Experiences of Parents of Adult Survivors’ Disclosures of Child Sexual Abuse

Many survivors of childhood sexual abuse (CSA) suffer for years before potentially reporting the abuse, often in adulthood. Men who are survivors of CSA are less likely to disclose and their disclosures are often more delayed than disclosures made by women who are survivors (Collin-Vézina et al., 2013; Gruenfeld et al., 2017; Hébert et al., 2009; McElvaney & Nixon, 2019; Schönbucher et al., 2012). Progress is being made in elucidating the realities of CSA and in developing treatments and support strategies for primary survivors, whether they disclose as children or adults. Likewise, there is an emerging body of evidence elucidating the impact of CSA disclosure on young children's parents (Cyr et al., 2016; Kilroy et al., 2014; Manion et al., 1996; McElvaney & Nixon, 2019; van Toledo & Seymour, 2016; Wamser-Nanney, 2017). However, extant research has failed to address the experiences of parents of children who disclose experiences of extra-familiar CSA in adulthood. Importantly, we do not yet know how parents of adult survivors experience their children's disclosures of CSA and whether such parents may be affected by the disclosure in ways that are similar or different from parents whose children disclose their abuse during childhood. Moreover, when adult survivors do come forward, they are often treated individually, but other members of the family system may also need support and care in response to the traumatic disclosure, as well (Kilroy et al., 2014).

Impact on Parents of Young-Disclosing Survivors of CSA

Existing research focusing on experiences of parents of survivors of CSA who disclose while still in childhood indicates that these parents often report experiencing distress, anxiety, depression, shock, panic, trauma, anger, guilt, powerlessness, and confusion (e.g. Cyr et al., 2016; Cyr et al., 2013; Hershkowitz et al., 2007; Kilroy et al., 2014; Landolt et al., 2012; McElvaney & Nixon, 2019; Myrick & Green, 2013; Santa-Sosa et al., 2013; Tal et al., 2018; Tavkar & Hansen, 2011). Parents are also often expected to participate in the treatment of their still-minor children. However, the distress of a child's disclosure may impact a parent's ability to support the child and if the parents are having difficulty coping, they may also need support of their own (Cyr et al., 2016; McElvaney & Nixon, 2019; Myrick & Green, 2013; Wamser-Nanney, 2017). Such studies elucidate the distressing impact of CSA disclosures on parents who are still raising their children, but do not yet address potential impacts on parents of adult children who disclose CSA.

Impact on Parents of Adult Disclosures of Past CSA

While Conolly (2003) recommended the need for research focused on the suffering of families whose adult children have disclosed past sexual abuse, there have yet been no studies regarding the experiences or needs of parents whose children do not disclose their experience of extra-familial abuse until adulthood, despite the fact that this is the more common scenario (Gruenfeld et al., 2017; Hébert et al., 2009). This lack of empirical and clinical attention may, in part, be due to the fact that parents of adult disclosers are not typically referred for therapy or brought into the therapy of adults who decide to disclose past CSA because there is often no natural mechanism for doing so. Adults are not usually accompanied by their parents; parental permission is not required for medical or psychological services, and charges are not filed through them with the police. Moreover, of the many organizations like the National Institute of Health (NIH) (2013) and the American Psychological Association (APA) (2014) that have written helpful literature for the parents of young survivors of CSA, none have addressed the needs of parents whose children do not disclose until adulthood.

The Current Study

The current study explored the experiences of two sets of parents soon after their adult sons’ disclosure of CSA by a common perpetrator. Because no quantitative or qualitative studies to date have attended to the experiences of parents of adult disclosers, this study represented a unique opportunity to hear parents’ own voices in telling their stories of receiving their child's disclosure and how these experiences impacted them in the period that followed the disclosures. In doing so, our analysis paid particular attention to the meaning, processing, emotional experiences, and thoughts that parents voiced to understand their lived experiences in responding to the disclosure and period that followed.

Method

To better understand the experiences of the four parents who participated in this case study, an exploratory qualitative methodology was employed. Narrative data were analyzed using Reissman’s (2008) thematic narrative analysis approach, with care taken to focus on the emic perspective of the participants rather than on the etic meanings we, as researchers, might bring into the study. In doing so, parents’ own voices and meanings ascribed to experiences by the parents themselves were maintained as much as possible throughout the analytic process.

