Below, please post your response to the assigned Cassidy article on Attachment Theory. I am looking for clear evidence that you have read the article and that you have formed a well-thought-out argument. You may also pose questions and find connections in your own life and work to the theory. I expect that your reflection will be a minimum of two paragraphs.
In addition, you will be expected to come back and reply to at least one reflection in a thoughtful, clear manner.
You may also find this video interesting; it's an example of the strange situation experiment discussed in the article.
I found the article The Nature of the Child’s Ties, to be very interesting and something I have never learned about. Attachment theory is specific behaviors in children, such as seeking proximity with the attachment figure when upset or seemed threatened. It shows the importance of the child’s relationship with their mother in terms of their social, emotional and cognitive development. Children experienced intense distress when separated from their mothers this is because the mother or caregiver provides safety and security to their child. There are two classes of factors that contribute to the activation of the attachment system such as the condition of the child, illness, fatigues, hunger or pain and conditions of the environment, threatening stimuli, the children know which type of attachment behavior(s) they should use with different people. I learned that the attachment behavior is the behavior that promotes proximity to the attachment figure. The attachment behavior system is the organization of attachment behaviors within the individual and then attachment bond is the affectional tie to the attachment. I found interesting that it’s not a bond between two people, but of one personal being attached to a person when the other person is not attached with them.
ReplyDeleteI found that the attachment theory in relation to other behavioral systems to be very interesting such as the exploratory system, the fear system, and the sociable system. The exploratory system gives survival advantage to the child providing important information about the workings of the environment. The fear system is having that protection such as from the dark, loudness, being alone, etc. The sociable system is being in company with others. A great example was the quote according to Bowlby, “ A child seeks his attachment-figure when he is tired, hungry, ill, or alarmed and also when he is uncertain of that figure’s whereabouts; when the attachment-figure is found he wants to remain in proximity to him or her and may want also to be held or cuddled. By contrast, a child seeks a playmate when he is in good spirits and confident of the whereabouts of his attachment-figure; when the playmate is found, moreover, the child wants to engage playful interaction with him or her. If this analysis is right, the roles of attachment-figure and playmate are distinct.” Also stated, “Mother are good for protection, peers for watching and playing with”. I thought that this article with really great and I learned a lot from it that I have never known before. I think it is fascinating to all of the different ways a child can be attached to their caregiver and then to other people as they get older but the attachment to the mother will never go away. Now I understand why my students come in crying (mostly on Mondays or after long vacations) even though they are at an older age they are developmentally at the stage of attachment to their mother and not understanding that she will be back home when they get there.
If interactive, attachment and communication types are somewhat cyclic is it possible to change or increase attachment in positive ways? Can parental or child/peer workshops be created to do this for social emotional behaviors?
Delete-Kelly
I found the Cassidy article very interesting as well and also found the section on “Multiple Attachments” fascinating. As young children grow to middle childhood and adolescence into adulthood, Cassidy stated that opportunities for new attachments outside of their own family emerge. When new attachment bonds are formed, does an individual, regardless of age, still possess the biological function associated with attachment behavior of needing protection and security for survival? It’s an interesting question to consider. For instance, your example about your students crying when they come back to school after a weekend or long break, clearly they miss their mothers or the comforts of home. However, are they crying because they miss their mothers or is it the biological function of attachment behavior causing this need to be protected and feel safe by an attachment figure?
DeleteBy the way, thank you for sharing that example. It made me question Bowlby’s theory.
I’m drawing on this article as well as a Bowlby article on attachment that I have read.
