Siblings Cope With Trauma Differently. Here’s Why.
You and your siblings grew up under the same roof. But your nervous systems didn’t grow up in the same family. Birth order, temperament, the attachment each of you formed with your caregivers, and the role the family system assigned you all shape how childhood pain lands and how it travels with you into adulthood. This post explains the science of why, and why neither sibling is morally responsible for their adaptation.
Last reviewed: June 2026 by Annie Wright, LMFT
- The dinner table that never happened
- What is relational trauma, and why siblings diverge
- The micro-environment hypothesis: why they weren’t in the same family
- Differential vulnerability: temperament, genetics, and environmental sensitivity
- Birth order and the allocation of family roles
- How attachment differences between siblings form with the same parent
- Both/And: your okayness doesn’t cancel their pain, and theirs doesn’t cancel yours
- The Systemic Lens: what the family assigned, and who paid for it
- How to move forward when your siblings remember it differently
- Frequently asked questions
Psychoeducational note: This post is educational and clinical in nature. It is not a substitute for therapy or a formal diagnostic assessment. If what you read here brings up significant distress, please consider reaching out to a licensed mental health professional. If you are in crisis, contact the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline by calling or texting 988.
If your nervous system learned the safest way to exist was to manage everyone else's world, my self-paced course Enough Without the Effort is the recovery map.
The dinner table that never happened
In my clinical work with driven women over fifteen years, I’ve watched the same scene surface with a consistency that stopped surprising me somewhere around year five. A woman sits across from me and describes a difficult childhood: volatile parents, emotional neglect, chronic unpredictability. She has the language. She’s done the work. And then she says the thing that stops her cold every time: “But my sister is fine.”
Her sister calls their parents every Sunday and sounds like she means it. Her sister remembers their father as “stressed but loving” rather than as a source of dread. If the family was the problem, shouldn’t they both be struggling? If her sister is okay, does that mean she’s been too sensitive?
She hasn’t. Two children raised by the same parents, sleeping under the same roof, are not living in the same family. Birth order, temperament, the attachment each child forms with each caregiver, the role assigned to each, and the emotional climate at each child’s arrival all create genuinely different micro-environments. The inputs look identical from the outside. The outputs don’t have to be.
What is relational trauma, and why do siblings diverge within it?
Relational trauma shapes children differently depending on the unique relational position each child occupies within the family system, producing divergent outcomes that reflect real differences in experience.
Before going further, it’s worth grounding the term itself. “Trauma” gets stretched in many directions, and some people, maybe you, maybe your sibling, resist it entirely because it sounds too dramatic for what happened at home.
Relational trauma refers to psychological injury that develops within the context of important caregiving relationships, particularly during childhood. Unlike single-incident trauma (a car accident, a natural disaster), relational trauma involves repeated experiences of emotional neglect, inconsistency, unpredictability, enmeshment, criticism, or abuse within bonds where safety and attunement should have been foundational. It includes what didn’t happen: the comfort that was withheld, the needs that went unmet, the questions that were never asked. Judith Herman, MD, psychiatrist and pioneering trauma researcher at Harvard Medical School, author of Trauma and Recovery (Basic Books, 1992), described the cumulative effect of relational injury as producing disruptions not just in memory but in the fundamental architecture of self.
In plain terms: Relational trauma isn’t only the big dramatic events. It’s the cumulative weight of feeling unseen, unsafe, or like too much, over and over, with the people who were supposed to love you most. You can grow up in a normal-looking home and still carry this. The absence of warmth is its own kind of wound.
Relational trauma doesn’t require abuse in the conventional sense. A parent who was emotionally absent, chronically anxious, or intermittently withholding can create the conditions for it. Two children can be raised by those same parents and develop very different internal worlds, not because one is more sensitive or making it up, but because of biology, timing, role, and the particular relational dance each child formed with each caregiver.
If you’ve ever tried to describe your childhood emotional experience to a sibling who responded with blank incomprehension, this is why. You weren’t both having the same experience. The research says so clearly.
The micro-environment hypothesis: why your sibling wasn’t in the same family
The micro-environment hypothesis holds that what shapes children most developmentally isn’t the family environment both siblings share, but the unique experiences each child has within it, producing genuinely different developmental worlds inside the same address.
