The word 'ego' comes from psychology and it's been well enough documented by both Jung and Freud. Spirituality 'stole' it and redefined it for its own ends, and ended up with a scapegoat to point a finger at so that they could feel better about themselves. That's stereotypical ego. Then comes the psychoanalysis from people who are experts because...... Pick a reason. All that happens is that they become ignorant victims of their own definitions.

If you're going to be Spiritual then the Sanskrit word to use is "Ahamkara," which provided the basis for Jung's work on the ego. Jung was actually well-learned on Sanskrit religious philosophy, more so than the Spiritual people who depict ego as the bad guy. The ancients wouldn't have used a Latin word anyway because it hadn't been invented then. Dontcha just love the irony? In another irony the ancients didn't differentiate religion/philosophy from psychology so the Spirituality of ignoring the understanding of the Jungian ego is not very Spiritual.

Both Aham and ego mean 'I' and Ahamkara is at the basis of this discussion. A kara is an 'invented thing', just like the ego of Spirituality because its basis is the person's false perceptions, agenda or both - https://www.britannica.com/topic/ahamkara

Crying because the child is cold and hungry are largely automatic functions and have little to do with consciousness/awareness, it's not until later in Life that the personality forms and the child becomes conscious/aware that "I am hungry." or "I have a wet backside." Until there is an ego/personality there is no sense of self. Children accept what their parents say because they have not developed a sense of "I am" until later in their childhood - they don't have a personality and their individuation process is very much in the early stages. According to Jung individuation doesn't really occur until much later in life - 20s or 30s. This is why many Spiritual people report an awakening around that time in their Lives, they are 'awake' to their own individuality. In early childhood the individuation process has just begun but the child is just forming their individuality, and as such has no real concept of their own individual beliefs. AS Jung would perhaps describe it, their egos have no 'contents.

Ego death (the 'real one') happens when the ego and its contents 'collapse' into the self, often caused by severe emotional trauma. It leaves the person unable to function so if someone without an ego is functional enough to come into the forum and declare they don't have an ego, they have an ego. This state is what's known in Spirituality as non-differentiated consciousness. It has been achieved by Spiritual adepts in temples as God-like will attest to, but it leaves the adept needing to be spoon-fed and have their nappies changed. Their whole Lives they strive to become what they already were.

If you want to understand this -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssuDqtUcKEw
and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhAeXyVDDTc


What you do with those links, or not, will give you an insight into your ego. And returning to the OP, doing and happening occur within the sphere of the differentiated ego-consciousness. In doing, the ego-consciousness assumes agency while happening can assume external agency.