ReplyDeleteIt is theorized that attachment, care giving, and parenting behavior systems are guided by instinctive preprogrammed factors. There is a functional significance to these emotional, fear and exploratory systems that are interrelated negotiations and experiences of the child, other humans, and environment. Children often seek proximity, protection, monitoring and attempt to reduce separation with attachment figures- caregivers. Attachment figures, often mothers, are used as a secure base. Children will explore and then return to refuel and if alarmed flee and seek out figure for security. Peer affectional system is a different type of exploratory attachment in which children interrelate and forms bonds with each other. With secure attachment children develop resilience and flexibility. When separated and received responsive reunions the children adapt and continue relatively the same as prior to separation. Intense emotions arise during formation, maintenance, disruption and renewal of attachment relationships (Bowlby 1979 pg 130, Cassidy 1999 pg 6). When there are mixed experiences and perceived unknown stress factors proximity to safety and reactions influence attachment. Avoidant attachment occurs when children do not have visual distress but had biological markers and a detachment on reunion. Ambivalent children were preoccupied looking for missing figures and when reunited they were withdrawn or inconsolable. These children often had mothers that did not encourage autonomy as much as other mothers. Positive collaborative communication seems to be key to child and caregiver attachment. Disorganized attachment occurs when the caregiver is seen as a source of danger and attachment figure.
Maria Reyes
ReplyDeleteCassidy Article Reflection
May 10, 2016
Before reading Jude Cassidy’s article entitled “The Nature of the Child’s Ties,” I watched the video presenting Mary Salter Ainsworth’s demonstration of an experiment related to John Bowlby’s attachment theory, called the “strange situation.” According to Bowlby’s theory, the parent-child relationship - specifically with the mother - plays an important role in a child’s social, emotional, and cognitive development. He explains that attachment behavior is a biological need stemming from human evolution - where a child keeps his or her proximity close to the mother due to survival instinct. Because attachment behavior is organized into a categorical system, infants are able to respond in context to environmental changes while working to attain some sort of goal. For example, in the video an infant named Lisa sees her mother leave the room twice. Both times, Lisa is seen crying and following her as she leaves the room. Because Lisa’s behavior is linked to an attachment behavioral system, she knows to respond with crying in context to an environmental change - in this case, her mother leaving the room. While crying, Lisa also decides to crawl to the door in an attempt to attain the goal of trying to reach her mother somehow. Lisa’s need to keep in close proximity to an attachment figure (her mother) exemplifies the biological function in attachment behavior.
Other attachment systems such as the exploratory, fear, sociable, and caregiving systems were discussed and observed in the video. For example, Lisa is seen exploring her new environment, while keeping her mother close by as a “secure base.” Next, when the stranger walks in, she experiences fear. After the stranger is in the room for a while, the stranger attempts to be sociable with Lisa. Last, when Lisa’s mother leaves the room, the stranger tries to assume the role of a caregiver and tries to comfort Lisa, but to no avail. These four attachment systems seen in the experiment further support Bowlby’s perspective about attachment behavior stemming from a biological function in a human’s need for survival. Because an infant needs to feel protected, a bond to his or her attachment figure is formed. Since I watched the video first before reading the article, it allowed me to make visual connections to Cassidy’s discussions on Bowlby’s work as I read. From this reading, I learned that attachments formed between a mother and child have a biological function which reflects an affectional bond. I also learned that while infants can make multiple attachments, they strongly prefer their mother in particular when they are distressed, a fact which is also reflected in Ainsworth’s video.
Jaime West
ReplyDeleteIn reading Jude Cassidy's "The Nature of the Child's Ties," it was fascinating to learn about the evolutionary and biological imperatives behind attachment behaviors (and caregiving behaviors) that function to maintain proximity between a child and caregiver. Just as children have the inherent desire to explore, they also have an inherent motivation to form attachments. It was interesting to think of attachment behaviors as a control system - they are activated more or less depending on internal and external factors that might given rise to the need for safety or comfort and also depending on the location and behavior of the mother, who generally serves as the principal attachment figure and becomes a safe haven for a child to return to. Children may choose to employ different behaviors depending on the situation and relationship and these decisions are guided by a child's mental representations of the self and the caregiver, as well as a child's cognitive assessment of the situation.