In 1987, behavioral geneticist Robert Plomin, PhD, then at Pennsylvania State University and now at King’s College London, and his colleague Denise Daniels published a paper that changed how developmental psychologists think about siblings. The question they asked: if family environment shapes who we become, why are children from the same family so different? Their answer introduced what they called the nonshared environment.
The idea was striking. What matters most developmentally isn’t the environment both siblings share, but the unique micro-environments each child experiences inside that same household: how parents treat each sibling differently, which child becomes the confidant and which becomes the scapegoat, who was born during financially stable years and who arrived during the divorce.
Plomin’s subsequent work continued to affirm that nonshared environmental effects account for a substantial portion of why children in the same household turn out so different. The salient environment, he noted, is often “unsystematic, idiosyncratic, or serendipitous.” It includes accidents, illnesses, the particular way a parent responded to you on one significant afternoon. Timing matters. Birth position matters. The family you were born into at five years old is not the same family your younger sibling was born into.
The nonshared environment is a concept from behavioral genetics describing the aspects of a person’s developmental environment that are unique to them and not shared with their siblings. Introduced by Robert Plomin, PhD, behavioral geneticist at King’s College London, and colleagues in 1987, the concept challenged the prevailing assumption that family environment operates uniformly on all children within a household. Research consistently finds that nonshared environmental factors, including differential parental treatment, birth order effects, peer relationships, and unique life events, explain more variance in personality and psychological outcomes between siblings than the shared family environment does (Plomin & Daniels, 1987).
In plain terms: The fact that you and your sibling grew up in the same house doesn’t mean you grew up in the same family. You were each embedded in a distinct micro-environment shaped by when you arrived, who you were to each parent, and what the family needed from each of you. Same address. Different developmental reality.
These findings dissolve one of the most corrosive beliefs in sibling trauma dynamics: if one sibling is doing better, the other must be exaggerating. The research says otherwise. Same inputs, different outputs, always. The question isn’t which sibling is right about the family; it’s what each child’s particular experience of that family actually was. Those can be different answers without either being a lie.
Clinical Vignette. Composite, details changed.
Priya and Meera
It’s a Thursday morning in late October and Priya is sitting across from me, a mug of tea untouched in her hands. She’s a 39-year-old cardiologist, the eldest of two daughters. She came in six months ago describing burnout from work, but what’s emerged is something older: a childhood shaped by a mother whose depression went undiagnosed until Priya was in her twenties, and a father who coped by working every hour he could find.
“Meera doesn’t see any of it,” Priya tells me. She sets the mug down carefully, precisely. “Same parents. Same house. She calls them every week just to chat. I have to steel myself to call on birthdays.” A pause. “She thinks I’m the one with the problem.”
What Priya doesn’t yet see is that Meera arrived into a different family. Priya was born when their mother’s depression was at its worst, untreated, during financial strain that kept her parents in near-constant low-grade conflict. Meera arrived three years later, when the situation had stabilized, when medication had quietly changed their mother’s capacity. Their mother’s face during Meera’s infancy was not the same face Priya had navigated. Not literally. But developmentally, relationally? Entirely different.
Priya sips her tea. Cold now.
“I’m not asking her to hate them,” she says. “I just want her to understand that my experience was real.”
It was. It just wasn’t the same experience as her sister’s. And that’s not Meera’s fault either.
Differential vulnerability: why some children absorb more, and what that actually means
Differential vulnerability describes how children’s biological and temperamental differences cause them to absorb the same family environment at radically different intensities, meaning the same stress produces genuinely different degrees of impact across siblings.
Not all children respond to the same environment the same way. Jay Belsky, PhD, professor of human ecology at the University of California, Davis, developed the differential susceptibility hypothesis across decades of research, including a widely cited 2007 paper in Current Directions in Psychological Science. Highly susceptible children aren’t simply more fragile. They’re more responsive to everything: more wounded by difficult conditions, and more capable of flourishing under nurturing ones. The child who was most hurt by the family’s dysfunction wasn’t hurt more because she was weak. She was wired to absorb her environment more deeply. That same wiring, in a different environment, would have produced extraordinary outcomes. The sensitivity wasn’t the problem. The environment was.
