Child abuse's effects on Erik Erikson's developmental stages

Child Abuse & Erik Erikson

On child abuse

Child abuse is a pressing problem that knows no race, color, ethnicity or religion. It transcends geographic lines and cuts across socio-economic brackets.

Child abuse comes in many forms. Section 10 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act defines child abuse as "any act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker, which results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse, or exploitation or an act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm" (Legal Information Institute, 2003). It encompasses everything from something seemingly more subtle as mild neglect or failure to provide the child with basic needs, to verbal abuse, to more severe physical, mental, emotional and sexual abuse and exploitation (Suprina and Chang, 2005).

Statistics on child abuse in the United States alone is staggering. Although child abuse reports rise up to as high as three million in the United States yearly, it is suspected that the actual number of abuse and neglect is thrice greater than reported. While the U.S. government and certain concerned organizations had taken the upperhand on this issue, as signified by the 906,000 child abuse convictions in 2003 alone, statistics on fatalities are even more alarming. The National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect (2003) reported that 1,300 died in 2001 as a consequence of child abuse, 85% of which are children not more than six years old. This even increased lightly in 2003, when records point to four children dying of child abuse every day, with three out of four of these children aged just under four (Child maltreatment Report 2003).

Impacts of child abuse

Alongside these fatalities are many other physical, social, cognitive and psychological problems that victims of child abuse go through. Oftentimes, the harrowing experience scars them until adulthood.

These adverse impacts on one's socio-psychological and socio-cognitive development have been established and proven in various studies. For one, the Administration for Children & Families of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services accounted in that 80% of young adults who had been victims of child abuse met the diagnostic criteria for at least one psychiatric disorder at the age of 21 (Child Maltreatment Report 2003).

Research has linked child abuse with impaired cognitive development and lower levels of social competencies, ego resiliency, and ego control (Suprina and Chang, 2005). Consistent with this general finding that abused children exhibit socio-emotional difficulties is the study of (Wodarski et al., 1995). Wodarski and his colleagues found that school-age and adolescent abused children were functioning poorly relative to their nonmaltreated peers on every component of socio-emotional development assessed. To wit:

Abused children stood out as markedly problematic in school, at home and in the community, displaying academic deficits, problem behaviors, lowered self-esteem, delinquency, elevated levels of aggression, and pervasive adjustment difficulties in a variety of contexts. (Wodraski et al., 1995: 510)

Wodarski and his team also found that abused children displayed pervasive and severe academic delays and had the higher tendencies of dropping out as compared with their non-maltreated peers.

Further, Hitchcock (1987) posits that victims of child abuse are more likely to develop an abusive lifestyle. Low self-esteem, inability to empathize with others, violence as an acceptable family value that expresses caring, increased feelings of inferiority, striving for superiority, lack of social interest, and a lack of a sense of belonging are also part of this abusive lifestyle (Suprina and Chang, 2005).

All these studies, in parallel with various other research and publications, only show that child abuse is a serious matter with far more serious consequences. The negative impacts of child abuse could not be more emphasized. Such traumatic ordeals at a young age, especially during one's formative years, are bound to leave a mark.

On child abuse vis-a-vis personality development and casework intervention

Erikson's description of personality development brings to mind the image of a path. We continue down this path from infancy to old age, but each different point along the way we encounter a fork - two directions in which to proceed. In Erikson's model, these forks in the path represent turning points in personality development. He called these points 'crises.' How we resolve each crisis determines the direction our personality development will take and influences how we resolve later crises. Of the two alternatives for resolving each crisis, one is said to be adaptive, the other not (Burger, 2005).

Until adolescence, how we develop our personality is primarily determined by what is done to us, as opposed to what we do. The love, care and support we receive from infancy to childhood and young adolescence play a vital part on how we develop trust, autonomy, initiative, industry, identity and even intimacy.

Child abuse no doubt hampers the victim's personality growth and development, as backed out by various publications, studies and research. During these formative years, we are delicate and breakable. Our environment and our relationships either make or break us. The aggressive, apathetic or withdrawn behavior can be traced to feelings that they hardly anyone can be trusted, or that they are inferior to others. All these are residual effects that linger on even long after they were abused or maltreated in the past (Oates, 1984).

But it is also important to note that while most child abuse victims succumb to maladaptive personality development patterns, there are also a remarkable few who manage turn their lives around and take the 'other path,' as Erikson would have put it. In a study on the personality development of victims of child abuse by Oates (1984), it was noted that because they were often left to fend for themselves, some victims developed some of the social skills in the social maturity scale. One such example was an 8-year-old child who was forced by her circumstances to fend for herself because her parents would not look after her.

Child welfare workers have varied approaches in treating in dealing with domestic violence cases, specifically those who are victims of child abuse.

It is recognized that a child is in a compromised situation if he or she continues living with his or her abusive family. The situation may become even more aggravated if intervention involves a roundtable talk among the caseworker, child abuse victim and abusive parents or family members. It is more likely to endanger the victim and to contribute to maintaining silence. In the presence of the violent partner, for example, a woman and her children are likely to hide and deny the violence. If they find the courage to disclose their experience of violence, they may be at risk of suffering even more severe violence, and the cycle goes on and on (Wodraski, et al., 1995).

Most child welfare workers agree that individual meetings with the victim and separate meetings with the adult in custody work best at most cases (Wodraski, et al., 1995). During these meetings, it is imperative to make the child feel he is any less adequate than others and that his or her painful ordeal did not make him any less of a person. Bringing out the child's confidence in his or herself and fostering him or her to trust other people is central to his or her recovery.

Placement of a child can is often considered, but only as a last resort, when most intervention and talks have seemed to fail.