This presentation focuses on the disorganized/disoriented (Group D) categories of infant, child, and adult attachment. The infant D category is assigned on the basis of interruptions and anomalies in organization and orientation observed during Ainsworth's strange situation procedure. In neurologically normal low-risk samples, D attachment is not substantially related to descriptions of infant temperament, and usually appears with respect to only one parent. At six, former D infants are often found to be role-inverting (D-Controlling) towards the parent, while drawings and separation-related narratives (D-Fearful) suggest continuing states of fear and disorganization. In adults, marked lapses in reasoning and discourse surrounding the discussion of loss or abuse during the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) causes a transcript to be assigned to Unresolved/disorganized (U/d) adult attachment status, which predicts infant D attachment. Bowlby's theory is extended, with the proposal that certain forms of frightening parental behavior will arouse contradictory biologically channeled propensities to approach and to take flight from the parent. Maltreated infants are therefore highly likely to be disorganized. Also identified are subtler forms of frightening parental behavior (including dissociative behavior and anomalous forms of frightened behavior) that appear to lead to infant disorganization. This suggests that infant D attachment may at times represent a second-generation effect of the parent's own continuing unresolved responses to trauma. Infant D attachment predicts disruptive/aggressive and dissociative disorders in childhood and adolescence, while U/d adult attachment appears frequently in psychiatric and criminal populations. Clinical implications are discussed.

In 1990 we advanced the hypothesis that frightened and frightening (FR) parental behavior would prove to be linked to both unresolved (U) adult attachment status as identified in the Adult Attachment Interview and to infant disorganized/disoriented (D) attachment as assessed in the Ainsworth Strange Situation. Here, we present a coding system for identifying and scoring the intensity of the three primary forms of FR behavior (frightened, threatening, and dissociative) as well as three subsidiary forms. We review why each primary form may induce fear of the parent (the infant's primary "haven of safety"), placing the infant in a disorganizing approach-flight paradox. We suggest that, being linked to the parent's own unintegrated traumatic experiences (often loss or maltreatment), FR behaviors themselves are often guided by parental fright, and parallel the three "classic" mammalian responses to fright: flight, attack, and freezing behavior. Recent studies of U to FR, as well as FR to D relations are presented, including findings regarding AMBIANCE/FR+. Links between dissociation, FR, U, and D are explored. Parallel processing and working memory are discussed as they relate to these phenomena.

No abstract

Disorganized/Disoriented (D) attachment has seen widespread interest from policy makers, practitioners, and clinicians in recent years. However, some of this interest seems to have been based on some false assumptions that (1) attachment measures can be used as definitive assessments of the individual in forensic/child protection settings and that disorganized attachment (2) reliably indicates child maltreatment, (3) is a strong predictor of pathology, and (4) represents a fixed or static “trait” of the child, impervious to development or help. This paper summarizes the evidence showing that these four assumptions are false and misleading. The paper reviews what is known about disorganized infant attachment and clarifies the implications of the classification for clinical and welfare practice with children. In particular, the difference between disorganized attachment and attachment disorder is examined, and a strong case is made for the value of attachment theory for supportive work with families and for the development and evaluation of evidence-based caregiving interventions.

No abstract

The term "attachment" is now in common usage and, as the readers of this Special Issue are aware, is referenced in a rapidly increasing variety of contexts involving child custody (McIntosh & Chisholm, 2008). The aim of this article is to provide judges, lawyers, mediators and mental health professionals involved in custody assessment with an overview of the history of the field of attachment and its principal measures, together with a clear description of what the term "attachment" does-and does not-mean to attachment researchers and theoreticians. Implications for normative separations that do not involve custodyrelated assessment or the intervention of courts or mediators are also considered. With respect to contested custody cases, we consider the use of standardized attachment measures, and note that sufficient validation for most such measures in clinical contexts is still developing. We describe three measures taken from the research literature (the Strange Situation procedure, the Attachment Q-sort and the Adult Attachment Interview), each subjected to meta-analyses and widely regarded as "gold standard" methods in research. These three methods come closest at this point in time to meeting criteria for providing "scientific evidence" regarding an individual's current attachment status. Limitations on widespread use include the need for substantiating meta-analyses on father-child relationships, and further validation across a wider spread of children's ages. We are confident that these restrictions can be solved by new research. In the interim, we argue that increased familiarity with the above measures will assist custody evaluators both in standardizing their assessment procedures and their capacity to gain more from the observational data available to them. Such increased standardization and depth of observation should be highly beneficial to the courts. Related to our endorsement of use of attachment measures in family law matters, we address issues of training, and strongly encourage custody evaluators to attend trainings in the principal methods of the field, and insofar as possible, to become certified in their use. Overall, we endorse the position that attachment theory provides important perspectives not only on the emotional process of divorce itself, but as well on the decisions made for and about the children concerned. Thus, this paper argues that attachment, correctly understood, creates a critical foundation for all professionals working with separated families.

Following Main and Hesse's hypothesis, several investigators have affirmed that frightened/frightening (FR) as well as particular atypical maternal behaviors are associated with infant disorganized and adult unresolved attachment. Here, for the first time, FR behavior was observed in (a) middle-class father-infant (n = 25) and independent mother-infant dyads (n = 50) and (b) a brief laboratory play session. In addition, relations between disorganization, unresolved attachment, and the six FR system subscales were explored. Paternal and maternal overall FR behavior was related to infant disorganization (n = 75, phi = .61, p < .001), and for a subsample where Adult Attachment Interviews were available (n = 32), to unresolved adult attachment (phi = .59, p < .001). At the subscale level, disorganized-FR behaviors were related to infant disorganization, but only for mother-infant dyads. Across the whole sample, both dissociative-FR and threatening-FR subscales were associated with infant disorganization. The dissociative-FR subscale emerged as the central predictor of infant disorganization and was the only subscale significantly related to unresolved attachment. The appearance of FR behavior in this 18-min play procedure suggests that FR probably occurs more frequently than previously suspected. The possible role of dissociative processes in unresolved adult attachment, disorganized attachment, and FR parental behavior is discussed.

Following a 1986 study reporting a predominance of ambivalent attachment among insecure Sapporo infants, the generalizability of attachment theory and methodologies to Japanese samples has been questioned. In this 2nd study of Sapporo mother-child dyads (N=43), the authors examined attachment distributions for both (a) child, based on M. Main and J. Cassidy's (1988) 6th-year reunion, and (b) adult, via the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI). In contrast to the previous Sapporo study, children's 3-way or "organized" distribution did not differ from the global distribution. However, when the disorganized-controlling (D) and cannot classify (CC) categories were applied to the analyses, a high proportion of D/CC children was found. Comparable analyses for Japanese mothers, including the unresolved/disorganized (U) and CC categories, were found to deviate slightly from the global norm. However, turning from global distributions to mothers' AAI classification as related to their child's reunion classification, all matches were surprisingly close to those established worldwide. When, as is customary, mothers' U and CC classifications were combined (U/CC) and compared with the child's D and CC classifications (also customarily combined as D/CC), mothers' U/CC status strongly predicted child D/CC status (r=.60, d=1.50). Additionally, mothers' AAI subclassifications predicted child subclassifications.