I found the interplay between different behavioral systems to be incredibly interesting. When a child is in a nonthreatening situation and in the presence of a secure attachment figure (whom they view as responsive and available), they are much more likely to exhibit exploratory behaviors and also sociable behaviors. Also, when in the presence of a secure attachment figure, a child is also less susceptible to feelings of fear, which would increase attachment behaviors and suppress exploratory behaviors. Cassidy points out that even when children are shown a picture of their mothers, it can calm their fears. I have often seen family photos in preschool and kindergarten classes, which are perhaps useful in this function as a "security blanket." The counterpart to attachment behaviors on the part of the child are caregiving behaviors on the part of the parent. Both serve to maintain a comfortable proximity and when a parent's caregiving behaviors are activated, a child's attachment behaviors can be deactivated, allowing them freedom to explore. An interesting point that Cassidy makes is that a child's and parent's ideas of the desirable proximity may differ. It was not mentioned whether or not a child's comfort level is learned from or influenced by what the parent is comfortable with, but I would assume that this is probably likely. There are also instances (as I'm sure any teacher or parent is very familiar with) when a child has a need for immediate attention, while a caregiver must balance multiple concerns, including long-term caregiving (e.g. going to work) that is in conflict with the short-term attachment need of the child.
Cassidy also discusses the characteristics of attachment bonds and notes that they are consistent regardless of whether or not attachment behaviors are displayed. In fact, when in the absence of real or perceived danger, the display of excessive attachment behaviors might signal an insecure attachment, while less attachment behaviors would indicate a secure attachment bond. Again, there is an evolutionary emphasis to attachment theory and Cassidy describes the reasons that having one principal attachment bond is better for survival, even though multiple bonds usually exist, forming a general hierarchy of attachment relationships. Finally, it is interesting to consider that even when children grow up, the attachment bonds to their caregivers still exist, but the comfortable proximity to their caregivers can increase considerably and, as Cassidy mentions, those parental attachments permeate fewer domains. The shift in attachment bonds over a lifespan are noteworthy and I wonder how much teachers become attachment figures in their students' lives. If a student feels safe and secure in his or her bond with the teacher, does that relationship foster greater exploration and risk-taking in the classroom? Also, if a child has insecure bonds at home, how much does that affect the ability to put trust in the teacher?
I think your questions about how attachment translates into a classroom setting are very interesting. Particularly, how can we nurture relationships with students who may struggle with their attachment to their primary caregivers. Like you mentioned, I think allowing small children to have photos of family members is a great way for kids to feel safe. With older students, I think giving them options in activities. How invested do we, as teachers, need to be in how a student does something? Can we give students room to explore and figure out what works best for them? Also, I think modeling our own security and confidence is a good first step towards making students feel that they can trust us.
DeleteJamie once students form strong bonds with their teachers they are more successful. In class I believe we talked about simply learning students names and using activities to get to know them makes a big difference. When students feel like they matter they become more interested. Learning requires you to ask questions and make mistakes, which frighten children. For students to learn the teachers have to create an environment where they feel comfortable taking those risks.
ReplyDeleteJude Cassidy
ReplyDelete“The Nature of Child Ties”
The Attachment Theory describes the importance of the relationship between a mother and child. Mothers are naturally nurturing and meet children’s’ needs giving them security. As the video showed, when a mother and child is separated he/ she will be in distress. Causing attachment behaviors like crying, screaming, reaching, and following until what was described in the video (strange situation) as the “reunion.” It makes sense that mothers who care for their children result in being attached. What is extremely confusing to me is children are attached to parents that don’t meet their needs. Children are even attached to abusive mothers.
Another interesting part of the article is multiple attachments. Children can become attached to more than one person. It could include fathers, siblings, grand parents, aunts, and uncles. Each attachment is not treated the same and there is a hierarchy. That hierarchy is determined by the time spent with the figure, the quality of care, emotional investment in the child, and social cues. For a youngster I could imagine that having different experiences with different figures could be very confusing. Especially when the conflicting figures could be their parents. Many students are in situations where their mom and dad are not together so they have to live in two different households and is often obvious when children come to school. As a teacher, how do you help to provide balance for this type of student?
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIn response to your question, I feel that the only way to provide balance for that type of student is for you as the teacher to be consistently there for the child. Consistency is very important to children. Unfortunately, you have no control over what happens outside of school. In essence, I feel that you would be "the balance" for that student.
