Attachment
and Bonding
Infants form attachments to caregivers and parents bond to
their offspring. Seems clear. Maybe not! Infants and parents are
complex. Attachment and bonding are complex processes. Not only
the media, but many professionals talk about attachment and
bonding in the same breath, as if they were different words for
the same thing.
In this issue of Early Report our authors clarify issues
involved in attachment and bonding. To lay the groundwork, we
asked Dr. Charles Nelson of the Institute of Child Development to
describe what the healthy newborn is like. Dr. Nelson tells us
that newborns are very well suited to their new lives, yet will
make tremendous advances in the early years and months.
Next, Dr. L. Alan Sroufe of the Institute of Child Development
draws the distinctions between bonding and attachment. Dr. Sroufe
points out that bonding refers to a mother's initial reaction to
her baby, but isn't necessarily restricted to the first moments
after birth. In contrast, attachment develops over the long haul
and has much more important implications for later growth.
Dr. Martha Erickson explains, on page 5, how attachment
relationships are formed, differences between "secure"
and "insecure" attachments, and what circumstances are
most likely to result in good relationships.
Terri Smith looks at some of the most recent studies on
attachment and offers a sampling of the interesting questions
that are being asked by researchers.
Finally, in the regular feature On the Director's Mind, Dr.
Richard Weinberg briefly discusses the effects of media coverage
of the war on young children.
-Kathy Kolb
The Capabilities of the
Human Newborn
William James, the prominent Harvard Psychologist who many
think of as the founder of psychology in the United States,
described the newborn infant's world as a "booming, buzzing
confusion. " At the time this was written (nearly 100 years
ago), this view was shared by many pediatricians and although
they were far fewer in number than today, child psychologists.
Although James' view of the newborn now seems shortsighted, it
was most likely due to our inability to study the young of our
species, and not sheer ignorance on James' part.
The scientific study of infant behavior formally began
somewhat more than 30 years ago, ushered in, in part, by the
innovative methods developed by the psychologist Robert Fantz (of
Case Western Reserve University). Fantz observed that infants
tended to look longer, or "prefer," visual patterns
they had never seen before, vs. patterns they had seen before.
Since Fantz's early reports, countless studies have examined the
capabilities of infants of all ages. The goal of this brief note
is to describe some of what we know about the newborn.
Vision: More Than Meets the Eye
In part because Fantz's first studies were
concerned with the infant's visual world, we tend to know a great
deal about this ability. In brief, we now know that newborns are
not born blind. Their vision is approximately 20/400 to 20/600.
What this translates to is that for an adult with normal vision,
objects that can be seen clearly 400 to 600 feet away can only be
seen clearly by the newborn at 20 feet away (e.g., think of the
largest letters at the top of the eye chart often displayed in
doctors' offices). Although this is by no means great eyesight,
it is sufficient for the newborn to he able to recognize general
features of the face (such as to distinguish Mom from Dad) and
very large objects. This is particularly true for things shown at
a distance of approximately 10 inches, which is ideal for the
newborn's world.
Aside from how well infants see (or don't see) at birth, we
also know that they have some color vision (although it will be
far better developed by 4 months) and fairly good motion
perception, but only minimal ability to gauge the distances of
things.
Making Sense of Other Senses
Although newborn vision isn't particularly
impressive, it is reassuring to know that the other sense
modalities are considerably more advanced. For example, at birth
infants will show different patterns and degrees of body movement
depending on what touches them (e.g., a puff of air directed at
their bellies vs. stroking). Their sense of smell is also
reasonably sophisticated; for example, based on the direction
they turn their heads, newborns can distinguish between the smell
of their mothers from that of a stranger. Finally, their sense of
taste is also well developed. Indeed, infants not only prefer
sweet solutions over salty or bitter tasting solutions (based on
how much they eat) but they also prefer some types of sweets over
others (e.g., glucose is preferred over lactose; note, however,
that it has not yet been determined if they prefer bitter-sweet
chocolate over sweet chocolate!).
