Coming Out as a Nondrinker at Work

The vast majority of U.S. adults at least occasionally consume alcohol (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2011). In many professions, drinking occurs after work, at special events (Payne, Jones, & Harris, 2013; Trice & Sonnenstuhl, 1990), and increasingly on the job to encourage creative thinking and comraderie (e.g., Farnham, 2012). Drinking is associated with higher pay and career success (Peters & Stringham, 2006).

Because abstaining from alcohol is considered a deviant behavior that can be stigmatized (e.g., Herman-Kinney & Kinney, 2013; Romo, 2012), nondrinkers face a dilemma in managing this taboo trait. Being a nondrinker can be considered an invisible stigmatized identity (Ragins, 2008) or invisible social identity (Clair, Beatty, & MacLean, 2005). A stigmatized trait is not obvious, but can result in stigma when uncovered or revealed (Ragins, 2008; Romo & Donovan-Kicken, 2012). As concealing versus revealing an invisible stigmatized identity to colleagues can have positive or negative consequences (e.g., Clair et al., 2005; Ragins, Singh, & Cornwell, 2007), strategic disclosure management is required (e.g., Meisenbach, 2010).

While the term “coming out” has historically referred to disclosing one’s sexual orientation, it can also describe the process of revealing other invisible stigmatized identities (Clair et al., 2005). Indeed, disclosing one’s nondrinking status is particularly worthy of study because abstaining in a professional culture in which drinking is lauded could violate an organization’s membership ties, collective identity, and shared norms (Hardy, Lawrence, & Grant, 2005). In addition to constituting a form of employee deviance, the nondrinker label could harm the employee’s image (Robinson & Bennett, 1995).

Determining whether to disclose one’s nondrinking status is particularly wrought with tension and uncertainty for former problem drinkers, who must manage the double stigma of being a nondrinker as well as a problem drinker. Despite its classification as a disease, alcoholism is extremely stigmatized (e.g., Schomerus et al., 2011), and this stigma may prevent people from seeking treatment (e.g., Williamson, 2012). Employers resist hiring problem drinkers due to fears of recidivism (Lublin, 2006) and concerns with employee productivity. Furthermore, people perceived as responsible for their stigmas (e.g., former problem drinkers) are more likely to be mistreated than people who are deemed blameless for their stigmatized traits (Crocker, Major, & Steele, 1998). Despite these challenges, an ability to communicate about one’s problem drinking could help an individual manage his or her sobriety.

A useful framework for understanding disclosure is Communication Privacy Management Theory (CPM; Petronio, 2002), which posits that people own their personal information and create metaphorical privacy boundaries to control whether, when, and to whom to disclose. People disclose based on a series of rules, including what is culturally normative and risk-benefit criteria (Petronio, 2002). Existing literature on disclosing one’s sexual orientation and general private information to colleagues is consistent with the tenets of CPM in that people are less likely to disclose if they anticipate adverse reactions and consequences. Employees are aware that revealing can make themselves susceptible to stigmatization, discrimination, and prejudice in the workplace (Clair et al., 2005; Ragins, 2008; Smith & Brunner, 2017). Similarly, an examination of the experiences of nondrinking professionals overall (Romo, Dinsmore, Connolly, & Davis, 2015) and former problem drinkers specifically (Romo, Dinsmore, & Connolly, 2016) uncovered that participants weighed the risks and rewards of revealing their nondrinking status to colleagues. Romo et al. (2015) found that while nondrinking professionals did not readily volunteer that they never drank alcohol, those who abstained for health or moral reasons were more likely to reveal their nondrinking status than problem drinkers, who viewed disclosure (unless they held positions of power) as more professionally risky (Romo et al., 2016). Consequentially, participants concealed their alcohol abstinence when they perceived more costs (e.g., stigma) than benefits. Participants did not share they never drank alcohol because they did not want to be negatively labeled or treated (e.g., 6-month sober Marshall said he avoided having a “coming out party” to avoid stigma). The vast majority of participants refused drink offers without giving a reason or suggesting that they were a nondrinker. By skirting the issue, participants were able to accomplish their instrumental goal of not drinking without risking offending the offerer, feeling ostracized, or drawing attention to themselves and potentially hindering their careers. Other participants, particularly those who were newly sober, opted to pass as a drinker, by holding a cup, an alcohol-looking drink, even a glass of wine. When participants were directly asked if they never drank or why they were drinking a nonalcoholic drink, all participants said they would admit to not drinking; however, many did not provide their real reason for abstaining (their trouble with alcohol—instead opting to give such personal explanations as health or joking about why they were not drinking). Only in a few cases in which participants wanted to help other problem drinkers quit drinking, wanted to maintain their own sobriety, or become closer to others through relationship building were participants open about their problem drinking (Romo et al., 2016).

For the most part, nondrinkers found it less risky to remain in the closet than disclose their nondrinking trait—especially their problem-drinking status. However, not all participants perceived the closet similarly. Participants’ reasons for not drinking shaped their experience of the closet. For instance, participants who did not drink for health or religious reasons experienced the closeting of their nondrinking identity differently than problem drinkers. The threat of stigma—and desire to stay closeted—was much stronger for problem drinkers. As opposed to other discreditable traits (e.g., sexuality), this research indicates that a nondrinking identity is a more behavioral form of difference than sexual identity.

This research also showcases an important distinction between the notion of disclosure and the closet. CPM does not explicitly consider power in disclosure decisions; for example, what shapes disclosure agency and agency’s role in guiding disclosure decisions and under what conditions. It is important to critically examine disclosure, especially in the context of stigma. As stigma is discursively constructed (Meisenbach, 2010), more work needs to be done to reframe problem drinking and alcoholism not as a character flaw but as a mental illness. In this way, by lessening stigma and ideally fostering an environment in which employees feel comfortable revealing their true selves at work without fear of repercussions, problem drinkers can feel more supported in their lifelong recovery efforts and colleagues may be motivated to seek assistance for potential alcohol abuse themselves.