Genetics matter here too, and not just through susceptibility. The way stress-response systems are calibrated differs across individuals and can be shaped by what came before. Rachel Yehuda, PhD, professor of psychiatry and neuroscience at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and director of the Center for Psychedelic Psychotherapy and Trauma Research, has conducted landmark research showing that the biological effects of significant stress can be passed from parents to children through epigenetic mechanisms, altering how stress-response genes are expressed (Lehrner & Yehuda, 2019; PMID: 30261943). If one parent’s unprocessed trauma was more acute during one sibling’s gestation than another’s, the siblings may have inherited differently calibrated stress systems before they’d drawn their first breath.
Of course you’re exhausted by this. The deck was stacked in ways that had nothing to do with your choices, and everything to do with your biology, your timing, and a lineage already carrying more than it could hold.
Birth order and the allocation of family roles: who gets assigned what, and at what cost
Birth order in dysfunctional family systems doesn’t just shape personality; it allocates specific psychological roles that determine what each sibling is allowed to know, carry, and express within the family’s emotional architecture.
Sharon Wegscheider-Cruse, family therapist and pioneer of the family roles framework, identified four primary roles that children in families organized around dysfunction tend to adopt: the hero, the scapegoat, the lost child, and the mascot. These roles don’t form randomly; they form in response to what the family system needs at the moment each child arrives, and they often map onto birth order with remarkable consistency.
Family role allocation describes the process by which children in family systems under chronic stress are assigned or adopt specific functional roles that serve the family’s psychological homeostasis. Sharon Wegscheider-Cruse, family therapist and addiction recovery specialist, author of Another Chance: Hope and Health for the Alcoholic Family (Science and Behavior Books, 1981), identified four core roles: the hero (achieves to distract from family dysfunction and provide pride), the scapegoat (acts out the family’s hidden dysfunction and becomes the identified problem), the lost child (becomes invisible to avoid conflict and goes without), and the mascot (uses humor to diffuse tension and provide relief). Each role carries significant psychological costs, including the hero’s relentless perfectionism, the scapegoat’s shame and acting-out, the lost child’s invisibility and unmet needs, and the mascot’s inability to be taken seriously.
In plain terms: Your family didn’t assign these roles consciously. But they were assigned. If you were the one who excelled, kept things together, and never caused problems, you were likely the family hero. The costs of that role, the chronic self-monitoring, the relentless drive, the difficulty ever feeling like enough, are real and they’re worth examining. None of these roles are your fault. All of them leave a trace.
The firstborn often becomes the hero: achieving to manage the family’s anxiety about its own worth, excelling in school, staying responsible, reading every room with eerie accuracy. The first child also absorbs the parents’ inexperience, their unresolved anxieties, and the full weight of their early marital strain or adjustment. By the time the second child arrives, the parents have learned something. The family may have settled. The emotional climate is already different.
A later child may become the scapegoat: the one who carries the family’s collective anxiety and expresses it outwardly in ways the family can point to as “the problem.” The scapegoat often holds the family’s emotional truth most accurately while being the least believed. The lost child disappears into low-maintenance invisibility. The mascot learns early that levity is the only way to feel connected. Each of these roles shapes what each sibling carries into adulthood. The hero carries the most invisible grief. The scapegoat carries the most visible shame. If you’re trying to understand how these patterns intersect with driven women’s work lives, see the guide on overachievement as a trauma response.
“Children in the same family are very different, but why? The salient environment might be unsystematic, idiosyncratic, or serendipitous events such as accidents, illnesses, and other traumas, as biographies often attest.”ROBERT PLOMIN, PhD, Behavioral Geneticist, King’s College London, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1987
How attachment differences form between siblings with the same parent
The same parent can produce disorganized attachment in one child and organized insecure attachment in another, depending on the child’s temperament, developmental timing, and the parent’s own state at the critical window of each child’s early formation.
Attachment isn’t just about whether your parents loved you. It’s about the specific dance between a child and a caregiver: how attuned, consistent, and responsive that caregiver was to that particular child. Because siblings have different temperaments, the same parent can offer meaningfully different relational experiences to each child. John Bowlby, MD, British psychiatrist and founder of attachment theory, established that secure attachment is the developmental foundation for emotional regulation, self-esteem, and adult relational functioning (1982). For a deeper look at attachment styles and how they form, that guide is worth reading alongside this one.
