Explaining the Psychological Mechanisms of Conflict Between Family of Origin and In-Laws and Its Impact on Couple Boundaries and Relational Autonomy
Keywords:
family of origin, in-laws, couple boundaries, relational autonomy, interfamily conflict, triangulation, thematic analysisAbstract
Objective: This study aimed to explain the psychological mechanisms underlying conflicts between the family of origin and in-laws and to identify their effects on couple boundaries, relational autonomy, and the formation of a shared couple identity.
Methods and Materials: This qualitative study was conducted using thematic analysis. The participants consisted of 24 married individuals living in Tehran, including 12 women and 12 men, selected through purposive sampling with maximum variation in age, length of marriage, parental status, and experience of conflict with in-laws. Data were collected through individual semi-structured interviews. Interviews lasted between 45 and 80 minutes. Sampling continued until theoretical saturation was reached in the twenty-second interview, and two additional interviews were conducted to confirm the adequacy of the data. After full transcription, the interviews were analyzed using NVivo software through initial coding, code organization, extraction of subthemes, and development of main categories.
Findings: Data analysis led to the identification of four main categories: “unbounded interference of families of origin in couple decision-making,” “emotional triangulation and loyalty conflict,” “couples’ inability to negotiate and stabilize relational boundaries,” and “erosion of relational autonomy and weakening of the ‘we-identity.’” The findings indicated that conflict between the family of origin and in-laws is not merely an interpersonal disagreement, but is deeply connected to attachment patterns, differentiation of self, family loyalties, relational anxiety, and the couple’s inability to define emotional, financial, communicative, and decision-making boundaries. Participants reported that direct or indirect family pressure placed them in a forced-choice position between spouse and family, leading to reduced intimacy, secrecy, chronic conflict, and diminished decision-making autonomy.
Conclusion: The findings suggest that the quality of couple boundary-setting plays a decisive role in whether interfamily conflict becomes a marital crisis or is managed adaptively. Couples who are more capable of shared dialogue, regulation of family loyalties, agreement on communication rules, and protection of relational privacy are more likely to preserve autonomy and reduce the destructive effects of family conflict. Couple therapy interventions should therefore address not only dyadic conflict but also extended family networks, intergenerational boundaries, and triangulation processes.
Downloads
References
Bowen, M. (1978). Family therapy in clinical practice. Jason Aronson.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Calatrava, M., Martins, M. V., Schweer-Collins, M., Duch-Ceballos, C., & Rodríguez-González, M. (2022). Differentiation of self: A scoping review of Bowen Family Systems Theory’s core construct. Clinical Psychology Review, 91, 102101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2021.102101
Coe, J. L., Davies, P. T., Sturge-Apple, M. L., & Cummings, E. M. (2018). The multivariate roles of family instability and interparental conflict in predicting children’s representations of insecurity in the family system and early school adjustment problems. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 46, 211–224.
Felmlee, D. H. (2001). No couple is an island: A social network perspective on dyadic stability. Social Forces, 79(4), 1259–1287. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2001.0039
Fiori, K. L., Rauer, A. J., Birditt, K. S., Brown, E., & Orbuch, T. L. (2021). You aren’t as close to my family as you think: Discordant perceptions about in-laws and risk of divorce. Research in Human Development, 17(4), 258–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2021.1874792
Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (1992). Marital processes predictive of later dissolution: Behavior, physiology, and health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(2), 221–233. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.2.221
Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (2000). The timing of divorce: Predicting when a couple will divorce over a 14-year period. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(3), 737–745. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00737.x
Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
Hu, W., Sze, Y. T., Chen, H., & Fang, X. (2015). Actor–partner analyses of the relationship between family-of-origin triangulation and marital satisfaction in Chinese couples. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24(7), 2135–2146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-014-0015-4
Kerr, M. E., & Bowen, M. (1988). Family evaluation: An approach based on Bowen theory. W. W. Norton.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
Mikucki-Enyart, S. L., Caughlin, J. P., & Rittenour, C. E. (2015). Content and relational implications of children-in-law’s relational uncertainty within the in-law dyad during the transition to extended family. Communication Quarterly, 63(3), 286–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2015.1039714
Minuchin, S. (1974). Families and family therapy. Harvard University Press.
Minuchin, S., & Fishman, H. C. (1981). Family therapy techniques. Harvard University Press.
Serewicz, M. C. M., & Canary, D. J. (2008). Assessments of disclosure from the in-laws: Links among disclosure topics, family privacy orientations, and relational quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25(2), 333–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407507087962
Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research: A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349–357. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
Wu, T.-F., Yeh, K.-H., Cross, S. E., Larson, L. M., Wang, Y.-C., & Tsai, Y.-L. (2010). Conflict with mothers-in-law and Taiwanese women’s marital satisfaction: The moderating role of husband support. The Counseling Psychologist, 38(4), 497–522. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000009353071
Yuan, X. (2019). Family-of-origin triangulation and marital quality of Chinese couples: The mediating role of in-law relationships. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 50(1), 98–112. https://doi.org/10.3138/jcfs.042-2017
