| Course | ADC 660 Addiction and Families |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 2 |
| Paper type | Theory paper with family assessment |
| Length | About 1,061 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Psychology and Addiction Studies |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for ADC 660 Module 2
When Drinking Organizes the Household: Family Systems, Roles and Their Limits
Student Name
Psychology and Addiction Studies Program, Aspen University
ADC 660: Addiction and Families
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
When Drinking Organizes the Household: Family Systems, Roles and Their Limits
In her second session at the Omaha family program introduced in the previous paper, Lisa described how life at home had changed. Dinner had stopped being a family meal; Glen ate in front of the television with a drink. Thanksgiving had been canceled two years running after arguments. Tyler, fifteen, was in trouble at school and rarely home; Emma, ten, made everyone laugh when tension rose. Lisa, her family and the program are fictional. This paper examines the family through systems frameworks.
The Family as a System
Systems approaches view a family as a whole whose members are interconnected, so that change in one member affects the others and the family tends to maintain a balance, or homeostasis, even when that balance is unhealthy. Steinglass et al. (1987), in a long-term study of families with an alcohol-dependent member, described how drinking can become an organizing principle of family life. Daily routines, such as meals and bedtimes, shift to accommodate drinking. Short-term problem solving comes to depend on whether the drinker is intoxicated. And family rituals, such as holidays and celebrations, may be disrupted or abandoned. They found that families who protected their rituals from disruption by drinking were less likely to pass drinking problems to the next generation, suggesting that rituals carry protective value.
Family Roles
Wegscheider (1981) described roles that she observed children taking in families with addiction: the hero, who achieves and holds the family together; the scapegoat, who acts out and draws attention away from the drinking; the lost child, who withdraws; and the mascot, who uses humor to relieve tension. The roles became widely known through popular books and treatment programs. However, they emerged from clinical observation rather than systematic research, and studies have found limited support for distinct, stable roles of this kind. They may describe patterns some children show, but applying them as labels risks fixing children in a role and overlooking their individuality.
The Stress-Strain-Coping View
Orford et al. (2013) offered a different lens, focused on the experiences of family members rather than on the family as a system or on roles. In their stress-strain-coping model, family members face sustained stress from a relative's addiction, experience strain in health and well-being and cope in various ways, each with costs and benefits. The model emphasizes support: family members cope better with information, emotional support and practical help. It avoids implying that family members are part of the problem.
| Framework | Focus | Strength | Limit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Family systems | Family as a whole; routines, rituals, balance | Shows how drinking reshapes family life; identifies rituals as protective | Can imply family members maintain the problem |
| Family roles | Children's patterns of adaptation | Intuitive; helps families see patterns | Little research support; risk of labeling |
| Stress-strain-coping | Individual family members' experience | Nonblaming; links to support | Less attention to family-wide patterns |
| Combined | Whole family and each member | Uses strengths of each | Requires judgment |
Rituals in Practice
Rituals need not be elaborate. Steinglass and colleagues' families protected ordinary things: dinner together, the way birthdays were celebrated, how holidays unfolded. What mattered was that the family kept these events distinct from drinking, for example by holding them even when the drinker was absent or by not allowing drinking at them. For children, such rituals provide predictability and a sense that the family's identity is larger than the drinking.
Strengths in the Family
A systems view also reveals strengths. Lisa had kept the children's school routines steady, Glen's mother remained close to the children and Emma's humor, whatever its origins, gave the family moments of warmth. Naming these strengths gave Lisa something to build on rather than only problems to fix.
Assessing the Hartley Family
Using these frameworks, the counselor noted that drinking had reorganized the Hartleys' evenings and eliminated their main rituals, family dinner and Thanksgiving. Tyler's trouble at school and absence from home and Emma's joking under tension resembled the scapegoat and mascot patterns, but the counselor treated these as ways the children were coping with stress rather than as fixed roles. Lisa's coping, mostly trying to keep the peace and covering for Glen with his employer, had protected the family in the short term but exhausted her.
Family Homeostasis and Change
Systems theory predicts that families resist change, even unhealthy patterns, because change disrupts a balance everyone has adjusted to. When one member changes, others may push, often without meaning to, toward the familiar pattern. If Glen stops drinking, the family may experience unexpected strain as roles and routines shift. Preparing the family for this, and supporting each member through it, is part of family-focused work.
Practical Steps
The counselor and Lisa identified one step from each framework. From the systems view, they chose to restore one ritual: Sunday breakfast with Lisa and the children, protected regardless of Glen's state, and Glen invited if sober. From the coping view, Lisa would stop calling Glen's employer to cover for him, letting him face the consequences of his drinking while staying safe. For the children, Lisa would tell each of them, in age-appropriate words, that their father's drinking was not their fault and that they could talk to her about it.
Cultural Considerations
Family systems frameworks developed mainly with white, middle-class American families. Families from other cultures may organize roles, rituals and responses to drinking differently, and practices that look like enabling from one perspective may reflect obligations of loyalty from another. Applying these frameworks well means asking families how they understand their roles and what their traditions are, rather than assuming.