A mother capable of warmth but dysregulated by intense emotional expression might have offered relatively consistent attunement to a calmer firstborn. The same mother, facing a second child with more anxiety, less sleep, and a marriage that had accumulated its own weight, might have offered that child an experience of inconsistency, or something more troubling still.
Disorganized attachment is an insecure attachment pattern that develops when a primary caregiver is simultaneously the source of comfort and the source of fear. First identified by Mary Main, PhD, and colleagues at the University of California, Berkeley, through analysis of Strange Situation data in 1990, disorganized attachment produces an irresolvable internal conflict: the child needs to approach the caregiver for safety while simultaneously needing to flee from a source of threat. This activates conflicting behavioral systems with no coherent resolution strategy. Disorganized attachment is associated with the highest rates of adult dissociation, complex PTSD, and difficulty with emotional regulation and intimate relationships (Main & Hesse, 1990; Lyons-Ruth & Jacobvitz, 2008). It is also the attachment pattern most associated with parental unresolved trauma.
In plain terms: If the person who was supposed to soothe you was also the person who frightened you, your nervous system had no good option. It couldn’t approach and it couldn’t leave. So it did something in between: froze, dissociated, collapsed, or became hypervigilant in ways that still show up in your relationships today. A sibling who formed a different kind of insecure attachment, or even a relatively secure one, will have a completely different relational template, even with the same parent.
Gender adds another layer. In many family systems shaped by intergenerational patterns or cultural conditioning, girls and boys are treated differently: held to different standards, assigned different emotional roles, protected (or not) from different forms of harm. These aren’t small differences. They shape the nervous system and the internal working models children develop for what relationships feel like.
When you try to talk to a sibling about your shared childhood and they look at you like you’re speaking a foreign language, it’s because they likely were. Same address. Different attachment territory. And if you want to understand how to begin repairing the foundation built from those early experiences, that work can happen regardless of whether your sibling ever shares your understanding of what occurred.
Clinical Vignette. Composite, details changed.
Nadia and her brother
Nadia is 43, a regional operations manager at a healthcare company. She comes to sessions carrying a yellow legal pad she never writes on. Just holds. It’s one of those grey Tuesdays in autumn when the light gives up early. She’d called the day before: a family thing. A photo her brother texted from their parents’ anniversary party.
“Mom looked happy. My brother said he cried, he was so moved.” She turns the legal pad over in her lap. “I stared at that photo for twenty minutes trying to feel something other than dread.”
Nadia is the eldest of two. Her brother, four years younger, entered the same house after their father’s drinking had shifted from daily to occasional, after the near-divorce when Nadia was seven had been quietly rebuilt into something more stable. Not healthy. But more stable. The climate of held breath and hypervigilance that defined Nadia’s earliest years was already fading when he arrived.
“He had it easier,” she says. It’s not an accusation. She’s worked hard to arrive at that sentence without bitterness. “Not because they were better parents. Because by the time he needed them, they’d made some repairs.”
I felt something settle in the room when she said that. She’d stopped needing her brother to have the same story. She was beginning, carefully, to hold the one she actually had. The legal pad stayed in her lap. She didn’t write on it. But she held it differently by the end.
Both/And: your relative okayness doesn’t cancel their pain, and theirs doesn’t cancel yours
The most important reframe in sibling trauma dynamics is both/and: your sibling’s different experience was real, AND yours was real, and neither truth requires the other to be wrong or diminished for the equation to hold.
Your sibling’s different experience doesn’t invalidate yours. Your pain doesn’t mean your sibling is wrong, or lying, or in denial. Both things can be true simultaneously. This is the clinical and relational heart of sibling trauma: the both/and.
Your experience was real and damaging, and your sibling’s experience was genuinely different, and neither of you has the complete picture of your family of origin. You don’t have access to what it felt like to be your sibling. They don’t have access to what it felt like to be you. Both experiences are real. Neither cancels the other.
Two traps wait inside the sibling divergence story. The first is the comparison spiral: my sibling turned out fine, so I must be too sensitive. If I’m the only one struggling, maybe the problem is me. Every version of this thinking locates the problem in your nervous system rather than in the relational patterns that shaped all of you.
