Performance of the Olson Circumplex Family Model in Families with a Child with ASD

Background:

For families of typically developing children, extremes of family cohesion (enmeshed and disengaged) and flexibility (rigid and chaotic) are associated with negative outcomes (Olson 2011). Although, some work has suggested that this may not be the case for families of children with autism (Altiere & von Kluge 2008). Specifically, regimented daily routines (increased rigidity) and highly involved caregivers (increased enmeshment) may be associated with positive outcomes (Altiere & von Kluge 2008).

Objectives:

1. Examine if families with children with autism reported more enmeshed and rigid family dynamics relative to families with typically developing children.
2. Examine if the relationship between reported enmeshment and rigidity was equally predictive of family outcomes for families with typically developing children and families with children with autism

Methods:

This data comes from a larger research effort examining leisure satisfaction and participation in families with and without a child with autism. As a part of the present analysis, 233 parents (111 with a child with autism, 122 with a typically developing child) responded to an online Qualtrics survey providing data on the following variables: Family Adaptability and Cohesion Scales (FACES-IV)(Olson, Gorall, &Tiesel 2004), The Depression-Short Form from the Neuro-QOL Item Bank v1.0 (Cella et al. 2012), and Neuro-QOL Item Bank v1.0 – Positive Affect and Well-Being – Short Form (Cella et al. 2012). Regression-based moderation analyses were used to examine if group (parent with or without a child with ASD) moderated the relationships between reported enmeshment and rigidity, and outcomes (reported happiness and depression).

Results:

Parents of children with ASD reported more enmeshment (t[233]=4.2, p<.01), and comparable rigidity (t[233]=1.0, p=.30) relative to families with typically developing children. Results from a moderation analysis found that parent reported family rigidity did not perform differently for families with typically developing children versus children with ASD for either parent reported symptoms of depression or positive affect and well-being. However, family enmeshment performed differently in families with and without a child with ASD (F[1,231]=7.1, p<.01). Increased enmeshment was associated with decreased parental happiness in families with typically developing children (β=-.31, p<.01). For these families, for every one SD increase in reported enmeshment, there was a corresponding .31 SD reduction in reported positive affect and well-being. Contrastingly, increased enmeshment did not affect parent reported happiness (β=.04, p=.63) in families with a child with ASD.

Conclusions:

It may be that high levels of enmeshment are necessary for supporting a child with ASD (e.g., increased time spent in attendance and coordination of therapeutic appointments, learning child’s specific likes and dislikes, time spent supporting child during daily life) and are not signs of dysfunction in this population. This finding dovetails with previous work, and suggests that ideal family dynamics may be different for typically developing children versus families with a child with ASD.