Childhood Attachment Patterns
In a previous blog, we considered the importance of connection and attachment, and some of the work that has informed what we refer to as Attachment Theory. In this blog, we take a closer look at the four categories of attachment styles that we see in children. Getting to grips with attachment styles and patterns can be helpful if you are looking to make meaning of your own childhood and understand more about your role in the family you grew up in. This can shine a light on any patterns you notice about yourself within relationships with others nowadays.
It’s important to consider that reflecting upon attachment styles can also be difficult as it involves connecting with childhood memories and feelings associated with your place in your family of origin. This can be particularly painful if you know your childhood has included physical or emotional neglect or other forms of abuse. If you do read on, please take your time, and take care of yourself. Aim to be attentive to what you feel and need as you reflect on the different attachment styles we see in children.
Childhood attachment styles
The research on Attachment that began with the work of British psychologist, John Bowlby, in the 1950’s and continues to this day, has identified four Attachment Styles. These are:
Secure attachment
Insecure avoidant attachment
Insecure ambivalent/resistant attachment
Disorganised attachment
Attachment Theory: A starting point for self-development
Before we consider each of the attachment styles in turn, it’s important to say that Attachment Theory is just that – a theory. That theory emerged in the mid 20th Century within a worldview that focused on the nuclear family unit. It’s important to recognise and celebrate that families come in all sorts of shapes and sizes.
Attachment Theory focuses on the ways that our early experience of nurturing impacts our relationship patterns. It’s worth mentioning that whilst Attachment Theory is widely accepted is widely accepted, some researchers have also emphasised the role that nature may play in shaping a child’s attachment pattern – so that the inborn or inbuild temperament and personality is what we see through attachment behaviour, rather than that behaviour being a reaction and response to the ways caregivers interact with the child[1]. The bottom line? Nature and nurture are likely to both play a role – and with the exiting knowledge we currently have, using Attachment Theory can be a useful framework for reflecting on the relationship between children and their caregivers. And, like so many things in life, most people’s attachment patterns or styles are not a neat fit for these textbook categories. A child may exhibit different attachment patterns at different times and in different environments and relationships. That’s okay, if we hold the theory lightly – using it simply as a starting point for reflection and consideration.
So, the different Attachment Styles? Let’s consider each in turn, looking at what we might see in a child who shows that attachment pattern and what types of things caregivers do or don’t tend to do that may contribute to this pattern. Firstly, let’s consider secure attachment.
Secure attachment
Securely attached children show signs of being generally able to be comforted by their caregivers when distressed. They can use their caregiver as what is known as a ‘secure base’ from which to explore their environment when they are not distressed. Imagine a child who is playing in the same room as their parent(s) or caregiver. They know they’re there, and feel safe and secure enough to crawl, or toddle over to the other side of the room – drawn by their interest in something they’ve seen or heard. Their curiosity outweighs any sense of trepidation about moving away from their parent or caregiver. They feel safe, secure and confident enough to take this risk. Perhaps this description seems a good fit for what you know about your own childhood?
Children who show secure attachment patterns seem to have caregivers who are consistently responsive to the child’s needs, sensitively responding to their moods and feelings correctly most of the time. They use their intuition and awareness of the child to recognise how the child might be feeling, or what they may need – and then respond appropriately. The child seems to come to trust the caring adult to meet their needs and can be relatively easily soothed by them when upset or frightened. Importantly, caregivers don’t have to get it right all the time to help a child develop secure attachment. It is inevitable that any caregiver – no matter how attentive and available will get it wrong some of the time and misread or misunderstand the child’s signals. Knowing this can help to manage the sense of guilt many parents feel for the time they – inevitably – didn’t hit the mark. What is important is that the child comes to trust their caregiver is reliably there, and that when mis-attunement happens, there is a repair of that rupture. Getting it wrong some of the time is not a barrier to secure attachment – getting it right most of the time and putting things right when mistakes are made is powerful way for a child to come to learn they can trust their caregiver. In this way, the overall sense for the child over time is that they feel loved and know they are seen, noticed, and understood by the person or people who care for them. As they grow and develop, children who are securely attached show resilience and a willingness and ability to trust others and trust themselves.