DeleteAshanti,
DeleteI agree that I think it is confusing that children become attached to their caregivers even if abusive. You would think because the parent doesn’t protect them and make them feel safe and instead abuses them either physically or verbally that the child wouldn’t become attached. It is like the child becomes attached to whatever they see first whether or not they feel secure or not. I thought the video as well was very helpful as a visual to see how that little baby reacted towards the stranger and when the mother left. I think that whether or not a child has both their parents, they have that initial attachment to the mother or in that case the caregiver who keeps them safe and as they get older they form different attachments to family and friends, even if they don’t have both parents, whether its an aunt or an uncle or sister and brother. That is how I interpreted it from the reading.
Ashanti in response to your question, I feel that you bring up some valid points, in terms of attachment theory. I totally agree that the video was a good visual and explained how a little baby can be attached to her mother. There is always a very strong bond with the baby and their mother, from the beginning of development to the end.
DeleteRoald Johnny
ReplyDeleteThe Nature of Child’s Ties
In her article, Cassidy (1999) discussed the various aspects of Bowlby’s attachment theory. From an evolutionary perspective, Cassidy (1999) mentioned that the genes associated with the proximity of the child and mother was favored because that increased the likelihood of survival. On a more microscale, Cassidy(1999) explained the different types of systems within the attachment theory. The systems I want to address are the fear, sociable, and caregiving systems. The fear system is based on that idea that infants will increase their attachment behavior if they are exposed to a frightening stimulus. This idea is based on a biological perspective since increasing attachment behavior will increase rate of survival and the ability to pass on genes. The sociable system is focused on being in the company of others. This system is also biologically based because being in the company of others increases chances of survival. I did find it interesting that Cassidy (1999) mentioned that Bowlby asserted that the sociable system and the attachment behavioral system are different. Based on Bowlby’s quote on page 8, what I understood is that the attachment system is based on directing attachment to one or few figures while the sociable system is based on wanting the be in good company. Lastly, the caregiver system, as Cassidy (1999) explained is based on parental behaviors that promote proximity and comfort when there is a potential threat to the child. This system is also biologically based and the main concept is establishing proximity between the child and caregiver.
There were two thoughts that occurred to me when I read this article. One thought was when Cassidy (1999) noted a finding by Bowlby that “infants become attached even to abusive mothers, suggest that they system is not driven by simple pleasurable association” (p.5). I am wondering if the reason for this finding is because the infants are dependent on the mothers for survival and they understand that. Another thought that occurred to me is the idea that infants can form attachments to inanimate objects. For example, probably most common object that infants might be attached to are blankets or teddy bears. One way to think of it is that these objects are a form of “comfort” when caregivers are not available. I do wonder if Bowlby did not care to incorporate this form of attachment into his theories.
Sindy Chari
DeleteResponse to Johnny's Comments
5/12/16
Johnny, I'm really glad you brought up the quote about the abusive mothers. While reading the article I kept wondering how much of Bowlby's theory could be applied to attachment in other relationships so the point about abusive mothers made me wonder about people who remain in abusive relationships. I wonder if there is a connection. I think your reasoning behind why infants are still attached to abusive mothers makes sense. If they see their mothers as their means to survival, even if the relationship isn't perfect or ideal they probably still feel attached. Maybe if they are attached to other caregivers who aren't abusive then they might form a greater attachment to those people since their chance for survival with the non-abusive caregivers is even greater?
In her article "The Nature of the Child's Ties" Jude Cassidy discussed attachment and why it's important. Attachment is the emotional bond between a child and a mother or caregiver. It's crucial to understand different types of it, how it develops and the impact of the attachment on the child social, emotional and cognitive development.
ReplyDeleteMothers provide care, positive and safe environment for their kids and kids' desire for proximity is understandable. Proximity to the parent has significant role because it includes social interaction, learning about environment and other factors which are important for child development. The author also underlines that protection is essential part because without protection it's unnecessary to feed and teach a kid.
Moreover, I found this example very curious. The author compares children behavior with thermostat. When a separation with a mother becomes very long or great in distance, the kid attachment system is activated and when the reunion is achieved the kid feels comfortable again.
