Connections
“When children are born, what they need most from their parents (or caregivers) is love, by which I mean affection, attention, care, protection, kindness, and the willingness to communicate”
Alice Miller
Every living being thrives on connection. Without it, survival becomes impossible. Take, for example, a seed: it doesn’t simply sprout on its own. It requires the right balance of water, sunlight, nutrients, and the presence of helpful microbes to begin germinating. As it grows and produces flowers or fruits, it relies on other beings to help disperse its seeds for future growth. Similarly, beneath the surface, tree roots are intricately connected through the mycelium of fungi, forming a vast network of interdependence.
You may sometimes feel isolated in this world, but if you take a moment to look around, you’ll realize that you are far more interconnected than you care to acknowledge.
Human beings are wired for connection; relationships are essential for our survival and well-being. This reality underscores the importance of healing — reminding us that we don’t have to navigate this journey alone.
To gain a deeper understanding of childhood trauma, it’s crucial to explore how we relate to others and the ways we form attachments to people from both our past and present. Recognizing these dynamics can illuminate our paths toward healing and making healthier connections.
There are several theories (from western perspective) about relationship styles:
· Attachment theory — further explained after the different theories.
· Social exchange theory — relationships are based on a cost-benefit analysis, where individuals seek to maximize rewards and minimize costs. Relationship satisfaction is influenced by perceived benefits, costs, and comparisons to alternatives.
· Equity theory — emphasizes fairness in relationships. It posits that individuals seek to maintain equity, where the contributions and benefits of both partners are balanced. Inequity can lead to dissatisfaction.
· Relational Dialectics Theory — Developed by Leslie Baxter and Barbara Montgomery, this theory highlights the tensions and contradictions inherent in relationships. It emphasizes that individuals navigate opposing desires, such as autonomy vs. connection and predictability vs. novelty.
· Interdependence Theory — Focuses on how partners in a relationship influence one another’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. It examines how the level of dependence affects relationship dynamics, including satisfaction and commitment.
· Humanistic Theory — Emphasizes personal growth and self-actualization within relationships. This perspective values empathy, authenticity, and unconditional positive regard, fostering deeper connections and understanding between partners
· Communication Privacy Management Theory — Focuses on how individuals manage private information within relationships. It explores boundary management and how sharing or withholding information affects relational dynamics.
· Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love — Robert Sternberg proposed that love consists of three components: intimacy, passion, and commitment. Different combinations of these components result in various types of love and relationship styles.
· Romantic Relationship Development Theory — This theory outlines stages of relationship development, from initial attraction to long-term commitment. It emphasizes the progression and changes in relational styles over time.
· Cognitive Behavioral Theory — This approach focuses on how thoughts and beliefs influence feelings and behaviors in relationships. It emphasizes the importance of communication, problem-solving, and addressing cognitive distortions.
Many of these Western perspectives are deeply influenced by colonialism and capitalism, which becomes clear from the explanations for these various theories. However, my search for “attachment theory” led me down the road to explore Indigenous ways of being, connection and interconnectedness.
To truly understand this concept, someone like me — living in a capitalist society — must engage in a process of learning and unlearning. While I don’t claim to fully understand this idea yet, I believe it’s essential for us to deepen our awareness of ourselves, our surroundings, our relationships, and our existence. Out of respect for these beliefs, I’ve included resources at the end of this piece written by Indigenous authors to support you on your healing journey.
Attachment Theory
This theory was originally developed by John Bowlby and later expanded by Mary Ainsworth. It posits that early childhood experiences with caregivers play a crucial role in shaping our attachment styles in adult relationships. These styles are generally categorized into four main types: Secure, Anxious, Avoidant, and Disorganized. Each of these categories can be further subdivided into more specific subtypes, but I’ll leave those nuances for you to explore on your own.
When a child’s need for a secure attachment bond is not met, they may feel threatened and react in ways such as crying or calling out for their caregiver. If this need for a stable bond is not consistently fulfilled, the child may face a range of social, emotional, and even cognitive challenges as they grow.
These attachment styles often exist in a spectrum, where people might express different forms of styles based on their relationships.
Avoidant attachment
Avoidant individuals are independent and self-sufficient, often feeling uncomfortable with both their own emotions and those of others. They struggle to express their true feelings, having learned to suppress their emotions during early childhood. As a result, they may downplay or dismiss their own feelings and those of others. This stems from a lack of emotional support from caregivers, who either failed to engage with them emotionally or did not demonstrate emotional attunement. Beyond basic needs like food and shelter, these children often faced shutdowns from caregivers when they expressed emotional needs, leading them to learn how to cope by detaching from their feelings.
Consequently, these children internalize the belief that their emotional needs are invalid, leading them to rely solely on themselves for support. They often feel threatened in situations that require commitment, intimacy, or vulnerability — whether it’s their own or someone else’s. In conflict, they tend to shut down or isolate themselves, preferring to take space to resolve issues independently. They can feel overwhelmed when pressured to engage or act in certain ways.
Cultural norms around gender roles, particularly within a patriarchal framework, often push many men from a young age to adopt this avoidant attachment style. Traits associated with “masculinity” frequently reinforce the idea that this is how men should behave. However, it’s important to note that individuals of all genders can exhibit these traits.
