Using genograms as a research method to discuss intergenerational processes in families of Holocaust survivors: an interpretative phenomenological analysis

ABSTRACT

Background: There is a lack of research into idiographic experiences of intergenerational trauma. Genograms are used in psychological interventions, but research into genograms as a research method is needed.

Objective: We sought to understand how descendants of Holocaust survivors experience the use of genograms as a visual research method to discuss intergenerational processes.

Method: Seven participants described their experiences of a genogram interview in a semi-structured interview. Interpretative phenomenological analysis was used to analyse data from the semi-structured interview.

Results: Five group experiential themes were identified: ‘The legacy of prior experiences’ – the experiences that participants brought to the genogram interview, and how they were able to engage with the process; ‘Scaffolding sensitive and nuanced discussions’ – the material and relational aspects of the genogram fostered safety while situating participants at the heart of the discussion; ‘The importance of telling our stories’ – the telling of rich and unedited stories steeped in beauty and strength; ‘The impact of sharing stories’ – participants felt vulnerable while revealing threads that ran through the generations, and also empowered by connecting with their heritage; and ‘Reverberations of storytelling’ – the psychological impact of the genogram in a broader journey of discovery.

Conclusions: Genograms elicit rich, contextualized data. Future research could investigate genograms with other ethnically minoritized groups recovering from the effects of genocide, using narrative approaches.

HIGHLIGHTS

• Genograms are used in psychological assessments and interventions, but research into genograms as a qualitative research method is limited.

• Seven participants described their experiences of a genogram interview in a semi-structured interview. Interpretative phenomenological analysis was used.

• Genograms can be used to elicit rich, contextualized data. Future research could tentatively investigate genograms with other ethnically minoritized groups recovering from the effects of genocide, using narrative approaches.

1. Introduction

Intergenerational impacts of the Holocaust have been widely documented through a psychopathological lens (Flanagan et al., 2020; Lambert et al., 2014), with few adopting a strength-based perspective. Furthermore, most studies have recruited first and second generation survivors, with only a few investigating the third generation.

Although findings are variable, relational experiences appear to play a role in the transmission of trauma within families (Field et al., 2013). It has been recommended that intergenerational trauma research should consider underlying relational processes such as attachment style, parental emotional availability, and family communication style (Flanagan et al., 2020; Payne & Berle, 2021). As most studies have been conducted in North America and Israel, there is a need to develop a more contextualized understanding of families’ experiences in other countries, including the UK.

Genograms are used in psychological therapy to explore relational and intergenerational processes (Carr, 2012). They are graphic depictions of multiple generations, with symbols representing family structure and dynamics, stressful life events, behaviours, and culture (Carr, 2012). Genograms are also a visual research method that represent participants’ experiences, generating rich data while capturing nuanced understandings of participants’ contexts. They allow investigation from a strength-based perspective, exploring family structures, generational dynamics, and resilience. Genograms facilitate instantaneous member checking, improving the quality of qualitative research. They have been used to investigate persecution, migration, and genocide, enabling a greater understanding of intergenerational legacies and fostering safety in qualitative inquiry, helping to better represent the voices of subjugated groups (Lewis, 2023). Little evidence exists regarding how minoritized groups might experience the use of genograms as a visual research method. This is important given the sensitivity of investigating topics such as mass trauma in these groups.

This study sought to co-construct genograms with the children and grandchildren of Holocaust survivors, reflecting on participants’ experience of doing so, to contribute to an understanding of the utility of genograms in discussing sensitive intergenerational phenomena. A hope was that the methodology could be applied to other minoritized ethnic groups who have experienced mass trauma, to provide a rich understanding of this complex phenomenon. This has the potential to develop into both research and clinical practice in this area.

The research question was: How do families of Holocaust survivors experience the use of genograms as a visual research method to discuss intergenerational processes?

2. Method

2.1. Study design

Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) (Smith et al., 2022) was used to enable access to the participants’ experiences and meaning-making with regard to both the process and content of the genogram.

2.2. Sample and recruitment

Teesside University granted ethical approval for the study (review reference: 2022 Apr 8876 LEWIS). Participants were eligible if they were children or grandchildren of anyone who had fled a Nazi-occupied country as a Jewish refugee or who had arrived in the UK as a Holocaust survivor. We included third generation survivors owing to the limited research with this group in the literature (Kahane-Nissenbaum, 2011). Participants were required to be English speakers over 18 years old.