One more interesting point is that kids become attached even if their parents don't meet their psychological needs. I guess it happens because kids don't have a choice, they can't ask for another parents that's why they just need to adapt to who they already have.
I'd like to share my own experience. I'm gymnastics coach and sometimes I teach "mommy&me" class for toddlers. During this class kids learn skills with help of their parents because they cannot separate for 45 minutes. The desire of proximity is understandable because kids get experience in new environment and they need protection from their parents.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJessica Phillips Lorenz
ReplyDeleteReflection to The Nature of Child’s Ties
I’ve read a lot about how to support bonding and attachment over the last few years. I find it very comforting to be reminded of the powerful biology that is at work. The analogy of the baby as “heat seeking missile” for his/ her object of attachment is a good one.
My son, Dylan, is in the middle of a mommy renaissance this week. His attachment behavior has been activated-- big time. I’m not sure what kicked it into gear--he had a fever a few days ago? Teething perhaps? Or maybe his genetic survival drive mechanism has kicked into gear? Because he and I are very much in dyadic tune, I wouldn’t be surprised if the increase in my stress (end of the semester, anyone?) kicked him into gear a bit. Perhaps I’ve had to prioritize my “food-getting behavior” or, in my case, “masters getting behavior” over my “caregiving system”?
I loved reading about the “exploratory system”. I teach a yoga class to mobile babies and their mothers. Sometimes, being in a new place sets off the “fear system” and the babies don’t want the mothers to put them down. Other times, if a baby is feeling very secure in his attachment, he will boldly crawl through the space in order to check out the colorful tunnel. “The attachment exploration balance” can shift from moment to moment! I found this to be so true. Sometimes a baby will happily crawl over to a pair of legs in black yoga pants and pull herself up to stand, looking very proud of herself. But when she looks up to her mommy to reconnect with her “safe haven”, as Cassidy put it, and finds that it is actually another mommy’s legs, her attachment behavior will be triggered and she will burst into confused tears.
I found the exploratory system to be very interesting as well. I also see this type of behavior even with my first graders. Especially when we leave the school to go on a field trip. Initially they cling to me but as the guide speaks to the children more and engages them in learning they become more comfortable with the guide and the environment and are eager to explore.
Delete-Inna Djaniants
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn the article, “The Nature of the Child’s Ties,” Cassidy discusses attachment behaviors that children exhibit. The attachment behavioral system really exposed new information to me that I had never understood previously when my own students exhibited this behavior. Cassidy states, “children are thought to become attached whether their parents are meeting their physiological needs or not” (p. 5). I have had students who have been raised by people other than their mother and yet the one person the students want to talk and write about is almost always their mother. I always found this odd considering there are other people in their lives that have offered them so much more love and protection yet the person they desire most is their mom.
ReplyDeleteNot having my own children the exploratory system is one behavioral system I have observed the most in my classroom and with my friends’ children. One of my friends has 2 year old twins and every time I visit them I have to give them space before I can get close to them. They have to see me interact with my friend, their mother for at least an hour before they allow me to get close to them without crying. Even then it takes them awhile to adjust to only me being around the room. The moment their mom steps into another room they both start crying. I have also observed the exploratory system in the classroom, particularly in Pre-K classes in the first week of school. So many parents have to spend time with their child in the classroom as the kids explore the room and their teacher. If parents exposed their children to other kids and adults (non-family) prior to entering Pre-K would the situation be different? Would parents need to spend less time allowing for their child to explore?
I found this article to answer so many questions of my students’ behavior. Yet I am curious about how students with autism would respond to these studies. Would they exhibit the same signs of behavior attachment?
Sorry, I did not write my name. Inna Djaniants.