Participants

The four participants were two married couples, each with an adult son who had experienced previous CSA by the same, extra-familial perpetrator and who had disclosed the abuse within the previous year. One couple was in their forties, and the other in their late sixties/early seventies. Immediately following the disclosures, police actively investigated the abuses, and the perpetrator was eventually convicted. The incidents of abuse had begun when the boys were minors but not disclosed to the parents until several years later, 1 year after the abuse had ended. The two families quickly formed a close-knit team, supporting each other and participating in law enforcement efforts. Other specifics have been withheld to protect participants’ privacy.

Procedures

The participants expressed interest in the opportunity to describe and explore their experiences to the first author. After a full board institutional review, the first author obtained formal informed consents from family members. Each parent then took part in an individual semi-structured interview of about 90 min, recorded with their permission. During the interviews, participants described their lived experience in relation to their son's disclosure and subsequent events. Prompting questions were informally and loosely phrased, so that participants had room to explore their own thoughts and experiences as these developed during the interviews. As the parents freely explored their answers, clarifying questions were asked to further understand their experiences.

The interviews were transcribed by the first author. The first author then did an immediate re-read as a first pass to allow for familiarity with the narratives and a superficial overview of potential themes and patterns in each narrative. Then the data from each individual were arranged chronologically. The data from each person were then formed into a narrative composed as much as possible from that participant's words. To ensure that each narrative accurately reflected the story of the participant, each parent was then given an opportunity to review their own assembled narrative for accuracy and to make sure there was sufficient confidentiality of information. Participants were invited to make corrections, offer additional comments or insights, and make omissions from the transcript of any material they did not want included. Furthermore, at the parents’ request, the sons were also invited to read the composed narrative and omit any information they did not want disclosed (none was omitted). The resulting narratives were then color-coded and analyzed for individual themes and commonalities and differences between the parents’ narratives by the first author. During the final stage of analysis, the second author examined both the narrative data and extrapolated themes for fidelity to the narrative, accuracy, and consistency. To further support dependability and credibility, the second author confirmed the soundness of the research process and assessed the quality of procedural aspects of the data collection and analytic process. Before preparation and submission for publication, the first author again confirmed consent for publication with each parent and son.

Results

As the narratives were analyzed, three themes and associated subthemes emerged. The first theme, the emotional impact of the disclosure, included bewilderment and disbelief, hyperarousal, anger, sadness and grief. The second theme, cognitive impacts of the disclosure, included ongoing self-assessments and changing views of others. The final theme described the parent's purposeful responses to the experience.

Theme 1: Emotional Impact of the Disclosure – “Like Spider Veins on a Windshield”

In response to the disclosures, the parents described a general sense of shock and distress. They used descriptors like “stressful,” “unbelievably painful,” and “devastating.” They reported increased experiences of “anger,” “aggressiveness,” and “irritability,” and noted having “difficulty concentrating,” “confusion,” and “loss of focus or forgetfulness.” They described “rapid,” “random” or “disconnected” thoughts. They named the emotions of “fear,” “anxiety,” “worry,” and “stress” and stated that they were consistent and sometimes severe. All four parents reported symptoms of insomnia and difficulty sleeping. They said things like “I felt horrific all summer,” and reported that they felt, “convoluted,” “punched in the gut” and “powerless.” All four parents mentioned the words “agony,” “agonizing,” “painful,” and “hurt.” Some described a sense of “dread” or” horror;” another used the words “twisted and awful” and another, “disconnected and clouded.” One described herself as “being in a fog,” and “not healthy enough to be clear-minded.” Each parent reported imagining mental images of the abuse which was described in ways that they said felt intrusive. Some experienced recurring nightmares or bad dreams about the abusive events. As the narrative unfolded and the police investigation went on, they said, the pain kept coming. As one mother expressed, “It felt like the spider veins on a windshield that has been hit by a rock. They just kept spreading and I couldn't control them.”