Participants were recruited from the Association of Jewish Refugees (AJR), which provides social and welfare services to Holocaust refugees and survivors, and a growing community of descendants. Adverts were placed in their monthly journal, promotional e-mails, and social media pages.

2.3. Procedure

Prospective participants contacted the researcher (first author), who provided an information sheet. Following written consent, interviews were arranged and conducted virtually using a secure online platform. This consisted of two interviews: the genogram and semi-structured interviews. All were conducted by the researcher.

The information sheet highlighted the possibility of the interviews causing distress, and participants were reminded they could pause or withdraw at any point.

2.3.1. Genogram interview

GenoPro (2011) was used, allowing the genogram to be shared live as it was co-constructed. GenoPro has symbols and a legend of 36 ‘emotional relationships’.

The interview was informed by genograms in systemic family therapy and the relational mapping interview (Boden et al., 2019; McGoldrick et al., 2020), which was developed to support participants to map their relationships in qualitative research and IPA. Boden et al. (2019) described the process as: ‘mapping the self’, ‘mapping others’, ‘standing back’, and ‘considering change’. The interview explored the quality and texture of familial relationships, and how these have been maintained and influenced over time using a ‘draw–talk–draw’ process: important people were mapped visually, with participants adding information and describing their relationships in detail.

Genograms have been modified for different contexts, such as trauma patterns within families (Jordan, 2004), with a greater emphasis on capturing strength and resilience when used in trauma-focused therapy (Walsh, 2016). Therefore, efforts were made to allow dialogue around strength and resilience. This was done through directing curiosity to enable discussions and untold narratives of participants’ organizing principles (Hardy & Laszloffy, 1995). Heteronormative and gender-normative limitations of genograms were named, exploring what family meant to each participant. Participants were shown a mock genogram from a practice interview, which aimed to be broad and inclusive, so that diverse family structures were represented.

The researcher shared aspects of their identity and interest in the research with participants, hoping that this would foster psychological safety. This was informed by the sensitivity of the subject matter and potential for race-based trauma.

The genogram was shared securely with, and belonged to, the participant, and was not used as research data.

2.3.2. Semi-structured interview

This interview was held next, and analysed for this study. Safety through transparency was established by participants seeing the interview schedule prior to meeting (Simon, 2013). It was designed to be open, prompting in-depth discussions (Smith et al., 2022), and was developed through consultation with the AJR (Table 1). To encourage agency, participants chose when to arrange the follow-up interview. This ranged from 2 to 14 days after the genogram interview. Participants reflected on their experiences of the genogram interview, using their genogram as an aide-mémoire. The interview was recorded and stored securely, and deleted after transcription. Transcriptions were securely stored, and identifiable information was changed. Only data from the semi-structured interview were analysed. Signposting for further support was provided in a debriefing at the end of each interview.

Table 1.

Interview schedule.

Interview questions

How did you find the first part of the interview?

What stood out to you?

Did anything stand out as particularly important from the genogram? If so, what?

How do you feel about it now having finished that part of the interview? What are your thoughts on it now?

Tell me about the best part of it.

Tell me about the worst part of it.

How did you feel as you were going through the genogram? What were your thoughts?

Has it impacted the way you think/feel about your family? If so, how?

Has it impacted the way you think/feel about yourself? If so, how?

Prompts

Could you say a little more about that?

What do you mean by that?

Can you describe that?

Tell me what you were thinking.

How did you feel?

Why?

How?

2.4. Participants

Seven participants were recruited, comprising five women and two men. Three were children of Holocaust survivors and four were grandchildren. Two were grandparents and four were parents.

2.4.1. Analysis

IPA explores lived experience, drawing on phenomenology, hermeneutics, and ideography (Smith et al., 2022). It is flexible, iterative, and inductive. The analysis was approached systematically, emphasizing idiographic and hermeneutic principles. The researcher led this process; then, the second and third authors separately interpreted three transcripts (Table 2). Consensus was agreed through reflective discussions. The researcher kept a reflexive diary to enhance their self-awareness and explore their positionality.

Table 2.

Framework of interpretative phenomenological analysis.