Insecure avoidant attachment
Some children – around one in five – show insecure avoidant attachment. In Ainsworth’s “Strange Situation” experiment[2], detailed in a previous blog, children with an insecure avoidant attachment showed little or no sign of distress when their usual caregiver left the room, and they also appear to be unfazed when the stranger came into the room, continuing to play independently. When their caregiver returned, they showed little interest in connection with them. It is as if the child is both physically and emotionally independent of their caregiver. In time, children with insecure avoidant attachment are likely to be extremely self-reliant and have concluded that it is safest not to seek connection with others.
Children who show insecure avoidant attachment patterns tend to have caregivers who – for a whole host of possible reasons – is somewhat insensitive or unable to respond to child’s needs. Perhaps because of their own struggles, they aren’t able or willing to be available for the child during times of emotional distress. Such a caregiver may feel uncomfortable when a child reaches out to them or seeks connection. They may have difficulty spotting or understanding a child’s needs or may have reduced capacity to meet those needs for the child. Sadly, children whose parent(s) experience post-natal depression, or who are dealing with other mental health or physical health difficulties may find their caregiver struggles to connect and attend to their needs. Perhaps Dad is in hospital, or works away for extended periods of time, leaving the child’s other parent to try their best to manage their own distress as well as attend to their child’s feelings. Or, Mum may be overwhelmed with the demands of parenthood, and struggling with the feelings triggered in her as a result of her own difficulties with her parents. Children raised in families who are finding it hard to manage tight finances or deal with threats of redundancy, or relationship problems may find their caregivers are distracted with the stress and worry this creates. Children who need to share their caregiver’s attention with several siblings or family members in need of care, and where caregivers have little external support may develop this type of attachment pattern. In other words, there are endless scenarios that can result in a caregiver having reduced capacity to meet and attend to a child in their early months of life.
Outwardly, whilst children with insecure avoidant attachment patterns may seem to be coping fine – and indeed, seem to be extremely independent, this outer shell can hide a vulnerable interior. Sadly, such children have learnt to protect themselves by keeping a distance and hiding any feelings of vulnerability. That makes it hard to trust or connect at a deep level with others. Perhaps you recognise some features of the description here as a fit for your own memories of childhood relationships?
Insecure ambivalent/resistant attachment
Some children – around 15 percent – show insecure resistant or ambivalent attachment. This attachment style is sometimes known as insecure anxious attachment. In Ainsworth’s “Strange Situation” experiment[3], detailed in a previous blog, children with an insecure resistant attachment pattern showed intense distress when their caregiver left the room. When the stranger entered the room, these children tended to be wary and demonstrated a fear in relation to the stranger. When their caregiver returned, they tended to exhibit what is sometimes called “push-pull” or “approach-avoidance” behaviour. In other words, they would move toward Mum, but also resit contact with mother, even pushing her away, or arching their back when picked up. Such children cried more and also explored less than the infants with secure or avoidant attachments.
Other features that are identified with an insecure resistant attachment pattern in children include a difficulty in playing independently. Sometimes, children with an insecure resistant attachment pattern can be given the label of “clingy”, and may seek lots of reassurance from caregivers, whilst also sometimes rejecting such reassurance.
Children who show insecure resistant attachment patterns tend to have caregivers who – again, for a whole host of possible reasons, aren’t able to provide consistent care and attunement towards the child. They may be preoccupied at times and respond inconsistently. That can be confusing for a child, and they can become anxious about their caregiver(s)’ availability. Such children, as they grown, may then internalise this experience so that they come to develop a negative view of self. In a bid to help meet their own needs for reassurance, they may anxiously seek this from others. Yet, all too often – such reassurance doesn’t help to change the child’s negative view of themselves. If you do recognise that this description parallels your own childhood experiences in some way, you may have developed an ambivalent attachment as a child.
