Attachment
John Bowlby’s 'Attachment':
"No, Attachment Theory is not 'out of date'". It is not based on a theory. The theory has been developed to explain the findings in 'empirical data' from natural studies of real life. A brief review of John Bowlby’s “Attachment” is provided for readers who may not be familiar with his work and the importance of the role of ‘mothering’. Some may think that Attachment is simply bonding that is achieved in the first few weeks after the birth of an infant. Many are possibly unaware of what Attachment actually is and the important role it fills for an infant in emotional and cognitive development. Many may be unaware of the full implications that this Attachment relationship with the mother has on emotional security and wellbeing of the child and also the long term impact on emotional wellbeing as an adult. His work can be studied by reading various authors on the topic or Bowlby's original huge volumes on Attachment, Separation and Loss. Here, I have distilled his findings on the role and importance of maternal attachment.
Bowlby’s research role:
During the early decades of the twentieth century, there was concern at the psychopathology and behaviour problems of children separated from their mothers for various periods of time. These separations were due to the mother or the child being hospitalised, or children fostered or placed in institutions. In 1950, John Bowlby was asked by the World Health Organisation to study why these problems occurred when children were separated from their mother. The questions being asked were: What was the nature of the mother-child relationship, that when deprived of it, children developed emotional and behavioural problems that had a lasting psychological impact? What was it about the quality of an intact relationship that, when separated, could result in emotional deprivation, insecurity and even later psychopathology?
Bowlby’s observational data on mental health and development were derived from a range of sources: ‘direct’ studies of children in institutions, hospitals and foster homes, and children being temporarily separated from and reunited with their mother; from ‘retrospective’ studies investigating early history of adolescents and adults who had developed psychological illness, including children who were evacuated from London during World War II; ‘follow up’ studies of children who had suffered deprivation in their early years; and ‘animal’ studies demonstrating maternal deprivation when young offspring were separated from their mothers.
This investigative work has been ongoing. What these studies have constantly identified and emphasised is the importance of the critical role of the interactive mother-child relationship. During the first two years of a child’s life, there is a vital role in emotional security, and in cognitive, personality and emotional development. Deficits in the continuity or quality of the relationship may result in corresponding impairment of these vital developmental processes. The child may develop an attachment style that has a negative impact on later emotional wellbeing and relationships and capacity to function effectively and confidently in the adult world.
Current social trends:
During the past fifty years in Western society, there has been a shift in the degree of parenting involvement by mothers, particularly in the lives of infants and young children. Up until the 1950s, mothers were generally full time ‘home makers’ who stayed at home taking care of the family and home. By the 1960s, mothers were mainly still full time stay-at-home mothers while their children were young and then many returned to the workforce after the youngest child started school. There was concern about the phenomenon of ‘latch key children’ who arrived home from school to an empty house. No doubt, home seemed empty without their mother to greet them with a hug and prepare an after-school snack. No doubt, without supervision, many did get up to mischief, but there was no ‘epidemic’ of mental health and social problems among children and adolescents that we have now. But that was before the major social movements of the second half of the 20th century and the accompanying social changes that eroded moral values and impacted on social values, parenting and the family unit.
Due to the social changes brought about by the women’s liberation movement and advances of medical science in human reproduction, fathers have been regarded as redundant in child-raising and even in the process of conception. Cloning has the potential to remove men from the procreation process entirely. In the high pressure existence and materialistic values of Western society, where women are compelled to work to pay a mortgage and bills or they choose to pursue a career, child-raising responsibilities are being abrogated to school teachers. Likewise, care of infants and young children is ‘outsourced’ to professional child care centres where the emphasis is on academic preparation for school. The link which has been identified between academic performance and the emotional and cognitive development in early childhood is being ignored and accordingly, the mothers’ role in this development is ignored.
These changes pose the question: ‘”Is the role of a mother in child-raising essential or is motherhood also being made
redundant”?
The aristocracy and the wealthy have always left their children in the care of full time nannies, and the emotional
deprivation these children experienced has been summed up in the phrase ‘poor little rich girl’. Live-in nannies are now often employed by professional couples who can afford them, as a more convenient alternative to day care, supposedly giving the children greater stability. The real beneficiaries are the parents, gaining greater freedom from parental responsibility and gaining flexibility in their own personal, professional and social lives. Many mothers are working full time or part time, so that women in general, are providing less time in face-to-face hands-on care in the critical early life of their children.
Many babies from the age of several weeks are being taken care of for a large part of their day by someone other than their mother, ie, ‘outsourced’ to ‘non-maternal care’.
Parallel with this trend has been a corresponding growth in emotional and behavioural problems among children and
adolescents. Concern regarding behaviour problems and lack of Self Esteem and emotional wellbeing of children is here once again. Therefore, perhaps it is time to examine the question again that Bowlby was asked to study, regarding the
nature of the mother-child relationship and the long term impact on children - in the current social context. Given
the social and economic changes and the changed roles of women, it is time to ask, “How relevant is the ‘attachment’ relationship between mother and infant ‘today’”?
Most readers would probably be familiar with the word ‘attachment’ in reference to a connection formed between mother and infant. However, unless you have read all of John Bowlby’s original volumes on “Attachment, Separation and
Loss”, you may be under the impression that ‘attachment’ is just the ‘bonding’ between mother and infant that occurs soon after birth. Actually, the ‘bonding’ is just the beginning of the attachment process, akin to imprinting. It takes a minimum
of two years to develop a strong, healthy ‘attachment’ between mother and infant – and all the other development that takes place in that context. This is essential to produce an emotionally secure child who will grow up to be an emotionally secure adult with the capacity to form healthy attachments in adult relationships and function effectively and confidently in the adult world.
Perhaps a useful place to start a current search from the beginning of a child’s life is examining the role of the parents
in conception and pregnancy. Advances in medical science such as IVF and availability of donor sperm and eggs have been able to assist couples who encounter reproduction problems. Further, eggs can be fertilized in a petri dish in a lab and implanted in the womb of a ‘surrogate’. Women can even ‘went a womb’ in India or Thailand for nine months. Whether this surrogacy is for medical reasons or convenience, it does remove the ‘mother’ from a significant experience of motherhood – pregnancy and birth.