Step of analysis	Process
Step 1: Starting with the first case: reading and rereading	Reading and rereading the interview transcript to immerse the researcher in the data. There is a focus on slowing down automatic reading habits that impede analysis. Researchers note striking observations and memories of the interview to aid productivity, analysis, and reflexivity. Rereading allows for narratives to organize the work and life-stories that may contain deeper patterns of description. It also allows analysts to track the rapport, noting how trust influences the depth of data.
Step 2: Exploratory noting	Notes are made of semantic text at an exploratory level, with greater familiarity about how participants interpret and describe certain areas. The aim is to construct in depth comments of the text. Core phenomenological comments start to emerge, highlighting key objects, relationships, processes, and places, and their meaning. There is a focus on the language and context used by participants. Analysts start to add abstract concepts and tentative interpretations.
Step 3: Constructing experiential statements	A process of consolidating initial notes begins, constructing experiential statements. The most significant notes are privileged, noting experiences or the experience of making sense of phenomena. This is done by looking at chunks of data. It exemplifies the hermeneutic circle, analysing ‘parts’ to understand the ‘whole’.
Step 4: Searching for connections across experiential statements	A plot of how experiential statements are related is developed, highlighting the most significant parts of the data. Analysts are encouraged to hold the research question in mind when doing so.
Step 5: Naming the personal experiential themes (PETs) and consolidating and organizing into a table	The patterns identified in previous steps inform the development of a table including all PETs. PETs form the highest level of organization in the table, with subthemes presented below. Experiential statements are organized below each subtheme, with a page number to reference. The table represents the analytical dialogue between analyst and participant. Polarization can help researchers to organize multifaceted and opposing aspects of experience. Studying the function of language can help to deepen the analysis.
Step 6: Continuing the individual analysis of other cases	This stage requires researchers to repeat the first five steps with other participants’ data systematically. There is a focus on treating each case on its own idiographic terms. Care must be taken not to regurgitate notions from previous cases. A reflexive approach to noting how previously analysed cases have influenced fore-structures will help new important aspects to emerge, improving the quality of the analysis.
Step 7: Working with PETs to develop group experiential themes across cases	This step involves the identification of patterns, including parallels and distinctions across PETs. This leads to the development of group experiential themes (GETs) that emphasize the common and distinctive phenomenological qualities across cases. While this level of analysis occurs at a broad level, it is also important to look carefully at the particular subthemes and experiential statements. Analysts are encouraged to ask a set of questions when working across these levels: ‘Which PETs are most potent across the data set? How do subthemes echo across other cases? Are any experiential features universal? At what level is the similarity shared?’ A table of GETs allows for common features of individual experience to be represented at a group level.

IPA emphasizes sensitivity to context; therefore, the sociocultural climate was considered. Although the researcher tried to hold a reflexive position, noting curiosities and considering whether these were rooted in preconceived assumptions, it was acknowledged that the process of understanding is not fully conscious and that mutual communion is not possible (Widdershoven, 2001).

The first author, the researcher, is a male middle-class British Jew who works as a clinical psychologist in adult mental health services in the UK National Health Service (NHS). Growing up in a family of Holocaust survivors shaped his interests in trauma, systemic ideas, and identity development. The second author is a white British woman from a middle-class background who grew up in a family where the impact of the Holocaust for her Jewish relatives was keenly felt. She is a clinical psychologist who runs a clinical psychology training course and has worked with children and adults with intellectual disabilities. Trauma is a common thread throughout her work. The third author is a woman from a working-class background with mixed British–Middle Eastern heritage. She is a clinical psychologist in specialist primary care, where complex trauma is the focus of her work. Although she does not have Jewish heritage, intergenerational trauma is a common thread owing to ongoing, long-standing conflicts in the Middle East, where her family resides.

3. Results

Five group experiential themes (GETs) were inhabited by all participants, apart from the theme ‘The importance of telling our stories’, which was not present for David (Table 3).

Table 3.

Group experiential themes (headings) and group level subthemes (bullet points).