“ How could this be?” Bewilderment and disbelief. Words like “shocked,” “unbelievable,” “overwhelmed,” and “stunned” were used often by the parents. One mother shared a powerful mental image she had experienced of herself in which she was lying in a hospital bed in a distressing fog of confusion, attempting to gather her thoughts, resolve, and strength. “Was that fog the source of emotional numbness?” she wondered. Her narrative included repetition of the words “I don't understand. How could this be? I just don't know how someone could do this.” She stated that her confusion was not simply an inability to understand the concept; rather, it was more an emotional and cognitive resistance to accepting an unacceptable reality. Each parent also voiced “horror,” “shock,” and “a sense of disbelief,” which they said was not related to a genuine doubt of the veracity of the sons’ disclosures but more of a vague sense that the reality seemed to be incredible to them.

“ I feel jumpy and on-guard: ” Coping with hyper-arousal. The parents all described states of being vigilant and “tied up in knots.” One mentioned that although it was not realistic, they “kept expecting the perpetrator to appear at the door or to walk right in. Whenever I want to go outside, I check around to make sure he isn't there, and I always keep an ear out for a car pulling up.” All the parents reported becoming vigilant about locking doors. For example, when one son's car was vandalized, all reported that they suspected the perpetrator and began to change their parking behaviors. One participant said that he increased his usual amount of exercise and running to try to lower his sense of feeling “hyper.”

Anger: “My constant companion.” While all the parents felt anger, it was more prevalent in some narratives than others. One mother described anger as her “constant companion.” She remembered beating eggs to cook, and “beating and beating.” It was an acceptable way, she believed, to express her ongoing anger and frustration. Three parents described themselves as “ticked” or “frustrated” at times and “intensely angry” at others. Anger was a response for each of them at having felt “betrayed,” “invaded” or “intruded upon.” They explicitly mentioned anger at the perpetrator. One father stated that he “seethed with rage,” especially when he experienced himself imagining the abuse his son endured. He used his rage to fuel his determination to “bring [the perpetrator] down,” and to “destroy him.” That anger initially felt motivating, he reported, but eventually became an unwanted burden, especially when it caused him to experience emotions like “hatred and loathing,” and “obsessions or fantasies of revenge,” which he said he did not want but could not control. Others mentioned that sometimes anger seemed to threaten their sense of safety or control. One mother expressed gratitude at the angry determination of the father in the other family because it reassured her that she could turn to tending to her son knowing that justice was still being pursued. The other mother stated that she felt less anger than the others and that she felt guilt whenever she did experience anger.

Each of the parents also verbalized anger at people who knew the perpetrator and had had suspicions but did not do anything: other parents who told them later of their own questions about the perpetrator or people who responded, “I knew it,” when finding out about the abuse. They felt anger at being given belated advice about what they “should have done,” and sometimes for even bringing up the topic at all. Two of the four parents reported being consistently concerned about bringing the perpetrator to justice and focused on this as a way of channeling their anger and showing support for the sons. The individual narratives also supported the presence of an internal emotional process that seemed to range from anger at one pole, to sadness at the other and noted a tendency to move from one to the other.

“ Unbelievable sadness” and “bottomless loss.” One parent mentioned an ongoing sense of “unbelievable sadness.” For some, sadness was described as either an experience through which they “had to wade” in order to self-regulate or an emotion they could purposefully titrate by “choosing to numb out” or self-distract. One described herself as frequently “spending time bawling/crying” and said she “no longer rejoiced at anything” and found herself “dragging her feet” as she went about her days. Others also described symptoms of anhedonia and demotivation.

Parents reported sorrowing on multiple levels; they described being mindful that they not only bore their own burdens, but keenly bore the burdens of their children, grieving that their children were suffering, described with words like “pain,” “anguish,” “depression,” “self-doubt,” and the possibility of “future complications in love and marriage relationships.” The parents described feeling a surge of grief and loss when seeing family photographs from earlier days or recalling fond memories and then realizing that the abuse had been happening at that time. They felt this as a loss or a contamination of the happy memories they had treasured and reported struggling to re-organize those memories. They stated that the realization that siblings were also being deeply affected added yet another layer of grief. The parents mourned these “bottomless losses” while also feeling saddened by the ongoing painful experiences that followed the disclosure. One set of parents reported that when their son experienced triggers of intense emotion, it was painful for them, as well. They said that their son's symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), sometimes triggered by a visit to his parents’ home, were a source of anguish and grief for them all. Listening to both sons’ accounts of the abuse given to the police and later in court were unanimously described as particularly painful for the parents.