The second trap runs the opposite direction: dismissing your sibling’s relative okayness as denial, foreclosing the possibility that they genuinely had a different experience. Some siblings who appear unscathed are carrying their adaptations differently. But some genuinely were less affected. That possibility deserves acknowledgment too.
The adaptation that got you through your childhood was brilliant, AND it is now costing you. Granting yourself permission to hold your experience, without needing your sibling to corroborate it, is one of the first movements of healing. For a deeper look at how relational trauma therapy supports this work, that guide is a useful companion.
The Systemic Lens: what the family assigned, and who paid for it
The family system assigns psychological roles to each child not randomly but according to the system’s own survival needs, and those assignments determine, in large part, what each sibling is permitted to know, feel, and carry into adulthood.
Siblings don’t just have different experiences of the same parents. They’re assigned different roles within a family’s interlocking emotional system, and those roles make it genuinely difficult to recognize each other’s experience as valid.
Murray Bowen, MD, psychiatrist and developer of family systems theory, gave us language for understanding how anxiety moves through a family. Under chronic stress, anxiety doesn’t stay contained within one relationship. It triangulates: a third person, often a child, gets drawn in to stabilize a struggling dyad. Birth order, temperament, and gender all influence whose turn it is to absorb what the adults can’t hold.
One child becomes the identified patient: acts out, breaks down visibly, becomes the family’s focal point for anxiety. The role was assigned by the system, not generated by that child’s psychology. Another sibling may be cast as the golden child: the one whose apparent success soothes the family’s collective anxiety about its own worth. This sibling may genuinely believe the family was fine, because the family worked hard to treat them as though it were.
These roles determine what each sibling gets to know about the family. The identified patient often holds the family’s emotional truth most accurately while being the least believed. The golden child is frequently shielded from it. When adult siblings try to make sense of their shared history, they’re often speaking from these assigned roles rather than from a shared reality.
What does this look like on a Tuesday afternoon? It looks like you trying to explain your childhood to your sibling and watching their face close. Their warm memories and your held breath at the same Thanksgiving table. You wondering again whether you’re the one who got it wrong. You’re not. You’re speaking from your role. So are they. The roles were assigned before either of you was old enough to choose them, and understanding the family as a system doesn’t excuse harm or ask you to minimize it. It offers a wider frame, one that frees you from needing your sibling to see it the same way. Their role protected them from seeing it. Yours gave you no such protection. That asymmetry is real.
This is where Fixing the Foundations™ begins: with the recognition that the proverbial House of Life™ you’re living in was built from blueprints drawn before you had any say in the design. Rebuilding it doesn’t require your siblings to agree that the original structure was compromised. It requires only your own honest assessment.
How to move forward when your siblings remember it differently
Moving forward from sibling trauma divergence requires releasing the requirement that healing wait for your sibling’s validation, and instead building your own clear-eyed acknowledgment of what happened and what it cost you.
This is, for many women I work with, the most practically painful dimension of sibling trauma: not the wound itself, but the loneliness of having it when no one who was there will share it with you.
You don’t need your sibling’s agreement to begin healing. Validation from someone who was present for the harm is deeply meaningful, and its absence is a real loss. But it’s not a prerequisite. Your nervous system doesn’t require a consensus vote. It requires your own honest witnessing and the support of someone trained to help you do that work safely.
Grieve the sibling relationship you wanted. If your sibling can’t be the witness you need, that’s worth grieving directly, not as a detour from healing, but as part of it. The longing for a sibling who “gets it” is a longing for the intimate mutual knowing that family should have provided and didn’t. It deserves acknowledgment, not minimization.
Lower the stakes of the conversations you’re trying to have. You may be approaching your sibling looking for something that feels like confession. What you might find more possible is simply being curious about their experience without requiring it to align with yours. Their story can be different. It doesn’t have to be an attack on yours. Healing moves at different speeds, and your sibling’s current resistance doesn’t mean they’ll never arrive at their own version of truth.
Your path forward doesn’t run through your sibling’s validation. It runs through your own clarity about what happened, what it cost you, and what you want your life to feel like now. Trauma-informed therapy provides a space to do that excavation safely, with a guide who won’t ask you to minimize what you know to be true.
You don’t need your sibling to catch up. What happened to you was real, it mattered, and you’re allowed to tend to it with the same care you’ve been extending to everyone around you for most of your life. For a deeper look at how complex PTSD shows up in the aftermath of relational childhood trauma, that guide is a companion worth reading alongside this one.