The legacy of prior experiences	Scaffolding sensitive and nuanced discussions	The importance of telling our stories	The impact of sharing stories	Reverberations of storytelling
Having off-limit conversations Feeling let down and excluded Addressing the past Running out of time Editing the narrative	The genogram as a framework – ‘a very succinct representation of a big thing’ ‘I don’t usually start the story with me’ The relationship – ‘you allowed it not to hurt’ Creating authorship through safety Limits of the software	Unedited and richer narratives The ‘survivor spirit’ Honouring family stories	Revealing threads Finding power in reclamation Painful vulnerability	Emotional release Powerful and dissonant emotions Changing patterns Wanting a sequel Work in progress

3.1. The legacy of prior experiences

Participants spoke powerfully around their family and the Holocaust. Experiences influenced how participants positioned themselves and others in the genogram and how foregrounds materialized.

3.1.1. Having off-limit conversations

Conversations about the legacy of the Holocaust were difficult for four participants, owing to the pain caused by their history:

When talking about Holocaust past you are, of course, touching on trauma at whatever level and degree. Uh, all the time … talking about the Holocaust itself or the people involved in it. These, these are people not here … and that's pain. … the risk of trauma … is ever present. (David)

David left unsaid why the people ‘are not here’, hinting at the unspeakable loss and trauma. The sensitivity surrounding this means that such discussions were ‘off limits’, leaving gaps:

… it's a time in history that I don't know much about from my family because my mum would just say that my grandpa never, just didn't talk about it and it was, you know, it was off, off limits. (Emma)

These off-limit conversations affected participants’ sense of self. David powerfully recounted how the gaps in family stories have left gaps in his identity:

Because have lost them. Because they were mute. … because I had no sense of identity for most of my life … in a sea of people I couldn't distinguish myself. I didn't know what, what was good about me and what was worth hiding away. I didn't know how I got to where I am. (David)

3.1.2. Feeling let down and excluded

Alongside the effects of these off-limit conversations, participants’ needs remained unmet in other parts of their lives. Sara spoke about how her need to make sense of her history was dismissed by mental health services, leaving her feeling invalidated:

… this group of people is totally not anywhere on the radar whatsoever, or even acknowledged. And that I raise it as an unmet need for my own personal self, not even like for other people. It’s bizarre. But just getting the message: ‘shut up and get on with it, it's ages ago’. (Sara)

Elizabeth described the prejudice and hate experienced within her community:

… there's the antisemitism angle as well. So you tend to keep quiet. … Or in the earlier days when I was younger you, you know, if you mentioned Austria or Germany … people would get a bit wound up. (Elizabeth)

Participants brought expectations of mistrust and hostility from others to conversations related to their heritage, Jewish identity, and emotional needs.

3.1.3. Addressing the past

Three participants described, perhaps driven by gaps in their family stories, how they researched their genealogy, resulting in greater awareness of their history:

I’ve thought about myself a lot. So in all my writing and stuff … I've analysed, I suppose myself quite a lot … I'm quite good at having done that. (Zoe)

3.1.4. Running out of time

For one participant, Elizabeth, there was an increasing existential pressure to participate in this study, wanting to pass something on to subsequent generations, as previous generations had done for her:

I was perfectly happy to talk about it and happy if it can be of some use for you in the future. Because that generation are gone pretty much, and soon my generation will be gone as well. So … it's timely. (Elizabeth)

3.1.5. Editing the narrative

Hannah recounted when others were unable to cope hearing her family’s history. After researching this in Germany, she edited the narrative to protect others and herself:

… I just edit those parts of the story out because I have upset people in the past talking about them. … where I started doing my research into the family. I suppose I hadn't really developed that sense … it's not so much the sensitivity, but like … the feeling that I could edit things out. (Hannah)

3.2. Scaffolding sensitive and nuanced discussions

Participants discussed how the structure of the genogram, both relational and tangible aspects, created a space to have a thoughtful, vulnerable conversation about the impact of the Holocaust.

