Seelenpflege 2016-3-4 Spezial

Beiträge | Contributions
versions of the same oscillating movement. ‹You must
understand that a circle is a point and a point a circle.›
Steiner’s point-circle concept describes basic spirit-soul
phenomena; Fritz Riemann (2007) described these phenomena
in a similar way – albeit in a different context
– in his book on anxiety. Looking at traumatic stress
disorder we see the same tendencies towards the point
(avoidance, rigidity) and the circle (panic attacks, dissociation).
Because there are many parallels between fear,
trauma and attachment it seems worthwhile examining
the point-circle concept in connection with the
findings of attachment research. It turns out that the
point-circle concept can provide an extended concept
of the dynamics of attachment and the possibility to
attain a more profound understanding of attachment
behaviours.
Attachment research
John Bowlby, the author of attachment theory, hypothesized
that children have an innate attachment
behavioural system, which is activated when they experience
fear or pain; it creates emotional proximity to
the caregiver through attachment signals and thereby
helps to guarantee survival (Bowlby 1958, 1973). If the
attachment behavioural system is regulated by sensitive
and reliable responses from the attachment figure,
the child is able to explore the world from this ‹secure
base› (Ainsworth & Bell 1970). If this regulation is missing
the child’s ability to explore will be restricted. The
attachment behavioural system and the exploration
behavioural system are therefore mutually dependent.
(Waters, Bretherton & Vaughn 2015). The attachment
behavioural system is also activated in adolescents
and adults when they experience distressing situations.
(Mikulincer & Shaver 2010).
Bowlby’s colleague Mary Ainsworth used a standardized
method for observing the attachment and exploration
behaviours of children between the ages of 12 and 18
months 1 when their attachment figure was present, absent
and after their return (Ainsworth & Bell 1970). She
initially identified three attachment patterns with various
subtypes (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters & Wall, 2015):
• Children with insecure-avoidant behaviour patterns
(A) tend to respond hardly or not at all to being
separated from their caregiver and avoid their caregiver
upon their reunion. They often appear to be
playing happily, but their exploration behaviour is
restricted and physiological monitoring shows that
they are actually under stress (Spangler & Schieche
1998, in Brisch 2004, p. 31).
• Securely attached children (B) are slightly restless
or cry when their caregiver leaves the room.
When she returns they seek comfort and proximity
and are then able again to explore extensively.
• Children with insecure-ambivalent or insecurepreoccupied
behaviour patterns (C) display great
anxiety when the caregiver departs. Upon their reunion
with the caregiver these children are difficult
to calm down and show anger and resistance whilst
clearly seeking contact at the same time. Their exploration
is constantly restricted because they seek
reassurance from their caregiver, even if the caregiver
does not convey the desired sense of security.
• Children with insecure-disorganized behaviour
patterns (D), a type that was only identified later,
display disrupted attempts at seeking proximity,
stereotypies and anxious behaviours towards their
attachment figure as well as frozen movements (Lyons-Ruth
& Jacobvitz 2016).
Attachment research has shown sensitivity, i.e. the ability
of the attachment figure to respond appropriately,
reliably and promptly to the child’s needs, to be a central
etiological factor in the development of attachment
patterns. Although more research is needed, for
instance into the connection between child irritability
and the sensitivity of the attachment figure (Vaughn &
Bost 2016), it can be concluded that sensitive, reliable
and prompt responses on the part of the attachment
figure often correlate with type B (secure), while type
A (avoidant) children often have attachment figures
who hardly respond to them. Attachment figures displaying
contradictory behaviours often result in type
C (ambivalent) attachments. Type D (disorganized)
children have often been abused or have experienced
other threatening behaviours such as flashbacks in
their parents who have themselves been traumatized.
(Lyons-Ruth & Jacobvitz 2016). This shows that children
develop different attachment patterns depending
on the behaviours of their attachment figures (Lyons-
Ruth & Jacobvitz 2016). Because the attachment behavioural
system has the function of securing survival,
children always attach themselves to their caregivers
even if these behave in a threatening, confusing or
frightening manner. In extreme cases children develop
attachment disorders. Yet even behavioural or psychological
disorders which only manifest in later life are
182