Grief: Dealing With Loss (Of Any Kind) #AtoZChallenge

Posted on by Astrid

Hi everyone. I’ve been struggling a lot lately again and, as a result, today am particularly late writing my #AtoZChallenge contribution. Today’s letter is G and I want to talk about grief.

Grief can refer to a person’s reaction to losing a loved one to death. That’s the most heard of definition anyway. Grief for a loved one who has passed away can last very long and, in fact, isn’t considered abnormal for the first year. If a person still experiences significantly distressing symptoms of grief more than a year after their loved one has passed, they may be diagnosable with prolonged grief disorder (also known as complicated grief).

Grief, of course, can also refer to the distressing symptoms experienced after losing a beloved pet. It doesn’t matter in this respect that the pet isn’t human; grief can still be experienced very deeply. I mention this because, like I said on Saturday, my spouse and I lost our cat Barry that day.

Grief, however, can also relate to distressing symptoms experienced after a loss that isn’t due to death. For example, heartbreak is in a way grief too. So are the distressing symptoms I experienced when losing my sight and, later on, many acquired skills due to autistic burnout.

Most people will be familiar with the five stages of grief described by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross. These stages are denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. In reality though, many people will not necessarily experience these stages in order and they may fall back due to stress. Still, many of the symptoms associated with the earlier stages in this model, made it into the criteria for prolonged grief disorder. Symptoms of prolonged grief include:


  • Identity disruption (eg. feeling as though a part of oneself has died).

  • Marked sense of disbelief about the death.

  • Avoidance of reminders that the person is dead.

  • Intense emotional pain (eg. anger, bitterness, sorrow) related to the death.

  • Difficulty reintegrating, such as problems engaging with friends, pursuing interests or planning for the future.

  • Emotional numbness (absence or marked reduction of emotional experience).

  • Feeling that life is meaningless.

  • Intense loneliness: feeling alone or detached from others.

Of course, people can experience many of these symptoms without having lost a loved one to death. Emotional numbness and avoidance of triggers, after all, are also symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. Many other symptoms occur in people who were traumatized in some way too. As an example, I relate to all symptoms when the aspect of bereavement is removed, and not just since Barry was put down. I don’t know whether that makes sense, but oh well.

Freud’s Theory of Personality #AtoZChallenge

Posted on by Astrid

Hi everyone. For my letter F post in the #AtoZChallenge on personal growth, I want to talk about Sigmund Freud’s theory of personality.

According to Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), the human personality consists of three main components: the id, the ego and the superego.

The id refers to sexual and aggressive drives that, Freud claims, are fully unconscious. More broadly, it refers to the drive for pleasure and the drive to avoid discomfort. This is the only part of the personality that Freud thinks is present from birth. As such, an infant cannot delay their need for gratification. For instance, when they are hungry, they are not able to keep themselves from showing this.

The ego is the part of the personality, both unconscious and conscious, that helps regulate the id and express our impulses in a way that’s acceptable in the real world.

The superego, which doesn’t start developing until a child is about five-years-old according to Freud, is the part of the mind that allows a person to distinguish right from wrong. This part includes the conscience, which is the part of the mind responsible for signaling that something is “bad”, as well as the ego ideal, which holds the person’s ideas of what is desired of them or what is “good”.

Healthy personality development can only happen if there’s a balance between the id, the ego and the superego, that is, if the ego is capable of moderating the other two parts of the personality. As such, if a person has an overactive id, they are thought to become impulsive or otherwise antisocial. On the other hand, if a person has an overactive superego, they will become overly judgmental. Freud actually claimed that pretty much all mental illnesses are down to imbalanced personality development.

Freud describes several stages of personality development, which are all related to the way the child interacts with their body. For instance, the first stage is called the oral stage, in which a baby discovers their environment through their mouth.

It has been nearly twenty years since I read about Freud. Back then, I only saw how Freud’s theory was wrong on so many levels and particularly judgmental, especially towards women. For instance, Freud reasoned that women have a less well-developed moral sense than men. This is obviously not true.

However, now that I read up on Freud’s theory, I can see certain parallels between Freud’s thoughts and the modern ideas of emotional development. For example, behavior signaling pleasure or discomfort is still strongly associated with Anton Došen’s first stage of emotional development. This is not, for clarity’s sake, meant to defend Freud, whose theory is not only grossly outdated but also horribly anti-woman, like I said. I guess this is a case of the saying that a broken clock is right twice a day.