Although hearing develops somewhat later than these other
senses, it is more sophisticated than vision. For example, in
work that is now widely known, Anthony DeCasper (University of
North Carolina-Greensboro) has demonstrated (based on patterns of
sucking behavior) that newborns just a few hours old are able to
recognize their mother's voice (but not their father's). The
basis for this recognition has been thought to be prenatal
experience in hearing the mother's voice. Note, though, that it
is not until about 3 months that infants will recognize their
mother's face. And, it is likely not until 6 or 7 months that
infants begin to think of their mothers as a very special person
in their world (Dads also become "special" about this
age).
The newborn's physical and motor skills are about equal to
their visual perceptual skills. They come into life possessing a
variety of reflexes that assist them in a number of different
ways; for example, if their cheek is stimulated, they will turn
their head in the direction of the stimulation (this is called
the "rooting" reflex, which facilitates finding their
feeding source). Other reflexes, such as the "crawling"
and "walking" reflexes, likely have some bearing on the
more advanced and voluntary forms of these behaviors that develop
toward the middle to end of the first year.
Infants Become Thinking, Feeling
Beings
The newborns' perceptual abilities are more
advanced than their cognitive (thinking) abilities. There is some evidence that
newborns can remember simple patterns for brief periods of time (e.g., a few
seconds to a few minutes), but in general their memory abilities are not
terribly well developed. Some of this is likely due to the immature status of
the brain, which will undergo considerable development over the next several
years.
Like the newborn's cognitive abilities, the development of
social and emotional behaviors have a relatively long incubation
period. Although newborns do smile, such smiles are generally
more of a reflex than a response to a social situation; social
smiling as a rule doesn't occur until 6 to 8 weeks. Similarly,
although newborns might be able to tell the difference between a
smiling face and a sad face, they have no idea what these faces
mean to humans. This latter ability may not begin to develop
until closer to the first year of life, and likely undergoes
further development over the next 1 to 2 years. Their own
production of emotion is also limited; emotions that adults
interpret as excitement and/or joy are frequently seen, but more
differentiated emotions like "afraid" or
"angry" or "sad" develop later in the first
year.
Overall, the newborn's world is far from the "booming
buzzing confusion" William James described. Although they
appear uncoordinated and unsophisticated to the untrained eye
(e.g., they don't say much at cocktail parties), they in fact are
born with a rich repertoire of behaviors that will assist them in
becoming the more mature infant of just a few months later.
By Charles Nelson, Ph.D.; Professor of Developmental
Psychology at the Institute of Child Development, University of
Minnesota.
Sorting it Out:
Attachment and Bonding
The terms "attachment" and "bonding" are
often used interchangeably, as though they had similar
implications. However, they have quite distinctive meanings.
Bonding actually refers to the parent's tie to the infant and is
thought to occur in the first hours or days of life. Attachment,
in contrast, refers to the relationship between infants and
primary caregivers, which develops gradually.
Parent to infant bonding has been argued to occur quite
suddenly, especially upon first contact with the infant
immediately after birth. There is no such implication in the term
attachment. As with any vital relationship, there can be no
instant attachment. Rather, the infant-caregiver relationship
builds over time. It evolves through a series of characteristic
phases, with each phase drawing on the one before. In fact,
newborn infants are not yet capable of attachment, since they
have little ability to distinguish one person from another and no
concept of a permanent object. Because attachment refers to a
relationship and not simply an experience of the parent, it is
not appropriate to say that an attachment relationship has formed
until the second half year. Even then the relationship is not
fully formed or fixed. It continues to evolve toward what John
Bowlby called a "partnership" during the preschool
years and to be elaborated thereafter.
From the bonding perspective there are critical moments just
following birth when the parental tie must be formed. Analogies
are made to imprinting in birds and other animals, and there is a
focus upon holding the infant and mutual gaze. Whether for mother
or father, such experiences are thought to cement the connection
with the infant. Following such an opportunity a permanent bond
will be formed. Without such an opportunity the possibility of
ever forming a bond is called into question. For better or worse
the relationship is fixed, and the child's well-being is thought
to hinge upon this.