DeleteHi Inna,
DeleteI was also very interested in the exploratory vs. attachment interplay. I do think that if children have never been to preschool and are then expected to separate from their parents and enter the total foreign environment of a busy classroom, it's probably very overwhelming for them and they probably feel scared, which would activate attachment behaviors. I think it's so important to allow a phase-in period so that kids can get comfortable, as you described. I do, however, know many children who have been in preschool or daycare and around many children and adults other than their parents who still require a lot of time to adjust to new environments. I think perhaps some kids are just more naturally wary. I also think the internal state of children on a given day plays a big part in their willingness to engage in exploratory or sociable behaviors. If a kid is sick or tired, they will generally want to be with their mother. When I was teaching after school to kindergarteners, there were times when they were so exhausted and would just cry for their mothers. Slowly as the year went on, their stamina increased and they became more comfortable, these behaviors eased up.
Sindy Chari
ReplyDeleteCassidy Reading Response
5/12/16
The reading "The Nature of the Child's Ties" by Jude Cassidy focuses on John Bowlby's study of attachment theory. Cassidy describes three main areas that Bowlby focused on regarding attachment theory, the biological and evolutionary basis of attachment theory, the attachment system in relation to other behavioral systems and the nature of a child's attachment.
Cassidy explains that Bowlby argued that genetic selection favored attachment between the child and its mother. This attachment is advantageous because when a child is in close proximity to its mother it gains protection, shelter, nourishment, and an understanding of the social and environmental aspects of its surroundings. One point in this section that I found particularly interesting was the comparison of the attachment system to a thermostat. I definitely agree that the attachment system is always trying to maintain homeostasis and so the child has to act in different ways depending on the situation to get what it needs from the mother in terms of attachment.
I thought that this idea of homeostasis tied in well with the next section where Cassidy explains Bowlby's research on how the attachment system interacts with the exploratory behavior system and the fear behavior system. I think that even among the interacts of these systems, the attachment system is still always trying to maintain homeostasis. For example, when the child feels secure and comfortable with the mother, it would be more likely to go out and explore its environment but if it doesn't feel secure and has something to fear, it would be more likely to stay very close to its mother for protection.
One point I found particularly interesting from the third section of the paper was that even when a child isn't displaying any type of attachment behavior toward their parent, the attachment and bond still exists. The idea goes back to the idea of homeostasis and that the child will display signs of attachment when needed. The attachment is fluid and dynamic rather than always the same.
While reading this article I wondered, can Bowlby's attachment theory between a child and its caregiver be applied to other types of relationships such as siblings, romantic relationships, friendships, student-teacher, etc? In the society that we live in, we are of course attached to our parents, but as we grow up some of the attachment shifts to our friends, spouses, etc.
I found the article The Nature of the Child's Ties by Jude Cassidy to be very informative and educational. It really talks about the many different elements that are associated with this theory. Factors such as biological and evolutionary have a impact on attachment theory. There is always a very strong attachment with a child and a mother, once the child is born. This attachment effects the overall development of the child as well.
ReplyDeleteMothers are very nurturing to their baby once is it born. When the baby is separated from the mother, the child will scream or even cry. This representation was displayed on the video about the baby little girl. Once the mother was out of the room the baby girl started crying and needed to have that instant contact with the mother.
In addition I feel that attachment theory is in all of us no matter what our age is. We as human beings want that nurture that love and affection always.
Pelin Gulen
ReplyDeleteReading Response
5/12/2016
In her article” The Nature of the child’s Ties”, Cassidy discussed ‘the attachment theory’ introduced by John Bowlby (1958). Dissatisfied within explanations on attachment, Bowlby went further in his studies and related his work to other areas of studies including biology, ethnology, cognitive science, and developmental psychology. This strong tie between mother and child is discussed to occur because of biological connections. However, in her article, Cassidy pointed out that children do not become attached just because their parents are meeting their psychological needs, by sharing evidence from studies showing that infants become attached to abusive mothers as well. (Bowlby, 1956). Further in her paper, Cassidy shared the role of context, emotions and cognition in attachment which are considered to be strongly associated.