Given the rate of scientific progress and the social trend of decreased parental involvement, it won’t be very long before human gestation can be carried out without the legal, financial and emotional hassles associated with human surrogacy. Transplanting wombs from women who have completed their own families looks like being an option since even a
post-menopausal womb remains viable. Three other plausible options would eliminate the need for a human womb. We must all be familiar with the movie, “Junior”, where Arnold Schwarzenegger’s character is implanted with an embryo and he is injected with a daily cocktail of hormones for nine months. A second option is implanting the embryo into the womb of an animal. If you think that is a crazy suggestion, it is not any crazier than the suggestion made by medical science several years ago to breed pigs which were genetically matched to individual humans in order to provide spare body parts instead of relying on human organ donors.
If you find the idea of pregnant men a bit weird or animals being used as ‘surrogate mothers’ as distasteful, then I am
sure we are not far from science providing other options. Not just fertilizing the egg in a petri dish, but for real convenience, a woman can choose to have the foetus develop in a large test tube - a true ‘test tube baby’. The foetus would be bathed in a saline solution infused with nutrients, and specific hormones added at appropriate stages of development, all computer-controlled – much like hydroponically grown marihuana. This is not just me being delusional. Fifty years ago, the term ‘ectogenesis’ was coined to describe the ability to raise a foetus outside the human body in an artificial womb - an ‘aquarium filled with amniotic fluid’. Bioethicists have supported this as a solution for homosexual couples and single men to not have
to deal with the legal hassles and emotional dramas associated with surrogate mothers. The technology already exists and human trials are being held up only by legal and ethical issues. A prediction has been made that the technology will be readily available within twenty years and that by 2074, only thirty percent of births would be ‘human births’.
Hydroponically grown babies does have implications for ‘attachment’ which would normally begin while the infant is still in the mother’s womb - and of course attachment must begin there. If it didn’t, then why do fathers bother putting their hands on the abdomen of the mother and talk to the developing baby inside, introducing themselves as the baby’s father, as
if they expect that the baby can hear and understand what they are saying? If it didn’t, then why do mothers bother talking to the developing baby and send loving thoughts to it? If it didn’t, then why do many adoptees, even those happy
in their adoptive families, feel the need to track down and re-connect with their birth mother?
Science and technology have developed artificial body parts and organs that function efficiently – as mechanical and
electronic devices which have saved lives. Hence, male scientists may regard a woman’s womb as just another body part with a mechanical function, merely a biological receptacle providing a biochemical environment of liquid nutrients and hormones. ‘Science’ may believe that it can replicate these functions and regulate them more efficiently than can a human womb. However, the essential component that makes the foetus human cannot be replicated by science – the essential emotional environment of a woman’s womb cannot be replicated, no matter how sophisticated technology becomes. Hence, I suspect that a foetus that develops in the soulless and emotionless environment of a test tube or an aquarium would be so emotionally deprived that it would lack the capacity to develop attachment with anyone after it is born - ever.
As for the attachment implication if a woman chooses surrogacy (human or animal) or a test tube or aquarium baby for convenience (so as not to interfere with her career or lose her figure) - it seems to me that she lacks commitment to motherhood so attachment is already doomed. As is the long term emotional wellbeing of her child.
I do have a question regarding development of attachment for infants of surrogate births, particularly if the surrogacy is carried out with little contact with the future mother. Considering the need for many adoptees to re-connect with their birth mother – will this be an issue in the future, for babies born to surrogate mothers? Or, conversely, is there a danger of lack of this development of attachment in the womb of surrogates? Watching a TV program on surrogacy, a surrogate mother commented that she made a deliberate effort to not bond with the baby. Her desire to protect herself from the emotional wrench of handing over the baby she has carried in her womb is understandable. But, what are the emotional implications for the baby? What impact does this have on the infant, being denied this emotional bonding? This causes me to wonder about the capacity for attachment and emotional wellbeing for this child in the future.
Attachment to a surrogate mother certainly would not be an issue for what I refer to as hydroponically grown babies – attachment would be a lifelong non-issue for them. As would be emotional wellbeing – or rather, the lack of.
These comments may seem facetious and absurd. Yet, consider the concern at high rates of mental illness in society,
angry youth, drug and alcohol dependency among adolescents and poor emotional wellbeing in primary school children. It is therefore appropriate to examine each step in child emotional development and question the impact of the developmental environment at each of those steps - from the beginning. It is also appropriate to examine the implications for any
changes imposed by social ideology and advances in science.
However, that is enough here in extrapolating from current trends to speculate on the role of medical science
and women in reproduction and the implications for attachment in the future. For now, I will just focus on the role of mothers after the baby is born – presumably from a female human womb. With this in mind, the original work of John Bowlby (1965, 1969, 1973, 2005) on ‘Attachment Theory’ and the ‘internal working model’ is reviewed briefly.
Attachment Theory:
The infant brain is innately programmed for instinctive-like behaviours which have the capacity for learning from feedback (ie, information on what behaviour effectively achieves its goal and what doesn’t) so their behaviour is 'soft wired'. From this learning, the infant is able to adapt its behaviour to what does work in each situation towards its goal of having its needs met. Attachment is an example of innate survival behaviour, whereby the infant makes a connection with a mother figure who is going to be ‘the one’ it can rely on to constantly be available to provide nurturance and protection. Early on, Attachment was assumed to reflect the child’s dependency on an adult, due to its helplessness, but it has been revealed to play a more complex role than that. Attachment has proven to not be synonymous with dependency, since dependency is strong at birth but attachment is not. Conversely, attachment develops and remains, even though dependency decreases as the child becomes older.
During the early months, the infant maintains proximity to its ‘attachment figure’ with ‘care eliciting behaviours’ such
as crying, smiling, cooing, and reaching up to be picked up. Once the infant becomes mobile, it seeks to maintain proximity to its mother by crawling around after her, keeping her in sight. The infant uses the mother as a ‘safe base’ from which to explore, and if the child ventures out of sight of the mother, will return for reassurance that she (ie, the safe base) is still there. The infant feels secure in the presence of the attachment figure and when out of sight, knowing that she is accessible. If the mother attempts to leave, the infant aims to keep her close by hanging on to her leg and clothing, and if that doesn’t work, changing tactics (adaptive behaviour) to crying and even screaming. This is not the sign of a ‘sooky baby’ but is normal, healthy ‘attachment behaviour’.
