“My Brother Was His Little Angel;I Was the Problem Child”: Perceived Sibling Favoritism in the Narratives of Youth Who Become Homeless

Siblings and Parental Favoritism

Research on sibling and parent relations is informed by two theoretical approaches of parental differential treatment (PDT); one which operationalizes and measures parental behavior, and social comparison theory, which examines perceptions of favoritism. According to Jensen, Whiteman, Fingerman, and Birditt (2013), distinguishing between favoritism and magnitude of difference demonstrates the complexity of sibling relations and allows researchers to examine interactions between these features and their resulting outcomes, although they also note that it is possible favoritism is a more salient feature for well-being than is overall inequality between siblings.

Those within the operational PDT theoretical framework study absolute levels of difference in how parents behave in relation to one child, relative to their behavior toward another (Finzi-Dottan & Cohen, 2011). Differential treatment can be positive in nature, referring to one child receiving more positive affect, engagement, and involvement from the parent than another child, or it can be conversely that negative affect, engagement, and involvement are disproportionately directed at one child over another (Jenkins, McGowan, & Knafo-Noam, 2016). The impacts on families where PDT occurs are well-documented, particularly as they pertain to negative outcomes. For instance, a recent study of early childhood found that higher levels of differential negativity were associated with increased risk of poor health, even when controlling for confounding variables such as socioeconomic status (Browne & Jenkins, 2012). Another study of 200 young adults aged 18 to 22 years found that differential levels of parental affection were strongly related to feelings of jealousy in sibling relationships (Rauer & Volling, 2007).

While some PDT theorists examine the absolute level of parental treatment and affection given to siblings within the same family, other researchers align more with social comparison theory and consider the perception of warmth and favoritism within familial relationships. Social comparison theory has its roots in the work of Festinger (1954) and has evolved to consider how siblings undergo a process of self-differentiation to examine their similarities and differences (Vivona, 2007) and to form a sense of identity (Weaver, Coleman, & Ganong, 2003). Some recent research shows that youth who are most likely to have a sibling comparison orientation are female and close in age to, but younger than, their sibling (Jensen, Pond, & Padilla-Walker, 2015). Perceptions of parental treatment have an impact on well-being, such that siblings who receive favorable treatment form “downward comparisons” resulting in enhanced self-concepts and those who receive less favorable treatment form “upward comparisons” with negative implications for their well-being (Jensen & McHale, 2017).

A pertinent factor in families is the perception of warmth and affection received from one’s parents, relative to a sibling. Individuals who perceive less parental warmth report feelings of shame (L. A. Brody, Copeland, Sutton, Richardson, & Guyer, 1998) and a lower sense of self-worth (McHale, Updegraff, Jackson-Newsom, Tucker, & Crouter, 2000; Rauer & Volling, 2007). Sibling context may be tied to psychosocial adjustment in a way that being the subject of perceived parental disfavoritism contributes to a decline in well-being and more engagement in harmful activities (Richmond, Stocker, & Rienks, 2005). Conversely, siblings who perceive themselves to be the recipient of parental favoritism report higher academic achievement (Barrett Singer & Weinstein, 2000), better mental health (Shanahan, McHale, Crouter, & Osgood, 2008), and less involvement in high-risk behavior (Scholte, Engels, de Kemp, Harakeh, & Overbeek, 2007), such as substance use (Jensen & Whiteman, 2014). This body of literature suggests that perceiving oneself as favored can be protective, while perceptions of disfavoritism can pose harm.

To date, the literature on youth homelessness has focused on these young persons’ experiences at home and with their parents but not on their relationships with siblings or perceptions of favoritism. The social comparison literature is applied to this investigation, as it suggests that sibling relationships are reportedly best when both are treated equally and diminished when favoritism is perceived (Boll, Ferring, & Filipp, 2003). The sibling who receives favorable parental treatment may experience enhanced self-concepts and well-being, whereas those who perceive themselves to be subjected to negative comparisons may have corresponding negative implications to their sense of well-being (Jensen & McHale, 2017). Differential parenting affects development, but the nature of the impact changes depending on whether the young person is the subject of parental praise or criticism in relation to their sibling(s).

