This paper examines six interconnected dysfunctional family behaviors depicted in the 1992 film Doing Time on Maple Drive. Through analysis of the family's interactions, the paper identifies lack of empathy, denial, idealization of certain family members, differential treatment based on gender, boundary violations, and inability to resolve conflict as core patterns that damage family relationships. The paper traces how these behaviors stem from the authoritarian father's refusal to acknowledge his own faults and how they manifest differently in each child's coping strategies, from substance abuse to closeting and emotional avoidance.
Doing Time on Maple Drive is the story of a supposedly perfect New England family that is not so perfect after all. The most notable dysfunctional behavior exhibited in the film is the lack of empathy of the father, Phil, a former military man, for either his children or his wife. Phil refuses to admit to his own faults and shows no compassion for his children as they struggle with adulthood. He blames them for their own problems but refuses to take responsibility for his own issues. When Phil wishes to assert his authority over his family, he does so in a bullying manner, including trying to physically humiliate them at sports.
Other members of the family also show very little empathy with one another. Tim, the oldest son, is an alcoholic and does not fully appreciate the extent to which his addiction and dropping out of college has affected the family. Matt also seems very emotionally disconnected from the family. Part of this stems from the fact that he is very young and struggling with his sexuality—adolescence is a time when children are often so absorbed by their personal inner struggles that they have difficulty appreciating the needs of others. But he is also engaged to a woman even though he clearly does not love her.
The youngest son, Matthew, of Doing Time on Maple Drive is gay. Matt refuses to admit to himself that being gay is something he cannot change. He has a fiancée he has just brought home to his parents whom he cannot love but hopes can provide a "cover" for his sexuality and even convince himself, as well as his family, that he is heterosexual. Both parents refuse to acknowledge their son's true nature. They also refuse to acknowledge any part they might have played in their oldest son's alcoholism and his unwillingness to enter treatment. Only at the end of the film, when Matt is finally able to be honest and open about his emotions, do the family's emotional barriers finally come crashing down.
One reason that Matt struggles so much with his sexuality is that his parents have idealized him as the "good" son, in contrast to the "bad" son Tim. Tim, because he is a dropout and an addict, is not viewed with compassion or as someone with an illness. Rather, he is treated as someone who is innately broken and dysfunctional. At one point, Phil even says to Tim: "Every time I look at you I thank God I have another son." Karen, the middle child, is treated differently because she has a "bad" marriage with a man who is out of work. This is seen as tainting her husband's masculinity as well as the fact that he wants to be an artist.
Karen also struggles with the legacy of her family's use of idealism because it is difficult for her to respect her husband since he is not "perfect." Matt must bear the brunt of his family's expectations to attend a good college and graduate, secure a good job, have the perfect fiancé, and raise a family in a conventional way. Because he cannot live up to these idealized expectations, he lives a lie and puts up a façade rather than telling his parents who he really is—or even admitting to himself who he really is. This reliance on idealization creates an impossible standard that drives family members toward dishonesty and self-denial.
The family clearly treats their children differently based on their perceived characteristics. This is exemplified in their treatment of Karen's husband Tom, who is devalued because he is a man yet not the main breadwinner for his family. Different expectations are clearly attached to individuals based on gender. Of course, perhaps the most obvious aspect of this is the fact that Matt is expected to be straight and have a relationship with a woman simply because of his gender. Gender roles imposed without flexibility or acknowledgment of individual identity become a source of profound family conflict.
Phil often belittles his children and treats them as if they are much younger than they actually are. All of the children in the film are adults, yet the father still tries to control them as if they were still dependent upon him. Karen is even unwilling to have a child with her husband because she feels her father would not approve because of her family's financial situation. This intrusion into adult children's autonomy is a hallmark of enmeshed family systems, where individual boundaries are not respected.
"Avoidance and aggression in family disputes"
You’re 80% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.