The mother is innately programmed to respond to ‘care eliciting behaviour’ by meeting the infant’s need. The mother-child relationship is an interactive one, with mother and infant responding to each other, strengthening the attachment relationship. The mother learns to be sensitive to her infant’s signals, responding to meet its needs, while the infant learns consequences of its own actions (ie, what ‘care eliciting behaviour’ works to meet its needs). The infant also reinforces the mother’s caring behaviour with rewarding smiles. This interaction is mutually satisfying to them both. If these conditions are met only in part or hardly at all, then a correspondingly less secure attachment develops. A stable Attachment can be vulnerable to changed circumstances such as an accident or a child becoming chronically ill, particularly if this involves periods of separation due to hospitalisation for the child. The child may become more clingy and demanding and/or the mother more protective. Alternatively, it may be a sibling who is sick and getting more of Mum’s attention. Any perceived threats of separation or loss of love will result in insecurity and clinginess. If the infant is not successful in maintaining the attachment relationship with its mother, or the mother fails to respond in meeting its needs, the child will experience some degree of emotional deprivation and loss of emotional security.
Vital to mental health is for an infant/young child to experience a warm, intimate and continuous relationship
with the mother or exclusive access to a permanent mother-substitute – one person who steadily ‘mothers’ the child
in which both find satisfaction and enjoyment. (Implications for attachment developing to a substitute-mother are discussed in the section on “Non-maternal child care” in “Parents Misled" under "More Info").This relationship with the mother in early years, plus varied relations with father and siblings, underlies development of character and mental health. The mother’s love and pleasure in her infant provides the child with ‘spiritual nourishment‘. Conversely, an unsatisfactory relationship in early childhood predisposes children to respond in an anti-social way to later stresses.
The concept of ‘emotional deprivation’ emerged from studies on actual separation (temporary or permanent) and on the quality of intact mother-child relationships. This was determined by the physical ‘accessibility’ and emotional ‘availability’ of the mother in meeting the child’s needs and the ‘sufficiency of interaction’. This emotional deprivation was quantified as ‘partial’ or ‘complete’. The quality of an intact mother-child relationship is also characterised by how secure the child feels in the relationship and behaves (eg, anxious attachment, aggrieved attachment or insecure attachment). The emphasis has been on the importance of the quality of the mother-child relationship (and the quality of non-maternal care). However, so important did Bowlby find Attachment to be for the security and mental health and development of the child, that he
concluded that a child was better off left with ‘bad’ parents (providing they are not abusive) than removed and placed in ‘quality’ care in an institution. He commented that ‘there was something worse than a bad home – no home at all’.
Psychological development is also a reflection of quality of the mother-child relationship. Bowlby (1987) concluded that learning (eg, impulse control, emotional regulation, abstract thinking, conscience) requires the child to ‘feel friendly towards the mother’, but if the relationship is emotionally deprived or is positive but is ‘mixed with resentment’, then hostility can
impede development. Children in therapy being treated for emotional problems associated with feeling deserted revealed that they had feelings of hostility, fantasies of violence against parents and a desire for revenge. This attitude of resentment is not compatible with the child’s desire for love and security so results in acute inner conflicts (ie, repressed anger) anxiety and
depression. (Reasons for anger and how and why it is repressed are discussed in “Repressed Anger” in "More Info" and “Anger” under “Self Esteem Parenting”). Impaired learning due to ‘resentment’ has implications for deficits in development of personality, power of abstract thinking and conscience. Behaviour may be impulsive and uncontrolled, resulting in the child
being ‘victims of the momentary whim’, hence unable to pursue long term goals. Their power of checking themselves may be absent or feeble, so they may become ‘ineffective personalities’, ‘their own worst enemies’. Without developing a capacity for emotional regulation, life may become a constant drama, lurching from one crisis to the next.
While a young child requires complementary input from both the female brain of a mother and the male brain of a father during the first two years, it is the particular input from a mother that is required to promote ‘right brain’ development such as ‘emotional regulation’ (Newton, 2008). The father takes on a more important role a few years later. Hence, while attachment with the father is also important, the focus here is on maternal attachment.
Summarising Attachment:
A secure, healthy Attachment between mother and child takes a minimum of the first two years of a child’s life to develop. Some significant essential features of the maternal-child relationship include ‘sufficient interaction’, ‘frequent and sustained physical contact’, the mother being ‘physically accessible’ and ‘emotionally available’ virtually 24/7 and having the ‘ability to soothe a distressed baby by holding’, the Attachment being ‘continuous’. If these conditions are not met, there may be some degree of long term impact on the quality of Attachment which has implications on the long term emotional security of the child and capacity to make secure attachments in relationships as an adult. For developmental learning to occur, the child needs to have ‘friendly feelings’ towards the Attachment figure. There are implications that ‘emotional deprivation’ and ‘resentment’ may provide some impediment to emotional wellbeing and cognitive development.
Summarising how I see Attachment:
Maternal Attachment is the unique (ie, 'one only') interactive relationship between a mother and her infant. ‘Bonding’ is the first step and at a simplistic level it is akin to ‘imprinting’ (as in bird and animal species), making a connection to and identifying the individual that the child can rely on for taking care and being 'accessible' and 'available' to meet its needs such as nurturance and protection. At a more complex level, Attachment is a ‘developmental learning context’ in which development of emotional and cognitive processes takes place that are fundamental to learning effective functioning in the adult world. It could be said that when parents bring a child into the world, they enter into an innate contract to take care of the child, guide and protect it and ensure its physical and emotional needs are met. Hence, I regard Attachment as an 'innate Attachment contract'.
Inner Working Model:
Linked in to Attachment relationships (between parents and the child), Bowlby describes the child building an ‘inner working model of the world and self in relation to it’ in the subconscious mind, built on perceptions of experiences. Key features of this model are: who the attachment figures are, where and how accessible they are and how the child can expect them to respond when turning to them for support. Hence, the structure of the model is influenced by whether the child feels confident that attachment figures are in general readily available, or more or less afraid they will not be when needed. If there are doubts regarding availability of the attachment figure, there is susceptibility to respond with fear whenever the individual meets any potentially alarming situation during the ordinary course of life.
Another key feature is the perception of how acceptable or unacceptable the child feels to the attachment figures. Much-loved children who grow up feeling confident of parental love and support develop an unconscious assurance that whenever and wherever they might be in difficulty, there are always trustworthy figures available who will come to their aid. When
faced with potentially alarming situations, they are likely to tackle these situations more confidently and effectively or seek help to do so. Conversely, children not confident in their parents’ love and support may feel unwanted by the parents and lack confidence in support or aid being available from anyone else. To these individuals, the world may seem comfortless and
unpredictable.