The nature of the parent–child relationship is important to consider (Pauker, Perlman, Prime, & Jenkins, 2017), and research has shown that this relationship worsens for the sibling who is disfavored (Boll et al., 2003). Likewise, the relationship between siblings is negatively affected when one is treated differently. When siblings experience perceived parenting differences, their relationships may be characterized by feelings of rivalry, anger, jealousy, mistrust, and conflict (Finzi-Dottan & Cohen, 2011; Rauer & Volling, 2007). The disfavored sibling is at risk of internalizing the belief that they did something wrong (L. A. Brody et al., 1998) and carries feelings of shame that continues even after the child has grown and left home (Gilbert & Gerlsma, 1999).

The Home Lives of Youth Who Become Homeless

As no studies could be identified that examine sibling relationships in families of youth who become homeless, it is unknown whether differential parenting practices exist. What is known about these young people’s families, however, is worth exploring to determine how they might align with, or differ from, the differential parenting literature.

There is no single parenting style that is associated with youth who experience homelessness (Kipke, Palmer, LaFrance, & O’Connor, 1997), but many of the characteristics found in homes with parental favoritism are also reported in the youth homelessness literature. Notably, this body of research has shown that these young persons’ homes often have marital difficulty (McRee, 2008), high levels of conflict (Hyde, 2005; Ringwalt, Greene, & Robertson, 1998; Wolfe, Toro, & McCaskill, 1999), parental disengagement (Ferguson, 2009; Kipke et al., 1997), and an inability to tolerate even minor transgressions (Alvi, Scott, & Stanyon, 2010). Analyses of the pathways that lead youth into homelessness often identify issues within their homes, such as stress associated with poverty (Torquati, 2002); parental substance misuse and/or criminal involvement (Tyler, 2006); interactions with the child welfare system (Ferguson, 2009); trauma (Martijn & Sharpe, 2006); disagreements over personal style, sexuality, or beliefs (Hyde, 2005); and feeling that the home environment was unsafe (Ringwalt et al., 1998).

Youth who experience homelessness often describe a sense of emotional rejection or neglect within their homes prior to leaving (Ringwalt et al., 1998). Some youth further report not receiving enough parental attention, being criticized or made the subject of deprecating comments, and feeling like a visitor in their home rather than a permanent member of the family (Ferguson, 2009). The home lives of youth who become homeless are often described as being physically and/or sexually abusive (Anderson, 1996; Smith, 2008), increasing the risk of mental illness and later victimizations in their lives (Ryan, Kilmer, Cauce, Watanabe, & Hoyt, 2000).

These young people generally experience instability in their home lives, such as relocations, temporary stays with multiple extended family members, or the breakdown of family relationships (Ferguson, 2009). In one study on youth homelessness, approximately 75% of respondents indicated they were raised in a single-parent household for most of their childhood, and that when a new parental partner was introduced, the relationships tended to be deeply strained (Hyde, 2005). Abuse of the young person may be present in these situations, as research has shown households that include nonrelated parents represent a family structure associated with higher than expected risks of assault (McRee, 2008). Young persons who become homeless often report being victimized by a nonrelated individual such as a stepparent (Ferguson, 2009) potentially because they do not fit into their parent’s new family (Hyde, 2005) or because of a sense of dislike toward the young person (Anderson, 1996). Those who become homeless also commonly describe a sense of betrayal, particularly if they report being abused by a stepfather and are not believed by their mother (Alvi et al., 2010; Anderson, 1996; Ferguson, 2009).

Hyde (2005) notes that while there is a growing body of research documenting the strained and often violent relationships between young persons who become homeless and their parents, little is known about how youth perceive these relationships. Even less is known about how their parents perceive the relationships. In one U.S.-based study, Whitbeck, Hoyt, and Ackley (1997) conducted interviews with youth and parents/caretakers and found that compared with nonrunaway families, they both reported more parenting problems, more conduct problems from the youth, less monitoring and warmth, and higher rates of rejection. Yet while the youth and parents agreed that the home lives were characterized by a range of difficulties, the parents consistently rated themselves higher than did the youth, such as on warmth and supportiveness (Whitbeck et al., 1997).

While little is known about sibling relationships within the contexts of these youths’ home lives, the theme of early adultification has arisen across multiple studies. For instance, Anderson (1996) identifies the “little adult” role, in which women in the study described having responsibility for a younger sibling when they were themselves quite young. Likewise, Alvi et al. (2010) have found an inversion of responsibility in the narratives of youth experiencing homelessness, in which the youth were expected to care for themselves or for their parents. Finally, Schmitz and Tyler (2016) describe a process of “early adultification” resulting from premature caregiving, early independence, and even parenthood that compelled them to provide for themselves, served as a precursor to the street, but could also be a source of pride.

