Analysis of Erikson's Stage of Initiative Vs Guilt - Essay Example

Analysis of Erikson's Stage of Initiative Vs Guilt Psychologists often differ on a number of issues, and psychoanalysis is no exceptional. The stages that a child undergoes right from the infant stage to the adulthood are a center of disagreements. Even though there is an agreement of the process one goes through, some of the challenges encountered and their impact in the future is the real bone of contention. Erik Erikson’s theory of the stages one follows from the infant stage to adulthood has been discussed and critiqued severally. According to Erikson, humans go through certain stages in the psychosocial development and each has challenges, which ought to be overcome failure to which there is a likelihood of hardship in the future. The theory has many stages, but in this paper, the focus will be on the ‘initiative versus guilt stage. Further to discussing this stage in depth, this paper will highlight the important of investigating studies pertaining to children especially in the development stages, upon evaluation of the studies on this topic. Crisis will occur at every stage of the development, and they will be both psychological and social-related. According to Erikson, each development stage has crises, which ought to be overcome by the individual in that stage. The crises emanate from the psychological need of a particular individual, and tend be conflict with society’s needs hence ‘social. When an individual successfully overcomes them, there is a sense of significantly healthy personality. In addition, there is an acquisition of the very essential virtues. For instance, in the ‘initiative versus guilt stage which occurs at the ages of between 3 and 5, a child who is successful will have a strong virtue of purpose. Conversely, a child who fails in this stage will not only have a weakness on the virtue of finding purpose; they will struggle in completing the other phases (Tsao, 2010). The ‘initiative versus guilt’ stage is often characterized by vigorous actions on the side of children and there is a tendency by parents to see the former’s actions as aggressive. However, these activities are imperative to this stage and the parents have to allow the process to go on unhindered (Capps, 2013). In addition to showing the said signs, children will also play regularly, interact with others and even initiate activities and games that showcase their creativity. These activities, which usually carried out in the company of other children, offer them the much-needed opportunity to develop interpersonal skills. If the children are given ample time and space to engage in these activities, they tend to develop a strong sense initiative. Besides, they start feeling they are capable of leading and influencing others, thus the need to ensure children are interrupted, rushed and reprimanded while in this stage. Where the parents fail to recognize the importance of allowing the children to grow as per the demands of the stage, there is a great amount of guilt engulfing a child. If after attempting a particular activity, a child is portrayed by the parent as foolish, the child will shrink and this will hinder the ability to overcome the challenge. Moreover, the child will lack the enthusiasm to embrace creativity, which is essential at this stage besides crippling the development of the interpersonal skills (Berger, 2007). Guilt emanates from the impression created by the parent’s actions that whatever a child is doing is not relevant or is bad. Consequently, it become almost impossible for a child to view such actions from any other angle except the one portrayed by the parent. In the theory, Erickson states that the major requirement for this stage is the parent’s decision to give the child as much independence as possible. The reason for the recommendation is that the child will often ask questions some of which light sound trivial or even nuisance. This occurs because at this stage the child thirsts for knowledge. Any mistake by the parent to show the child that questions asked are either stupid or nuisance, the child might resort becoming a follower rather than take initiative. In addition, a child might take on some initiative that pose danger to them, and the normal thing for a parent will be to stop the child. However, the harm is not more in stopping the child but in the methods, tactics and tones used. Notwithstanding the above assertions, guilt is a necessity in this stage as it teaches the toddler a sense of self-control. Again, where the parents fail to restrict the independence, the child might not understand the limits of their initiatives. As a result, this will inhibit their capability to grow in other stages. It is for this reason that parents have to balance the importance of self-initiative by parents and the necessity of guilt. An excess of either will lead to an unbalanced life, thus creating a hurdle in the next stage. In contrast, where balance is achieved, purpose is realized, and the next stage will be evidenced by tremendous tenacity and impetus by the child to over whatever crises that characterize it. Evaluation While this theory offers a nutshell of what to expect as a parent when a child reaches this stage, it is lacks clarity on the other issues likely to affect children. For instance, it was reported that while not all children are susceptible to the environmental adversity such as marital, financial or emotional stress, these were “linked to social emotional behavior problems and cognitive deficits” (Obradovic, Bush & Stamperdahl, 2010 p.270). That is to say, whereas the issues going on externally might not universally affect the children, a significant portion of them is affected. The fact that Erikson’s theory does not adequately addresses the issue means there is a deficiency, hence the need to carry out further research on social development stages. In other words, it is imperative to ascertain if external factors do indeed influence the social development of children. More weaknesses in this theory is that it does offer the balance that is required for parents to avoid overdoing their role of ensuring a child’s safety is well catered. Though the study states that guilt is important to help a child understand how self-control is cultivated, it lacks the methodology to apply in ensuring balance. Therefore, it is vitally important further research studies are carried out to establish how a parent could balance their role and the independence a child needs. Where this is not achieved, Tsao (2010) argued that there is a possibility of a lack of balance, which will inadvertently lead to struggles by the child in the next stage. Despite having these weaknesses, the study could also offer very important lessons to the parents on how to handle their children upon reaching this stage. While the study is not comprehensive in a number of areas, it offers a glimpse of what parents should expect their children to exhibit. Furthermore, it prepares the children on the approach to have when a child’s activity is dangerous. Instead of being extremely angry, a parent could gently explain the risks of undertaking certain initiatives without using demeaning, insulting or reprimanding tones. In essence, the study provides parents with an overview of how a child is likely to behave, and how their trends ought to be reciprocated. Nonetheless, the study fails in offering a remedy on how parents ought to ensure external adversity do not affect the children or how to respond. Recommendations Clearly, this study has offered some vital information on the stages humans undergo, and this important to help children in every stage. With this knowledge, parents and guardians can raise children in full understanding of their expectations. Concerning the approach of the study, it can be described as one done in a good way, albeit with a few limitations. As noted, there is a need to carry out further research in the topic of social development, particularly in the ‘initiative versus guilt’ stage because some underlying issues are yet to be addressed adequately. The reaction of children to the environmental crises, which might be facing their parents, ought to be addressed. In addition, the study on whether it is the tone or the entire action of restricting a child’s initiative that results in guilt ought to be addressed further. Overall, the study offers some precious lessons on how a child behaves in this stage, but it is imperative to conduct further research to have a holistic picture of the stage. References Berger, K. (2007). Study guide to accompany The developing person through the life span, 7th edition. New York: W. H. Freeman. Capps, D. (2013). Erik H. Erikson’s Young Man Luther: A Classic Revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 64(3), 327-329 Obradović, J., Bush, N., Stamperdahl, J., Adler, N., & Boyce, W. (2010). Biological Sensitivity to Context: The Interactive Effects of Stress Reactivity and Family Adversity on Socioemotional Behavior and School Readiness. Child Development, 81(1), 270-289. Tsao, C. (2010). Successful Resolutions: Erik Erikson's Eight. Development and Psychopathology, 34(4), 290-291. Read More