Enneagram: The Nine-Point Circle of Personality #AtoZChallenge

Posted on by Astrid

Hi everyone. I’m late writing my letter E post in the #AtoZChallenge, because I didn’t have time to prewrite it. Yesterday, I was at my and my spouse’s house to say goodbye to our cat, who had to be put down today. When I came back to the institution, I didn’t feel well enough to write my post for today, hence why I’m writing it this evening. My letter E post is about the Enneagram.

What is the Enneagram? The Enneagram of personality is a system of nine different interconnected personality types. Its origin and history are disputed, with many people claiming it has ancient roots. Modern ideas about it, however, mostly come from Bolivian psycho-spiritual teacher Oscar Ichazo in the 1950s and Chilean psychiatrist Claudio Naranjo in the 1970s.

The basis of the idea are the nine points on a geometric figure called enneagram. There is some so-called “sacred geometry” behind the ways the points are connected. For example, the points 3, 6 and 9 are connected and so are the other six points. It has something to do with the fact that one divided by seven is a repetitive number sequence with no three, six or nine in it. I don’t know the details though.

For clarity’s sake, the Enneagram is not science-based, but that doesn’t keep people in the fields of leadership and spirituality from using it.

Like I said, there are nine types on the Enneagram. These can be divided into different categories. For example, there are the centers of intelligence, which are heart (types 2, 3 and 4), head (types 5, 6 and 7) and body (types 8, 9 and 1). There are also instinctual subtypes of each Enneagram type, namely social (SO), sexual/one-to-one (SX), and self-preserving (SP). Everyone uses all three instincts, but one is more dominant than the others.

The nine Enneagram types are mainly defined by a person’s core motivations, or what drives people to act in a certain way. The types are:


  • Type 1: the perfectionist/reformer. Their core desire is to be good/right and they strive to be correct, appropriate, virtuous and ethical.

  • Type 2: the helper/giver. Type Twos want to be appreciated and seen as helpful people.

  • Type 3: the performer/achiever. Type Threes want to be valued and successful.

  • Type 4: the romantic individualist. Fours’ main desire is to be authentic and to find their own place in the world.

  • Type 5: the observer/investigator. Fives mainly want to be competent and capable.

  • Type 6: the loyalist. Sixes mainly want to be secure, safe and supported.

  • Type 7: the enthusiast. Sevens mainly want to be happy, unrestrained and satisfied

  • Type 8: the protector/challenger. Eights’ main focus is on being independent and protecting themselves

  • Type 9: the peacemaker. Nines are mainly focused on being at peace and maintaining harmony.

Like I’ve often said, I’m most likely a type Four. More specifically, I’m probably an SX4.

Dysfunctional Families: Characteristics Seen in Adult Children #AtoZChallenge

Posted on by Astrid

Hi everyone. Today’s topic choice was hard once again, so I eventually decided on one related to yesterday’s topic of codependency. Today, I am going to describe the characteristics of adult children of dysfunctional families.

First, what is a dysfunctional family? It could refer to a family in which one or both parents are alcoholics or addicts. This was how originally ACoA (Adult Children of Alcoholics) was started, but later “and dysfunctional families” was added. Dysfunctional families are, in this sense, also families in which one or both parents are abusive or neglectful.

What effects does growing up in a dysfunctional family have on adult children? Adult Children of Alcoholics and Dysfunctional Families has a laundry list of characteristics of adults who grew up in dysfunctional households. This list includes being an approval-seeker, being frightened by angry people and frightened of personal criticism, having low self-esteem and stuffing or denying your feelings.

Most of these characteristics are what Lindsay C. Gibson, author of Adult Children of Emotionally Immature Parents, calls “internalizing” traits. However, depending on your role in a dysfunctional family, you could also end up externalizing your trauma. By this I mean that you end up being toxic or abusive yourself. This particularly happens to adult children who were the “golden child” or “hero” in an abusive family. A “golden child” is a child who is praised excessively and used to uphold the family’s “perfect” image. These children are often the parents’ “favorite” and may get spoiled. As Pete Walker, author of Complex PTSD: From Surviving to Thriving, says, however, being spoiled excessively is traumatic in its own right.