Youth who are not supported at home, lack parental warmth, and feel rejected by their parent(s) are at an increased risk of running away (Tyler, Hagewen, & Melander, 2011). Repeated incidents of abuse, neglect, or abandonment can contribute to long-term disillusionment toward caregivers (Ferguson, 2009) and lead to a devaluation of themselves (Anderson, 1996). Young persons may choose to leave home as a form of empowerment (Hyde, 2005) or may be thrown out due to a combination of external influences and events, interpersonal conflict, and behavioral difficulties (Heinze, Hernandez Jozefowicz, Toro, & Blue, 2012; Martijn & Sharpe, 2006). The relationships that young people who become homeless have with their parents are often negatively characterized and may continue to be strained even after the youth are out of the house (Milburn et al., 2005).

Method

At the root of interviewing is an interest in the lived experiences of other people and of the meanings they attach to these experiences (Seidman, 2006). Open-ended interviews were conducted by the author with eight youth, between the ages of 17 and 23 years, experiencing homelessness in the city of Toronto. While 10 participants were recruited, this article only reports on the findings of the eight who had siblings. Seidman’s (2006) approach to interviewing was used in this study; it emerged from life history research (Langness & Frank, 1986; Thomas & Znaniecki, 1996), but differs significantly in that participants are generally asked to speak openly about a particular, broad topic. In Seidman’s (2006) method of interviewing researchers ask open-ended questions with the major task of building on and exploring the participant’s responses. Through this approach, the interviewer helps the participants reconstruct their experiences and reflect on them. This often involves recounting concrete details through the telling of personal stories. All the interviews were conducted in the spring of 2010 as part of a doctoral dissertation and on average took between 45 and 90 minutes to complete.

While two interviews were conducted with each participant, this article reports on findings from the first interview, which focused on the “home” as the primary broad site of exploration. Participants were asked in general terms to discuss their experiences growing up with reference to anything they wanted to share. One advantage of this kind of nondirective interviewing is that it encourages spontaneity and allows the researcher to learn what the participant thinks is important, or at least what she or he thinks is important to share (Langness & Frank, 1986). The participants were encouraged to lead the discussion and offer what they were comfortable sharing.

The young people were recruited based on their meeting of specific criteria: being capable of sitting for an extended period, ability to discuss their life in detail, availability for multiple interviews, and having spent the night prior to the interview in a shelter, on the street, or in a domicile not considered to be their own. Interviews were conducted on-site at a local agency, and a staff member was asked to help identify clients who met these criteria. Pseudonyms are used for anonymity of the participants, who were an eclectic group with various ethnicities, socioeconomic statuses, sexual orientations, and family backgrounds. Four of the participants were Caucasian and born in Canada; Mike, Julia, and Lucy were all born in Canada but were of Somali, Filipino, and Métis descent, respectively, and Marcus was born and lived for 15 years in Brazil. While none of the youth characterized their families as being wealthy, seven of them lived with parents who had stable jobs and would be considered middle-class. Ray described his family as being lower-middle-class, and he was raised by a single working mother. Every other participant lived in a two-parent household, and three that included a stepparent. The sexual orientations of some, but not all, participants emerged in the course of the interviews. While Ray identified as a gay man, Jordana as a pansexual woman, and Paige as a straight woman, the sexual orientations of the other participants remains unknown as they did not offer this information.

Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were reviewed for any reference to siblings, parents, and/or stepparents. The quotes were isolated and coded to identify themes that emerged across participant narratives. All participants provided written informed consent at the start of each interview and received $20 cash remuneration for their time, per interview completed. This study was reviewed and approved by the Research Ethics Board at York University.

Findings

Among the eight participants who had one or more siblings, seven shared narratives that contained aspects of perceived parental disfavoritism toward them. The eighth participant, Ray, was a 21-year-old man who was raised by a single mother. He described a close relationship growing up alongside three older sisters in a small town, stating, “It was fun because there was always laughter and there’s always jokes and they’re always laughing at something or making fun of people or just making up these inside jokes.” Ray’s experience was the exception, as all the others identified themselves as being the disfavored child in the family. The extent of the disfavoritism, or the extent to which they discussed it, varied but consistently established a clear link between poor parental relations and a perception of being disfavored relative to a sibling. Whether this perception was related to subsequent homelessness is not known, but these relationships did exist within household tensions prior to the youth leaving.