Feelings of grief and loss permeated the experience and involved not only in the present, but also transformed the past as each parent recognized the loss of the childhood they had thought their families had provided. The adolescence the parents had believed their sons were living was replaced by a revised history in which their sons’ milestones and experiences were now tainted by a dark parallel experience suffered silently behind closed doors. One of the parents pointed out that all the loved items of memorabilia had been converted into agonizing triggers; looking at family photos became a series of painful realizations: “that was taken just when the abuse must have begun,” and “the smile in this photo belies the fact that he was being abused, and I didn't even know.” For both families, albums also contained photos that included the perpetrator himself, another reminder of the trauma.

Grief for the future seeped up for all four parents as they wondered how the abuse would affect their young adult children as they launched their careers. They questioned how the abuse might affect their sons’ future relationships and their marriages. “How long might they need therapy in the future?” one father asked. Multiple parents reported that any thoughts they had about milestones still to come would suddenly provoke a fear that future achievements could be tainted by the effects of the abuse.

For all four parents, the negative thoughts and emotions waxed and waned, particularly increasing, they said, at new stages in the investigation and at times that were particularly difficult for the sons. The investigation, subsequent trial, and the sentencing hearing were especially difficult, they reported. Each person in the families also gave a victim's impact statement in court, describing the agony the abuse had caused.

Theme 2: Cognitive Impacts of the Disclosure – “Was I Asleep at the Switch?”

All the parents reported struggling with how to assess their past performance as parents. In different ways, each focused on evaluating their own personal responsibility for their child's abuse, reviewing subtle signs or possible intervention points they may have overlooked. The primary conflict each parent described was whether and in what way the abuse was a result of parental failure, oversight, neglect, or guilt. Three parents expressed that they wondered if they had exercised sufficient parental diligence, taken an appropriate measure of initiative in regulating their sons’ relationships, and whether they were competent as parents. “Was I asleep at the switch?” “What was I doing?” they asked. “These are questions I’ve never answered because I can't. I can't undo it.” The unanswered questions were deeply distressing, and they each struggled as this father did, “…agonizing over things I cannot change.”

These participants emphasized that they had always gauged their parental role as a high priority. They each noted that they were committed, present, and deeply invested in parenting well. Prior to the disclosure, the parents stated, they had not dismissed the possibility of the perpetrator being abusive in total naiveté; they each had considered the possibility that the perpetrator could initiate inappropriate behavior and addressed the possibility with their sons, other parents, and even with the perpetrator. They said they had done their best due diligence, so the disclosure was all the more disheartening and disrupting of their views of themselves. This loss of identity meant to one parent that they could no longer believe they “had it together,” and to another that they had not been sufficiently on guard to protect their son. One said, “I am now aware I can be deceived.” One mentioned often feeling “pathetic,” while others described themselves as feeling like they were “weak,” “broken,” and “having feelings of failure.”

Finally, each of the parents described themselves as engaging in a process of determining the meaning(s) of their self-assessment. They asked themselves questions like, “what does this mean about me as a parent and as a person?” Despite the differences in the degree of difficulty each person had in answering the question, or the length of time they struggled with the question, each parent devoted a significant amount of their narrative to the topic. Repeated phrases or questions that described the struggle included: “I blew it and maybe I was too distracted.” One wondered, “Did I allow my own life mess to get in my way?” They all verbalized in some way the question, “Other people saw red lights, why didn't I?” One parent said, “I’m angry at myself for not speaking up more; why didn't I?” And another: “I have regrets about how I handled it. I still feel guilty. I was afraid of hurting… [the perpetrator's] feelings, of being rude. I didn't want to be overly suspicious.” One noted how difficult it was to see through him: “He was crafty, he was good at what he does.” Another stated: “I feel exposed, like I’m not as smart as I should be. I am supposed to get these things right.” They all asked questions like, “What does this mean about us as parents?” “How could I, as a parent, have an abuser hanging out at my house?”

Notably, the parents’ self-assessments were not all negative. Significantly, one father took the emphatic position that “We have done nothing wrong. [The perpetrator] chose this evil. We have committed no willful violation. We pursued everything we saw the way we knew how. We followed up with questions. I confronted him.” He discouraged focus on self-evaluation as distracting from the goals of supporting the sons and bringing the perpetrator to justice. The others individually noted that position and tried to adopt it as much as they could.