The Ups and Downs of
"Bonding"
While the concept of bonding has been useful, it
also has had many unfortunate implications. On the positive side
it did encourage changes in rigid hospital policies which had
disenfranchised mothers and families. Now parents are often
encouraged to greet and engage the new infant. And this is fine.
It is a normal and important part of the human experience.
However, this term, and the surrounding mythology, implied that
when parents did not have opportunities for early skin to skin
contact (for example, in the cases of prematurity or adoption),
they could never adequately bond to the infant and that the
child's emotional health might be permanently compromised . Not
so poignant, but equally unfortunate, was the implication that if
there was an opportunity for early bonding, the job of parenting
was nearly complete. Both ideas have been shown to be wholly
mistaken by more than a decade of research (see below).
The bonding concept also is misleading in implying that these
very early experiences are highly salient for the infant. But the
newborn, whose neocortex is scarcely functional, has virtually no
capacity to retain experiences at this time. The time after birth
is often, though certainly not always, a magic moment for
parents. After all, infants commonly are awake and alert at this
time. However, there is no reason to believe it is a meaningful
experience for the infant. It is much later that infants can
truly share emotional experiences with their parents.
Attachment: A Lifelong Commitment
From the attachment or relationship perspective,
all of early childhood experience is important. While the
specific attachment between infant and caregiver does not emerge
until the second six months of life, it builds upon the history
of interaction that precedes it. Just as relationships between
adult partners are based on what they do together over time, so
the infant-caregiver attachment is built upon all that is shared
over the weeks and months of early childhood.
It is in this sense that the early days and weeks of life are
important. They mark the beginning of the process of getting to
know each other. But the first weeks are no more important than
later weeks and months. The quality of the relationship depends
on the entire history of care. If the infant experiences
consistent, dependable care that is responsive to his signals and
needs, he will develop an abiding confidence in care and trust in
self and others. This is what is meant by a secure attachment
relationship. It cannot be instantly achieved, nor can it be lost
in the early days of life. Those who cannot have immediate
contact with their infant may have some catching up to do, and
those who adopt may have some early history to overcome and a
period of readjustment, but secure attachment relationships,
characterized by parental love and infant trust, remain the norm.
Research has demonstrated the strength of the attachment
relationship. Studies have shown that premature but otherwise
healthy newborns, separated for an average of two weeks at birth,
were just as likely as full-term infants to be securely attached
by the end of the first year. Likewise, infants adopted in the
first half year are as likely to be securely attached as infants
raised from birth by their natural parents.
Finally, there is evidence that even when attachments are not
secure at the end of the first year they may yet change. Such
"anxious attachments," as they are called, can become
secure even in a 6-month period if the quality of care changes,
which tends to occur when the parent's own life circumstances
change toward the better.
Both attachment theory and the bonding perspective emphasize
early experience and the critical role of infant-parent
relationships in later development of the child. In fact, the
mechanisms involved in the attachment process are so important to
human development that the concept of unattached children is not
very meaningful . Under only the most bizarre circumstances, such
as a child being reared in an institution without a parent, would
a child not form an attachment to one or more caregivers.
Yet even within attachment theory there are limits to what the
infant can "cope" with. If too much time passes without
the opportunity to form a stable, supportive relationship the
child may develop a fundamental handicap in the ability to form
other relationships in the future. Children moved from placement
to placement or who experience repeated or unresolved losses of
parents are at serious risk for developmental problems,
especially since it is more difficult to alter an insecure
relationship than to build a secure relationship in the first
place. Still, the situation is not nearly so rigid as implied by
the bonding concept. One has months, if not years, to build the
relationship with the young child, rather than hours or days. And
even when early relationship development goes awry, opportunities
for change remain. Only when there is a lack of stable,
responsive care over an extended period of time do children seem
to become locked in helplessness or an antagonistic stance toward
the social world.
By L. Alan Sroufe, Ph.D.; Professor of Developmental
Psychology at the Institute of Child Development, University of
Minnesota.
Some References from the Sroufe and
Erickson Articles
Ainsworth, M. D. S., Elehar, M., Watern, E., & Wall, S.