Marcus was at the time of the interview a 23-year-old man who had been raised outside Canada for the first 15 years of his life before joining his birthparents. He spoke very little about his parents in the interview due to estrangement. When asked about his current relationship with his parents and siblings he stated,

I used to really connect to my family but now I just feel disconnected. I feel like they’re strangers to me now . . . When I first came (to Canada) it was kinda like, trying to bond or whatever and as I grew older, I changed a little bit more and I guess became more distant to a point where there is no relationship now.

The relationship with his mother was particularly troubled, as he described. “I didn’t really have a strong connection with my mom. She has her favorites and that was partly one of the problems. She liked my youngest sister and my older brother favorite.” A perception of disfavoritism was evident in the relationship with his mother and is related to his current estrangement from his family.

Emerging out of the youth narratives was a dichotomy between how their parent(s) treated the “good child” (their sibling) and the “problem child” (themselves). This dichotomy was evident in the interview with Anna, a 19-year-old woman, who said about her father,

He had some anger issues . . . My dad, every time I was trying to do something that seemed to make myself happy he’d always try and find a way to make me not want to do it and try to bring me down. I used to play ringette and hockey and everything like that but he’d be, like, [stated in an angry voice] “You shouldn’t be doing this, you should be doing that.” And, it’s like, my school work is getting done, it’s not affecting hours of when I have to go to school and everything. What’s the problem?

Anna had an older brother whom she felt her father favored:

[My dad was] better with him than he was with me. My brother was like his little angel. I was the problem child. I was trying to go to school and everything but my dad would turn around and say something that made it seem as if I did something wrong. Like if I wasn’t doing my homework or I was taking a break from doing my homework or whatever, he’d snap out at me.

The “anger issues” Anna described resulted in physical and emotional abuse toward her in particular. She stated, “He used to beat me a lot and say I’m worthless, I can’t do anything right, I’m a mistake.” She, like Marcus, is now estranged from the parent who showed disfavoritism. “Now he’s wondering why I don’t call and talk to him after my parents split up. It’s like, ‘gee, I wonder why?’” Anna also added that she does not see her brother either, “I don’t really get along that much with my brother. I talk to my mom. I send her emails and stuff over Facebook.” The estrangement is limited to her father and brother, but not to her mother who she described as being, “really nice,” potentially indicating a link between parental disfavoritism and her current strained relationships.

Paige, also a 19-year-old woman at the time of the interview, similarly expressed that her father had a history of physical violence toward only her. After her biological parents divorced, her father remarried and began practicing Orthodox Judaism:

My dad was born Jewish but [he and my stepmother] got really, really religious and I didn’t want any part of it. And I didn’t like a lot of the rules, and like when my dad got mad a lot of it had to do with religion and religious rules that I’d break, not knowing. So, I wasn’t really down with that.

Paige described her father as “pretty abusive when he gets angry,” particularly in relation to breaking the religious rules such as, “wearing tank tops to school, mixing meat with berry, and not using the right sink or the right dishes with the right food.” When asked whether her father was violent toward everyone in the family Paige stated,

No, just me. He’ll break stuff but he’s never hit my stepmom or any of the other kids. We’ve gotten into lots of fights, but I’m pretty mouthy. I know I should back down but I just can’t. I get all angry but I never throw the first fist. That’s something my mom taught me, is violence isn’t good.

Paige was singled out apart from her stepsiblings, as the child who violated the family’s religious beliefs and fought with the father. Much like Anna, Paige’s relationship with her father was strained at the time of the interview, but she also described her mother lovingly by stating, “My mom’s always been really honest with me. I can always go and talk with my mom. She’s a very strong woman. I have a lot of respect for her.”

For Lucy, a 19-year-old Indigenous women, the good child–problem child dichotomy was most apparent in the way she and her sibling were treated unequally during the holidays. She stated that during her teenage years she was “just a bad kid, you know, get kicked out of school, not coming home, and stuff like that, tell my parents off.” As a result,

As I got older my brother started getting treated better and stuff like that, you know. They started to favor him. He was the better child. Christmas would come around, he’d get $150 and I’d get $50, just because he was the one living with them and they knew what he was doing, where he was at. Christmas was always good because more of my extended family that I never really talk to, they came. So I got to see family that didn’t really know what I was like; they didn’t treat me like [my parents did].

While her grandparents were unaware of her behavior and consequently, “thought I was a little peach,” it was evident to Lucy at Christmas that her parents doted on her brother.