Disorganised attachment
The “Strange Situation” research identified the three Attachment categories in children we have already considered. In 1986, researchers[4] added a fourth category, called either disorganised or disoriented. Like both the ambivalent and avoidant categories, disorganised attachment is recognised as form of insecure attachment in children. In all three of these categories, there is a recognition that – for whatever reason – the attachment pattern may be linked to a child experiencing a lack of psychological connection and sense of a safety within their early relationships.
Sadly, researchers have observed disorganised attachment patterns in children who are being cared for by someone who is a source of threat or fear and who is unpredictable and frightening and abusive. The child’s source of safety is also a source of fear for them. Children begin to show disorientated behaviour. Whist they want intimacy and connection from the caregiver(s), they also instinctively fear the rejection that connection attempts can provoke. In time, the child – sadly, comes to expect to be hurt and forms a negative view of themselves and of other people and may show trauma type responses, such as freezing or showing and apparent dissociation. For young, developing brains, it is impossible to make sense of unpredictable, frightening, and abusive behaviour – and as such, they find both the outer world and their inner experiencing to be disorganised and disorientating. It can be difficult to face such childhood memories if this has been your own experience as a child. Having the support of people you can trust to speak to and discuss any feelings or memories that emerge for you if you do recognise that your childhood may have included features suggesting disorganised attachment in childhood.
A brief word about the ever-evolving world of psychological research:
In this blog, we’re focusing in on the four attachment patterns and styles already explored. However, research continues to consider attachment patterns to better hone and develop theories that help to express the complexity of human relationships. In recent years, a further category has been identified – reactive attachment disorder (RAD). RAD is a very rare disorder that results from non-attachment and is sadly seen in extreme cases of social and emotional neglect or where children have had little or no opportunity to develop stable attachments. Such children may be within the care system, in foster care or being placed in adoptive families. In this blog, our focus in on the four attachment styles already covered. For anyone seeking psychological support in relation to adoption, (e.g., parenting an adopted child who may be showing signs of RAD or recognising that having been adopted yourself, you may experience attachment issues), it is important to ensure that any counsellor or psychotherapists you may choose to work with is registered as an adoption support agency (ASA) with Ofsted[5].
Taking care of yourself
Having spent time exploring these four attachment styles, you may have had chance to reflect on your own memories of childhood and the relationships you experienced with your own early caregivers. Do allow yourself to acknowledge that this can be challenging and difficult, particularly, if you recognise signs that you may not have had early secure attachments with important people in your early life. Self-care is so important if you’re making time to understand more about your role in the family you grew up in. Working with a counsellor or psychotherapist as you explore your own attachment history and experiences, and how this impacts you today, can be part of that taking care of yourself.
The hope of neuroplasticity
It’s also worth recognising that whatever attachment pattern or style we may recognise as a “best-fit” descriptor for us in childhood, there is more to say. As humans, we have flexible brains that have the capacity to adapt and change. This is known as neuroplasticity – our brains are malleable and can be reshaped by our experiences and environment. That means that our attachment patterns and styles can also develop and change over time. It’s this theme that we’ll pick up in a later blog.
References:
[1] Kagan, J., & Snidman, N. (1991). Temperamental factors in human development. American Psychologist, 46(8), 856.
[2] Ainsworth, M. D. S., Bell, S. M., & Stayton, D. J. (1971) Individual differences in strange- situation behavior of one-year-olds. In H. R. Schaffer (Ed.) The origins of human social relations. London and New York: Academic Press. Pp. 17-58.
[3] Ainsworth, M. D. S., Bell, S. M., & Stayton, D. J. (1971) Individual differences in strange- situation behavior of one-year-olds. In H. R. Schaffer (Ed.) The origins of human social relations. London and New York: Academic Press. Pp. 17-58.
[4] Main M., & Solomon J. (1986). Discovery of a new, insecure-disorganized/disoriented attachment pattern In Yogman M. & Brazelton T. B. (Eds.), Affective development in infancy (pp. 95–124). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
[5] In December 2010, the Adoption and Children’s Act of 2002 was amended so that only counsellors and psychotherapists registered as an adoption support agency (ASA) with Ofsted are able to offer specialist adoption services. to ensure that individuals affected by adoption are provided with support and services from practitioners who hold the proper qualifications and experience.