Personality Cafe banner
1 - 2 of 2 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,356 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I came across this link just now and was entranced by it. It's a lengthy (about 17 pages) article about different ways infants are treated and the resulting attachment the child forms. I've read some attachement theory stuff before but this just seemed to hit home better. My parents did the controlled crying method and this article explains why that does put young children to sleep but isn't good for emotional development.

While I'd say I have good attachment in general, I do see some flashes of the other responses in myself and others.

This seems like a good forum location to start a discussion about attachment.

Your thoughts, insights, contributions welcome.

http://energeticsinstitute.com.au/early-life-attachment-affects-adult-relationships/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,325 Posts
So here is the problem tho with correlation studies they can be framed to confirm or still support some bias. I.e. It may confirm somethings but there will always be holes.

Not saying correlation studies are not useful but often how questions are even framed and delivered can have a great effect on answers and even a very objectively intended study may influence answers simply by focus. Simply by what is not asked can influence as well.

I do believe that environment matters and that would obviously include attachment theory. I am far more on the behavior stages theory with positive and negative reinforcement in theory. As far as when I consider one of the more legitimate main models. Attachment theory should not be discounted or dismissed of course not. But I do think attachment theory has been greatly capitalized on by cherry picking stuff to pull at more new aged type of parenting styles. I think it's important to consider that when attachment theory is cited as a source or reference to affirm something being peddled at people to appeal to the very very obvious last 15-20 year trend in parenting. I guess just maybe considering that publishers do plenty of market research on trends and many books (media) are developed with intent to sell. So if you consider what the trends say people want to hear and are more receptive to right now well attachment theory is aligned with that.

When I was studying the different theories in college I could see even subtle influences professors have while teaching (it's usually quite transparent what theories professors support and they push it, they don't just objectively provide the info in most cases). Also you need to consider the publishers, editors, and authors of these books. Even many books providing the method to teach the theory have some forms of bias in them which well often can correlate with the specific era and what is seen as politically correct.

I guess I think attachment theory has a place because I believe in both nature and nurture. But I do not personally think it's as prevalent a theory as behavior reinforcement theory. I think it just gets a lot more emphasis because it aligns a lot with well new aged hipster philosophy that is trending right now. It has to do with sales etc. market studies obviously show gen y having kids now and gen x are on a counter culture spin as of now trending similar to previous decades. So how to appeal to that well by pulling at heart strings and presenting emphasis on theory that counters previous models. Attachment theory is a soft approach that is what is in trend right now.

Anyways yes I think of course a baby neglected will suffer adverse affects compared to a child comforted. As far as that grey area on some soothing vs allowing crying self soothing I think personally it's very grey and the other environmental factors involved matter a lot. Attachment theory supports my theory on over coddling and that having adverse effects so obviously I cannot use it to support that and then dismiss its relevance when it can be too much withdrawal. NEITHER extreme in my opinion is good. So that is where I guess I get annoyed is when people use attachment theory to conflate it some how justifies or confirms they should over coddle. That is just cherry picking as well.

Whelp that's my two cents. Kids need to be picked up and comforted at times and they also need to slowly (not cruel dramatic or sudden) be weaned over time to progressively shift into more self sufficiency. That also does mean knowing how to smooth themselves. That is not to say just to leave a child sudden and shift dramatically where it could be traumatic. Balance!!!!!
 
1 - 2 of 2 Posts
Top