If parents responded to provide comfort only when coaxed, the child will grow up believing that assistance and cooperation are available from others only if they are coaxed. If comfort is available from parents only if certain rules
are kept, then, providing the rules are moderate and sanctions mild and predictable, the individual will still believe that support will always be available when needed. However, the rules may be strict and difficult to keep and sanctions may be of a damaging kind. If the parent sulks or threatens suicide or threatens to not love the child, or in exasperation threatens to
leave (particularly if there is pretence to pack a bag) or send the child away, then the child will have doubts about comfort being available. They may fear abandonment and be likely to respond to other situations fearfully.
If the child is taken to a therapist to deal with anxiety or behavioural problems, the parent, feeling ashamed, full of regret and unable to acknowledge what they have done and the effect on the child, (or not see it as relevant), is unlikely to reveal they have made these threats. Rather, parents are at pains to present the child’s behaviour as unreasonable and incomprehensible and present themselves as reasonable parents who have done all in their power to help. The child will not tell, either, taking the cues from the parent, fearing that the parent will carry out the threats if the child ‘tells on the parent’. Bowlby refers to this as the child being a ‘willing conspirator of silence yet yearning for someone to come to their aid’. If the child does tell, it is likely to be attributed to ‘imagination’.
A dilemma for the child constructing this ‘inner working model’ is data from multiple sources (eg, child’s emotional experience, what Mum says and what other people say). Usually data from other sources is reasonably compatible with
the child’s first hand experiences. However, sometimes it conflicts. This produces confusion about what the actual truth is or the child creates two separate ‘models’ and attempts to reconcile them, or oscillates between. The child’s experience may be that the parents are not loving and supportive, yet the mother says she loves the child although she may complain that the child is insufferably demanding when requiring her attention. Other people may endorse the mother’s view by telling the child how lucky he is to have such loving parents. He may dismiss his own feelings and negative perceptions and come to believe that he is bad and is fortunate to have such a loving mother that he does not deserve.
Parenting experiences can affect the developing personality resulting in a range of ‘maturity’ of personality. At one end of the spectrum, a ‘mature’ personality approaches the world with confidence, and when difficulties strike, if disposed to, turns to trusted figures for support. Conversely, at the opposite end, in the arrested development that results in an ‘immature’
personality, the individual may be chronically anxious and in need of support but never trusts anyone.
Studies show development of well-adapted personalities as having strong sense of ‘self worth’, a working balance of initiative and self-reliance as well as capacity to seek help and make use of help when the occasion demands. They took responsibility for their own behaviour, grew up in close-knit families, valued the importance of a stable home base, identified with their same-sex parent, their parents had clearly defined values and provided love, acceptance, support and encouragement. Autonomy was encouraged but not forced. Bowlby refers to astronauts as an example of this personality type. They are capable of living and working effectively in conditions of great potential danger and stress. Although individualists with a high degree of self-reliance and clear preference for independent action, they are comfortable when dependence on others is required and have a capacity to maintain trust in what might be termed conditions of mistrust. Bowlby provides a specific example in the disastrous Apollo 13 mission to the moon – as depicted in the movie starring Tom
Hanks.
Hierarchy of Attachment Relationships:
Here is my proposed hierarchy of levels of Attachment relationships during the critical developmental first two years of a child’s life:
Primary A: Both parents, with one parent (generally mother) being the primary care giver
Secondary A: Immediate family
Tertiary A: Significant non-family such as close family friends, child care workers, teachers, significant extended family.
Presumably, attachment begins in the womb and I will refer to this primary attachment as natural-primary A., since it is the natural state of affairs when a woman conceives via sexual intercourse (or in-vitro fertilisation) and carries the developing foetus during pregnancy and then gives birth. Hence, if primary attachment develops in the womb with the birth mother, this has implications for the nature of primary attachment for children of adoption and surrogacy. (If Attachment does not start in the womb, then why do fathers bother placing their hands on the mother’s swollen abdomen and introduce themselves to the foetus as its Dad? Or why do some adoptees always feel like they don’t belong? Or others who feel the need to track down and reconnect with their birth mother, even though they have always felt loved by their adoptive parents)?
Bowlby concludes that if infants are placed early enough with a caring foster or adoptive mother, a strong attachment can be formed and any damage of emotional deprivation can be repaired. Nevertheless, I would describe the substitute role of an adoptive mother as a replacement-primary A. figure since she has completely replaced the birth mother as the primary
caregiver. The degree to which the replacement A. figure fulfils the functions of the primary A. successfully probably depends much on the age of the child when adopted. It would also depend on the nature and motivation of the adoptive mother to create that crucial Attachment and her hands-on involvement in caring for the child during its first two years. The sooner after birth, the better the chances of replacing the natural-primary A. that had already begun in the womb of the biological mother and through any contact after the birth. By contrast, adoption after being handed around to various foster carers or an institution would make it more difficult to develop a secure replacement-primary A. The quality of the replacement-primary A. may be an anxious one, with the child subconsciously fearing being abandoned again.
A substitute mother-figure (eg, a nanny, family member or child care worker) who is the main carer for an infant can become the main Attachment figure. I refer to this as a tertiary or secondary A. figure becoming elevated to surrogate-primary A. If the mother is not present to meet the Attachment needs of a young child, it will latch on to anyone who is and that person will become elevated to the status of being the most significant parenting figure for the child. (Implications are discussed in the section on “Non-maternal child care” in “Parents Misled" under "More Info").
Conclusion:
In spite of social changes that devalued the role of a mother and father in child raising, Attachment between child and both a mother and a father is just as relevant now as when John Bowlby carried out his valuable research. The emotional needs of kids remain the same now as they were then and the role of mothering, in spite of the trend in 'outsourcing parenting', continues to be essential to meeting those emotional needs.
References:
Bowlby, J.,“Attachment and Loss, Volume II: Separation, Anxiety and Anger”, Basic Books, Inc., New York 1973).
Bowlby, J.,“Attachment and Loss, Volume I: Attachment”, Basic Books, Inc., New York, (1969).
Bowlby, J.,“Child care and the growth of love”, Pelican Books (1953).
Newton, Ruth P., “The Attachment Connection”, New Harbinger Publications: Oakland (2008).