(1978). Patterns of attachment. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss, Vol. 1: Attachment.
New York: Basic Books.
Bretherton, E, & Waters, E. (Eds.). (1985). Growing points
in attachment theory and research. Monographs of the Society for
Research In Child Development.
Egeland, B., & Erickson, M. F. (1987). Psychological
unavailability: The effects on development of young children and
the implications for intervention. In M. R. Brassard, R. Germain,
& S. N. Hart (Eds.), Psychological maltreatment of children
and youth. New York: Pergamon.
Egeland, B., & Farber, E. A. (1984). Infant-mother
attachment: related to its development and changes over time .
Child Development, 55 (3), 753-771 .
Erickson, M. F., & Pianta, R., & Egeland, B.
(1984, April). Behavior problems in young children: Early identification and
prevention. Symposium presented to the National Association of School
Psychologists, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Erickson, M. F., & Pianta, R. C. (1989, July). New
lunchbox, old feelings: What kids bring to school. Early
Education and Development, 1 (1), 35-49.
Erickson, M. F., Sroufe, L.A., & Egeland, B. (1985). The
relationship between quality of attachment and behavior problems
in preschool in a high-risk sample. In I. Bretherton & E.
Waters (Eds.), Monographs of the Society for Research In Child
Development, 50, (1-2) 147-166.
Lewis, M., Feiring, C., McGurfog, C., & Jaskir, J. (1984).
Predicting psychopathology in six-year-olds from early social
relations. Child Development, 55, 123-136.
Rode, S. S., Chang, P., Finch, R. O., and Sroufe, L. A.
(1981). Attachment patterns of infants separated at birth,
Developmental Psychology, l7, 188-191 .
Singer, L., Brodziniky, D., Ramsay, D., Stein, M., &
Waters, E. (1985). Mother-infant attachment in adoptive families.
Child Development, 56, 1543-1551 .
Sroufe, L. A. (1983) . Infant-caregiver attachment and
patterns of adaptation in preschool: The roots of maladaptation
and competence. In M. Perlmutter (Ed.), Minnesota symposium in
child psychology, Vol. 16. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Vaughn, B., Egeland, B., Waters, E., & Sroufe, L. A.
(1979). Individual differences in infant-mother attachment at 12
and 18 months: Stability and change in families under stress.
Child Development, 50, 971-975.
The Importance of
Attachment in Children's Development
The first year of an infant's life is characterized by
phenomenal changes in how she understands and interacts with the
world around her. According to Erik Erikson's now-classic
explanation of growth within the entire lifespan, the most
important task of that first year is to establish a sense of
basic trust of others. Other theorists and researchers have
further explained and expanded upon Erikson's basic notions of
trust and security in infancy. Notable among these are John
Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth with their pioneering work on the
importance of parent-infant attachment.
Human infants automatically form attachments to the adults who
care for them in the first few months of life. As described by
Alan Sroufe in this issue of Early Report, attachments develop
over time, typically becoming well established by about one year
of age. Nearly all infants form attachments, the only likely
exceptions being children who are so severely disabled that they
cannot engage in reciprocal interactions with caregivers, or
those children, perhaps in institutions, who have no opportunity
for sustained interactions with a caregiver.
Attachment: A Firm Foundation
Although virtually all infants form attachments to their
caregivers, these relationships vary in quality. Researchers
classify attachments as secure or anxious. In general, a
one-year-old who is securely attached is able to enthusiastically
play and explore the environment in the presence of the
attachment figure, periodically sharing a look, a smile, or
showing the caregiver a toy. When tired, sick, or upset, the
securely attached child readily seeks and accepts comfort from
the caregiver. Through months of experience with a caregiver who
is sensitive and predictable, this child learns to trust that the
caregiver will be there to meet her needs. And this child learns
to trust in her own ability to solicit that care. That basic
trust in caregivers and in oneself is carried forward,
influencing the child's expectations and behavior in subsequent
relationships with other adults and peers.
