Vis full versjon : Tilknytningsteori
Hva legger dere i begrepet tilknytningsomsorg. Hva skal til for å skape en trygg tilknytning og hvilken betydning har det?
Hm, kortversjonen blir vel kanskje å leve livet sammen med barna (og mannen) på en slik måte at vi unngår å skyve hverandre unna, men bevarer og oppfordrer til å være så nær man til enhver tid ønsker. Og ikke minst akseptere hverandre slik man er, og respektere seg selv og sine egne grenser.
Jeg finner de åtte idealene hjelpsomme - jeg oppfatter de som "den enkle veien" til god tilknytning. Om vi ikke kan følge det jeg ser på som idealet, må vi finne nye måter for å opprettholde samme tilknytning. Et eksempel fra vår hverdag: Jeg begynte å jobbe, og ungene i barnehage. Vi kunne ikke lenger unngå langvarig eller hyppig fravær fra hverandre. Martine hadde på eget initiativ begynt å sove i egen seng, og sammen besluttet vi å flytte henne inn til oss for å sove sammen igjen. Altså, hun sovner i sin seng som hun ønsker, og vi har "tillatelse" til å flytte henne over i vår seng når vi legger oss. Da kjøper vi oss mer tid sammen. I tillegg har vi kuttet ut mye aktivitet og besøk til andre, og har fokus på rolig tid sammen på ettermiddag og helg.
Her er en kortfattet innføring i tilknytningsteori:
Her er en kortfattet innføring i tilknytningsteori:
http://www.daniel-sonkin.com/Tilknytningteori_en_oversikt.htmDa fant du det jeg lette etter :)
Jeg vil også bare skrive inn et par ting som jeg synes er spesielt interessant:
Infants will form attachments to any consistent caregiver who is sensitive and responsive in social interactions with them. The quality of the social engagement is more influential than the amount of time spent. The biological mother is the usual principal attachment figure, but the role can be taken by anyone who consistently behaves in a "mothering" way over a period of time. Within attachment theory, this means a set of behaviours that involves engaging in lively social interaction with the infant and responding readily to signals and approaches. Nothing in the theory suggests that fathers are not equally likely to become principal attachment figures if they happen to provide most of the child care and related social interaction
Some infants direct attachment behaviour (proximity seeking) towards more than one attachment figure almost as soon as they start to show discrimination between caregivers; most come to do so during their second year. These figures are arranged hierarchically, with the principal attachment figure at the top. The set-goal of the attachment behavioural system is to maintain a bond with an accessible and available attachment figure. "Alarm" is the term used for activation of the attachment behavioural system caused by fear of danger. "Anxiety" is the anticipation or fear of being cut off from the attachment figure. If the figure is unavailable or unresponsive, separation distress occurs. In infants, physical separation can cause anxiety and anger, followed by sadness and despair. By age three or four, physical separation is no longer such a threat to the child's bond with the attachment figure. Threats to security in older children and adults arise from prolonged absence, breakdowns in communication, emotional unavailability or signs of rejection or abandonment.
The attachment system is very robust and young humans form attachments easily, even in far less than ideal circumstances. In spite of this robustness, significant separation from a familiar caregiver—or frequent changes of caregiver that prevent the development of attachment—may result in psychopathology at some point in later life. Infants in their first months have no preference for their biological parents over strangers.
Bowlby's original sensitivity period of between six months and two to three years has been modified to a less "all or nothing" approach. There is a sensitive period during which it is highly desirable that selective attachments develop, but the time frame is broader and the effect less fixed and irreversible than first proposed. With further research, authors discussing attachment theory have come to appreciate that social development is affected by later as well as earlier relationships.
Relationships with peers have an influence distinct from that of parent-child relationships, but the latter can influence the peer relationships children form. Although peers become important in middle childhood, the evidence suggests peers do not become attachment figures, though children may direct attachment behaviours at peers if parental figures are unavailable. Attachments to peers tend to emerge in adolescence, although parents continue to be attachment figures. With adolescents, the role of the caregiver is to be available when needed while the adolescent makes sorties into the outside world.[
Infants form attachments if there is someone to interact with, even if mistreated.
Around 65% of children in the general population may be classified as having a secure pattern of attachment, with the remaining 35% being divided between the insecure classifications.[
Following this argument, the assumption that attachment is expressed identically in all humans cross-culturally was examined. The research showed that though there were cultural differences, the three basic patterns, secure, avoidant and ambivalent, can be found in every culture in which studies have been undertaken, even where communal sleeping arrangements are the norm.
Although there is research which shows that when mothers are taught to increase their sensitivity to an infant's needs and signals, this increases the development of the child's attachment security, there are no conclusive empirical efficacy studies on Sears attachment parenting.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.