A noted psychologist had just finished his address to a group of professionals when a member of the audience approached him and introduced himself. The psychologist immediately recognized the name. Before him stood a world-famous doctor, once featured on the cover of Time magazine, whose medical innovations had transformed treatments and revolutionized curative procedures.
The esteemed doctor proceeded to confess that he had suffered his entire life from depression. As a boy, he loved to draw, and he had possessed a natural talent for artistic design. Growing up, he dreamt of one day becoming a successful architect.
But his parents had other ideas. “Architecture?” they asked. “No. You need to use your intelligence to support a family. You are going to medical school.”
And so he did, with almost unparalleled success. Nonetheless, despite his extraordinary contributions to medicine, the doctor felt unfulfilled in life for not having pursued his passion.
Sometime later, the psychologist lamented the insistence of the doctor’s parents, how they had deprived him of the life he had wanted and the sense of purpose that he had never realized. When he finished, the psychologist found himself confronted by several doctors from the audience.
“We know who you were talking about,” they said. “Do you have any idea how many lives were saved through his procedures and inventions? How dare you suggest that his own personal gratification outweighs the contribution he made to the world and the people he benefited?”
The psychologist later expressed his ambivalence. Were those other doctors right? Was the cost of personal satisfaction outweighed by the value to society? He admitted that he did not have an answer himself.
Grapple with the Gray
List two or three reasons supporting the psychologist’s inclination that the parents failed their son.
List two or three reasons supporting the other doctors’ assertion that the greater good outweighs the individual lack of fulfillment.
Is there another alternative?
Having weighed the options as a parent, what do you say?
Gray Matters
The doctors who criticized the psychologist are indulging in a common fallacy. Now that we know the outcome, it’s easy to project back and opine what should or should not have been done at the beginning. However, Monday-morning-quarterbacking is useless when the first whistle signals the opening kickoff on Sunday afternoon.
If the parents had a crystal ball and could see alternative futures—one where their son lived a highly influential but ultimately unfulfilled life, and another where he enjoyed personal satisfaction but left no great mark upon society—then we might be able to engage in a reasonable debate. Indeed, self-sacrifice on any level for the greater good is a value that supersedes almost every other.
But to force a child to abandon not only his hopes and dreams but his natural talents and passions is an entirely different matter. Moreover, the parents here were not committed to all the good their son might do as a doctor but rather the financial rewards they saw in his professional future. Not every doctor changes the medical landscape for the better. Indeed, some do great harm. And some architects truly do change the world for the better through their visionary achievements. Imagine if Frank Lloyd Wright had become a radiologist and Frank Gehry a thoracic surgeon.
Of course, fiscal reality must figure into any deliberation of vocational future. A child determined to become a poet needs to be made aware of the very long odds of supporting himself, just as a child set on becoming a major-league pitcher or NBA center is best served to have some kind of backup plan to ensure financial security.
But to disregard a child’s dreams and inclinations out of hand, especially in our current age of opportunity, no matter how practical or idealistic the motives, seems both insensitive and cruel.