One hypothesis is that the child who is securely attached at
one year becomes the competent toddler and preschooler. A number
of studies support this. In one study, for example, two-year-olds
who were securely attached as infants were more compliant,
enthusiastic, and persistent in solving problems. At age
three-and-a-half these same children were more socially competent
with peers than children who had not been securely attached
infants. At age 4 to 5, children with secure attachment histories
have been observed to be more confident and socially competent in
peer relations than children who were anxiously attached.
In contrast, the anxiously attached infant typically exhibits
one of two patterns of behavior:
- The “anxious-resistant” infant apparently
learns she cannot trust the caregiver to respond to her
needs in a predictable way, therefore does not dare to
venture out to play and explore. Even though this child
is often extremely upset when separated from the
caregiver, when they are reunited the child seems unable
to accept comfort from the caregiver, often alternating
between desperate clinginess and active resistance
(sometimes even aggression). This pattern of attachment
has been shown to be related to inconsistent,
unpredictable care during the early months of the child's
life.
- The “anxious-avoidant” infant has apparently
experienced interactions with a caregiver who does not
respond to the infant's bids for care and attention. They
do not appear to be upset when separated from their
caregiver and actively avoid interacting with the
caregiver when they are reunited.
We might infer that these infants come to characterize others
as unpredictable or unavailable, and themselves as powerless to
solicit the care they need. Anxious-resistant and
anxious-avoidant children develop little confidence that they
will be successful in future relationships and ventures. Not
surprisingly, anxiously attached one-year-olds are likely to
exhibit significant behavior problems by the time they are 4 or 5
years of age, especially in cases where their caregiving
environment does not improve during the intervening years.
These children also have more difficulty adjusting to
kindergarten. The relation between anxious attachment and
subsequent problems is especially strong among low SES families
in which there often are more generally stressful events that
have a negative impact on both child and parent, as well as fewer
protective factors operating to mediate the negative effects of
an anxious attachment. Interestingly, in a study on a
middle-class sample, it was found that anxiously attached boys
had more behavior problems in school, but only if their families
experienced high levels of stress.
Sensitivity: The Path to Secure Attachment
Studies about parent-infant relationships show that the most
powerful component of a secure attachment is early, sensitive
care for children, characterized by:
- recognition that even the youngest infant can signal her
needs and wishes;
- accurate reading and interpretation of infant cues and
signals;
- letting the child's signals, rather than the parents'
needs or wishes, set the agenda;
- and consistency or predictability over time.
Of course no parent can or should jump at every little signal
the baby gives; but the child's overall experience should be that
her signals are effective in getting a response--that caregivers
are available and willing to respond. In order to respond
sensitively, a parent must understand the cues and signals of the
child, be willing to respond, and have the emotional strength and
social support necessary to sustain sensitivity over time.
There are several “forms” of insensitive parenting.
One is a persistent, chronic failure to respond to the infant's
cries and other bids for attention--an especially harmful form of
insensitivity. The long-term effects of emotional
unresponsiveness include anxious-avoidant attachment, declining
intellectual functioning, and often serious behavior problems.
Insensitivity also may be inconsistent, erratic patterns of
responding to the infant. Or it may be intrusiveness, which is a
failure to respect the child's signals that say, “I don't
feel like playing (or eating or being tickled or kissed) right
now.” Insensitivity does not imply bad intentions on
the part of the adult, but may result from inaccurate knowledge,
erroneous beliefs (e.g., that responding consistently to a baby's
cries will “spoil” the baby), stress and exhaustion, or
emotional issues that render the caregiver unable to be available
to the child.
Implications for Professional Practice
The challenge to professionals working with young children and
families is to provide the information and support that will
empower parents to provide the sensitive care their children need
and deserve. Under ideal conditions that would happen early
enough in the infant's life--or even prenatally--so that a secure
attachment might be established during the first year of life.
But, in cases where that is not possible, we can work with
parents and children at later periods of development to improve
the quality of their relationship, knowing that the child's fate
is not sealed just because of a less-than-optimal start. The
presence of other supportive adults in the child's life also can
provide an important buffer to the effects of nonoptimal
parent-child relationships. In the larger sense, we also can
advocate for social policies that reduce family stress and
support parents in their efforts to provide consistent, loving
care throughout the course of their child's development.