Using the Frameworks Together
No single framework captured the Hartleys. The ritual view showed what the family had lost, the stress and coping view explained how Lisa had been managing and the role labels, used loosely, helped Lisa notice how differently her two children were reacting. Steinglass et al. (1987) offered the most hopeful point for practice: a family that deliberately protects even one shared ritual keeps some of its identity apart from the drinking.
Conclusion
Steinglass and colleagues' systems view shows how drinking can organize family life and why protecting rituals matters. Wegscheider's roles capture recognizable patterns but have limited evidence and should not become labels. Orford and colleagues' stress-strain-coping model focuses on family members' experiences without blame. Used together, the frameworks helped the Hartleys' counselor see the family's patterns and choose small, practical steps.
References
Orford, J., Velleman, R., Natera, G., Templeton, L., & Copello, A. (2013). Addiction in the family is a major but neglected contributor to the global burden of adverse health and social outcomes. Social Science & Medicine, 78, 70-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.11.036
Steinglass, P., Bennett, L. A., Wolin, S. J., & Reiss, D. (1987). The alcoholic family. Basic Books.
Wegscheider, S. (1981). Another chance: Hope and health for the alcoholic family. Science and Behavior Books.
Reading the ADC 660 Module 2 assignment instructions
The second module of ADC 660 typically asks for a paper on family systems and roles in addiction. The Module 2 instructions in your Aspen course take priority; the family here is invented. Explain systems concepts such as homeostasis and family organization, with concrete examples from a family's routines. Describe how addiction can reshape routines and rituals. Present family role theories critically, noting their evidence base and the risks of labeling. Compare frameworks for understanding families in a table that shows each one's strengths and limits. Assess a family using them. Give APA 7 references, and avoid labeling family members in ways that blame or fix them in a role. Link each framework to a practical step, so the assessment leads somewhere.
How the ADC 660 Module 2 example is put together
The composite Hartley family in Omaha has reorganized around Glen's evening drinking. Steinglass and colleagues' book The Alcoholic Family describes how drinking can come to organize daily routines and rituals and how families that protect their rituals fare better. Wegscheider's book Another Chance describes roles such as hero, scapegoat, lost child and mascot; the paper notes these have little research support. Orford and colleagues' stress-strain-coping model describes how family members cope. A four-row table compares frameworks. The assessment finds holiday rituals abandoned and Tyler drifting toward a scapegoat pattern, and the counselor helps Lisa restore one protected family routine. Lisa also stops covering for Glen at work.
ADC 660 Module 2 rubric: what earns full marks
Family systems papers earn credit for accurate systems concepts, critical treatment of popular role theories and an assessment that leads to practical steps. This example uses a primary source for the systems view and applies its concept of rituals. It presents the family roles fairly while noting the weak evidence, so readers can use them as possible patterns rather than facts. The stress-strain-coping model offers a balanced alternative focused on each member's experience. The assessment uses concrete observations rather than labels, and the recommendation to protect a family ritual follows directly from the research. The paper treats the children's behavior as coping, not as fixed character.
ADC 660 Module 2 help: mistakes that cost marks
Family systems papers often apply role labels such as hero and scapegoat as if they were established findings, which can trap children in a description. Note that they come from clinical observation and have limited research support, and say how you would use them cautiously. Use systems ideas, such as how drinking reorganizes routines, with concrete examples. Compare frameworks rather than relying on one. Avoid labels that blame family members or suggest they caused the problem. Look for strengths, such as rituals the family has protected, which research suggests matter. Remember that a framework is a lens, not a diagnosis; families recognize themselves in some parts and not others.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More ADC 660 and Psychology and Addiction Studies sample papers
- ADC 660 Module 1: Addiction in the Family Context
- ADC 660 Module 3: Children of Parents With Addictions
- ADC 660 Module 4: Engaging Families in Treatment
- ADC 660 Module 5: Brief Family Interventions
- ADC 660 Module 6: Behavioral Couple Therapy
- ADC 660 Module 7: Intensive Family Therapy
- ADC 660 Module 8: A Tiered Family Treatment Plan
- SBS 200 Module 7: Late Adulthood
- PAC 414 Module 2: Recognizing Signs of Abuse
- PAC 115 Module 4: Digestive and Endocrine Terms
- PAC 799A Module 8: Defending the Method
ADC 660 Module 2 questions, answered
What does ADC 660 Module 2 usually ask for?
Aspen's ADC 660 covers family systems and roles in this module, so a paper applying systems ideas and evaluating role theories is typical. Check your Module 2 prompt.
What is the alcoholic family in systems terms?
Steinglass and colleagues described families in which drinking becomes an organizing principle of daily routines, problem solving and rituals.
Are family roles like hero and scapegoat supported by research?
These roles, described by Wegscheider, are widely used clinically but have limited research support and should be applied cautiously.
Where can I find a free ADC 660 Module 2 sample paper?
This page holds the full paper: systems concepts, family roles and their limits, a comparison table and a family assessment.
Why do family rituals matter?
Steinglass and colleagues found that families who protected their rituals, such as holidays and dinners, from disruption by drinking fared better.