“ How can a person I believed to be so good have also been evil?” In discussing how their thoughts or feelings had changed toward others, some repeatedly mentioned feeling more vulnerable, less trusting, more cautious, and more attentive. Although she still considered herself to be insightful about other people, one mother realized that her judgment could be deceived; “good is not as clearly good anymore.” Some talked about trying to moderate their suspicions rather than allowing them to become disproportionate. Others mentioned that the presence of evil (a term all four parents used) was no surprise to them. Some of the parents mentioned difficulty in assessing trustworthiness in other people and a lowered level of reliance on their own insight or intuitiveness; they began to see others as potentially much more misleading than they had previously imagined.

Both of the mothers found themselves asking questions like, “How can a person I believed to be so good have also been evil?” “Was there any good, or is there only evil?” Most of the parents asked, in some way, “How could I have been so wrong in my judgments? What else am I wrong about?” One wanted to know, “What does it mean to trust someone? How can I know when to trust?” They all stated in one way or another, “I just don't know how someone could do this,” and described a heightened sense of pessimism about other people and the world.

Theme 3: Purposeful Parental Responses – Believers, Supporters, and Warriors

While the parents’ view of the world had to be painfully stretched to encompass the unthinkable, each parent individually noted that they bonded together in support of the sons and each other. They each described clear purposes or tasks on which they were focused and noted their own “role” in achieving those purposes, as well as the roles of the others. They each said that they chose to believe their sons, and every parent verbalized focusing their energy on supporting the sons as they coped with their trauma responses and went through the investigation and trial. The parents noted the strangeness of recognizing and respecting their sons’ roles of making all final decisions with police and care providers while continuing to provide parental support and advice. They watched as the police, detectives, attorneys, court liaisons, psychotherapists and others turned to their sons for the final decision on all matters. They were clear that their roles were support roles and described them as such.

One father described himself and was described by the others as “lead warrior;” he was the point person in supporting the sons and pushing for prosecution of the perpetrator. He wanted to model a strong response that would empower his son to see himself as a “heroic survivor,” rather than as a “helpless victim.” Others described themselves as having “roles” or “jobs” that were primarily “emotional support,” “processing the obligation to balance justice with mercy” or “feeding the troops.” They each saw themselves and their sons as “a team” who had, as one father said, “chosen wise, appropriate, reasonable, powerful paths from a variety of emotional, theological, relational, and personal concerns. All were fed into the hopper and out came a remarkable clarity about the next step to take. When one set of parents was reluctant, we didn't go down that path. When there was disagreement, we apologized, wrapped it up, and moved on well.” They described coordinating with each other to plan each step: whom to call for assistance, what kind of penalty they would seek, and other questions about the investigation. They also said that they planned out what they would tell friends and family, when they would tell it, who would do the speaking, and what details would be given. They each consciously identified and carried out the role of team member. Importantly, three parents stated that they had grown stronger through the ordeal and all agreed that they had bonded as families and as friends. They each appreciated the opportunity to work as a team, and each noted feeling sad for other parents and families who must endure similar crises alone.

The story of one father was particularly moving: the night of the disclosure, the family hugged and cried together, and the father spoke to his son with passion, “I’m sorry I wasn't able to protect you, but I’m going to protect you now. You are my son. You are MY son,” he said emphatically. “‘You are my son! You are my son!’ He held on to me hard, and I was squeezing him back.” He wanted his son to feel strong and protected, but not overshadowed. “It was a very powerful night,” he said. This father described himself as continuing to feel that closeness with both of the young men as they moved forward in the process of cooperating with the investigators to gather evidence. “To me,” he said, “it felt like hand-to-hand combat, fighting [the perpetrator] for my family.” He and both survivors spent hours together strategizing. “It was like the camaraderie of battle,” he remembered; “there was a sense of closeness, and everyone had something to contribute.” That sense of closeness was described as an important motivator for him and the others as the months of investigation passed. They uniformly reported being proud of their sons and grateful for the support of being members of a team who won what one called “a costly victory.”