By Martha Farrell Erickson, Ph.D., Coordinator, Project STEEP,
University of Minnesota.
A Look at Recent Research on
Attachment
An examination of recent child psychology journals reveals the
enormous amount of research taking place on the subject of
attachment. Brief descriptions of some of the newest publications
on attachment follow.
One aspect of attachment being studied is the effect of
attachment on social relationships. For example, a recent study
looked at security of attachment as it relates to best friend
relationships in 4-year-olds. Researchers examined best friend
pairs and found that when both “best friends” had
secure attachments to their mothers, the children in the pair
were more happy and harmonious and less controlling than were
children in best friend pairs wherein one of the children was
insecurely attached. Another study examined the association
between attachment and social competence at school among a sample
of 6-year-old children. The children's teachers and peers rated
the subjects on such things as behavior, competence, and
likeability. The researchers found that insecurely attached boys
were rates as being less competent, less well-liked, and as
having more behavior problems than securely attached children in
the sample. This pattern was not found for the girls in the
sample. The authors offered a few speculations on why this might
be the case, one being that boys are more likely than girls to
display acting-out behaviors.
Some recent studies have focused on quality of attachment as
it relates to sibling relationships. One such study found that
siblings with secure attachments had less antagonistic
relationships in comparison to siblings with insecure
attachments. Securely attached older siblings were found to be
more likely than insecurely attached older siblings to respond to
their infant siblings' distress with caregiving (verbal
reassurances, hugging, kissing, etc.). Insecurely attached
infants protested more than securely attached infants when their
mother turned their attention to the older child. In another
study on siblings, researchers observed infant twins'
interactions with each other and with an unfamiliar peer between
the ages of 6 and 24 months. Twin pairs rated to be securely
attached at 12 months had interacted more at 6 months than those
rated to be insecurely attached. At 24 months, twin pairs were
more likely to interact with each other than an unfamiliar peer.
The authors point out that while it might be expected that twins
would show a higher rate of insecure attachments than singletons
(because of the extra demand placed upon their mothers), this
sample of twins did not differ significantly in their
distribution of attachment security from Ainsworth et al.'s
studies of the general population.
Maternal factors have also been examined in relation to
attachment relationships. Several articles link maternal
sensitivity to secure infant-mother attachment. In one of these
studies, researchers were able to predict quality of attachment
on the basis of observation of maternal sensitivity with 94%
accuracy. In a study of infants at social risk due to poverty,
maternal depression and caretaking inadequacy, researchers showed
that developmentally oriented home visitation had a significant
impact on these at-risk infants. Home visits (described as
“developmentally oriented parenting support”) averaged
46 visits over a span of 13 months. The home-visited infants were
twice as likely to be classified as having secure attachments to
their mothers as infants in a matched sample who were not home
visited. Additionally, the home visited infants scored an average
of 10 points higher on a test of infant mental development (the
Bayley Mental Scale) than non-visited infants.
These are only a few of the studies on attachment published in
the last few years. Other recent publications have examined
cross-cultural patterns of attachment, the effect of hearing
impairment on the quality of mother-infant attachment, the effect
of day care on attachment relationships, and the list continues.
For a more complete list of references, please contact CEED.
By Terri Smith, CEED
References
Cohn, D.A. (1990). Child-mother attachment of
six-year-olds and social competence at school. Child
Development, 61, 152-162.
Lyons-Ruth, K., Connell, D.B., Grunebaum, H.U.,
& Botein, S. (1990). Infants at social risk: Maternal
depression and family support services as mediators of infant
development and security of attachment. Child Development, 61,
85-98.
Park, K.A., & Waters, E. (1989). Security
of attachment and preschool friendships. Child Development,
60, 1076-1081.
Smith, P.B., & Pederson, D.R. (1988).
Maternal sensitivity and patterns of infant-mother attachment. Child
Development, 59, 1097-1101.
