Describe and evaluate Bowlbys theory of attachment.

Bowlby argued that attachment was an evolved mechanism that ensured the survival of the child. In other words, forming a bond with someone, often the child’s primary care giver was essential in order to survive, which is why they strive to maintain close proximity to the significant adult. He argued that babies have abilities such as crying and smiling to encourage the primary care giver to look after them, and vice versa, the parents, particularly mothers, possess instincts designed to protect their child from hurt or harm.

Furthermore, Bowlby presented his concept of monotropy, which he described as the attachment to one person who is most important in the baby’s life. While he doesn’t deny that the baby forms multiple attachments, they always have one more important person to them. Often, Bowlby argues, this is the mother. This has been one of Bowlby’s more controversial claims, because, critics maintain, fathers are also very important in a child’s upbringing, so why should they be overlooked? Furthermore, if a child grows up without a maternal influence due to death of the mother, or her leaving etc, does this mean that they will not be able to develop normally? Will there be a knock-on effect in later life? Another problem is that of adopted children. If a child finds out they are adopted when they are older, even though they will have formed an attachment with their adoptive parents, they will often still feel a bond between themselves and their birth parents, posing the question is attachment just about nurture, or is nature involved too?

A lot of Bowlby’s work is supported by other psychologists and researchers, which make his claims more valid, in the sense that other people have had similar findings, so there is more likely to be some truth in what he claimed. Not only did people develop his ideas and concepts, but he did too. He built on Freud’s idea that mother-child relationships play a large role in future relationships. Bowlby argued that the first attachment a child has provides them with an ‘internal working model’. This means that the child creates an image of themselves, loveable or not, and of the caregiver, trustworthy or not, and of the relationship between the two. For example, if a child was brought up by a single mother, who was often angry and neglectful, and was someone whom the child trusted, who then frequently broke that trust, that person is likely to be hesitant in ‘letting people in’ as it were. If they have formed an attachment with someone who didn’t care for them in return, they will probably find it difficult to trust someone else easily. The idea of early relationships affecting future ones is known as the continuity hypothesis. But, what about other environmental factors, problems in life? Is it really possible to argue that the initial attachment between parent and child is what affects a person’s relationships in later life? This is why, critics may argue, Bowlby’s views are somewhat reductionist.

This process of attachment, Bowlby said, takes place within the critical period, which thought to be the first three years. He believed that the attachment process should not be disrupted, or there would be serious consequences. This belief is supported by other evidence found that the critical period is vital to a child’s development. If a child grows up with insecure attachment patterns, they will "develop the inability to form secure attachments and react in a hostile, rejecting manner with their environment" (Pickover, 2002), meaning that often such children will allow themselves to get close to an ‘attachment figure’, and then pull themselves away before they can be rejected, striving to not allow themselves get hurt. Also, it can be because they don’t deem themselves worthy of the love and care, in extreme cases.

In my opinion, parents should be held responsible to an extent, as they do have a large influence over the early years of a child’s development; but, there are other factors to consider. Also, I don’t believe that the mother is mainly the primary attachment figure. There are some parts I do and other parts of Bowlby’s theory I don’t agree with.