"No, Attachment Theory is not 'out of date'". It is not based on a theory. The theory has been developed to explain the findings in 'empirical data' from natural studies of real life. A brief review of John Bowlby’s “Attachment” is provided for readers who may not be familiar with his work and the importance of the role of ‘mothering’. Some may think that Attachment is simply bonding that is achieved in the first few weeks after the birth of an infant. Many are possibly unaware of what Attachment actually is and the important role it fills for an infant in emotional and cognitive development. Many may be unaware of the full implications that this Attachment relationship with the mother has on emotional security and wellbeing of the child and also the long term impact on emotional wellbeing as an adult. His work can be studied by reading various authors on the topic or Bowlby's original huge volumes on Attachment, Separation and Loss. Here, I have distilled his findings on the role and importance of maternal attachment.
Bowlby’s research role:
During the early decades of the twentieth century, there was concern at the psychopathology and behaviour problems of children separated from their mothers for various periods of time. These separations were due to the mother or the child being hospitalised, or children fostered or placed in institutions. In 1950, John Bowlby was asked by the World Health Organisation to study why these problems occurred when children were separated from their mother. The questions being asked were: What was the nature of the mother-child relationship, that when deprived of it, children developed emotional and behavioural problems that had a lasting psychological impact? What was it about the quality of an intact relationship that, when separated, could result in emotional deprivation, insecurity and even later psychopathology?
Bowlby’s observational data on mental health and development were derived from a range of sources: ‘direct’ studies of children in institutions, hospitals and foster homes, and children being temporarily separated from and reunited with their mother; from ‘retrospective’ studies investigating early history of adolescents and adults who had developed psychological illness, including children who were evacuated from London during World War II; ‘follow up’ studies of children who had suffered deprivation in their early years; and ‘animal’ studies demonstrating maternal deprivation when young offspring were separated from their mothers.
This investigative work has been ongoing. What these studies have constantly identified and emphasised is the importance of the critical role of the interactive mother-child relationship. During the first two years of a child’s life, there is a vital role in emotional security, and in cognitive, personality and emotional development. Deficits in the continuity or quality of the relationship may result in corresponding impairment of these vital developmental processes. The child may develop an attachment style that has a negative impact on later emotional wellbeing and relationships and capacity to function effectively and confidently in the adult world.
Current social trends:
During the past fifty years in Western society, there has been a shift in the degree of parenting involvement by mothers, particularly in the lives of infants and young children. Up until the 1950s, mothers were generally full time ‘home makers’ who stayed at home taking care of the family and home. By the 1960s, mothers were mainly still full time stay-at-home mothers while their children were young and then many returned to the workforce after the youngest child started school. There was concern about the phenomenon of ‘latch key children’ who arrived home from school to an empty house. No doubt, home seemed empty without their mother to greet them with a hug and prepare an after-school snack. No doubt, without supervision, many did get up to mischief, but there was no ‘epidemic’ of mental health and social problems among children and adolescents that we have now. But that was before the major social movements of the second half of the 20th century and the accompanying social changes that eroded moral values and impacted on social values, parenting and the family unit.
Due to the social changes brought about by the women’s liberation movement and advances of medical science in human reproduction, fathers have been regarded as redundant in child-raising and even in the process of conception. Cloning has the potential to remove men from the procreation process entirely. In the high pressure existence and materialistic values of Western society, where women are compelled to work to pay a mortgage and bills or they choose to pursue a career, child-raising responsibilities are being abrogated to school teachers. Likewise, care of infants and young children is ‘outsourced’ to professional child care centres where the emphasis is on academic preparation for school. The link which has been identified between academic performance and the emotional and cognitive development in early childhood is being ignored and accordingly, the mothers’ role in this development is ignored.
These changes pose the question: ‘”Is the role of a mother in child-raising essential or is motherhood also being made
redundant”?
The aristocracy and the wealthy have always left their children in the care of full time nannies, and the emotional
deprivation these children experienced has been summed up in the phrase ‘poor little rich girl’. Live-in nannies are now often employed by professional couples who can afford them, as a more convenient alternative to day care, supposedly giving the children greater stability. The real beneficiaries are the parents, gaining greater freedom from parental responsibility and gaining flexibility in their own personal, professional and social lives. Many mothers are working full time or part time, so that women in general, are providing less time in face-to-face hands-on care in the critical early life of their children.
Many babies from the age of several weeks are being taken care of for a large part of their day by someone other than their mother, ie, ‘outsourced’ to ‘non-maternal care’.
Parallel with this trend has been a corresponding growth in emotional and behavioural problems among children and
adolescents. Concern regarding behaviour problems and lack of Self Esteem and emotional wellbeing of children is here once again. Therefore, perhaps it is time to examine the question again that Bowlby was asked to study, regarding the
nature of the mother-child relationship and the long term impact on children - in the current social context. Given
the social and economic changes and the changed roles of women, it is time to ask, “How relevant is the ‘attachment’ relationship between mother and infant ‘today’”?
Most readers would probably be familiar with the word ‘attachment’ in reference to a connection formed between mother and infant. However, unless you have read all of John Bowlby’s original volumes on “Attachment, Separation and
Loss”, you may be under the impression that ‘attachment’ is just the ‘bonding’ between mother and infant that occurs soon after birth. Actually, the ‘bonding’ is just the beginning of the attachment process, akin to imprinting. It takes a minimum
of two years to develop a strong, healthy ‘attachment’ between mother and infant – and all the other development that takes place in that context. This is essential to produce an emotionally secure child who will grow up to be an emotionally secure adult with the capacity to form healthy attachments in adult relationships and function effectively and confidently in the adult world.
Perhaps a useful place to start a current search from the beginning of a child’s life is examining the role of the parents
in conception and pregnancy. Advances in medical science such as IVF and availability of donor sperm and eggs have been able to assist couples who encounter reproduction problems. Further, eggs can be fertilized in a petri dish in a lab and implanted in the womb of a ‘surrogate’. Women can even ‘went a womb’ in India or Thailand for nine months. Whether this surrogacy is for medical reasons or convenience, it does remove the ‘mother’ from a significant experience of motherhood – pregnancy and birth.