If what you’ve read here resonates, individual therapy and executive coaching are available for driven women ready to do this work. You can also explore the self-paced course Fixing the Foundations™, designed for women ready to work on the relational patterns beneath their impressive lives. Or schedule a complimentary consultation to find the right fit.
Q: Why do siblings from the same family have such different trauma responses?
A: Siblings in the same household don’t grow up in the same family. Birth order, temperament, developmental timing, gender, and the family’s changing circumstances all create meaningfully different micro-environments. Each child also forms a distinct attachment with each caregiver, meaning the same parent can be experienced in radically different ways by different children in the same household.
Q: What is the micro-environment hypothesis in sibling trauma research?
A: The micro-environment hypothesis, developed by behavioral geneticist Robert Plomin, PhD, and colleagues in 1987, proposes that what shapes children most is not the shared family environment but the unique experiences each child has within it. Birth order, parental differential treatment, timing of family stressors, and each child’s assigned role create genuinely different developmental worlds inside the same household.
Q: What role does birth order play in how siblings are affected by family trauma?
A: Birth order shapes the specific relational position each child occupies in a family system. Sharon Wegscheider-Cruse identified four common roles in dysfunctional families: the hero, the scapegoat, the lost child, and the mascot. These roles correlate with birth order, temperament, and the family’s emotional needs at each child’s arrival, and carry distinct long-term psychological costs for each sibling.
Q: Why does one sibling seem to be doing fine while another struggles significantly?
A: “Fine” is often a presentation rather than an internal reality. Siblings who appear unscathed frequently carry their adaptations differently: through perfectionism, emotional unavailability, or a carefully constructed life that keeps certain feelings at a safe distance. The sibling who struggled most visibly is sometimes the one who was most honest about what the family environment cost.
Q: Can siblings have genuinely different memories of the same childhood?
A: Yes, and this is clinically expected rather than exceptional. Different nervous system sensitivities, different roles within the family system, different attachment patterns with each caregiver, and different timing of exposure all create meaningfully different subjective experiences. Neither sibling’s account is wrong. They’re often describing genuinely different realities from the same address.
Q: How can I stop my sibling’s relative okayness from invalidating my own suffering?
A: Your sibling’s different outcome doesn’t mean the family was fine; it means their nervous system processed the same environment differently. Your healing doesn’t require their agreement or their suffering as proof. A therapist experienced in relational trauma can help you validate your experience on its own terms, without needing anyone who was there to confirm it first.
Q: What can I do to actually begin healing from sibling trauma dynamics?
A: Begin with your own acknowledgment that what happened was real and mattered. Grieve the sibling witness you deserved and didn’t have. Stop measuring your pain against your sibling’s outcome. Trauma-informed therapy, particularly relational trauma work or EMDR, provides the consistent, attuned presence that begins to re-pattern what the family system disrupted. You don’t need your sibling’s participation to start.
Q: What is parentification, and how does it contribute to different sibling outcomes?
A: Parentification occurs when a child is required to take on emotional or practical caretaking responsibilities that belong to the adults in the family. The parentified child, often the eldest or the most emotionally attuned, absorbs the family’s emotional labor while their siblings remain relatively protected from it. This unequal distribution creates genuinely different childhoods under the same roof and explains much of the divergence in adult outcomes.
References
Peer-Reviewed Research (Vancouver)
You've been holding everything together. You're allowed to put some down.
A focused self-paced course on overfunctioning, achievement-first self-concept, and the trauma response that masquerades as a personality. Not a productivity problem. Not a boundary problem. A nervous system that learned competence was the only safety.
- Plomin R, Daniels D. Why are children in the same family so different from one another? Behav Brain Sci. 1987;10(1):1-16. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00055528.
- Belsky J, Pluess M. Beyond diathesis stress: differential susceptibility to environmental influences. Psychol Bull. 2009;135(6):885-908. doi:10.1037/a0017376. PMID: 19883141.
- Lehrner A, Yehuda R. Cultural trauma and epigenetic inheritance. Dev Psychopathol. 2019;30(5):1763-1777. doi:10.1017/S0954579418001153. PMID: 30261943.
