Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 1993, Vol. 19, NO. 3,287-292

THE AGE ONSET OF PERSONAL AUTHORITY IN THE FAMILY SYSTEM

David Lawson Harper Gaushell Stephen F. Austin State University Northeast Louisiana University

Ralph Karst Northeast Louisiana University

The present research explored Williamson’s position that relational patterns indicative of Personal Authority in the Family System (PAFS) occur during the fourth and early f f ih decades of life. Participants were 232 university student volunteers. Individuals age 30 and above reported less triangulation with their nuclear families and less intimidation and less intimacy with their parents than the under age 30 group. These results provide some support for the view that differ- entiation is more clearly discernible in the fourth and fiFh decades of life than in earlier years. Canonical correlations revealed that as age increases, the amount of variance accounted for by nuclear family triangulation, intergenerational intimi- dation, and intergenerational intimacy increases, supporting Williamson’s posi- tion that age is a significant factor in achieving several relational patterns indicative of PAFS.

An issue of critical importance for most intergenerational family therapists is a client’s relationship to his or her family of origin (Bowen, 1978; Williamson, 1982). In particular, Bowen (1978) emphasizes the importance of becoming progressively more differentiated from one’s family of origin. Differentiation is seen as especially essential for the develop- ment of healthy intimate relationships, both inside and outside the family of origin.

Williamson (1981) includes the process of differentiation or individuation in his concept of Personal Authority in the Family System (PAFS). PAFS refers to a “new stage in the family life cycle” (Williamson, 1981, p. 441) in which adults are faced with the psychosocial task of terminating the intergenerational hierarchical power boundary between themselves and their older parents. Personal authority implies “the behavioral patterns characteristic of an integrated and differentiated self [Bowen, 19781 exercising increased control over

David Lawson, PhD, is an Associate Professor of Counseling, Department of Counseling and Special

Harper Gaushell, EdD, is anhsociate Professor of Counseling, Department of Educational Leadership

Ralph Karst, P M , is a Professor and Director of the Center for Educational Research, Department of

Education, Stephen F. Austin State University, Nacogdoches, TX 75962.

and Counseling, Northeast Louisiana University, Monroe, LA 71209.

Educational Leadership and Counseling, Northeast Louisiana University, Monroe, LA 71209.

July 1993 JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY 287

individual destiny in life and choosing personal health and well-being in a systemic sense” (Williamson &Bray, 1988, p. 363). As it directly concerns family relationships, PAFS refers to one’s ability to reconnect and belong to one’s family of origin while simultaneously main- taining a distinct and differentiated position within the family of origin (Bray, Willlamson, & Malone, 1984). Terminating the intergenerational hierarchical boundary enables one to relate to other individuals, including parents, as peers. Of particular relevance to this article is Williamson’s (1981) position that the achievement of PAFS generally occurs during the fourth and early fifth decades of life.

The achievement of PAFS by an individual is seen as a biopsychosocial developmental task for both adults and their families which involves the accomplishment of a number of pre- conditions set forth elsewhere (see Williamson, 1981). From Willlamson’s perspective, these psychosocial life tasks are not achieved prior to age 30, with the majority of cases falling between 35 and 45 years of age. Williamson (1981) concludes that it is inappropriate to expect people in their 20s to develop personal authority. In addition, the absence of PAFS relational patterns in adults in the fourth generation and following implies a dysfunctional hierarchy in the intergenerational family system (Bray et al., 1984), resulting in their inability to experience a differentiated self as an adult in the presence of the parents (or other authority figure).

Although studies have been conducted which support age-related differences on PAFS (Bray, Harvey, & Willlamson, 1987; Harvey & Bray, 1991), to date, no empirical data exist comparing groups of individuals of different ages on the constructs comprising PAFS. The present study attempts to explore the accuracy of Williamson’s assumption that age is a signi- ficant factor in the achievement of relational patterns indicative of PAFS.

METHOD Subjects

The participants (N=232) were university student volunteers representing seven univer- sities from four southern states. No attempt was made to control the overall sociodemo- graphic characteristics of the sample. The sample had the following characteristics: ages ranged from 19 to 64; background was middle-class; 36.6% were male and 63.4% female; 87.8% were white and 12.2% nonwhite; 59.9% were married, 27.6% single, and 12.5% separated or divorced; 45.25% had no children and 54.75% had at least one child; 72.7% were employed full-time and 27.3% were full-time students.

Instrument The Personal Authority in the Family System Questionnaire (PAFS-Q) was developed

by Bray et al. (1984) “to provide a self-report measure of intergenerational family relation- ships as perceived by each individual in the family” @. 2). PAFS-Q (Version A) is comprised of 132 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale and grouped into eight nonoverlapping scales: Spousal Fusioflndividuation (SPFUS), Intergenerational Fusioflndividuation (INFUS), Spousal Intimacy (SPINT), Intergenerational Intimacy (ININT), Nuclear Family Triangula- tion (NETRI), Intergenerational Triangulation (INTRI), Intergenerational Intimidation (INTIM), and Personal Authority (PerAut). These scales purport to measure the major constructs underlying PAFS (e.g., fusion, individuation, triangulation, intimidation, etc.). This instrument has been found to be both reliable and valid (Bray et al., 1984; Bray et al., 1987).

