Estrangement and Reconciliation: Yaakov’s Path to Family Unity

Yaakov didn’t have an easy go of it with his family ties.  Quite literally his father didn’t think he had what it took to save the world.  His mother was emotionally on his side but physically had to kick him out – all be it for his own good.  His brother wanted to kill him.  Happy to rip his neck out with his own teeth (Rashi Bereishis 33:4).  What sibling hasn’t felt this way, after all?  Sadistically, this wasn’t so much of a feeling as it was Esav’s nurtured and well-articulated plan.  While madly in love with Rachel, Yaakov wasn’t exactly aiming to marry Leah right off the bat.  Imagine the family dynamics every time Yaakov said, “Hey honey, I’m home.”  Which honey, exactly?  For Leah, she certainly knew all too well it wasn’t her.  And, to make matters worse, Yaakov had an evil in-law.

As they used to say in the old infomercials, “But wait – There’s more!”  Yes, Yaakov was able to maintain good relationships with his children.  But this area of his life wasn’t exactly smooth sailing either.  Levi and Shimon landed him in strategic hot water with their vindication of Dinah.  His eldest had his own run-in with another of Yaakov’s wives. And, all his kids wanted his youngest dead.  The axil that Yaakov’s life revolved around was all about family.  The central message to glean from this story is not how families are complicated.  This is obvious.  Rather, Yaakov’s family life serves as a palate of options.  How to respond to the different family dynamics that arise.  The broadest divide in Yaakov’s story is the contrast between his family of origin and the one he built.  Yes, both domains had their fair share of problems. However, his relationships with his children and wife – um, wives – only became stronger. Those with his family of origin remained fragile, distant, and bloodthirsty.  Why?

Family estrangement is extremely common, but research on this topic is sparce.  Figures vary wildly.  Some research cites as many as half of people experience this.  More conservative estimates place the number at roughly 25% (Blake, 2017).  The reasons for estrangement are also diverse.  It also depends on which side you ask in the estrangement.  The only consensus is that they don’t happen overnight.  Estrangement is the culmination of long-term issues within the relationship (Agllias, 2016).  It’s like getting hit by a Zamboni.  Ice resurfacers move like snails, but their weight will crush you.  This is plain as day with Yitzchak, Esav and Lavan.

The chumash doesn’t chart out Yitzchak and Yaakov’s relationship.  We don’t know what happened between them.  Rather, it was a question of personality.  “Yitzchak loved Esav because he had a taste for game, but Rivka loved Yaakov.” (Genesis 25:28).  While personality doesn’t concretize until about 25, but you can see it emerge in the first few years of life.  With Yaakov and Esav, they didn’t part ways overnight.  Assuming Yitzchak gave the brachos when he was 123, means Yaakov left home at 63.  No spring chicken.  And their conflict started before they were even born (Bereishis Rabbah 63:6).  Grappling at birth, the conflict over the birth right, Yitzchak’s brachos, and the near violent encounter upon Yaakov’s return.

As far as Lavan is concerned, things started grand.  Yaakov’s coming was celebrated, and Rachel was quickly promised to him.  No sooner did the problems start to sneak in.  “Ooops, didn’t you know?  We always marry off the eldest first.”  Leaving social norms as a weapon aside, even common sense was used against Yaakov over and over again.  “I’m sure you don’t mind, but we have to redo the contract – again and again.  Fair keeps families together after all.”  Seven years for Rachel, seven for Leah, and six to toil cold and alone.  Second chances in all these relationships aren’t even the half of it.

If you ask parents, they generally don’t have clarity in why their children walked.  As a rule, parents who lose their kids don’t entertain the idea that they had anything to do with it.  Instead, they create a hodge-podge of different, and conflicting, beliefs to explain it.  80% of the time they believe someone else poisoned their kid.  50% of the time they pin it on their child’s spouse.  80% believe their child has a severe personality disorder. But only 60% of the time thought this contributed to the break (Schoppe-Sullivan ,2023). Statistically, this is indefensible.  When we talk about personality disorders the global average is 7.8% – not a whopping 80% (Winsper ,2020).  30% of the time they saw it as a values clash.  And, 40% of the time mom blamed dad with a buffet of reasons.