I myself exhibit both internalizing and externalizing traits of being an adult child. I could, for instance, relate to at least half the items on the “laundry list”, but also can be emotionally volatile and demanding. I was, also, usually treated as the family’s “golden child”. This sometimes makes me feel sad, but I try to focus on self-awareness and healing instead.

Codependency and Emotional Dependence #AtoZChallenge

Posted on by Astrid

Hi everyone. For my letter C post in the #AtoZChallenge, I wasn’t really sure what topic to pick. I could go with cognitive functions, but without explaining personality typologies first, this wouldn’t make sense. Since I chose the broad topic of personal growth for my theme, I could however choose a topic that isn’t necessarily related to personality. IN this post, I’m talking about codependency.

What is codependency? In a narrow sense, it refers to certain behaviors exhibited by individuals in a close relationship with an addict. The addict is, in this sense, dependent on a substance (or behavior) and their partner is codependent, as in “second-degree dependent”.

I used to understand codependency as involving just enabling behaviors. For example, a codependent person might be manipulated into giving the addict access to their drug of choice. In this case, a person buying alcohol and giving it to an alcoholic, is codependent.

Actually though, codependency isn’t just the direct enabling of an addiction. It also happens in abusive relationships in which neither of the parties involved is an addict. For example, a person staying with their partner in spite of domestic violence, could also be seen as codependent.

Codependency, as such, is more related to being emotionally dependent on someone else despite them being in some way toxic. It could also be seen as compulsive caregiving.

For clarity’s sake, though their are certain individual traits that make someone more susceptible to becoming codependent, codependency is at least as much an attribute of the relationship as it is of the individual.

How can you heal from codependency? The first step is to set healthy boundaries. This means that boundaries are not so weak that they allow others to use you as a doormat and not so rigid that you end up self-isolating. Of course, what boundaries you set, depends on the person you’re setting boundaries with. For example, you may want to go no-contact with an abuser, but keep a supportive friend close by.

Another step in the healing process is to recognize yourself as a unique individual separate from the addict or abusive person you’re codependent on. And, for that matter, separate from everyone else in the world. This means learning about and validating your own preferences, wants and needs. As you learn to be more aware of your own individuality, you’ll start to develop greater emotional independence.

Healing from codependency will ultimately help you have healthy relationships with the people around you.

I am not currently in an abusive relationship and don’t have any close relatives who are addicts. As such, I am not really codependent on anyone at the moment. However, being that I grew up in a dysfunctional family, I do share some traits of emotional dependency. I was at one point also diagnosed with dependent personality disorder (DPD), even though my psychologist at the time only chose that diagnosis to make it look like I was misusing care. She actually claimed that I was perfectly capable of asserting myself, which people with DPD definitely aren’t.

Like I said, codependency is at least in part defined by the relationship, whereas DPD is a diagnosis meant for an individual. It doesn’t, however, take into account the fact that many adult children of dysfunctional families will end up showing (co)dependent behaviors in other relationships too.

Big Five: The Five-Factor Model of Personality #AtoZChallenge

Posted on by Astrid

Hi everyone. For my letter B post in the #AtoZChallenge on personal growth, I’d like to discuss the five-factor model of personality, also known as the Big Five.

The Big Five are five personality traits that psychologists think comprise the human personality. These were proposed based on factor analysis of words people use to describe someone’s behavior. Apparently, these five traits encompass all aspects of the human personality.

Unlike with some other personality typologies, the Big Five isn’t a dichotomous system. Rather, the traits are a spectrum ranging from one extreme to the other and everyone falls somewhere along the spectrum on each trait.

The traits are commonly summed up in the CANOE or OCEAN acronym. They are:


  • Conscientiousness: efficient/organized vs. haphazard/careless.

  • Agreeableness: sympathetic/cooperative vs. cold/competitive.

  • Neuroticism (or low emotional stability): moody/nervous vs. relaxed/calm.

  • Openness to experience: imaginative/philosophical vs. uncreative/unintellectual.

  • Extraversion: bold/energetic vs. shy/bashful.

As you can probably see, most of these traits are not formulated in a morally neutral way. For example, it’s often seen as better to be efficient and organized than to be careless. As such, a high score on all subscales (except for neuroticism) is generally seen as desirable.

I took a Big Five test once when in college and scored badly on all subscales except for openness to experience. Then again, there was a validity scale too, which scored how much you tend to answer in socially acceptable ways even if this isn’t genuine. On this subscale, I scored such that it’s likely that I rate myself more negatively than I am.