288 JOURNAL OF Ah4RIZM AND FAMILY THERAPY July 1993

Procedures The PAFS-Q and a demographic information sheet were administered by designated

faculty at the participating universities. Subjects were instructed to rate their current rela- tionship with relevant family members.

RESULTS Based on Williamson’s assumptions concerning the age onset of PAFS, the participants

were divided into three age groupings for data analysis: group one included all participants below age 30 (n = 87; M = 24.53; SD = 3.23); group two included participants age 30 to 39.9 (n = 88; M = 34.44; SD = 2.80); and group three included participants ages 40 and above (n = 57; M = 45.60; SD = 6.21).

The data were initially examined using a one-way MANOVA. The resulting Pillais test indicated significant differences among the three groups (F(16,446) = 4.28,~ c.0001). The univariateF-tests identified significant differences on three of the eight dependent variables: Nuclear Family Triangulation (NFTRI)(F (2, 229) = 17.70, pc.OOol), Intergenerational Intimidation (INTIM)(F(2,229) = 15.68,pc.0001), andhtergenerationallntimacy O ( F (2,229) = 4.7, p c.01) .

To isolate more specifically where the differences lay, Hotellings P pairwise compari- sons followed by univariate pairwise comparisons for the three age groups were performed. These results are as follows: (a) For Group 1 to Group 2, Hotellings P pairwise was found to be significant (F (8, 166) = 5.4, p <.Owl), with the univariate comparisons identifying significant differences on Nuclear Family Triangulation (F (1, 173) = 25.6, pc.0001), Intergenerational Intimidation (F (1,173) = 18.5 ,~ c.OOOl), and Intergenerational Intimacy (F (1, 173) = 5 . 7 , ~ c.01); @) for Group 1 to Group 3, Hotellings P pairwise was found to be significant (F (16, 442) = 4.6, p c.OOOl), with the univariate comparisons identifying significant differences on Nuclear Family Triangulation (F (2, 229) = 17.7, p <.OOOl), Intergenerational Intimidation (F (2,229) = 15.7,~ c.OOOl), and Intergenerational Intimacy (F (2, 229) = 4.7, p c.01); and (c) for Group 2 to Group 3, Hotellings P pairwise was not significant (F (1, 143) = 1.2, p >.30).

Means and standard deviations for each group for the eight PAFS-Q scales are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 PAFS-Q s a l e Means and Standard Deviations

PAFS-Q Scale

SPFUS INFUS SPINT ININT* NFTRI* INTRI INTIM* PerAut

Age Groups

Youngest Middle Oldest - M J 4 SD M & i SD M a SD 70.5 7.7 69.8 8.3 70.5 8.7 30.0 4.4 29.0 5.5 45.6 7.7 45.1 8.6

100.2 15.7 94.2 17.4 31.2 3.1 34.9 5.7 30.6 9.8 32.7 11.4

100.5 17.7 111.5 16.1 42.6 7.2 43.6 9.3

30.4 5.7 45.4 8.2 92.1 17.9 35.2 5.0 31.1 9.2

114.8 15.2 45.0 6.7

*Significant at p c .01

July 1993 JOURNAL OF UARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY 289

A follow-up examination of the data using Canonical Correlation Estimate of Effect yielded the results shown in Table 2.

Table 2 Canonical Correlations

Variable

SPFUS IN-FUS SPINT ININT* NFrRI * INTRI INTIM* PerAut

Aye Groups

Youneest Middle

.53703

.39782

.34603

.37177

.39641

.18270

.33041

.34566

.60080

.37649

.37117

.38590

.45399

.20382

.49077

.33312

Oldest

.67327

.44509

.45741

.42689

.60540

.27977

.62560 3 3 1 7

Examination of Table 2 reveals that for all three significant variables, the oldest group (40 years and older) contributed the greatest amount of variance.

DISCUSSION

These results lend some support to Williamson’s (1981) assumption about the age onset of PAFS. The pairwise comparisons indicated no significant differences between the middle and older age groups on PAFS relational patterns. However, significant differences were found between the middle and younger age groups and the older and younger age groups, with the middle and older groups reporting significantly less triangulation (higher score = less triangulation) with their nuclear families and less intimidation (higher score = less intimida- tion) and less intimacy (higher score = more intimacy) in relation to their parents than the under 30 group (see Table 1).

The results provide some support for the view that differentiation is more clearly dis- cernible in the fourth and fifth decades of life than in earlier years (Harvey & Bray, 1991). Less nuclear family triangulation would presuppose a higher level of relational functioning for the two older groups in their nuclear families and would be indirectly related to less intimidation (INTIM) between the first and second generation (i.e., adult and adult parent). Conversely, higher levels of intimidation would be reflected in greater triangulation and thus less differentiation. As concerns intergenerational intimacy, it is expected that the two older groups will have less intimate or close relationships with their parents than the younger group (Harvey & Bray, 1991; Williamson & Bray, 1988).

