Title: Henry did not have a well-lived life.
This essay is about a fictitious character named Henry, who did not live a good life, as according to Erikson’s theory on Psychological Development.
Erikson’s Eight Stages of Psychosocial Development are:
- Trust vs. Mistrust.
- Autonomy vs. Shame and Doubt
- Initiative vs. Guilt
- Industry (competence) vs. Inferiority
- Identity vs. Role Confusion
- Intimacy vs. Isolation
- Generativity vs. Stagnation
- Integrity vs. Despair
I start my essay by examining my fictional character Henry, as according to Erikson’s Stage One, Trust vs. Mistrust.
I do not have a countercheck to verify Henry’s claims on his childhood primary caregiver, who was his mother. The woman died many years ago. Based on Henry’s adult relationships, I can diagnose and predict that his childhood care was harsh and inconsistent. He has an issue with trust. It started in early childhood when biological, ethical and ethnical factors influenced his development (Denburg, 2015). Henry mistrusted even his adult children. He was not assisted to nurture self-confidence, nor confidence in the larger picture. Consequently, Henry was often unduly anxious, mistrusting, insecure and negative. He was unable to form stable relationships with his first wife, children, siblings, parents, cousins and friends. Henry was disadvantaged with an early insecure attachment bond with his caregiver, and was unable to overcome this shortcoming during his adult years. Henry lacked the virtue of hope.
I examine Henry, using Erikson’s Stage Two in the Psychosocial Development Theory; Autonomy vs. Shame and Doubt.
Henry showed he had a small measure of self-control, but he was horribly short of self-esteem. He tried to put up a brave front after his first marriage failed, but he lacked the self-esteem to continue trying to seek a suitable job and new marriage. When his marriage failed, he thought it was the mother of all failures and his life stood still after that. The American Psychological Association (APA) said that “people who are kind and compassionate to themselves have an easier time managing the day-to-day difficulties of divorce.” (APA, 2015) Henry’s parents did not manage to encourage him to persist in trying for his secondary needs. He had tasted independence during his short married life, living away from his parents’ home, but opted to return to the patriarchal home after his divorce. His signs and symptoms point to the diagnosis that he felt inadequate to sustain himself. Henry isolated himself after his divorce, showing he probably felt shame and doubted himself. This was before “cohabitation and divorce began to be more common, transforming marriage into something more optional and more vulnerable (Tomas, 2011). He lacked the will to persist in pursuing his desires.
Stage Three Initiative vs. Guilt.
In stage three of Erikson’s theory of Initiative vs. Guilt, the boy who did not have a good balance between initiative and guilt failed to nurture purpose in life. Henry had the initiative to try once, but after his failure in early adulthood, he felt reprimanded and his guilt imprisoned him. Indeed, research results “suggest that interpersonal guilt, when elevated and linked to pathogenic beliefs, may also be associated with psychological problems and indicate there may be a down side to guilt” (O’Çonnor, Berry, Weiss, 1999).
Stage four of Industry (competence) vs. Inferiority:
Young Henry was not good in his academic work. He felt he was a failure in school and subsequently, he developed an inferiority complex. His failed marriage was a broken bond, and “shame arises from threats to the bond” (Scheff, 2002). He later refused to strive hard for success, since he thought he lacked the virtue of competence, which was necessary for success.
Erikson’s fifth stage – Identity vs. Role Confusion
As a young man, Henry thought he wanted the identity of a successful, working man, and family man. Unexpectedly, his first marriage failed and he became confused. He quit his job, partly because he felt ashamed to face society. As a single father, he was even more confused. Henry left the fathering responsibility to his parents. This behavior has been predicted by psychologists. DeGarmo and Forgatch said that “For parenting needs, divorced fathers depend upon new partners and extended kin networks more heavily than do their divorced mother counterparts.” (DeGarmo and Forgatch, 2011). He was not a married man and lacked a stable sexual partner. Living in the 1970s, sex outside marriage was frowned upon by his culture and society. He was not equipped to handle all these new developments. His world fell apart.
Erikson’s Stage Six, or Intimacy vs. Isolation.
Henry avoided stable relationships with both male and female gender. He refused to commit himself to any romantic relationship.
He isolated himself and felt lonely. He still had his parents and children to talk to, but they could not fill the gap in his life. As a matter of fact, his family members served to remind him of his past failures. Henry felt depressed. His parents wanted him to see a psychiatrist but he refused. He felt it would add on to his failures. On one hand, he wanted love. On the other hand, he was unwilling to venture out to seek his desires. He was stuck in a self-defeating cycle. Fear of intimacy is a valid response of “individuals’ anxiety about close, dating relationships…” (Descutner & Thelen, 1991). When there was more fear, the man would respond with less self-disclosure, social intimacy and social desirability measures.
Explaining Henry, using Erikson’s Stage Seven, Generativity vs. Stagnation
Henry was not productive in any official capacity. He did not have a job, nor was he interested in raising his grandchildren (Feldman, 2015). Needless to say, he was not keen to interact with society by doing charitable work. He felt stagnant and unproductive. He did not care for others and failed to obtain reciprocal care.
Stage Eight: Ego Integrity vs. Despair
Henry did not experience a well-lived life (Broderick & Blewitt, 2015). He was given wealth by his parents and with his initial capital, he invested to accumulate more money. He was happy with his personal investments and wealth. However, his life was bitter sweet. He seldom talked about his past. Apparently, he accepted responsibility for the way his life evolved. By the time he reached his sixties, he said it was way too late to attempt salvaging his broken relationships with his adult children and relatives.
Henry was relatively healthy his entire life. He had mixed feelings about his life. Only in his darkest moments would he speak of his past, in despair. He said his life has passed, without a formal career and his children had grown distant. There was no point in feeling hopelessness. He would live on, bearing the knowledge that he accepts the choices he made early in his life.I think Henry did not receive adequate intervention to help him. Thoits said “Social support can have a direct impact upon psychological symptomatology and can mediate the psychological consequences of stressful circumstances.” (Thoits, 1985)
Conclusion:
Henry failed to achieve the virtues of all the stages of his psychosocial development. He may have said he had a good life, but according to Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development, I would conclude he did not live a well-lived life.
Copyright by Cai, Sep, 2015 – 2025.