How valid are the Big Five in actually assessing someone’s personality? Studies have shown that they can be measured, but whether these are the real or only important personality traits, is still up for debate. For example, some researchers have suggested a sixth trait: honesty vs. humility. Do you notice how this one is actually worded in a morally neutral way?

Attachment Theory for Personal Growth #AtoZChallenge

Posted on by Astrid

Hi everyone and welcome to my eleventh attempt at doing the #AtoZChallenge. I’m doing it on personal growth and self-improvement this year and, for my letter A post, I want to talk about attachment styles.

Attachment theory was first developed by John Bowlby (1907-1990). Bowlby was educated in psychoanalysis but didn’t feel that this idea took into account a person’s environment.

Attachment theory is based on the bond between a child and their primary caregiver (usually mother) early in life. Bowlby observed that, if a child’s need for consistent, secure attachment isn’t met, that child will develop emotional, social and sometimes even cognitive problems.

The idea of attachment styles comes from Mary Ainsworth (1913-1999). She designed something called the “strange situation”. In this experiment, young toddlers (between 12 and 18 months of age) were observed during their interactions with their mothers, a stranger who was at one point introduced into the situation, and while alone.

This led to the idea that there are three distinct attachment styles:


  • Secure: the child reacts with distress in the absence of their mother but is easily soothed by her.

  • Resistant (now known as anxious or anxious-preoccupied): persistent distress that continues far longer even in the presence of the mother.

  • Avoidant (dismissive-avoidant): no outward signs of distress either when the mother leaves or when she returns: a child ignores the mother.

Later, a fourth attachment style (disorganized or fearful-avoidant) was added. Children who would be classified as having this attachment style, exhibit characteristics of both the resistant and avoidant style. For example, a child seeks comfort from the stranger rather than their mother.

Remember, attachment theory and attachment styles are based on observations of toddlers. As such, how relevant are these to adults? Current research shows that attachment styles are moderately stable over time. As such, if you had an insecure attachment style as a child, you’re likely to still have some attachment insecurity as an adult.

However, as you’ll see when I discuss other topics relevant to personal growth, hardly anything in the human psyche is black-or-white and this goes for attachment styles too. Rather, in adults, there are two continuums along which someone will function: attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance. Most people fall somewhere in the middle on both, experiencing some attachment anxiety and some attachment avoidance but not so much that it interferes with their daily life.

How does an insecure attachment style present in adults? Generally speaking, someone who leans towards dismissive-avoidant will value their independence, have difficulty sharing their emotions and have a hard time being in an intimate or otherwise close relationship.

People who have more of an anxious-preoccupied attachment style, are the opposite: they crave relationships and worry excessively about losing the people close to them, leading them towards neediness and manipulation.

People who exhibit disorganized attachment, will alternate between craving intimacy and avoiding it.

I at one point had an attachment styles questionnaire administered and scored highest on the anxious-preoccupied attachment style. I currently believe I have some avoidant tendencies too, so in terms of black-or-white attachment styles would be considered fearful-avoidant with a strong leaning towards anxious.

The Most Important Life Lesson

Posted on by Astrid

Hi everyone. Today Sadje asks us in her Sunday Poser to share life lessons we’ve learned. I was pretty sure I’d done a post on the most important lesson I’d learned in life some years ago, so went to look and indeed, I wrote about this topic in 2018. Wow, how time has flown!

And it doesn’t surprise me that, when I read Sadje’s question, my initial thought was to share the exact same lesson I shared back then: that it’s important to stay true to yourself. Today though, I’m going to make it even bolder: I am the most important person in my life. That sounds selfish, right? But guess what? Each of us is the most important person in our own life. You can’t live for anyone else, by which I mean no-one else can make you happy. No, not even when you think that someone else does; it’s still your understanding of their love or acceptance that makes you happy.

To word it even more bluntly, if everyone thinks of themself first, no-one will be forgotten. This doesn’t mean we need to be going against moral sensibility or harming other people just because we want it. After all, harming others isn’t in our own best interest in the long run either.

By saying that no-one else can make us happy, I also didn’t mean we don’t need connections. However, no-one else can live our life for us.

I also want to share what learning this life lesson has helped me with since 2018. I still struggle with everyday decisions, but I attribute this to the fact that I often get overwhelmed with them.