3.2.1. The genogram as a framework – ‘a very succinct representation of a big thing’

The genogram’s visual attributes enabled participants to reflect and explore, providing a distinct perspective. Emma described how the characteristics of her family could be viewed from a perspective which had been difficult to achieve:

… it was helping me to think in a different way than if I was just having that conversation without a visual aid. To say, ok, so these people are here and then you've got this person here who was born, what was the relationship between these people? … be able to look at it visually while you're talking, was just a help. (Emma)

The genogram’s visual nature was concise and accessible:

Yeah, I like. I like this very succinct representation of a, of a big thing. (Zoe)

Constructing the genogram helped to start conversations about a deeply personal and onerous topic:

I think it's a really helpful tool for allowing people to have potentially quite sensitive and difficult discussions in a way that removes … confusion over where to begin and the responsibility of giving a story like this to somebody else. … a really helpful way to have a discussion about, about my family's history. … a particularly difficult part of the history to talk about. … It's … just a really good framework actually it helps, yeah. (Hannah)

3.2.2. ‘I don’t usually start the story with me’

Five participants described surprise seeing themselves at the centre of their genogram, having previously positioned their gaze upon their ancestors. For Hannah, this caused a shift of perspective, allowing her to consider the impact on herself and her family:

… we started with me. I think that stood out a bit. … I don't usually start the story with me. So that was quite good. And putting the kids on and my husband. Again, didn't really expect that. (Hannah)

The genogram allowed David to relate to events from the past more continuously, opening possibilities to discuss relationships that he is part of and may influence:

The children's names for a start. … I fixed my mind that this was about the past rather than the future. But it is interesting. And it's an interesting reference for me because of course logically the lines should continue into the future. If they came from the past, why wouldn't they go forward? So … that's extremely helpful. (David)

Overall, the genogram helped in understanding complex intergenerational patterns and provided novel considerations about the future.

3.2.3. The relationship – ‘you allowed it not to hurt’

Six participants reflected on relational characteristics of the process. Compassionate questioning reduced threat when exploring intergenerational processes:

I think you've been very compassionate with your questions. … probing without being probing. (Elizabeth)

There was collaboration and cultural resonance. Humour and lightness provided comfort:

A kind of a lightness. … a kind of using humour … as a mechanism to deal with pain. Which is something … I've hugely identified my Jewish identity. The notion of using humour to deal with pain and loss. (Adam)

This relational foundation fostered safety, allowing participants to confront the legacy of the Holocaust:

You know, we, we didn't spend that much time dwelling on the, the Holocaust fates of my family. But you allowed it not to hurt, and not to cauterize the memory-releasing process. (David)

Participants also reflected on the researcher’s acknowledgement of heteronormative assumptions within the genogram, fostering confidence:

… you were able to do it [map out relationships] correctly first time. (Sara)

3.2.4. Creating authorship through safety

Two participants spoke about knowing the interviewer’s identity helped them to feel safer; fostering a shared sense of meaning:

Because you knew how to do this, but you also knew about, obviously with transgenerational trauma in this group of people. (Sara)

Adam reflected on broader contextual issues related to how Jews are treated. Holding greater power enabled a stronger sense of authorship:

… the power of being able to … define one’s own story and to kind of hold … the memory themselves. Like as someone who comes from a family of Holocaust survivors, initially it was done to us and even in contemporary society there are discussions that go on about us. (Adam)

While participants valued collaboration, they considered opportunities for more radical coproduction:

But I guess I'm interested in, you know, outside of the therapeutic context … the research context. I'm interested in what the impact would be to be more radical about genogram ownership and coproduction. (Adam)

3.2.5. Limits of the software

In contrast, for some, constructing the genogram was difficult. The software was ‘clunky’ and the online interview limiting:

It was clunky … because it didn't quite like you were saying it … you know the little lines and stuff were not quite right, it felt, to describe certain things. (Sara)

Sara went on to question the appropriateness of the software’s iconographic representation of mental health difficulties, reinforcing stigma:

… instead of having a square with half empty for mental health issues, perhaps it could be something a bit more relevant. (Sara)

For others, the lack of a key was limiting:

Yes, I'd like to know what the symbols all are. I can't see where you explain them. I know you told me. … a little code of what means what. Would be helpful. (Elizabeth)

For Adam, the genogram’s orderly aesthetic misrepresented the disorderly nature of his family, leading to a sense of incredulity: the genogram may take participants further away from the ‘truth’:

… families are complicated and nothing is straightforward … to kind of draw half a line and squiggle and go round that person and have a line that looks a certain way … . I think there's a kind of uniformity to doing it online with the software … it's kind of make believe. (Adam)

3.3. The importance of telling our stories

Six participants were able to tell unedited, rich stories with a unique quality of strength.