Less intergenerational intimidation (INTIM) by the age 30 and above groups provides the strongest support for Williamson’s view on the termination of the hierarchical boundary between the adult and the adult parent during the fourth and fifth decades of life. Williamson holds that intergenerational intimidation is a powerful relational adhesive which maintains the hierarchical boundary between the adult and the adult parents. Less parental intimidation

290 JOURNAL OF UARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY July 1993

and thus less fear of parental rejection or being overwhelmed by the identity of the parent would seem to put the age 30 and above groups in a better position to renegotiate the hier- archical boundary between themselves and their parents.

In examining the canonical correlations across the three age groups for the NFTRI, IMNT, and INTIM scales, it becomes apparent that as age increases, the amount of variance accounted for increases (i.e., increasingly larger correlations), once again supporting Williamson’s position that age is a significant factor in the achievement of several relational patterns indicative of PAFS. Williamson and Bray (1988) state that age is not merely axio- matic in itself but is based on their observation as to the time when people are able and willing to develop personal authority in their families of origin. Our data appear to provide some support for their observations.

The results for the Nuclear Family Triangulation (NFTRI) scale were less clear and less conclusive than for the INTIM and ININT scales. Of particular note is the reduced sample size for the NFTIU scale (127 subjects compared to 232 with other scales) since only subjects with children could respond. Additionally, the youngest group (Group 1) had considerably fewer subjects than the middle (Group 2) and oldest groups (Group 3) (16, 58, and 53 respectively). However, excluding the youngest group and considering only the middle and oldest groups, the same pattern is evident; the oldest group contributes the greatest amount of variance.

A major concern raised by our results is the fact that only three of the eight independent scales of the PAFS-Q provided support for the age onset of PAFS relational patterns. Several possible explanations might be posited for lack of a greater number of significant differences on the PAFS-Q. First, our results may bring into question the degree of functional relatedness between all of the constructs underlying PAFS. Perhaps the eight relational patterns indica- tive of PAFS are less interconnected than Williamson assumes. Second, perhaps the age 30 and above groups have achieved a degree of differentiation (i.e., less parental intimidation and less nuclear family triangulation) without being highly differentiated. Bray and William- son (1987) state that highly differentiated individuals will report high intimacy and high individuation along with less intimidation and less triangulation. Thus, with less differen- tiated individuals one would expect fewer significant differences on the individual scales as our data indicate. Third, the PAFS-Q may not adequately measure the eight components of PAFS. Finally, it is possible that Williamson’s theory may be inaccurate. Further research seems necessary to clarify this issue.

The results of this study appear to have some relevance for intergenerational family therapists’ expectations in doing family-of-origin work with middle-class, educated clients. Although to a lesser degree than Williamson posits, our fiidings suggest that some relational patterns indicative of PAFS are most salient in the fourth and fifth decade of life. Hence the achievement and development of these relational patterns before age 30 and in many cases before age 40 might be an unrealistic expectation for therapy. Perhaps with this information in mind, family-of-origin therapists may wish to consider Williamson’s (1981) preconditions for the termination of hierarchical boundaries as they establish goals for family-of-origin work. Williamson (1981) suggests that clients can work on self-observation and objectifi- cation during the years prior to their 30s and 40s.

Limitations of this study include the nonprobability nature of the sample, relatively small sample size, possible cohort effect (although this would seem unlikely considering closeness in age differences), and limited applicability of the findings to other groups (e.g., less edu-

July 1993 JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY 291

cated, socioeconomic groups other than middle class). Future research might address these limitations as well as compare relatively healthy individuals with a clinical sample concern- ing the age onset of PAFS patterns. In any event, it would seem that at least minimal support exists for Williamson’s concept of the age onset of PAFS constructs.

REFERENCES

Bowen, M. (1978). Family therapy in clinicalpractice. New York Jason Aronson. Bray, J., Williamson, D., & Malone, P. (1984). Personal authority in the family system: Development

of a questionnaire to measure personal authority in intergenerational family processes. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 10, 167-178.

Bray, J., Harvey, D., &Williamson, D. (1987). Intergenerational family relationships: An evaluation of theory and measurement. Psychotherapy, 24,516-528.

Harvey, D., & Bray, J. (1991). An evaluation of an intergenerational theory of personal development: Family process determinants of psychological and health distress. Journal of Family Psychology, 4,4269.

Williamson, D. (1981). Personal authority via termination of the intergenerational hierarchical boundary: A “new” stage in the family life cycle. JournulofMaritalandFamily Therapy, 7,441- 452.

Williamson, D. (1982). Personal authority in family experience via termination of the intergenerational hierarchical boundary: Part 111-Personal authority defined, and the power of play in the change process. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 8,309-323.

Williamson, D., & Bray, J. (1988). Family development and change across the generations: An intergenerational perspective. In C. J. Falicov (Ed.), Family transitions: Continuity and change over the life cycle (pp. 357-384). New York Guilford.

292 JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY July 1993