a Department of Psychology , Stockholm University , Stockholm , Sweden.
b Institute of Child Development , University of Minnesota , Minneapolis , MN , USA.
Attach Hum Dev. 2017 Dec;19(6):534-558. doi: 10.1080/14616734.2017.1354040. Epub 2017 Jul 26.
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.
近年来,失序/迷失方向(D)依恋在政策制定者、从业者和临床医生中引起了广泛关注。然而,这种关注似乎有些基于一些错误的假设,即(1)依恋测量可以作为个体在法医/儿童保护环境中的明确评估,以及(2)失序依恋可靠地表明儿童虐待,(3)是病理学的有力预测指标,(4)代表儿童的固定或静态“特征”,不受发展或帮助的影响。本文总结了表明这四个假设是错误和误导性的证据。本文回顾了关于婴儿失序依恋的已知情况,并阐明了该分类对儿童临床和福利实践的影响。特别是,本文探讨了失序依恋和依恋障碍之间的区别,并强烈认为依恋理论对于支持家庭工作以及发展和评估基于证据的护理干预措施具有价值。