Differentiation and emotional maturity

A friend has been working on his differentiation of self for some time now. He is a curious learner, has done responsible self-work (reading, seeing a therapist, using a coach, working on his family of origin relationships), and he asks a lot of great questions. Recently he asked about the connection between differentiation of self and emotional maturity. Which got me to thinking and pondering about the matter.

While differentiation of self is a key concept in Bowen Family Systems Theory (BFST) it defines a narrow concept related to functioning. Specifically, the concept is not a description of a state of being or a “stage” a person arrives at or resides. It describes a way of functioning relative to ones capacity to separate thinking from feeling, thereby being non-reactive and less driven by emotionality when in relationship with others. This facilitates functioning out of one’s values and principles rather than anxiety and its derivatives (reactivity, triangling, herding, groupthink, enmeshment, etc.).

Rightly interpreted, Bowen’s Scale of Differentiation is a helpful schema for understanding the concept of differentiation of self. The problem lies in how often it is misinterpreted.

Emotional Maturity

I find myself favoring the concept of emotional maturity as a helpful frame of reference for many of the elements of differentiation of self. I think there is a direct correlation between a person’s emotional maturity and one’s capacity for differentiation. Given the fact that emotional maturity is a nuanced and dynamic concept, I also find it helpful to plot it in the wider categories of high, middle, and low levels, rather than on a scale.

Here is how the characteristics of emotional maturity may be described:

Low Emotional Maturity

• Prone to intense attachments or enmeshments
• Lack of self-awareness of emotions or interior life (may not be aware of cutoff, reactivity, stress, or anxiety)
• Lack of awareness of, and inability to reflect and interpret, family of origin emotional process
• Identity derived from roles or constructed-adopted persona (large pseudo-self)
• Tend toward polarization in relationships, with family and others
• Lack of capacity to be emotionally neutral. Their emotional stance is irrationally negative (antagonistic) or blindly positive (loyal).
• Often functions out of projection (takes everything personally).
• Lack capacity for empathy or perspective.
• Will tend to act out the anxiety in the family.
• Disruptions in significant relationships typically results in reactivity.
• Find it difficult to self-regulate in the midst of and in the wake of a crisis.
• Will invest self in a belief system or people who reassure their beliefs or who promise salvation, status, or privilege.
• Lack ability to question or reflect upon the consequences of their behavior.
• Lack awareness of how they communicate, or how they do not “connect” with others in their speech or behavior.
• Prone to absorb the anxiety of family or relationship system resulting in blame, guilt, and psychosomatic symptomology.
• Lack appropriate sense of boundaries (can be prone to over- or underfunctioning)
• Rarely find their self or their voice.
• Have a great need for a larger relationship system for managing anxiety.

Middle Emotional Maturity

• May often be too attached and prone to symptoms associated with dependency or fusion.
• When not highly anxious can separate appropriately from the family of origin and establish individual life principles and goals.
• In times of high anxiety will develop symptoms or function out of reactivity. But, they are able to self-regulate once anxiety diminishes.
• Can be aware of interior emotional process if they pay attention.
• Have an accurate level of awareness of how they are perceived by others and how their communication is being received by others.
• During times of anxiety will attack, coerce, herd, or use other methods to try and encourage conformity.
• They may gossip about people and not deal directly, but they make efforts to be principled with those who are important to them.
• Will unwittingly allow unhealthy and unethical behaviors as they are uncomfortable holding people responsible for what they do.
• Will do their (assigned) part (enabler, accomplice, triangle, IP, maintain secrets) to maintain homeostasis in a family or other system.

High Emotionally Maturity

• Highly emotionally mature people are rare. They seem to be the exception rather than the rule.
• They tend to rise to positions of leaders, teachers and healers.
• They can remain unattached to what and how others are feeling or to reactivity or emotionality.
• They have the capacity of seeing others as they are and validating them for who they are.
• They have no need to make others into something for their self-gratification, self-validation, or self-worth.
• They are clear about their principles and so stir reactions from others (both positive and negative).
• They function, and make decisions, based on their principles, ideals, and values rather than on personal need, or, on others’ personal needs, predilections, opinions, or demands.
• Their emotional field often is experienced as unique, powerful, and different. This can be attractive or experienced as a threat.
• They often form engender followings that admire or hate them. Either response may be a result of the fact that they don’t need others for affirmation or validation.
• They tend to be characterized by courage and so are able to challenge rather than pamper, can hold others accountable, and can be prophetic as well as visionary.
• They take responsibility for their own goals, their own position, and their own well-being rather than those of others.
• In work and relationships their influence is a result of empowering, permission-giving, and collaboration rather than insisting on conformity or setting ultimatums.

From, Perspectives on Congregational Leadership: Applying Systems Theory for Effective Leadership, by Israel Galindo. Check out the Perspectives on Congregational Leadership blog.