Given the rate of scientific progress and the social trend of decreased parental involvement, it won’t be very long before human gestation can be carried out without the legal, financial and emotional hassles associated with human surrogacy. Transplanting wombs from women who have completed their own families looks like being an option since even a
post-menopausal womb remains viable. Three other plausible options would eliminate the need for a human womb. We must all be familiar with the movie, “Junior”, where Arnold Schwarzenegger’s character is implanted with an embryo and he is injected with a daily cocktail of hormones for nine months. A second option is implanting the embryo into the womb of an animal. If you think that is a crazy suggestion, it is not any crazier than the suggestion made by medical science several years ago to breed pigs which were genetically matched to individual humans in order to provide spare body parts instead of relying on human organ donors.
If you find the idea of pregnant men a bit weird or animals being used as ‘surrogate mothers’ as distasteful, then I am
sure we are not far from science providing other options. Not just fertilizing the egg in a petri dish, but for real convenience, a woman can choose to have the foetus develop in a large test tube - a true ‘test tube baby’. The foetus would be bathed in a saline solution infused with nutrients, and specific hormones added at appropriate stages of development, all computer-controlled – much like hydroponically grown marihuana. This is not just me being delusional. Fifty years ago, the term ‘ectogenesis’ was coined to describe the ability to raise a foetus outside the human body in an artificial womb - an ‘aquarium filled with amniotic fluid’. Bioethicists have supported this as a solution for homosexual couples and single men to not have
to deal with the legal hassles and emotional dramas associated with surrogate mothers. The technology already exists and human trials are being held up only by legal and ethical issues. A prediction has been made that the technology will be readily available within twenty years and that by 2074, only thirty percent of births would be ‘human births’.
Hydroponically grown babies does have implications for ‘attachment’ which would normally begin while the infant is still in the mother’s womb - and of course attachment must begin there. If it didn’t, then why do fathers bother putting their hands on the abdomen of the mother and talk to the developing baby inside, introducing themselves as the baby’s father, as
if they expect that the baby can hear and understand what they are saying? If it didn’t, then why do mothers bother talking to the developing baby and send loving thoughts to it? If it didn’t, then why do many adoptees, even those happy
in their adoptive families, feel the need to track down and re-connect with their birth mother?
Science and technology have developed artificial body parts and organs that function efficiently – as mechanical and
electronic devices which have saved lives. Hence, male scientists may regard a woman’s womb as just another body part with a mechanical function, merely a biological receptacle providing a biochemical environment of liquid nutrients and hormones. ‘Science’ may believe that it can replicate these functions and regulate them more efficiently than can a human womb. However, the essential component that makes the foetus human cannot be replicated by science – the essential emotional environment of a woman’s womb cannot be replicated, no matter how sophisticated technology becomes. Hence, I suspect that a foetus that develops in the soulless and emotionless environment of a test tube or an aquarium would be so emotionally deprived that it would lack the capacity to develop attachment with anyone after it is born - ever.
As for the attachment implication if a woman chooses surrogacy (human or animal) or a test tube or aquarium baby for convenience (so as not to interfere with her career or lose her figure) - it seems to me that she lacks commitment to motherhood so attachment is already doomed. As is the long term emotional wellbeing of her child.
I do have a question regarding development of attachment for infants of surrogate births, particularly if the surrogacy is carried out with little contact with the future mother. Considering the need for many adoptees to re-connect with their birth mother – will this be an issue in the future, for babies born to surrogate mothers? Or, conversely, is there a danger of lack of this development of attachment in the womb of surrogates? Watching a TV program on surrogacy, a surrogate mother commented that she made a deliberate effort to not bond with the baby. Her desire to protect herself from the emotional wrench of handing over the baby she has carried in her womb is understandable. But, what are the emotional implications for the baby? What impact does this have on the infant, being denied this emotional bonding? This causes me to wonder about the capacity for attachment and emotional wellbeing for this child in the future.
Attachment to a surrogate mother certainly would not be an issue for what I refer to as hydroponically grown babies – attachment would be a lifelong non-issue for them. As would be emotional wellbeing – or rather, the lack of.
These comments may seem facetious and absurd. Yet, consider the concern at high rates of mental illness in society,
angry youth, drug and alcohol dependency among adolescents and poor emotional wellbeing in primary school children. It is therefore appropriate to examine each step in child emotional development and question the impact of the developmental environment at each of those steps - from the beginning. It is also appropriate to examine the implications for any
changes imposed by social ideology and advances in science.
However, that is enough here in extrapolating from current trends to speculate on the role of medical science
and women in reproduction and the implications for attachment in the future. For now, I will just focus on the role of mothers after the baby is born – presumably from a female human womb. With this in mind, the original work of John Bowlby (1965, 1969, 1973, 2005) on ‘Attachment Theory’ and the ‘internal working model’ is reviewed briefly.
Attachment Theory:
The infant brain is innately programmed for instinctive-like behaviours which have the capacity for learning from feedback (ie, information on what behaviour effectively achieves its goal and what doesn’t) so their behaviour is 'soft wired'. From this learning, the infant is able to adapt its behaviour to what does work in each situation towards its goal of having its needs met. Attachment is an example of innate survival behaviour, whereby the infant makes a connection with a mother figure who is going to be ‘the one’ it can rely on to constantly be available to provide nurturance and protection. Early on, Attachment was assumed to reflect the child’s dependency on an adult, due to its helplessness, but it has been revealed to play a more complex role than that. Attachment has proven to not be synonymous with dependency, since dependency is strong at birth but attachment is not. Conversely, attachment develops and remains, even though dependency decreases as the child becomes older.
During the early months, the infant maintains proximity to its ‘attachment figure’ with ‘care eliciting behaviours’ such
as crying, smiling, cooing, and reaching up to be picked up. Once the infant becomes mobile, it seeks to maintain proximity to its mother by crawling around after her, keeping her in sight. The infant uses the mother as a ‘safe base’ from which to explore, and if the child ventures out of sight of the mother, will return for reassurance that she (ie, the safe base) is still there. The infant feels secure in the presence of the attachment figure and when out of sight, knowing that she is accessible. If the mother attempts to leave, the infant aims to keep her close by hanging on to her leg and clothing, and if that doesn’t work, changing tactics (adaptive behaviour) to crying and even screaming. This is not the sign of a ‘sooky baby’ but is normal, healthy ‘attachment behaviour’.