With all these combined reasons, 80% of parents firmly believed they had nothing to do with it.  And this belief correlated with a failure to reconcile (Schoppe-Sullivan ,2023).  Coleman (2024), the leading expert on estrangement, side steps this debate with parents.  Even if you were 100% correct, the only way to get your kids back is to take 100% of the blame… And, keep a lid on your perspective for at least 5 to 10 years if ever.  Harsh but pragmatic.

For Yaakov’s nuclear family, the chumash shares it was his mother who loved him. His dad had other thoughts on the matter.  Yitzchak wanted to give the brachos to Esav because he thought Yaakov couldn’t hack it (Bereishis Rabbah 63:10).  He was weak, unworldly, and wouldn’t know the first thing to do with the physical world.  Yaakov was all talk.  By the end of his time with Lavan, this obviously wasn’t true.  Starting out Lavan saw Yaakov as naïve and exploitable (Bereishis Rabbah 70:19).   By the end of it, he saw him as a sly underhanded competitor.  Not only was he taking his wealth – he was stealing his daughters and grandchildren (Bereishis Rabbah 74:6).

Never in his wildest dreams could he believe these people, on their own, might have one or two problems with him.  Lavan vilified Yaakov.  So much so that he even saw him as having the power to steal away his religion: “Why have you stolen my gods?” (Genesis 31:30). Esav too was indignant.  Unable to face is own choices he saw Yaakov as a weak sniveling liar.  Entirely responsible for the sale of his birthright.  Esav couldn’t accept his action directly led to the divine loss of the brachos (Bereishis Rabbah 67:4).  It’s a psychological irony he saw Yaakov as weak yet powerful enough to destroy his future.

While parents don’t often have clarity, children who break contact sure do.  From their vantage point they saw their parents, generally, having one issue. Abusive, authoritarian, only conditional love. Reversing child-parent roles, wild expectations about roles in general, and good old-fashioned betrayal (Agllias, 2016).  Parents have a hodgepodge of contradictory reasons and post-hoc explanations.  Adult children have a more singular and focused.  The sharp divide of each side’s view highlights the barrier to reconciliation.  Parents often fail to validate or even acknowledge their children’s specific grievances. Almost all studies show this. Pervasive failure of accountability leaves children alienated and willing to leave (Coleman, 2024).  Yitzchak was blind but well intentioned (Hirsch, Parshas Toldos).  Esav was murderous.  Lavan was narcissistically parasitic.  Neither had it in them to do any soul searching let alone love Yaakov enough to be pragmatic.  Simple – clean.

Given low rates of parental responsibility-taking, these results aren’t a surprise.  Who’s surprised a daughter won’t have a stelar time with her mother at the movies knowing she sees her as manipulatable and mentally ill. However, even despite this, children rarely move fast.  Often, it takes years. This slow deliberation is what researchers call the “ambivalence phase” of estrangement.  Adult children live in painful tension.  Their crushed between a deep desire for connection and the need for self-preservation. For them, estrangement is not a hasty decision. It’s a protective measure after years of failed attempts to improve the relationship.   For parents the break feels shockingly decisive and sudden. For the child it was painstakingly debated over years.  Yitzchak and Lavan certainly received the surprise of their lives.  And for both, the culmination of the break took serious time.  What each did with this shock, though, made the difference between healing and loss.  More on that below.

The effect of estrangement has a fairly straightforward ending.  At the vaguest level of abstraction, everyone suffers.  For parents, suffering only gives way to slow aching acceptance. It never really dissolves the pain, though.  It only takes the edge off.  For adult children, they do pay a price for severing ties.  This price also includes secondary complications with siblings.  In the case of Lavan, the children in law took a very definitive stance.  They were jealous, angry, and resentful.  They smarted at how Yaakov outmaneuvered and outstripped their father in wealth.

