More Points for Attachment Theory

My posting has slowed over the past month as I've enjoyed putting more time toward writing and revising my book. I did want to share with you another great parenting discovery, though. Thanks to Stacy of MamaOm, I just finished reading Hold On to Your Kids by Dr. Gordon Neufeld and Dr. Gabor Mate. The book makes a compelling case against the peer-oriented culture which has grown to dominate over the past few decades, especially as it pertains to parents losing their hold on kids as the primary nurturing and guiding force until they reach maturity. It goes as far as to claim that true maturity isn't actually occurring among those who are taking their cues solely from their fellow immature peers. It's the blind leading the blind, with disastrous results.

In today's culture which places a high value on peer interaction along with less time available for families to spend together, it's more difficult for parents to remain the primary orienting force in their children's lives. Children are encouraged to socialize with other children early and often. High student: teacher ratios in daycares and schools encourage attachment to peers instead of teachers. The extended family of loving adults that used to be the norm in children's lives is now the exception, and our mobile society creates isolation instead of community. Add to this mix the effects of media which perpetuates the culture of cool, and the result is that it's simply much, much harder to parent today than it was a few decades ago, and it's far easier for children to turn to each other to meet their attachment needs.

So … what does all this mean to me, the mother of a three-year-old sensitive child? Actually, the implications are pretty direct. As a sensitive child, Lucas absorbs everyone's energy. He mimics everything and everyone. It already appears that he's very susceptible to influence by his peers, coming home from preschool with new behaviors and mannerisms all the time, to my enormous frustration. He's also sensitive to even the most subtle withdrawal of my affection, and this drives him to attach more quickly to others who will fill the void. If he's around his peers when we've been having a rough time with our mother-son relationship, any authority and influence I may have had disappears and all hell breaks loose. If this keeps up, I'll lose him completely by middle school.

As you already know if you are a regular reader, I've struggled with how to handle these difficulties. Mainstream parenting philosophy dictates that firmer boundaries and punitive measures are necessary to nip negative behavior in the bud. Attachment theory suggests the opposite. I've waffled between the two, leaning toward attachment and then chickening out in the face of parental and societal pressure. Intuition always leads me back to attachment, though. And when I doubt myself, I end up with a book like this one to give me the support I need.

The following is a quote from the book that seemed to sum up the prescription for me:

"The key to activating maturation is to take care of the attachment needs of the child. To foster independence, we must first invite dependence; to promote individuation we must provide a sense of belonging and unity; to help the child separate, we must assume the responsibility for keeping the child close. We help a child let go by providing more contact and connection than he himself is seeking. When he asks for a hug, we give him a warmer on than he is giving us. We liberate our children not by making them work for our love but by letting them rest in it. We help a child face the separation involved in going to sleep or going to school by satisfying his need for closeness."

For me, this translates to:

• Playing more with him and watching him play, especially when he hasn't asked.
  
• "Spending time" at bedtime, (laying next to him until he falls asleep) even if it's inconvenient for me.
  
• Satisfying his need for closeness – saying yes unless there is a really good reason to say no – even if it means going with him every time he needs to go to the bathroom or find a sock or wash his hands.
  
• Allowing our daily "quiet time" to be spent in the same room together.
  
• Being unconditionally loving in my tone and words. Reaffirm that I love him no matter what.
  
• Do what it takes to manage my own frustration in healthy ways (exercise, meditate, sleep, etc.) so I don't take it out on him.
  

In essence, I need to consider his attachment needs ahead of my own needs for space, quiet, control, approval or whatever it is I'm seeking at the moment. I am a mature adult, and I can be creative in finding other healthy ways of getting those needs met. Lucas is not, and he won't be for a long time. If left to his own devices, his choices are not going to be smart ones. Just look at most adolescents.

This book was just the right wake-up call to get me back on track - again.

My First Critic!