3.3.1. Unedited and richer narratives

Four participants described how their family stories unfolded, capturing a nuanced, deeper narrative. Hannah was surprised at being able to recount a multifaceted story so clearly:

… it's such an important kind of relationship between parents and children and children and grandchildren and grandchildren and children, grandchildren and grandparents. … there's so much to unpack. … to feel like you've actually managed to kind of create something that … does make some sense of it. (Hannah)

The genogram enabled telling of a comprehensive and contextualized story:

I thought maybe I'll miss things out by mistake that are important. But … it was quite a comprehensive discussion about the family and … the sort of journey geographically but also, you know the sort of development and how that affected the family. (Zoe)

3.3.2. The ‘survivor spirit’

Four participants described subjugated stories of strength and pride, as opposed to dominant narratives of victimhood:

… they came and they started from nothing, you know … And you think, good for them! … I'm really, really proud of them all. Because you know, it shows a real survivor spirit. (Elizabeth)

Adam spoke of the opportunity to celebrate beauty:

It felt like a wonderful counterbalance … thinking about positive things, not just to be thinking about ‘wow, how messed up did everything get?’ … it's also useful reminder to myself … whatever these family patterns may be and what people are left with and are struggling with, that a lot of like beautiful positivity in the people themselves. And that's not to be forgotten. (Adam)

3.3.3. Honouring family stories

Two participants spoke of telling stories that honoured their family and the moral responsibility of including subjugated narratives within broader narratives around the Holocaust. Hannah described a particularly strong sense of duty to represent her family’s working-class story, where limited access to resources impacted people’s chances of survival:

And you know, there's been parts of the families that have managed to, to escape … but later there's been a reunion. Whereas for Gina there wasn't … so it goes back to her just being from that community that really didn't have a chance to … escape at all. Which is, ironically, why I feel it's really important to share it. (Hannah)

3.4. The impact of sharing stories

All participants spoke about the emotional impact of sharing their story.

3.4.1. Revealing threads

Five participants described threads running between generations. Elizabeth reflected on when she became aware of intergenerational traits, during a reparation event in Austria with her mother:

We children who were there in that room all had that thread running between us, of having ridiculously anxious parents, overprotective parents that have rubbed off on us … very revealing … (Elizabeth)

Participants were able to forge new meanings:

It's reaffirmed the importance of the past, of my family and their experiences in what, what made me, what makes me. (David)

3.4.2. Finding power in reclamation

Four participants spoke about the strength and reclaimed power that they experienced from telling their stories, through having authorship:

I was affirmed in myself that talking about … stories that are like inevitably connected to victimhood and guilt and powerlessness. … That by talking about them, there's a reclamation and there's a kind of having power. Not even having power over the stories, but, but holding it like having agency. (Adam)

This is despite the pain caused by confronting the stories:

It's like turning the light on something that you might not really want to look at very much. But by looking at it in a … visual and succinct way and then being able to input how you feel about each of these people, your relationship, and then seeing it all there … empowering … (Sara)

Positivity and a sense of rootedness were also gained:

I feel really proud of them, so which in turn makes, helps me, or encourages me to feel more positive about myself … having roots. (Elizabeth)

3.4.3. Painful vulnerability

While some gained strength and power from telling stories, five participants described pain and vulnerability:

It's … made me feel quite vulnerable. Like there were things that I have felt … not that things were guarded secrets for me … but unspoken stories. (Adam)

For Elizabeth, themes of loss emphasized the lack of a family network, leaving her feeling isolated:

… that's probably the only bit that gets me emotionally … that I don't have an extended family … my parents were both only children … all their aunts, uncles and cousins vanished, and they never found out what happened … there isn't … that protective bubble … sometimes I feel that as a lack. (Elizabeth)

3.5. Reverberations of storytelling

All participants discussed the emotional reverberations of storytelling, with some reflecting on what the process would mean in the future.