Discussion

This initial exploration revealed that parents may be significantly impacted by disclosures of their adult children who are survivors of CSA. Extant evidence confirms that the impact on parents who are still raising minor children can be considerable and that well-supported parents are better resources for young disclosers of sexual abuse (Cohen et al., 2006; Hoch, 2009; Kilroy et al., 2014; McElvaney & Nixon, 2019; Tavkar & Hansen, 2011). However, the current study is the first to provide insights suggesting that the same may also be true for parents of adults who disclose after having left the family home. When adults disclose, however, there is no natural mechanism for including the parents or family system in the interventions, if there are any interventions at all. Because access is limited, studying, and caring for this population may be much more difficult. Importantly, this exploratory study is a first glimpse into the unexplored voices and experiences of parents whose children are adults when they disclose CSA. We found that the impact on parents of disclosing adults may be both similar and distinct from the experiences of parents whose children are minors when they disclose.

Kilroy et al.’s (2014) use of the term systemic trauma to describe “the experience of having a child who was sexually abused” (p. 498) may be apropos not only for the parents of young disclosers, but the parents of adult disclosers, as well. Similar to parents of younger children, these parents experienced significant emotional impacts as a result of the knowledge that their sons had been abused, as well as intrusive cognitions and images. While no diagnostic interview was conducted, there is evidence from these narratives to suggest that the disclosure experience may be emotionally distressing or even traumatizing for some parents. The parents’ narratives revealed re-experiencing of the imagined abuse, intense emotional responses, hyper-arousal, and negative thoughts and emotions. These descriptions are consistent with Myrick and Green’s (2013) discussion of the secondary traumatization of the parents of young disclosers of child sexual abuse. The participants in this study experienced intrusive, distressing images of what the abuse might have been like, nightmares and sleep disturbances, intense negative emotions, difficulty concentrating, strong guilt feelings, distorted thoughts about their own level of responsibility, anger, and other symptoms. All the parents in this study reported continuing to experience these symptoms, even at the time of the interview several months after the disclosure. This finding is significant, since parents of disclosing adults are not necessarily treated as though they, too, may be impacted.

The experiences described by these four parents were categorized into three themes: first, the emotional impacts of bewilderment and disbelief, hyperarousal symptoms, anger, and sadness and grief; second, the cognitive impacts of ongoing self-assessments, changing views of others; and third, purposeful parental responses. The first two themes, emotional and cognitive impacts of disclosure, had many similarities to the studies of parents of young disclosers described by both Kilroy et al. (2014) and McElvaney and Nixon (2019). Kilroy et al. described the emotional impacts of shock, sympathizing with the child, shame/guilt, anger, sadness/depression, self-blame, reviewing/reliving past, believing, making sense/rationalizing, and coping attempts, all of which overlapped with the experiences of parents in the current study. While not necessarily generalizable to all parents of adult disclosers, the narratives of these parents may represent many more overlooked survivors of the systemic impacts of child sexual abuse. At the very least, they indicate that the age of the child may not necessarily differentiate the impact on the parent. Additionally, the findings of Crabtree et al. (2018) demonstrate similar impacts on the adult siblings of child sexual abuse survivors, also reinforcing Kilroy’s et al. (2014) use of the term systemic trauma.

Unlike the parents of younger children, these parents were not legally responsible for their sons; all decisions about legal matters, psychological support, and other matters rested with the adult sons, as did the final responsibility for navigating services. Because the sons were adults, the parents were no longer in the stage of parenting in the sense of helping to manage their sons’ behavior, though they did offer considerable emotional support. The parents viewed their experience of working together against a common perpetrator as unusual, and one which they believed would be helpful for others. These parents described their process of verbalizing their own specific roles and were very focused on strategizing together about each person's roles and how to do them well. These parents frequently expressed deep gratitude for what they saw as a unique opportunity of being able to function as a team as the process unfolded and also for the value of having others who understood what they were going through. These parents were friends with each other and had healthy relationships with their survivor sons, which may not be the case with other families. They had strong social support from each other and others. When the abuse was reported, they also had positive experiences with law enforcement and the court system. These variables may have created different outcomes than may be the experiences of other families.

