 635–652. doi: 10.1037/a0031578
Boehm, J. K., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2008). “Does happiness promote career success?” Journal of Career Assessment, 16(1), 101–116. doi: 10.1177/1069072707308140
Davidson, R. J., & McEwen, B. S. (2012). “Social influences on neuroplasticity: Stress and interventions to promote well-being.” Nature Neuroscience, 15(5), 689–695. doi: 10.1038/nn.3093
Kok, B. E., et al. (2013). “How positive emotions build physical health: Perceived positive social connections account for the upward spiral between positive emotions and vagal tone.” Psychological Science, 24(7), 1123–1132. doi: 10.1177/0956797612470827
Stellar, J. E., et al. (2015). “Positive affect and markers of inflammation: Discrete positive emotions predict lower levels of inflammatory cytokines.” Emotion, 15(2), 129–133. doi: 10.1037/emo0000033
Lyubomirsky, S., & Dickerhoof, R. (2005). Subjective Happiness: A Primer. Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(3), 137–152. Este estudio explora la relación entre la felicidad y el comportamiento prosocial, destacando cómo participar en actos de bondad puede mejorar el bienestar subjetivo.
Otake, K., Shimai, S., Tanaka-Matsumi, J., Otsui, K., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2006). Happy people become happier through kindness: A counting kindnesses intervention. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7(3), 361–375. El estudio investiga los efectos de realizar actos de bondad sobre la felicidad subjetiva, demostrando que participar en actos de bondad puede contribuir a un aumento del bienestar.
Post, S. G. (2005). Altruism, happiness, and health: It’s good to be good. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 12(2), 66–77. Este artículo de revisión explora la relación entre los comportamientos altruistas, el bienestar y la salud, y sugiere que participar en actos de bondad y altruismo puede tener un impacto positivo en la salud mental y el bienestar general.
Konrath, S., Fuhrel-Forbis, A., Lou, A., & Brown, S. (2012). Motives for volunteering are associated with mortality risk in older adults. Health Psychology, 31(1), 87–96. El estudio examina la relación entre los motivos del voluntariado y el riesgo de mortalidad, lo que indica que los motivos altruistas para el voluntariado están asociados con mejores resultados de salud y una mayor longevidad.
Dunn, E. W., Aknin, L. B., & Norton, M. I. (2008). Spending money on others promotes happiness. Science, 319(5870), 1687–1688. Este estudio investiga la relación entre el gasto prosocial y la felicidad, sugiriendo que gastar dinero en otros puede conducir a una mayor felicidad que gastar dinero únicamente en uno mismo.