Teti, D.M., & Ablard, K.E. (1989). Security
of attachment and infant-sibling relationships: A laboratory
study. Child Development, 60, 1519-1528.
Vandell, D.L., Owen, M.T., Wilson, K.S., &
Henderson, V.K. (1988). Social development in infant twins: Peer
and mother-child relationships. Child Development, 59,
168-177.
Why is the Attachment
Relationship Important?
Babies are phenomenal. From birth they automatically respond
to the world in certain ways--tickle their cheeks and they turn
their heads and suck, usually toward a source of food! Around six
months, babies begin to consolidate special relationships with
the adults who take care of them. This attachment develops
gradually and is established by the end of the first year. (This
is in contrast to bonding, which describes a parent's
immediate response to a child, often in the delivery room.)
Once attachment has been established, the adult becomes very
important to the child. Separations from that special adult are
very difficult, especially if they are lengthy or permanent. For
the young child, such a loss is a major emotional upheaval
because he/she does not yet have the intellectual ability to
understand what is happening. Usually, this important first
relationship continues throughout life. It sets the stage for
future development--the child gains a sense of confidence and
self-worth, and begins to understand how intimate relationships
work.
All children become attached to adult caregiver(s).
What is significant is that some kinds of attachment are
“better” than others. Babies with “secure”
attachments tend to be better equipped emotionally to deal with
life than babies with “anxious” attachments.
How Does Attachment Develop?
The “ingredients” of attachment are:
- the behaviors of the adult who physically cares for and
is emotionally involved with the baby (typically mom, but
could be dad, grandma, nanny, etc.), and
- the development of the baby's intellectual ability to
understand his feelings and his interactions with his
world.
The “recipe” for secure attachments includes
caregivers who are generally sensitive and responsive to the
baby's needs. When a baby cries, a responsive caregiver tries to
discover what the baby needs--to be fed, held, or to have a
diaper changed. These babies see the world as predictable and
sensible.
Babies with anxious attachments have caregivers who are
unresponsive, inappropriate, or inconsistent, who may ignore the
baby's cry or feed the baby regardless of the baby's need. These
babies learn that adults are not dependable and that, if
adults do not meet their needs, they--the babies--must not be
very competent.
What are the long-term effects of the attachment
relationship?
We know that the kind of attachment a child has formed by age
one can predict some future behavior. Longitudinal research of a
group of children for more than twelve years provides clear
evidence about what these children are like at age twelve.
Interesting differences exist between children who had secure
versus anxious attachments. Children with secure early
attachments are more likely in later years to:
- be better problem-solvers
- form friendships and be leaders with peers
- be more empathetic and less aggressive
- engage their world with confidence
- have higher self-esteem
- be better at resolving conflict
- be more self-reliant and adaptable
In contrast, children with anxious attachments are more likely
in later years to:
- be socially withdrawn from peers
- be overly dependent on adults (e.g., teachers)
- have lower self-confidence
- victimize or be victimized by peers
- form fewer friendships
- be less emotionally healthy
These behaviors, predicted earlier, fit theories of attachment
well. Attachment theory and preliminary research also supports
predictions about a person's ability to provide high or low
quality parenting.
Theories of attachment related to later outcomes are, however,
not cast in stone. Anxiously attached children are not doomed to
fail and securely attached children are not guaranteed success.
Certainly, if the quality of care is consistent (a responsive
mother remains responsive or a child whose needs have been
ignored continues to receive insensitive responses) the patterns
will persist. However, a child's world can change; life can get
better or can get worse, thereby changing the course of the
child's development and ability to cope with ordinary and
extraordinary stress. For example, separation from an important
caregiver can influence the way a child interprets future
relationships and experiences.
What will happen to Baby D?
No one can predict for sure what will happen to Baby D.
In terms of relationships, we know the key elements in
a secure attachment are the caregiver's responsiveness and
availability. A change in the child's environment that alters
these can put the child at risk.