Holidays and birthdays were a time when perceived disfavoritism/favoritism became more apparent. Like Lucy, Julia, then a 17-year-old woman, felt that her family treated her differently than her stepsiblings. She stated,

My parents had, not a lot but some, money and they’d buy us toys and stuff. But as I grew up, they started to buy things only for my brothers and not me. My stepmom would make food, make dinner, for them and not me.

Julia had a particularly difficult relationship with her parents because she was raised by her biological father and his wife. Around the age of 12 years, Julia described, her stepmother “started to turn really evil.” Being the only daughter, Julia received criticism from her stepmother and father:

[My stepmother] took care of us and stuff but she didn’t know how to take care of me, very harsh. Like, they used to tell me in the morning, I used to get ready for school, they’d always say I looked ugly. They were like, “Oh, why are you putting on [make-up]? Who are you trying to impress?” Really mean things. They used to call me a bitch and a slut. And like, how are you calling me this? I’m not even dating anyone. Like, what do you mean, you know?

Julia, like other youth discussed, was physically abused by her father. She stated,

My dad says, “Don’t use the word ‘beat’ because we’re not beating you” but I did used to get beat pretty bad. One time he choked me on Christmas and then one time he put my head to the floor and kicked me.

Julia’s father used to also physically assault her biological brother but stopped after her half-sibling was born:

He used to beat my blood brother but he doesn’t put his hands on him anymore because they’re trying to make themselves like a normal family, like a preppy family and stuff, you know, with no problems or anything. Except I’m just a problem so they burned me.

At the time of the interview, Julia was staying in a shelter and had only minimal contact with her family, despite wanting more regular contact. She described her father, brother, and stepfamily as, “a big family over there, ignoring me.” In her own understanding of the issue, Julia attributed the disfavoritism to being female and a nonbiological relative. She stated, “That’s the thing, I was very distant from everybody when I was living at home because my dad was a guy and he chilled with the boys and my stepmom loved her real, like her blood son, so I was the out person.”

The perception of parental disfavoritism carried through participants’ narratives and characterized how their relationships with their siblings were complicated by this perception of inequitable parental treatment. Jordana was an 18-year-old woman who, like other youth previously discussed, had a difficult relationship with her father. She stated,

My dad and I, we love each other. Our relationship is kind of complicated because after I was gone for a year when I came back to have a visit I just wanted to be close with him, like, really badly. I just wanted to be his daughter but, um [begins to cry]. Sorry. I just fucked up so bad when I was living with them that he just doesn’t trust me anymore. So I feel like we’ve still got a lot to work through before we can have a good relationship again. But I love him and I know he loves me. It’s just, there’s a lot of shit we have to work through.

While living with her parents, Jordana was sent to a treatment center for mental illness and addiction. Reflecting on how this experience affected her family, she stated,

For a long time [my parents] treated me like I was the example for my brother. They’re like, “Oh, don’t do what Jordana did.” And it was like, “Do you want to go to school [or] do you want to be where Jordana is right now? You should go to school because otherwise you’ll be where she is.” So every time I came to visit I felt like they were using me as an example for my brother, which I think was really bad because it made my brother look down on me.

At the time of the interview, Jordana had a strained relationship with both of her parents. While she occasionally returned home to visit, she stated, “It’s not my home anymore at all. I feel like a guest. I don’t know, it doesn’t affect any feelings for me.” After Jordana left, the family’s financial situation improved. “They’re doing a lot better financially since I’m gone because they only have one kid to support. They bought all this fancy furniture and their house always looks like a model home instead of like people live there.” Jordana’s younger brother remained living with their parents at the time of the interview. When asked what advice she would give him, Jordana pointed out that he should appreciate the advantages of being the favored child. She would tell him,

Smarten-up, stupid kid! I’ve tried to give him advice. I always tell him like, “Look at what you have.” I’ll point to the house; I’ll be like, “You have your own iPod, you have your own computer, you have your own room, your own space.” And, like, his room is pretty decent, he’s allowed to paint it how he wants and decorate it how he wants . . . He just has so much freedom and he doesn’t even appreciate it. He doesn’t understand how much my mom and my dad both love him. He’s just a brat. I love him but he’s a little brat. He’s such a spoiled rich kid.

