Black Sheep: Why Families Marginalize Their Own Members

Every extended family I know has a “black sheep,” some person labeled as an intransigent outsider threatening group stability. Frequently, that role is given to a child who perceives that they are different from the others and who refuses to back down from their commitments. However, other family members—perhaps an in-law or cousin—may also find themselves in this spot. Usually, the person at issue knows that they have been identified as such. Occasionally, they don’t.

Psychologists addressing this topic typically stress the feelings of isolation and shame that black sheep have. For most humans, family connection is crucial to our sense of who we are. Even as we seek the independence that comes with adulthood, we want to know that we still have the support of the people who provided our life’s foundations. To be demeaned, set apart, or otherwise stigmatized by those caregivers is deeply troubling.

Although there is no easy course for the person so labeled, therapists emphasize the importance of keeping communication lines open. Remember points of family connection as well as disconnection. However, when disrespect becomes extreme or abusive, black sheep should reaffirm the worthiness of their own identity and viewpoints. If that means severing certain connections, so be it. Find others who grant you the dignity you deserve. Remain open to the possibility of reconnection later on. And recognize that some of your most important qualities and accomplishments may come from your determination to follow your own vision of life.

I support this therapeutic approach. But I want to stress that this process—of making someone feel like an outsider in their own home—is a matter of family dynamics as much as individual disagreement. As I describe below, families are like other groups in their attempts to marginalize one or more of their members. Let’s examine this process.

Who gets stigmatized as a black sheep?

People in power—in the case of families, functioning fathers and mothers—rarely are depicted in this way. To be sure, they may feel lonely, unappreciated, and even oppressed. They may leave the marriage. But the black sheep label doesn’t fit. Instead, black sheep are almost always people who are farther from the centers of control.

Commonly, that means children, especially those that are “different” in ways the family rejects. To be sure, there are many ways kids can be different or embarrass the family by their actions—think of criminal offenses, school failures, and financial catastrophes—but that doesn’t make them black sheep. Rather, black sheep are those who are perceived to be intransigent in their habits and thus are a continuing source of disruption to family functioning. Of course, ideas about “disruption” and “functioning” are controlled by family leaders. As they see it, it is the black sheep who must change.

Unlike friendship groups, families usually must maintain ties with their non-conforming members. People should “get along,” even if this means just enduring one another’s company at holidays, stage-of-life ceremonies, and health emergencies. These difficulties increase as children age and add spouses/partners to the family mix. It is common then for one of these in-laws to assume the mantle of black sheep. After all, they come from families with different values and habits; they seek to change the child they’ve attached themselves to; they have only modest interest in visiting that child’s family; there are fewer levers to control them. More to the point, it is much easier to blame that outsider for family disruption than it is to accuse one’s own child, who may share the very same beliefs and habits as their partner.

Interestingly, grandparents, however eccentric they become, are not considered black sheep. Neither are very young children, however horrible their behaviors. Instead, black sheep are people whose burgeoning independence poses a threat to a unified family style. An obstreperous brother or sister may hold this title all their adult years, or at least until they are brought back “into the fold.”

Although most writers on this topic tend to identify the black sheep phenomenon as a sign of a “dysfunctional” family, I see it as a common device families use to marginalize perceived threats to their value system and ritual practices. Consider below some functions of the black sheep.

Venting group frustrations

Conformity Essential Reads

Why Be a Non-Conventionalist?

Lessons in Heroic Resistance

Because they are complicated social entities, families face ongoing challenges to their integrity and worldly success. Many of these difficulties stem from the behaviors of the family leaders. Rather than confront those issues directly, it is easier to place blame on a weaker family member who is seen as “disruptive.” That scapegoat is said to distract family attention, drain resources, and otherwise threaten harmony. Sensing status enhancement for themselves, other siblings may join in the condemnation. Notably, this scapegoating system works best if there is only one victim. Otherwise, it becomes apparent that family problems are greater than the leaders admit them to be.

Reaffirming bonds among insiders

Identity is a double-edged sword. One side affirms the people we stand with; the other acknowledges those we oppose. When a family member is marginalized, it allows others to recommit to one another and to their shared lifestyle. Commonly, that means extolling the importance of family traditions. “Good” children, that is, those who stayed in the local community and supported their parents, are distinguished from the “bad” ones who strayed.

Identifying salient values

Like individuals, groups may require threats to their functioning to make public their key values and norms. Issues like college enrollment, marital choice, and national politics may expose differences within the group. Some families are tolerant of people’s choices. In others, fathers and mothers proclaim, “As long as you are living under this roof...”

In that spirit, family principles may be announced; a set of rules, decreed. Acknowledging their dependency, most children accept these terms, even as they try to escape their influence. By contrast, black sheep openly oppose the system.

Demonstrating the dangers of deviance

One of the advantages of being a younger child is getting to see how an older sibling is punished. At such times, judgments are formed about the temperaments of the two parents, the severity of punishments they provide, and the specific issues that set them off. Interested in independence themselves, younger children decide which boundaries can be stretched and how this can best be accomplished.

From the parents’ perspective, disciplinary events are public rituals which are meant to make plain what kinds of behavior will be “tolerated.” Younger children must know they will receive the same treatment as their elders and that there will be collective punishment if they hide the sins of others.

Again, black sheep never fully accept the rectitude of these parental punishments. They may even decide at an early age that there is “something wrong” with their caregivers.

Reaffirming family roles

Finally, stigmatizing a family member gives others a chance to dramatize their roles in the group. Identifying a behavior problem makes plain a mother’s moral leadership. A punishing father articulates his executive role. Other children join forces as spies and confederates of the power holders. One may even jump to the front as the “responsible” child.

So motivated, families shame and punish the problem child. They tease and gossip about them. Extremely, they shun and threaten banishment. Always, they wonder whether the black sheep can be kept at an acceptable distance or whether they will wander further and further away.