Caterina Rossi
Are we blessed or cursed to be our parents’ children? Attachment theory, developed in the 20th century, suggests initial attachment to your primary caregiver creates a template for all future relationships.
When I was a child, my relatives used to joke no one, aside from my mother, could even think of picking me up. If anyone else tried, I would have an emotional outburst with ugly crying and petty screams. As I grew up and met the outside world, I learned to control my disruptive feelings around the people I came across. Yet, it was still transparent almost no one, except from my mum, could ever truly gain my trust.
I don’t know if our similar personalities were a reflection of how incredibly close me and my mother were. Or maybe we maintained our symbiotic relationship due to those shared characteristics. I suppose a bit of both.
My mother was my entire world. Every step of my personal and professional growth has been influenced by the relationship we shared.
What Is Attachment Theory?
As a child, the type of connection I shared with my mother exhibited symptoms of an “insecure attachment”. This type of bond manifests in the toddler’s tendency to become distraught when separated from their parents. But they often don’t find comfort in their return. Furthermore, these children are usually more distrustful of strangers.
Initially developed by psychoanalyst John Bowlby, attachment theory emphasises the need to form a relationship with at least one primary caregiver for survival and growth. This bond needs to form within the first two years of life. The study was later expanded by developmental psychologists Mary Ainsworth, Mary Main and Erik Hesse, who introduced four distinct attachment styles.
“The bond I shared with my mother, intense and deeply intimate, shaped the way I see and experience relationships”
In 1969, Ainsworth conducted the famous experiment called “Strange Situation“ which saw a group of parents playing with their babies in a room. They were instructed to leave their kids behind and return a few minutes later. Besides the insecure type, the other three attachment styles that emerged were:
- Secure: babies became upset when their parents left, but were comforted by their return.
- Avoidant: babies barely reacted either when their parent left or returned.
- Disorganised: involves a mix of behaviours, including fear, confusion and erratic reactions to the caregiver’s presence or absence.
Am I My Mother’s Child?
A close friend of mine says that having me in their life is like adopting a stray dog. How I develop a relationship reminds them of how our four-legged furry mates attach to their humans. I tend to be devoted and occasionally obsessive with the few people I grow fond of.
Furthermore, I never had a large group of friends. It is challenging for me to trust people outside of my own “pack” and when I decide to allow a person in my world, I will hardly leave them. They become part of me and I expect, in return, blind loyalty and affection. People have often jokingly called me “clingy and needy”. I believe the bond I shared with my mother, intense and deeply intimate, shaped the way I see and experience relationships.
In my case, as past psychologists predicted, the attachment I developed with my primary caregiver influenced who I am now in relation to others. My mother and I were one thing. She made me feel whole. And I will spend the rest of my life searching for the scattered pieces of what can once again constitute my half. I am not searching for a community, I am looking for soulmates.
Criticisms Of Attachment Theory
Now, the theory attracted some criticism due to the Western-based setting and Eurocentric concept of attachment. Some cultures tend to favour an environment where babies are encouraged to nurture more inclusive relationship building, where there is not only one primary caregiver.
Besides, dividing how children develop their bonds into four different categories seems a bit simplistic. In my opinion, any theory that attempts to generalise human behaviour and split it into fixed groups will always be flawed. No experiment can be a spotless reflection of how humanity works.
“There is more to the past than our parents”
My experience with my mother does represent some of the characteristics associated with insecure attachment. Yet it doesn’t fully encompass every single aspect of it. For instance, the strategy adopted by babies who exhibit this behaviour is usually a consequence of “unpredictably responsive caregiving”, which was certainly not my case.
And what about the consequences this bond might lead to in the future? Are we doomed to be the outcome of what our primary caregiver taught us?
Do Our Parents Define Us?
Or parents are one facet of a more complex narrative. This is the story of a person happy with the template upon which she built her inner social circle. It is the tale of someone who felt loved and treasured, with the fortune of growing up feeling desired and special. I am my mother’s daughter. But I never even tried being otherwise. I didn’t look for other examples, yet I stumbled upon them and partially integrated them into my social system.
Our past shapes who we are – it is undeniable. But there is more to the past than our parents. Children and teenagers are incredibly adaptable, curious and resourceful. They crave and look for more than they are given. Some of them are lucky enough to find what they need. Others… not so much. It still does not mean it’s an unbreakable curse. After all, as many psychologists would agree, the brain is incredibly plastic and malleable. Humans adapt and, with the right help, triumph.
READ NEXT:
Featured image courtesy of Trung Nhan Tran via Unsplash. No changes made to this image. Image license found here.