Back in May, I wrote a post called A Few Thoughts on Skepticism and Labels. Last month, a comment on that post showed up for moderation. It was from someone calling themselves "The Skeptic" and included some common arguments against this whole crystal phenomenon. I was grateful for the opportunity respond to this person's concerns, and since it was buried in last May's post, I thought I'd repost the exchange here.

Here is what The Skeptic wrote:

Ok... so here's a few more than slightly cynical comments.

First, if you truly believe in crystal children, and that your kids are in fact crystal children, why is it several of you tell no one about your beliefs? Could it be that you doubt the validity of your own claims? Hmm…

Second, to touch on the subject of Indigo children being mislabeled as ADD or ADHD. (BTW, they have recently combined the two, saying that their one in the same) I believe that medical professionals too often try and find an explanation for every human behavior, to the point of ridiculousness, and I think that calling children Indigo/Crystal is doing just the same. Your children are different, unique. Why not leave it at that? Why the necessity of some mystic label?

Finally, I believe that you create use these labels to bolster yourselves as parents. You feel entitled to have a child who is a step above the average, and so you see what you want to see in your children. An allergy isn't just an allergy, its a sign of ultra sensitivity. And not just physical sensitivity, no, emotional/psychic sensitivity.

While I doubt my blasphemous tirade will make it onto to the website, I know this will at least get to the author of this website.

Oh, and this blog is supposed to be addressing the criticisms of skeptics… Yeah, that lasted maybe a paragraph. I would be genuinely be interested in a blog that actually addresses opposing views.

Thanks
THE Skeptic

And here was my response:

Hi Skeptic,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts here. I do appreciate them. You're actually the first critic to leave a comment on my blog. I was recently told that if you don't have any critics you aren't reaching a large enough audience. So, hooray! I guess my audience is growing.

I'd like to honor your comments one by one. First, regarding telling no one about our beliefs, if you read the last comment I left right above this one, you'll see some of my thoughts on that. Anyone who is embracing a belief that is not widely accepted is going to naturally feel hesitant to broadcast it to the world. Of course there is fear - fear of being criticized, fear of being rejected, fear of losing friends who aren't open to alternate beliefs.

Plus, noticing a different energy in our kids is such a subtle thing that many of us often doubt if we're really seeing what we think we're seeing. We don't see it reflected back in society at large, so there is also, naturally, self doubt. Finding and sharing with others who are sensing the same things helps us all to feel like we aren't alone and we aren't crazy to thing something different is going on with our kids.

I agree with your second point about medical professionals and labeling. I, too, struggled with the knowledge that we're doing the same thing with the crystal/indigo label. There was also a great discussion on this in the comments section. I'll add to it here by answering your question about why we don't just leave it at knowing our kids are different or unique. Leaving it at that and treating them as if they're like every other kid can actually do more harm than good (which was the entire point of this post, actually). The mystic label simply addresses the evidence we're all seeing that these are mystical gifts. Kids who read our minds, sense energy, know about past lives, predict future events - what would you call these other than mystical?

As for bolstering ourselves as parents, have you ever been in a family with mystical kids for any length of time? It's no hayride. Knowing your kids aren't going to fit society's mold, that most schools are likely not going to work for them, that you never know what is going to set off their hives or rashes doesn't make anyone feel special. We're just sharing what we're noticing and supporting one another in our challenges since they often fall outside the range of common experience.

For your third point, I see no reason not to post your comments, and neither do I see them as blasphemous or even a tirade. They are reasonable and common arguments against this phenomenon, and you gave me the chance to further clarify some of my ideas. I thank you for that, and I welcome further respectful discourse. You're helping me write my book more thoroughly.

And finally, if you're "interested in a blog that actually addresses opposing views," then this isn't your blog. The rest of the world is an opposing view. This blog is a place for parents to safely explore a new idea and how it might apply to their children.

Thanks again for your comments.
Cheers!
Alexis

That was it. I feel good about the exchange, and appreciate the opportunity to practice thoughtfully responding to a different point of view – something I'll surely be doing much more of when my book is published.