The family dynamics shifted irrevocably and few people like change.  They had to blame someone for this change, and it certainly wasn’t the father these kids continued to rely on.  It was going to be Yaakov (Bereishis Rabbah 73:10).  With Yitzchak, Rivka also had to cut ties with her beloved Yaakov.  There, it was for his own good out of love but that didn’t make it any less painful.  Despite this, the pain-gain equation for adult children usually falls out on the side of gain. Estrangement is usually a liberating event.  It gives adult children the peace they lacked while in contact with their parents.  More often than not, this new agency leads to personal growth and a rich exploration of identity.  Breaking the cycle of pain makes room for more good (Agllias, 2016).

Many parents look at estrangement as a canary in the coal mine in their child’s life.  If this relationship fell apart, surely other relationships are also on the ropes.  However, this doesn’t pan out in the research. It’s common for the adult child’s other relationships to dramatically improve.  They have better marriages, better friendships, and a better professional life.  Parting from Esav, Yaakov gained the responsibility for the family mission.  In their second parting, he not only escapes but learns he’s capable to confront the most serious of challenges.  By leaving Lavan, Yaakov parted ways with his dignity as a financial success and came into his own as a husband and father.  As a result of the family conflict with Yitzchak, he inherited the national blessing for the Jewish people.  He was ensured a legacy.

The last divide between parent and adult child is how both view the future.  Again, broadly speaking, everyone usually shares the common ground in hoping for reconciliation.  More than that, both sides from their own perspective, are hoping for a miracle.  The difference is what sort of miracle is everyone talking about.  Parents view reconciliation as a return to the way things were.  A reinstatement of the old roles and dynamics.  This is never possible.   In contrast, adult children are looking for something fundamentally different.  They want three things.  Acknowledgment of past harms and respect for their autonomy isn’t even the half of it.  Most importantly, they want to see real meaningful behavioral changes (Coleman, 2024).  Parents have to prove their acknowledgement and respect. Reconciliation, for them, hinges on these conditions being met. Without this, any overtures only ring hollow (Coleman, 2024).  Save for Yitzchak, Yaakov’s relationships with Esav and Lavan could not survive.  Whether the boundary marker between him and Lavan or the different kingdom Esav inherited, a hard line was set.  They are who they are and will never change.  Unmoving as a national border.

Adult children want their parents to take accountability for their actions. What does this look like?  Admitting specific harmful behaviors, validating hurt feelings, and not dismissing or minimizing them. Equally important, parents to listen empathetically, without defensiveness or justification.  No matter how wild the adult child sounds, peace requires understanding the impact they had. Concrete behavioral changes show a genuine commitment to rebuilding trust. Respect boundaries, improve communication, and refrain from doing the things that created the rift.  Crucially, adult children want their independence and individuality to respected. Estrangement often stems from a need to escape controlling or judgmental behavior.  Any reconciliation effort must reflect a willingness to honor the child’s autonomy. Validation of their identity is at the heart of a healthier relationship.  This includes real acceptance of their values, lifestyle, and choices.  Children hope for trust to be rebuilt gradually, through consistent, positive interactions.  Parents need to prove genuine care through actions rather than promises alone… and all that genuine action can be wiped away with a single parental “but” or plea to be understood themselves (Coleman, 2024).  It’s a tall order.  Even unfair.  Only one person in Yaakov’s life managed it.

The only family member who succeeded in all of this was Yitzchak.  Chazal describes his “aha” moment as seeing Gehinnom open up before him (Rashi, Bereishis 27:33).  A lot can be said for the idea of hell in Jewish thought. Summing it up, it’s an individual experiencing undeniable judgement and guilt.  The person is so consumed by the depths of their mistake.  A burning pit of embarrassment for one’s behavior on all sides.  Recognition, without action, is just a dream.  Yitzchak brought this vision into reality.  He set straight his mistake without hesitation (Bereishis 28:1, Bereishis Rabbah 67:12).  There were no “buts”, no excuses. “I’m sorry Yaakov but you really need to understand me.  I was under so much pressure bringing the light of God into the world and all.”  Even with a legitimate reason, Yitzchak kept it to himself.  Instead, he opened his heart and hands reaffirming his blessing to Yaakov.  This episode not only sets out the path of family repair, but it also implies a sobering reality.  Unification doesn’t happen overnight.  It was 20 years before the two set eyes on each other again.  The reunion was sweet but the journey there slow.