The mother is innately programmed to respond to ‘care eliciting behaviour’ by meeting the infant’s need. The mother-child relationship is an interactive one, with mother and infant responding to each other, strengthening the attachment relationship. The mother learns to be sensitive to her infant’s signals, responding to meet its needs, while the infant learns consequences of its own actions (ie, what ‘care eliciting behaviour’ works to meet its needs). The infant also reinforces the mother’s caring behaviour with rewarding smiles. This interaction is mutually satisfying to them both. If these conditions are met only in part or hardly at all, then a correspondingly less secure attachment develops. A stable Attachment can be vulnerable to changed circumstances such as an accident or a child becoming chronically ill, particularly if this involves periods of separation due to hospitalisation for the child. The child may become more clingy and demanding and/or the mother more protective. Alternatively, it may be a sibling who is sick and getting more of Mum’s attention. Any perceived threats of separation or loss of love will result in insecurity and clinginess. If the infant is not successful in maintaining the attachment relationship with its mother, or the mother fails to respond in meeting its needs, the child will experience some degree of emotional deprivation and loss of emotional security.
Vital to mental health is for an infant/young child to experience a warm, intimate and continuous relationship
with the mother or exclusive access to a permanent mother-substitute – one person who steadily ‘mothers’ the child
in which both find satisfaction and enjoyment. (Implications for attachment developing to a substitute-mother are discussed in the section on “Non-maternal child care” in “Parents Misled" under "More Info").This relationship with the mother in early years, plus varied relations with father and siblings, underlies development of character and mental health. The mother’s love and pleasure in her infant provides the child with ‘spiritual nourishment‘. Conversely, an unsatisfactory relationship in early childhood predisposes children to respond in an anti-social way to later stresses.
The concept of ‘emotional deprivation’ emerged from studies on actual separation (temporary or permanent) and on the quality of intact mother-child relationships. This was determined by the physical ‘accessibility’ and emotional ‘availability’ of the mother in meeting the child’s needs and the ‘sufficiency of interaction’. This emotional deprivation was quantified as ‘partial’ or ‘complete’. The quality of an intact mother-child relationship is also characterised by how secure the child feels in the relationship and behaves (eg, anxious attachment, aggrieved attachment or insecure attachment). The emphasis has been on the importance of the quality of the mother-child relationship (and the quality of non-maternal care). However, so important did Bowlby find Attachment to be for the security and mental health and development of the child, that he
concluded that a child was better off left with ‘bad’ parents (providing they are not abusive) than removed and placed in ‘quality’ care in an institution. He commented that ‘there was something worse than a bad home – no home at all’.
Psychological development is also a reflection of quality of the mother-child relationship. Bowlby (1987) concluded that learning (eg, impulse control, emotional regulation, abstract thinking, conscience) requires the child to ‘feel friendly towards the mother’, but if the relationship is emotionally deprived or is positive but is ‘mixed with resentment’, then hostility can
impede development. Children in therapy being treated for emotional problems associated with feeling deserted revealed that they had feelings of hostility, fantasies of violence against parents and a desire for revenge. This attitude of resentment is not compatible with the child’s desire for love and security so results in acute inner conflicts (ie, repressed anger) anxiety and
depression. (Reasons for anger and how and why it is repressed are discussed in “Repressed Anger” in "More Info" and “Anger” under “Self Esteem Parenting”). Impaired learning due to ‘resentment’ has implications for deficits in development of personality, power of abstract thinking and conscience. Behaviour may be impulsive and uncontrolled, resulting in the child
being ‘victims of the momentary whim’, hence unable to pursue long term goals. Their power of checking themselves may be absent or feeble, so they may become ‘ineffective personalities’, ‘their own worst enemies’. Without developing a capacity for emotional regulation, life may become a constant drama, lurching from one crisis to the next.
While a young child requires complementary input from both the female brain of a mother and the male brain of a father during the first two years, it is the particular input from a mother that is required to promote ‘right brain’ development such as ‘emotional regulation’ (Newton, 2008). The father takes on a more important role a few years later. Hence, while attachment with the father is also important, the focus here is on maternal attachment.
Summarising Attachment:
A secure, healthy Attachment between mother and child takes a minimum of the first two years of a child’s life to develop. Some significant essential features of the maternal-child relationship include ‘sufficient interaction’, ‘frequent and sustained physical contact’, the mother being ‘physically accessible’ and ‘emotionally available’ virtually 24/7 and having the ‘ability to soothe a distressed baby by holding’, the Attachment being ‘continuous’. If these conditions are not met, there may be some degree of long term impact on the quality of Attachment which has implications on the long term emotional security of the child and capacity to make secure attachments in relationships as an adult. For developmental learning to occur, the child needs to have ‘friendly feelings’ towards the Attachment figure. There are implications that ‘emotional deprivation’ and ‘resentment’ may provide some impediment to emotional wellbeing and cognitive development.
Summarising how I see Attachment:
Maternal Attachment is the unique (ie, 'one only') interactive relationship between a mother and her infant. ‘Bonding’ is the first step and at a simplistic level it is akin to ‘imprinting’ (as in bird and animal species), making a connection to and identifying the individual that the child can rely on for taking care and being 'accessible' and 'available' to meet its needs such as nurturance and protection. At a more complex level, Attachment is a ‘developmental learning context’ in which development of emotional and cognitive processes takes place that are fundamental to learning effective functioning in the adult world. It could be said that when parents bring a child into the world, they enter into an innate contract to take care of the child, guide and protect it and ensure its physical and emotional needs are met. Hence, I regard Attachment as an 'innate Attachment contract'.
Inner Working Model:
Linked in to Attachment relationships (between parents and the child), Bowlby describes the child building an ‘inner working model of the world and self in relation to it’ in the subconscious mind, built on perceptions of experiences. Key features of this model are: who the attachment figures are, where and how accessible they are and how the child can expect them to respond when turning to them for support. Hence, the structure of the model is influenced by whether the child feels confident that attachment figures are in general readily available, or more or less afraid they will not be when needed. If there are doubts regarding availability of the attachment figure, there is susceptibility to respond with fear whenever the individual meets any potentially alarming situation during the ordinary course of life.
Another key feature is the perception of how acceptable or unacceptable the child feels to the attachment figures. Much-loved children who grow up feeling confident of parental love and support develop an unconscious assurance that whenever and wherever they might be in difficulty, there are always trustworthy figures available who will come to their aid. When
faced with potentially alarming situations, they are likely to tackle these situations more confidently and effectively or seek help to do so. Conversely, children not confident in their parents’ love and support may feel unwanted by the parents and lack confidence in support or aid being available from anyone else. To these individuals, the world may seem comfortless and
unpredictable.