If Baby D has a secure attachment with her foster parents and
her grandparents continue to meet her needs, she will probably do
well. Secure attachment makes such transitions easier. However,
the disruption of the relationship with her foster parents may
cause so much anxiety that she will have difficulty dealing with
stress, even adjusting to her new family.
In terms of cultural identity, very early issues of
identity relate to finding oneself as a separate individual among
other people. However, as Baby D develops and becomes
increasingly aware of differences in culture, race, and ethnic
values, she may have difficulty establishing her own personal
identity as a black person if she is living in a white family, in
a white community.
Thus the situation is not simple. Ethnic identity and
community acceptance are important to the well being of the
child. But so is a history of continuous, responsive care. One
cannot be measured against the other. Those who make decisions
for and about children like Baby D must understand the
consequences of these decisions.
What are the implications for policymakers?
Decisions about foster care placement, child care, adoption,
and child abuse should be considered in light of what is known
about attachment. For example, when children are moved from one
foster care placement to another and another, they experience
repeated or unresolved losses of adults with whom they have begun
attachment relationships. Not only is the foster care system
strained, but the children are at serious risk for developmental
problems. They are often children who had poor relationships as
infants and, due to their emotional problems, are very difficult
for foster parents to handle.
In studies of child care it has been found that infants form
attachment relationships to their day care providers as well as
their parents. The quality of those relationships, and the stress
of disrupted relationships, can be very influential. There is
evidence that poor quality infant day care can have a detrimental
effect on the development of a child's attachment relationship
with the parents.
This case raises questions for states other than Minnesota.
For example, a 1985 case in Michigan prompted revision of their
adoption law. The changes are: once a child has been in foster
placement for 45 days, he cannot be moved for reasons of race. If
a child has been in a foster home for over a year, foster parents
are given first preference in adoption. If a relative seeks
adoption at this point, the court must consider which placement
would be in the best interest of the child.
Fact Find suggests policy changes that will:
- encourage strong efforts by social service agencies to
recruit minority foster parents
- require social service agencies to seek relatives to
provide care when children must be removed from their own
homes
- minimize the number of changes in foster placement and
day care staff turnover
- require those who work with children in the child
protection system (e.g., social workers, guardians ad
litem, lawyers, judges, etc.) to have some training in
child development
- provide appropriate training for foster care and day care
providers
On The Director's Mind
As this edition of Early Report goes to press, the
United States is at war in the Persian Gulf. Perhaps we all
underestimated the impact of a “real” war on our
children, a protected generation whose experience with military
conflict and aggression among nations has been limited to
Nintendo games, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle cartoons, and GI Joe
doll play. But this has changed too quickly. Our nation's
children are immersed in a Prime Time War. Quiet dinner time has
been replaced by order-in pizza and the call of the CNN drums to
another episode of the War. Instant replays of forward passes
have been replaced by graphic replays of scud missile attacks on
Israel and Saudi Arabia. Afternoon cartoons and prime time
comedies have been interrupted by the “Boys in
Baghdad,” endless live interviews with military analysts,
and tapes of battered American POWs. This is not a Nintendo game,
indeed this is a War, unlike any other, that has become a live
media event brought directly into our homes. In the confusion of
our own stress, fears, and anxieties, we are not sure what to do
and what to say to our children.
There are a few observations I would share regarding these
unprecedented events: First, there is absolutely no reason for
parents or child care providers to allow young children to
watch TV war coverage. Even the ominous tone of the music
accompanying the war reports can be frightening to children, let
alone the horrifying but incorrect inference that a missile might
land in “my backyard.” Also, we need to be cautious
about the ways that important, predictable daily routines and
time together may be seriously disrupted by TV viewing. We know
that in general, a child's TV diet should be monitored--why
should we become negligent regarding war coverage?
I would seriously question any school-age child watching TV
coverage of the war without adult supervision. Questions will
arise for everyone and especially for children who have
significant others in the Persian Gulf. The opportunity to talk
through some of the issues can be comforting and stress reducing.
These are difficult days for all of us, but we should not
forget our responsibilities for meeting the developmental needs
of children in spite of a war.
Richard A. Weinberg
|
Winter 1991, Volume 18, Number 2