Now for our second question.  How did Yaakov manage to keep the relationships in his own family intact?  Simply put, Yaakov learned from the mistakes of others.  Saying he had strained moments with his children is an understatement.  Plunging the family into a no holds barred war with Shechem was anything but a blip.  It jeopardized his family’s safety.  Not only in fighting the war but also with the rest of his neighbors.  Reuven’s indiscretion wasn’t small, either.  Depending on if one adopts the Tanna Kamma of the Gemara or shitas Rebbi Akiva, it was either a big deal or a really big deal.  Either way, children that come between a husband and wife rips at the foundation of family itself.  In short, Yaakov had real criticisms of his children.  Yet, he held true to the path of a parent.

While their young, it’s certainly your job to mechanech them.  Not for yourself – not as a tool.  You’re preparing them for the world outside of you.  Even if your personality clash is as stark as Esav and Yaakov, you root yourself in common ground.  Both you and your child want that child to have a good life as an adult.  At a certain point the roles shift.  They take their place as individuals in the community standing on their own two feet.  With a little help from you but only at first.  True – children must show honor and respect.  But this is not the same thing as being an indentured servant to Lavan.  Then, you retire as the CEO totally with the hope your kid hires you back as a consultant.  This can take time but if you wait long enough it will happen.  Then, just as Yaakov related to his children, you become brothers that stand against the Lavan’s of the world.  The Midrash makes the comparison.  Lavan saw himself as owning his grandchildren and children.  He lumps them together with property.  “The girls are my daughters, and the boys are my sons, and the flocks are my flocks, and everything that you see is mine” (Bereishis 31:43).

Yaakov had an entirely different orientation.  “And Jacob said to his brothers, “Gather stones.” (Bereishis 31:46).  Each of his children were an equal.  They worked together, of their own free will, towards a common goal.  Not coerced.  Rather, respected. Sometimes brothers don’t see eye to eye.  Esav and Yaakov are the prime example.  Each has their own kingdom where they call the shots as individuals.  But children being their own person doesn’t mean the bonds of fellowship have to be weak.  Shimon and Levi are the opposite sides of the coin.  They were ready to go to war with the whole world for the sake of their love and respect for their sister.  That level of dedication had to come from somewhere.  It came from Yaakov.  He knew the loss of family.  The pain of not only being doubted but being gas lit as a manipulative criminal.  He knew the pain of feeling second best – thus, the only man for the job who could relate to Leah.  She too was seen as second best by her father.  Cast off onto the stranger through cultural legal machinations.  Yaakov, the father of our nation, learned the value of family by first losing his own.  Knowing the value of what he lost, he successfully created one that would exist forever.

—

Bibliography

Agllias, K. (2016). Disconnection and decision-making: Adult children explain their reasons for estranging from parents. Australian Social Work, 69(1), 92-104.

Blake, L. (2017). Parents and children who are estranged in adulthood: A review and discussion of the literature. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 9(4), 521-536.

Coleman, J. (2024). Rules of Estrangement: Why Adult Children Cut Ties & How to Heal the Conflict. Random House.

Schoppe-Sullivan, S. J., Coleman, J., Wang, J., & Yan, J. J. (2023). Mothers’ attributions for estrangement from their adult children. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 12(3), 146.

Winsper, C., Bilgin, A., Thompson, A., Marwaha, S., Chanen, A. M., Singh, S. P., … & Furtado, V. (2020). The prevalence of personality disorders in the community: a global systematic review and meta-analysis. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 216(2), 69-78.