3.5.1. Emotional release

Three participants discussed their emotions after the genogram interview. There was a sense of processing of feelings:

When something's there and it's recorded, I don't think about it quite as much as I did. Perhaps it frees up your mind to think about other things and accept … that's just the way it is. (Hannah)

Sara described validation through externalizing the difficulties that her family had faced. This legitimized her distress, resulting in a powerful destigmatizing experience:

It sort of brings it into reality … So it's not all in your head anymore slash feeling like I'm mental or mad because it's all in my head. If it comes out of my head into this format it's a thing, isn't it? So it's not me just being like a bit neurotic or mental. It's actually a transgenerational trauma situation that can be pointed at and explained. (Sara)

3.5.2. Powerful and dissonant emotions

All participants described powerful emotional experiences after the genogram. Seven of them discussed positive, and three described negative experiences.

Emma expressed shame about internalizing the high standards that she was exposed to when growing up, and anxiety about what she had unconsciously passed on to her children:

I think probably the worst part was realizing that even though … I thought I was different and I hadn't perhaps taken on some of those values that actually I have. That's probably the worst part of it … (Emma)

Conversely, David described vitality and enrichment:

Very powerful, very helpful. … it's like applying a match or a cigarette lighter or a flame in general to the end of an unravelling piece of nylon fibre string. (David)

3.5.3. Changing patterns

Three participants described changes following the genogram, such as greater self-awareness:

I'm not bothered for myself, but I'm doing it for my son … making him see, you know in the ‘ohh it's important where you are in the class’ … I think I've tried to amend that a little bit and caught myself. So that, that's been quite a big impact actually … (Emma)

Elizabeth discussed changes in the way she related to herself; an increased sense of confidence:

I feel a bit more confident. Knowing what I come from rather than ‘oh they had such a terrible time and they are traumatized … ’ … That's been a shift. (Elizabeth)

3.5.4. Wanting a sequel

Three participants wanted further opportunities to tell their story and explore intergenerational patterns. The genogram interview did not always provide adequate time to discuss everything:

I haven't put them all on there because as I say, it would just have gotten huge and a bit unmanageable … we could have done that. I mean, if it had been a longer discussion, I wouldn't have minded. (Hannah)

3.5.5. Work in progress

Participants situated their experience in a broader journey of exploration. They took something away to work on further:

… you've … represented it pictorially, so it's there. You know you could write a book about it, but that's the outline of the book. (Zoe).

4. Discussion

Limited evidence exists on how individuals belonging to subjugated groups experience visual research tools (Orr et al., 2020). We explored second and third generation Holocaust survivors’ experience of genograms to discuss intergenerational processes, with results indicating that this is a helpful method. Participants explored their experiences and family stories, feeling that their voices were represented accurately, supporting evidence that genograms locate participants as experts (Glegg, 2019; Werner-Lin, 2010).

Genograms allowed participants to reflect on diverse family structures (Mercier & Harold, 2004; Tasker & Delvoye, 2018) and relational characteristics, replicating previous findings (Alexander et al., 2018) that genograms can invoke rich inaccessible data.

Participants reflected on being Jewish in Britain. Discussions about antisemitism influenced the genogram, and prejudice affected how participants engaged with the process. It is important to consider how discrimination influences data depth in research on the legacy of the Holocaust (Orr et al., 2020).

The material influence of the genogram, and the relationship with the researcher, were important. Their style influenced participants’ sense of safety, collaboration, control, and authorship. Furthermore, knowing the researcher’s identity helped to create a feeling of safety and a shared sense of meaning.

The genogram elicited stories with distinctive qualities of hope and pride, contrasting with the dominant narratives of victimhood. Participants were surprised and empowered by this. Genograms can provide opportunities to explore strength and resilience within family systems (Filizola et al., 2011; Hamad et al., 2021; Mercier & Harold, 2004). The participants held their family stories in high esteem, demonstrating a strong moral responsibility about how stories are told and located within narratives around the Holocaust. Participants reported how historic and contemporary contexts of being ‘done to’ highlight the importance of power and authorship in qualitative inquiry.

Participants provided rich information about family origin and structures, relational dynamics, parenting styles, scripts, myths, communication styles, strength, and resilience, contrasting with Holocaust research from a more pathological perspective (Lehrner & Yehuda, 2018). There was pride when reflecting on familial achievements, with strong family relationships cited as being essential when recovering from the Holocaust’s after-effects. This ‘beautiful positivity’ offered an important counterbalance to stories steeped in grief, victimhood, and murder.