Suggestions for Working with Parents of Adult Disclosers of Child Sexual Abuse

Results of this study suggest that service providers to adult survivors of CSA would do well to be mindful of the well-being of the entire family system in which survivors are located, particularly parents whose own ability to cope may likewise affect the survivor's capacity to heal, as has been found with younger children (Kilroy et al., 2014; Landolt et al., 2012; McElvaney & Nixon, 2019), and siblings who may also be affected (Crabtree et al., 2018). Clinicians working with parents of adult children often screen for trauma in their client's life and family of origin but may consider screening for traumatic experiences associated with adult children as well, or even with grandchildren and siblings. A family systems perspective may be helpful because it “broadens attention to the entire relational network, identifying potential resources for resilience in the immediate and extended family” (Walsh, 2012, p. 401). Because the positive influence of significant relationships nurtures the resilience of families in crisis (Minuchin et al., 2005; Walsh, 1996; Walsh, 2012), parents of adult children should be viewed as potentially valuable resources in mutual healing. Parents’ experiences of loss and grief are genuine and deserve to be supported, and at the same time, their adult children deserve the parents’ support if this can be offered in healthy ways. Having support for their own pain may allow them to self-regulate and to support adult children without requiring that the child be the parents’ source of support, as well.

When problems can be addressed as a team and hardships seen as trials to be overcome together, relationships grow and individuals benefit (Gottman et al., 2002; Kilroy et al., 2014). McElvaney and Nixon (2019) recommend that support for parents of younger children include psychoeducation normalizing emotional responses to trauma for the child and for the parent, help managing the parents’ guilt, psychological resources for child and parent, and supportive group therapy to help parents share concerns and manage relationships post-disclosure, and to enable them to help other parents. The experience of the parents in this study who seemed to find value in their own “group” experience, in helping each other cope, and processing together suggests that this may be a valuable option for other parents of adult disclosers.

The parents in this study, similar to those described by McElvaney and Nixon (2019), needed to process their parental identities as protectors, their feelings of possible guilt or regret over not being able to protect their child, meaning-making, and coping with intense emotions. Because the development of a coherent trauma narrative assists in moderating the arousal responses of trauma survivors and in processing many of the topics mentioned by the parents, narrative therapy may prove helpful to the parents and enable them to better support their adult children (Tuval-Mashiach et al., 2004; White & Epston, 1990). Parents and adult child disclosers may be in unique positions to support each other as they address the kinds of inner conflicts the parents in this study revealed, and as they begin to reconstruct healthy present, past, and future views of self, other, and the world (Cohen & Mannarino, 2008; Myrick & Green, 2013). They may find, as did the parents in this study, that with appropriate individual and/or family support, their shared struggles have the potential to strengthen familial relationships.

The families in this study were already healthy and resilient and so were able to engage in mutually supportive relationships. The circumstance was also unique in that the sons and parental dyads were already friends and could lean on one another for support. The parents noted that they were able to process and strategize together about their own concerns without overly burdening their sons. Not all parents may have access to such support and clinicians may consider making appropriate referrals to parental support groups or other networks in such cases.

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

The most obvious limitations of this preliminary investigation arise from the exploratory and qualitative nature of the data and limited number of participants. As an exploratory study, the research was not intended to draw conclusions generalizable to the whole population but rather to offer a detailed understanding of the particular participants in this case. Another limitation may be that the parents may have had more insight into their experiences after more time had passed and more time to process the experience. While the timing allowed for vivid recall of ongoing emotional and cognitive responses, follow-up studies may also be helpful.

Further research may help to shed more light on the needs of parents of adult disclosers. For example, looking at larger numbers of parents with both qualitative and quantitative measures could yield helpful information about the incidence of secondary traumatization and provide more information about relevant narrative themes. It is also recommended that researchers study parents of first-time adult disclosers who are older than the children of the participants in this study who were young adults. The parents of adult children who have established their own homes and careers, or who have become parents themselves before disclosing the abuse, may have different insights to offer. Additionally, when the abuse is disclosed because of a crisis in the life of the adult survivor, the situation may be further complicated. While these parents believed their adult children and were supportive, and questions of accusation between parents and adult children were not pertinent to this case, they may be complicating factors in other cases.

Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of parents of adult children who disclose a history of CSA. The four parents involved each reported symptoms consistent with distress or trauma, which suggests that trauma not only impacts individuals but also family systems, even when the survivors are adults (Minuchin et al., 2005; Walsh, 1996; Walsh, 2012). It would be unfortunate to assume that simply because the burden of child-rearing is finished, parents are no longer vulnerable to the pain and distress of their adult children. As this study revealed, further research and clinical attention into family members’ experiences with respect to CSA is warranted.