The perception of parental favoritism was tied to increased freedom and a sense of being spoiled, according to Jordana and to Mike, a 23-year-old man who believed his father outwardly favored his youngest sister. Mike’s narrative reflected that

[My youngest sister] has a lot of freedom growing up now. Like, the way she’s raised, it’s very different from how me and my other sister was raised. We were raised in a much harder, much stricter environment. It’s like, now she just has it really easy. She gets spoiled a lot.

Mike too, like Julia and others, recounted a strained relationship with his father that got worse as he got older. Mike stated that “around kindergarten, ages up until like 5 or 6, things just started changing.” Where he and his father used to go to the park and to movies, as he grew up they “started drifting apart . . . I noticed I started being disciplined a little more, disciplined a little harder.” Yet the often-physical punishments did not extend to his younger sister:

I’d always get the most brutal punishment for the things that she would always get away with. She got away with so much. So, it was a bunch of conflicts again in the house that I was getting in trouble for and she was getting away with, even up until now. I remember when I was younger I’d always get that lecture about, “Oh, you’re the oldest, you should know better,” but even those times that my parents say that I’m the oldest, my sister eventually grew up to become those ages. She passed those ages and you’re still spitting that bullshit at me. It wasn’t specifically my mom, because my mom after a while started realizing that this kid is just a manipulator but it was my dad.

Mike recounted in detail the physical violence he experienced growing up and how it was exacerbated anytime he was perceived to be acting against his father’s favored sibling.

Another time I can remember, a bunch of our family members were together. We were sitting in a circle, all of us were together. I was laying on my grandma’s lap because that was the first time I’d ever seen her. First vacation we’d taken and I’d seen her in how many years and my sister was on one of my other aunties. Out of nowhere, [my sister] had thrown a bottle cap at me thinking that no one else would have seen that. I didn’t say nothing; I took it and I just tossed it back towards her. I got in trouble for that. My dad had called me to a room, grabbed me by the back of my neck, dragging me around asking me, what’s wrong with me and such, stuff like that and eventually he led my head towards a deep-freezer that was by a wall and I banged my face in there. I’m like 10 years old, eh? Banged my eye in there, face first, eye first, swelling for days. And again, she had gotten away with it. That’s how he dealt with things with me. There is no such thing as talking to you diplomatically, there is no such thing as that with him when it came to how he dealt with me when I was younger. It’s hands first, violence first. Always. Violence first or insults or put-downs. That’s how you deal with Mike.

At the time of the interview, Mike was regularly in contact with his mother but not his father. On reflection of what he learned from his father’s treatment he said, “Well, number one thing, if I have a child in the future or anytime soon, I’m definitely going to make sure I bond with them. I’m going to make sure I have a relationship with them.”

Discussion

Siblings play an important role in a young person’s development (Vivona, 2007) and in contextualizing their sense of belonging within a family through comparisons of how each sibling is treated (Suitor, Sechrist, Steinhour, & Pillemer, 2006). This article explored the narratives of eight young people experiencing homelessness in Toronto, to better understand how these youth described their relationships with their siblings and parents while they lived at home. While this this is not a representative sample, it is compelling that seven of the eight youth who had siblings perceived themselves to be the disfavored child in the house. Whether this perception had a part in their subsequent homelessness is unknown, but their narratives do point to parental–sibling tensions as a source of conflict.

It is well-documented that youth who experience homelessness often describe their families as experiencing high levels of interpersonal conflict (Alvi et al., 2010; Ferguson, 2009; Hyde, 2005; Martijn & Sharpe, 2006). The findings of this study do not measure the presence and magnitude of differential treatment, but rather focuses on favoritism as a more salient feature for well-being between siblings (Jensen et al., 2013). Applying social comparison theory (Festinger, 1954) to sibling relations, this study shows a trend of perceived disfavoritism in the narratives of youth who become homeless. The literature shows that young people who are most likely to engage in sibling comparison are female and close in age to, but younger than, their sibling (Jensen et al., 2015). In this study, five of the eight participants who made comparisons were female and close in age to their sibling lending some support to this supposition.

Perceptions of being disfavored by a parent can have negative implications for one’s sense of well-being (Jensen & McHale, 2017). The sense of shame that often accompanies being the disfavored sibling (Gilbert & Gerlsma, 1999) was evident in the narratives of youth in this study. Jordana recalled being used as an example for her brother, indicating that her parents would point to her life as the example of what not to do. Jordana had been treated for mental illness and addictions, the presence of which may have affected her perceptions. Due, at least in part, to this sibling shaming Jordana felt detached and like a visitor in her home; this is a finding not unfounded in the youth homelessness literature (Ferguson, 2009). Lucy demonstrated an internalization of self-shame when she stated that her extended family “didn’t really know what I was like.” The good child–problem child dichotomy was so prevalent in their homes that these youth came to believe, at least within the context of their family, that they were a problem.