I did find the multiple attachments part interesting and explanatory, in that as it is also supported by the findings; biological parents, siblings, grandparents, uncles are likely to become attachment figures and how in come stressful situations infants can become attached to other infants. To me, this clearly shows that infants feel a need to be attached in some ways. Moreover, even though most infants are considered to have more than one attachment, they do not treat all of them equivalent. (Cassidy, 1999) This part of the reading took me back to my conversation with my sister which took place a few weeks ago. She mentioned about how calm her new born daughter was around her father and others, however she wasn’t as quiet with her as she was with others. I shared some points from the article with her, especially the part where Cassidy shared the bond is considered to exist consistently over time and also even during a period when child is directing no attachment behavior to a parent, the child is still attached.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeletePelin, I also found the multiple attachment part of the article very interesting. What you're saying about your sister and her daughter makes me think of the "goal corrected responses" that was mentioned by Bowlby, and also they ways in which a child's current emotional state affects their need or desire to be close to their mother. For example, when a child is agitated or upset, they are more inclined to seek out their mother for comfort than anyone else. This is because the child feels that the mother is the solution to the problem, and will make everything better. Perhaps this is why your niece is gravitating toward your sister when she is upset, and seems to be around her father or others when she is in good spirits.
DeleteNisreen Aljubouri
ReplyDeleteThe Nature of the Child's Ties
5/12/2016
The article “The Nature of the Child’s Ties” defines specific behaviors in children and shows how attachment relationships with their parents are at an advantage cognitively, socially, and emotionally. According to Bowlby infants have “a universal need to seek close proximity with their caregiver when under stress or threatened.” That means, Children who separated from their mothers may have anxiety and feel unsafe. Bowlby claimed that mothering is useless if delayed until 2-3 years. Children will be unsafe, unsecured, and unprotected.
In the evolutionary perspective Bowlby stated that attachment is a normal and healthy characteristic in humans’ life and it is not a sign of immaturity. Humans by nature come into the world to form attachments with others, because this will help them to survive. Children’s attachment to their mothers is a primary attachment that will eventually lead them to explore the world. So this kind of attachment represents a kind of a door to the later social life; if disrupted, it can have severe consequences.
On page 5 Cassidy stated that “with development, the child gains access to a greater variety of ways of achieving proximity.” In the video we have seen the child’s reaction. To achieve proximity, he cried and crawled to the door. He stopped crying when mother responded.
It was hard for me to read this article without having childhood flashback. I was lucky though to have multiple attachments. My older siblings were there. In addition to friends and teachers.
In Cassidy’s article on attachment theory, “The Nature of the Child’s Ties,” he discussed the intricacies and inner working of the relationship between children and their mother’s, or other caregivers. Cassidy introduces us to the many ways in which children’s emotional attachment needs are met by the nurturing and caring nature of a mother. Often times, upon separation from their mothers, children will show visible signs of distress, and will return to being at ease once they are reunited. I found Bowlby’s theory interesting, when he claimed that many positive or beneficial outcomes for a child are a result of the close proximity or nearness that they have to their parent. He continued to state that the most important factor in survival advantage is the child’s protection from predator’s or the “biological function” of attachment theory. While this may seem more relative to animals than with humans, Bowlby does not seem to distinguish, and evidently, this theory applies to humans as well.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing that I found interesting in regard to attachment theory, was that a child’s attachment to their mother is not always dependent on the mother’s level of care and loyalty to their child. For example, children will show behaviors of attachment toward mothers who are kind and caring just as well as those who are negligent and abusive. This further proves the predisposed feelings of attachment that children feel; it truly is an “attachment behavioral system.” Children will become attached to their parents, whether or not their physiological needs are being met by them. Another one of Bowlby’s theories is referenced later in regard to the emphasis on the importance of proximity that a child has to their caregiver. Bowlby compares the child to a “heat-seeking missile,” adjusting its path according to changes that may occur in the mother’s location or behavior. Examples of these goal-corrected responses, may be when a child notices their mother is leaving them in a new or unfamiliar place, and reaches out to them, or begins to cry. It is clear that emotions are related to attachment, and they have a lot to do with why attachments are maintained. Bowlby provides that children seek out their mother’s when they are tired, hungry, or sad, and by contrast, they look for a playmate or a friend when they are in good spirits. A great deal of the reason a child seeks their caregiver is dependent on the disposition or mood they are in to begin with; a child feels that their caregiver can make everything better with a hug or a cuddle, and often searches for this, even as a baby.