I’ve been thinking some more about the shortcomings of traditional attachment parenting (must I start calling it "mainstream attachment parenting," distinguished from the "mainstream" parenting that AP itself rejects?), which I started writing about in this post after reviewing some more of Gordon Neufeld’s work.
AP prompts a strong negative reaction from some people (check the comment section of that post), I think because the proponents are sometimes dogmatic about it, and also because of the usual answers they have when behavior and relationship problems do arise. Confronted with an "attachment parent’s lament" — But I did all these things! I breastfed, I co-slept, I wore my baby, I never left him with anyone, what do I do NOW? — the answer seems always to be "attach more," by which is meant more co-sleeping, more closeness, and more modeling good behavior. The subtext: Obviously you haven’t given your child enough love, or he would be ready — ready to become independent, ready to separate from you, ready to behave.
They’re almost right — the answer isn’t so much to "attach more" as it is to "attach deeper." That is, to attach more maturely, beyond encouraging your child to attach to you through physical closeness, beyond encouraging your child toattach to you through imitating you — to encouraging other, longer-lived kinds of attachment. From my previous post, Neufeld says they are:
-
Through belonging and loyalty ("I’m on your side; I want to obey you")
- Through a feeling of being significant, important;
- Through a feeling of love and affection;
- Through being secure in the knowledge that they are known and understood (the deepest and most persistent and mature level of attachment).
So, yes, in a way, if there are (non-age-appropriate) separation problems, if there are behavior problems, more attachment is needed — but it doesn’t have to come from co-sleeping and cuddling.
And sometimes it really can’t — especially when the desired behavior is one that necessarily involves a decrease in physical closeness — if you’re trying to help your school-aged child with behavior problems that arise while she’s away from you, for example, or if you’re hoping to help your young child make the transition from co-sleeping to sleeping in a different room.
It is pretty obvious once you know about it — kids need to be attached, and if the only ways you give them to be attached to you are physical closeness and imitating, then in any situation that calls for them to be away from you or to be doing something different from you, they’re going to be at sea (and looking for cues from someone else, who may or may not be a good example).
That’s not to downplay the importance of closeness and modeling. That’s what the really young ones need. And it’s why AP parenting really does work so well for babies and little toddlers. They truly need closeness and modeling, the more the better while they’re so little.
The DVD series I wrote about has some very specific ideas about how to encourage the other kinds of attachment. But it’s not hard to imagine some, too. Often the easiest that comes to mind is "being significant" — communicating to the child that they’re important, that you think of them often even while you’re apart.
I missed you while you were gone.
While I was out today, I saw a chickadee sitting on a fence, and it made me think how they are your very favorite bird, and that made me smile.
I took the birthday card you made for me and put it up in my office where all my co-workers can see it.
That kind of thing.
bearing blog 