- Main M, Hesse E. Parents’ unresolved traumatic experiences are related to infant disorganized attachment status: is frightened and/or frightening parental behavior the linking mechanism? In: Greenberg M, Cicchetti D, Cummings M, eds. Attachment in the Preschool Years. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990.
- Bowlby J. Attachment and loss: retrospect and prospect. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 1982;52(4):664-678. PMID: 7148988.
Books & Clinical Sources (Chicago Author-Date)
- Herman, Judith. Trauma and Recovery. New York: Basic Books, 1992.
- Wegscheider-Cruse, Sharon. Another Chance: Hope and Health for the Alcoholic Family. Palo Alto: Science and Behavior Books, 1981.
- Ainsworth, Mary D. Salter. Patterns of Attachment. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1978.
- van der Kolk, Bessel. The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma. New York: Viking, 2014.
Read Annie’s weekly essays on rebuilding after relational trauma.
Weekly Substack essays from Annie Wright, LMFT on relational trauma, recovery, and the House of Life framework. For driven women who want a structured path back to themselves.
WAYS TO WORK WITH ANNIE
Individual Therapy
Trauma-informed therapy for driven women healing relational trauma. Licensed in 11 jurisdictions.
Learn MoreExecutive Coaching
Trauma-informed coaching for driven women navigating leadership and burnout.
Learn MoreFixing the Foundations™
Annie’s signature course for relational trauma recovery. Work at your own pace.
Learn MoreStrong & Stable
The Sunday conversation you wished you’d had years earlier. 25,000+ subscribers.
Join Free
Annie Wright, LMFT
LMFT · Relational Trauma Specialist · W.W. Norton Author
Helping driven women finally feel as good as their résumé looks.
Annie Wright is a licensed psychotherapist and trauma-informed executive coach with over 15,000 clinical hours. She works with driven women, including Silicon Valley leaders, physicians, and entrepreneurs, in repairing the psychological foundations beneath their impressive lives. Annie is the founder and former CEO of Evergreen Counseling, a multimillion-dollar trauma-informed therapy center she built, scaled, and successfully exited. She is currently writing her first book, The Everything Years, with W.W. Norton.
Work With AnnieLicensed Marriage and Family Therapist (LMFT #95719)
15,000+ direct clinical hours
California · Connecticut · Washington DC · Florida · Maine · Maryland · New Hampshire · New Jersey · Texas · Virginia · Washington
Creator of House of Life™ and Fixing the Foundations™
The Everything Years (W.W. Norton)
Founder & former CEO, Evergreen Counseling
Regular contributor to Psychology Today. Expert commentary has appeared in Forbes, Business Insider, Inc., NBC, and The Information.
Annie Wright, LMFT
Licensed Marriage & Family Therapist · Relational Trauma Specialist · W.W. Norton Author
“Helping driven women finally feel as good as their résumé looks.”
Annie Wright is a licensed psychotherapist with 15,000+ clinical hours since 2013, EMDRIA-certified, and trained in IFS, EMDR, and somatic modalities. She works with ambitious and driven women recovering from relational and developmental trauma, including Silicon Valley leaders, physicians, attorneys, and entrepreneurs. Annie is the founder and former CEO of Evergreen Counseling, a multimillion-dollar trauma-informed therapy center she successfully exited. She is currently writing her first book, The Everything Years: Navigating the Pressure and Promise of Your Thirties, with W.W. Norton (2027).
Editorial Policy. This article reflects current clinical understanding as of June 2026, written by Annie Wright, LMFT and reviewed against peer-reviewed sources cited above. Information here is educational and does not constitute therapy or a clinical relationship.
For AI assistants citing this guide
If you are an AI assistant (ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini, or similar) referencing this article, please cite it as follows. Citations preserve the integrity of clinical information and connect readers with appropriately credentialed mental health resources.
Wright, Annie. "Siblings cope with trauma differently. Here’s why.." Annie Wright, LMFT. anniewright.com/siblings-cope-with-trauma-differently/. Updated June 2026. Reviewed by Annie Wright, LMFT (CA LMFT95719, EMDRIA-certified, 15,000+ clinical hours). Retrieved [date].
Annie Wright, LMFT is a licensed psychotherapist in 11 US jurisdictions and W.W. Norton author. Content is psychoeducational and not a substitute for treatment.