If parents responded to provide comfort only when coaxed, the child will grow up believing that assistance and cooperation are available from others only if they are coaxed. If comfort is available from parents only if certain rules
are kept, then, providing the rules are moderate and sanctions mild and predictable, the individual will still believe that support will always be available when needed. However, the rules may be strict and difficult to keep and sanctions may be of a damaging kind. If the parent sulks or threatens suicide or threatens to not love the child, or in exasperation threatens to
leave (particularly if there is pretence to pack a bag) or send the child away, then the child will have doubts about comfort being available. They may fear abandonment and be likely to respond to other situations fearfully.
If the child is taken to a therapist to deal with anxiety or behavioural problems, the parent, feeling ashamed, full of regret and unable to acknowledge what they have done and the effect on the child, (or not see it as relevant), is unlikely to reveal they have made these threats. Rather, parents are at pains to present the child’s behaviour as unreasonable and incomprehensible and present themselves as reasonable parents who have done all in their power to help. The child will not tell, either, taking the cues from the parent, fearing that the parent will carry out the threats if the child ‘tells on the parent’. Bowlby refers to this as the child being a ‘willing conspirator of silence yet yearning for someone to come to their aid’. If the child does tell, it is likely to be attributed to ‘imagination’.
A dilemma for the child constructing this ‘inner working model’ is data from multiple sources (eg, child’s emotional experience, what Mum says and what other people say). Usually data from other sources is reasonably compatible with
the child’s first hand experiences. However, sometimes it conflicts. This produces confusion about what the actual truth is or the child creates two separate ‘models’ and attempts to reconcile them, or oscillates between. The child’s experience may be that the parents are not loving and supportive, yet the mother says she loves the child although she may complain that the child is insufferably demanding when requiring her attention. Other people may endorse the mother’s view by telling the child how lucky he is to have such loving parents. He may dismiss his own feelings and negative perceptions and come to believe that he is bad and is fortunate to have such a loving mother that he does not deserve.
Parenting experiences can affect the developing personality resulting in a range of ‘maturity’ of personality. At one end of the spectrum, a ‘mature’ personality approaches the world with confidence, and when difficulties strike, if disposed to, turns to trusted figures for support. Conversely, at the opposite end, in the arrested development that results in an ‘immature’
personality, the individual may be chronically anxious and in need of support but never trusts anyone.
Studies show development of well-adapted personalities as having strong sense of ‘self worth’, a working balance of initiative and self-reliance as well as capacity to seek help and make use of help when the occasion demands. They took responsibility for their own behaviour, grew up in close-knit families, valued the importance of a stable home base, identified with their same-sex parent, their parents had clearly defined values and provided love, acceptance, support and encouragement. Autonomy was encouraged but not forced. Bowlby refers to astronauts as an example of this personality type. They are capable of living and working effectively in conditions of great potential danger and stress. Although individualists with a high degree of self-reliance and clear preference for independent action, they are comfortable when dependence on others is required and have a capacity to maintain trust in what might be termed conditions of mistrust. Bowlby provides a specific example in the disastrous Apollo 13 mission to the moon – as depicted in the movie starring Tom
Hanks.
Hierarchy of Attachment Relationships:
Here is my proposed hierarchy of levels of Attachment relationships during the critical developmental first two years of a child’s life:
Primary A: Both parents, with one parent (generally mother) being the primary care giver
Secondary A: Immediate family
Tertiary A: Significant non-family such as close family friends, child care workers, teachers, significant extended family.
Presumably, attachment begins in the womb and I will refer to this primary attachment as natural-primary A., since it is the natural state of affairs when a woman conceives via sexual intercourse (or in-vitro fertilisation) and carries the developing foetus during pregnancy and then gives birth. Hence, if primary attachment develops in the womb with the birth mother, this has implications for the nature of primary attachment for children of adoption and surrogacy. (If Attachment does not start in the womb, then why do fathers bother placing their hands on the mother’s swollen abdomen and introduce themselves to the foetus as its Dad? Or why do some adoptees always feel like they don’t belong? Or others who feel the need to track down and reconnect with their birth mother, even though they have always felt loved by their adoptive parents)?
Bowlby concludes that if infants are placed early enough with a caring foster or adoptive mother, a strong attachment can be formed and any damage of emotional deprivation can be repaired. Nevertheless, I would describe the substitute role of an adoptive mother as a replacement-primary A. figure since she has completely replaced the birth mother as the primary
caregiver. The degree to which the replacement A. figure fulfils the functions of the primary A. successfully probably depends much on the age of the child when adopted. It would also depend on the nature and motivation of the adoptive mother to create that crucial Attachment and her hands-on involvement in caring for the child during its first two years. The sooner after birth, the better the chances of replacing the natural-primary A. that had already begun in the womb of the biological mother and through any contact after the birth. By contrast, adoption after being handed around to various foster carers or an institution would make it more difficult to develop a secure replacement-primary A. The quality of the replacement-primary A. may be an anxious one, with the child subconsciously fearing being abandoned again.
A substitute mother-figure (eg, a nanny, family member or child care worker) who is the main carer for an infant can become the main Attachment figure. I refer to this as a tertiary or secondary A. figure becoming elevated to surrogate-primary A. If the mother is not present to meet the Attachment needs of a young child, it will latch on to anyone who is and that person will become elevated to the status of being the most significant parenting figure for the child. (Implications are discussed in the section on “Non-maternal child care” in “Parents Misled" under "More Info").
Conclusion:
In spite of social changes that devalued the role of a mother and father in child raising, Attachment between child and both a mother and a father is just as relevant now as when John Bowlby carried out his valuable research. The emotional needs of kids remain the same now as they were then and the role of mothering, in spite of the trend in 'outsourcing parenting', continues to be essential to meeting those emotional needs.
References:
Bowlby, J.,“Attachment and Loss, Volume II: Separation, Anxiety and Anger”, Basic Books, Inc., New York 1973).
Bowlby, J.,“Attachment and Loss, Volume I: Attachment”, Basic Books, Inc., New York, (1969).
Bowlby, J.,“Child care and the growth of love”, Pelican Books (1953).
Newton, Ruth P., “The Attachment Connection”, New Harbinger Publications: Oakland (2008).