I am happy to report that, since indeed landing in a less than supportive environment (ie. the intensive support home) in 2022, I was able to stand up for what I needed. I’m now back in quite a supportive place, but I’m glad I’m still able to advocate for myself. This doesn’t mean that the thought that everyone will ultimately abandon me if I’m myself, is gone. It’s worse than ever, in fact. I still need to work on the idea that, even if they do, that doesn’t mean I’m a bad person.

Comparing Myself to Others as an Enneagram Type Four

Posted on by Astrid

Hi everyone. I’ve reflected on the Enneagram as it relates to me several times before. I often use Enneagram-based journaling prompts for this. Today, a prompt that was designed for those who are type One, the “Perfectionist”, spoke to me. I’m not a One, but, as a Four, I gravitate to type One when in a good mental state. The prompt was how I judge myself and whether I compare myself with others.

Since the prompt resonated with me, I decided to look at the prompts designed for type Fours. There, I found one that asked me who I compare myself to.

I am by no means an expert on the Enneagram, but the first prompt made me think of comparing myself in order to judge and maybe boost my achievements. In other words, if someone else can do something, I should be able to do it too. The prompt for type Fours, on the other hand, made me think of comparison as the beginning stage of envy. In other words, if someone else appears to have or be something I am not or don’t have, I wonder: “Why not me?!” Or worse yet: “Why them?!”

I think that comparing yourself to others can be healthy, when it is done in a constructive way. I’m not saying that Ones’ way of comparing themselves to others, is always healthy. After all, comparing your achievements to others’ can lead to self-defeating beliefs too. In other words, if someone else can do something you can’t, you may be just as likely to fall into the trap of wondering “why not me?” as I am when someone seems to have an “ideal” life.

For me, indeed, comparing my achievements to those of others, sometimes leads to low self-esteem. However, it can also lead to self-motivation. Sometimes I see the possibilities and use this to inspire my own creativity, while at other times, I see that others are “better” and end up wallowing in self-limiting beliefs. This is the fundamental difference, I think, between the question aimed at type One and the question for type Four: Ones are asked how they compare themselves to others, whereas Fours are asked who they compare themselves with. I, as a Four, often end up feeling bad when comparing myself with others. When I, however, let go of the “who” in the comparison, it doesn’t mean I won’t feel disappointed in myself, but chances are higher that I won’t see it as a personal flaw. And no, this is not a way of saying Ones are better than Fours, though of course as quite an unhealthy Four, I feel this way a lot. I’m saying that, when I let go of the “who” when comparing myself with others and instead focus on the “what” of other people’s achievements, I can use this as inspiration for my own personal development.

Experiencing Envy As an Enneagram Type Four

Posted on by Astrid

Hi everyone. Lately, I’ve had some real struggles that got me thinking hard about myself. I often want to love myself and that, interestingly, seems to include denying my less than stellar qualities. Then again, if I really want to love myself as I am, that includes accepting my shadow side too.

Today, I am focusing on one of these aspects of myself I’m not so proud of: envy. I’m exploring this from an Enneagram point of view.

As those who’ve read my other Enneagram-based posts know, I’m a type Four. Fours’ core vice is envy. More specifically though, I’m a sexual/one-to-one (SX) type where it comes to instinctual variants. These are not just focused on envy, but on competition.

I don’t necessarily consider myself very competitive in sports or games or whatever. In fact, I’m quite the opposite. However, I realized I’m an SX type when reading the first chapter of The Complete Enneagram by Beatrice Chestnut and watching some YouTube videos too. I realized I do compete with my fellow clients for care.

Like, I can’t stop claiming that one particular fellow client doesn’t need to deal with temp workers. Whether that’s true, doesn’t even matter to me, as I honestly couldn’t care less about his care. In that sense, I’m not competitive. Oh wait, that’s a lie. I didn’t start competing for care until I met the full-time one-on-one client at the intensive support home, so in this sense, it does matter what others have.

I do also believe envy is part of what got me to decide to enter a forum my spouse is active on recently (I left when my spouse called me out). My intention wasn’t to spy on my spouse, but rather I was envious of the connections my spouse had made through that forum. Never mind that I am on a ton of forums myself and could have developed genuine connections if I just cared to put in the effort. I probably have myself and my being a Four to blame for the fact that I never feel like I belong anywhere. Which makes me think, maybe I really am not an SX type, but a social (SO) type. I do need to look into instinctual variants more.