Research on the homes of youth who become homeless often identifies these settings as characterized by parental violence (Anderson, 1996; Hyde, 2005; Smith, 2008). The narratives shared within this study largely supported this body of research, but the youth also further identified themselves as being the primary, or sole, target of this abuse. For instance, Anna, Paige, Julia, and Mike all were the victims of family violence that was not inflicted on their sibling(s). More specifically, with the exception of Marcus whose mother expressed favoritism, it was the fathers who were the ones implicated in the sibling favoritism and, for four youth, the resulting physical violence.

Early sibling research by L. A. Brody et al. (1998) indicates that parents who cannot tolerate ambivalence may project “badness” on one child and “goodness” on another. The presence of this kind of parenting in homes where youth become homeless is perhaps not surprising, given that Alvi et al. (2010) have found parents in these families are often intolerant of even minor faults within their children. Aging was identified as one such fault committed by Julia, for whom becoming a teenager resulted in emotional abuse, and Mike who began receiving physical punishments after he began kindergarten; neither believed their opposite-sex sibling(s) were subjected to the same reproach. A common theme of fathers not accepting minor offenses ran through the interviews, such as Anna’s father yelling at her for playing hockey and Jordana being punished for breaking religious rules of which she was unaware.

Young people may leave difficult home lives on their own (Hyde, 2005) or be thrown out for a variety of complex reasons (Heinze et al., 2012; Martijn & Sharpe, 2006). Although this article does not intend to make any definitive claims that parental disfavoritism is involved in this process, it is known that differential parenting results in family conflict (Finzi-Dottan & Cohen, 2011), the parent–child relationship worsens for the sibling who is disfavored (Boll et al., 2003), and that the negative relationships these young people have with their parents may continue to be strained even after the youth are living independently (Milburn et al., 2005). Of the seven youth in this study who felt disfavored, none had established subsequent harmonious family relationships by the time of the interview. Some youth, such as Anna and Paige, spoke very highly of their mothers and Julia and Jordana were trying to reestablish some form of contact with their respective families but generally parental relationships—particularly with fathers—remained strained.

This research points to an important precondition to homelessness that may not yet be well-understood, but it has limitations that should be noted. First, the sample size is small and not necessarily representative of the experiences of youth outside this study. However, given that sibling relations within the context of homelessness have not been a point of study previously, these findings do provide a starting point for future research. Additionally, this study was limited to the narratives of youth participants, which were dependent on memory and may have been selectively shared. Information was not collected on participants’ mental health status or use of substances, both of which might affect their recall and perception about previous events. No external validation was sought, nor were the opinions of the parents or siblings involved. Finally, no causal or contributing factors were examined, such as birth order or genetics, which have been discussed in other differential parenting studies (Jenkins et al., 2016). While these limitations must be considered, this study raises a new avenue of investigation and adds to our understanding of the home and family lives of young people who experience homelessness.

Conclusion

Most children are raised alongside a sibling (Jenkins et al., 2016) and their relationships with one another contribute significantly to the feel and culture of the household (G. H. Brody, 1998). This article reported on key findings to the question, “How do young people describe their relationships with siblings and parents prior to experiencing homelessness?” Seven of the eight youth who had siblings described one or more parent(s) who not only favored a sibling but actively made their life harder through neglect, verbal abuse, and/or physical abuse. While there is a considerable body of literature that describes these young peoples’ home lives, no studies were identified that focused on their sibling relations or perceived parental disfavoritism. This research adds to our understanding of their experiences prior to homelessness. It also identifies a possible pathway to the street that requires further investigation.

A history of parental disfavoritism/favoritism within a household may have long-term repercussions. As G. H. Brody (1998) notes, prior experiences in the family are not erased but get integrated into new relationship patterns and continue to influence the sibling relationship at subsequent points in time. This integration of past and present familial experiences may be detrimental, as past negativity may continue to influence the way youth feel about their parents and siblings after leaving home. However, it also points to the possibility that the effect of older, negative, experiences may be decreased if more positive newer ones are introduced. Further research is needed to better understand sibling and parent relationships within their homes.