Alexander et al. (2018) highlighted how genogram research may attract individuals wanting to connect with their family histories, and the risk of distress when using genograms to explore sensitive subjects. In the current study, participants were drawn to ‘Addressing the past’, possibly because of the voids that have been left. Some had previously processed the impact of the Holocaust, and this provided greater resilience when confronting the topic, despite the distress.

Genograms identified threads running through families, including avoidant communication styles. Communication styles of Holocaust survivors and their children can be typified by fragmentation, indirectness, silence, and secrecy, resulting in feelings of guilt, victimization, overidentification, and a threatening world view (Braga et al., 2012). Loss, pain, and trauma played important roles in ‘Having off-limit conversations’, and contributed to incomplete family origin stories and fragmented identities.

Participants described how internalized parental beliefs and expectations, such as high academic standards, were unconsciously passed on to their children. Quadrio (2016) described therapy with families of Holocaust survivors, noting that academic and professional success was promoted intergenerationally to manage survivor guilt and parental grief. Another thread was how participants noticed overly protective patterns of parenting. Field et al. (2013) researched intergenerational trauma following the Cambodian Khmer Rouge regime, with overprotective parental styles and role reversals mediating mental health difficulties in the second generation. The current study may contribute to evidence that subsequent generations of Holocaust survivors can experience attachment difficulties (e.g. Bar-On et al., 1998; Podietz et al., 1984; Scharf, 2007).

Participants described evocative emotions during and following the genogram. Some found ‘Power in reclamation’ as they gained authorship. Similarly to Alexander et al. (2018), some found it difficult to share aspects of their stories; exposing a ‘Painful vulnerability’. For others, there was ‘Emotional release’: acceptance, validation, and catharsis. The process also provided greater insight into their behaviour, motivating participants to change their communication or parenting style, supporting the therapeutic effects of genograms. Therefore, the ethical implications of this methodology should be carefully considered. Some were left feeling satisfied and fulfilled, obtaining a sense of closure regarding their families’ stories, and some wished for further opportunities to meet. For several participants, the experience was situated in a broader journey. There was also a sense of having gained something, be that a material representation of one’s family or a sense of validation.

Some found the genogram software limiting, highlighting the lack of meaningful icons that captured important family qualities, and an icon key. The genogram’s digital representation of family systems appeared artificial and difficult to connect with. Also, as the researcher conducted both the genogram and semi-structured interviews, there may be a ‘halo effect’, with participants reporting what they thought the researcher would like to hear.

Participants felt that their voices and experiences were represented accurately, with the genogram material interview feeling salient. Genograms could support families who have survived trauma, to generate deeper understandings and explore rich family-of-origin stories. Transparency regarding the heteronormative limitations of genograms is also essential in exploring diverse relationships and family structures.

A key challenge was holding both the content and process of the genogram in mind, and avoiding being drawn solely into the content of the genogram, rather than the experience and meaning-making. From an ontological perspective, IPA enabled access to participants’ experience and meaning-making with regard to both the process and content of the genogram interview. This approach to understanding the phenomena sees both content and process as being inextricably linked, with the process reflecting aspects of the content and vice versa. It was hoped that a non-dichotomous ontology would allow the analysis to remain ‘close’ to the lived world, seeing the experience as one, while also considering contextual influences.

Researchers could reconsider how trauma is conceptualized, as a multifactorial and storied experience that can reverberate across generations in the way in which individuals relate and retell their family narratives. This may help them to expand upon narrow explanations that solely consider trauma as an individualistic experience with a discrete symptomology. With careful ethical consideration, the use of a genogram may help researchers to access these multifaceted, transgenerational, and storied phenomena.

Given the prominence of storytelling as a broader theme, alongside information related to identity, future studies may consider using a narrative analysis to investigate how individuals make sense through their stories. Future research could tentatively explore genograms for other minoritized groups recovering from genocide. Sadly, numerous attempts to destroy racial, ethnic, religious, or national groups have been documented following the Holocaust. While this study’s findings are modest, and with a context-specific sample, researchers could use this method to facilitate deeper understanding of the psychological impact of devastating crimes against humanity.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Data availability statement

Participants did not provide consent for their raw data or interview transcripts to be made publicly available to researchers beyond those involved in the current study. However, the data that support the findings of this study may be made available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author, in conjunction with an appropriate data-sharing agreement.