It’s a common misconception that avoidants lack emotions or feelings. This perception, often perpetuated on social media, can paint them as narcissistic or toxic. In reality, this perspective emphasizes how others are triggered by avoidant individuals.
Get LaVie’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
At the core of avoidant behavior lies a deep-seated fear of their own emotions, stemming from a lack of guidance on how to express themselves safely. They fear intimacy and connection, having experienced their needs for connection dismissed from an early age. When faced with the emotions of others, they frequently interpret this as a personal rejection. This fear of rejection leads them to prefer self-reliance over the vulnerability of seeking support from others.
Anxious attachment
Anxious individuals can be seen as the polar opposite of avoidant individuals. They possess a strong desire for closeness and intimacy, yet they grapple with significant anxiety about their relationships. Often, they struggle to rely on themselves and seek others to fill the void in their lives, constantly pursuing external validation. Fearful of abandonment, they continuously seek reassurance externally and tend to overanalyze others’ behaviors for any signs of rejection. They are very sensitive to criticism which they perceive as a rejection of their self by others.
This attachment style typically develops when caregivers are inconsistent or neglectful in meeting their children’s emotional needs. Consequently, these children learn early on that the attention and love they desire must be fiercely protected, leading to heightened vigilance and anxiety in their relationships. As a result, they frequently invest significant effort into seeking their caregivers’ connection, often at the expense of their own needs.
Due to a lack of consistent caregiving and guidance on how to navigate their emotions, anxious individuals often find it challenging to understand their feelings. This can result in intense emotional reactions that feel overwhelming. When caregivers were unavailable, they learned to seek attention through emotional outbursts as a coping mechanism.
Culturally, anxious attachment is often stereotypically attributed to women, but it can manifest across all genders. Anxious individuals may be dismissed as “too much” or “too emotional,” and their needs for closeness and reassurance can be misinterpreted as manipulative or unhealthy. Ironically, this constant need for connection can push others away, instead of fostering the closeness and safety they genuinely seek.
At the core of an anxious person is a desire to feel safe with their emotions, yet they have not been taught how to express these feelings in a secure manner. They are often mislabeled as “insecure” because, unlike avoidants, they struggle to rely solely on themselves. However, it’s important to recognize that both anxious and avoidant traits stem from insecure foundations.
Disorganized attachment
I tend to view disorganized attachment as a blend of avoidant and anxious behaviors. Individuals with this attachment style experience mixed feelings about their relationships — they crave love and connection but often push people away. As a result, they frequently oscillate between anxious and avoidant tendencies. Due to the unpredictability of their behaviors, they struggle to manage their emotions, which can lead to either complete suppression or sudden emotional outbursts. Their relationships can be inconsistent, as they may seek closeness one moment and withdraw the next, driven by a fear of connection.
Disorganized attachment forms when a child desires love and care from their caregiver but simultaneously fears them. This attachment style typically arises from a tumultuous childhood marked by fear or trauma, often resulting from an erratic or incoherent relationship with the caregiver. These caregivers may have been inconsistent in their responses — sometimes providing safety and at other times becoming a source of threat or fear. This inconsistency leaves the child confused and unable to develop a clear strategy for seeking comfort and security.
As a result, individuals with disorganized attachment often find it difficult to trust themselves (anxious tendency) and others (avoidant tendency). This attachment style is considered one of the rarer forms of attachment. At its core, the individual is seeking a safe relationship which they can fully trust. However, because their caregivers were not reliable sources of trust and safety, they are perpetually on the lookout for signs of mistrust in their relationships.
Secure attachment
Individuals with secure attachments are open communicators who respect both their own boundaries and those of others. They feel comfortable within themselves and in their relationships, maintaining a healthy balance between independence and interdependence.
During conflicts, they are adept at emotionally regulating themselves, expressing their feelings in a safe and constructive manner without becoming overwhelmed or suppressing their emotions. They possess the ability to self-soothe. They enjoy their own company while also valuing connections with others, appreciating both autonomy and closeness.
This attachment style typically develops in children who receive consistent and responsive caregiving. Their caregivers are attuned to their emotional needs, providing a safe environment where children can trust that their feelings are valid.
A common misconception is that these caregivers may have been overly “soft” or “lenient,” never saying “no” to their child. In reality, effective parenting in this context involves setting clear boundaries, where even a “no” is communicated in a kind yet assertive manner. This approach models for the child how to establish secure boundaries as they grow into adulthood, fostering healthy relationships throughout their lives.
While these attachment styles are often discussed in the context of romantic relationships, they can easily be applied to all types of relationships in our lives — such as those with parents, children, friends, relatives, and peers. For parents, understanding these attachment styles can significantly enhance your ability to support your child by recognizing their unique needs.
Western healing practices typically focus on helping individuals transition from so-called “insecure” attachment styles to a secure attachment style. This involves understanding one’s own attachment patterns and adopting more secure practices. However, while it may be straightforward to identify these attachment styles, the true challenge lies in recognizing the patterns within ourselves and gradually breaking them down, one by one.
This journey is not an easy one, but it is essential for personal growth. If you’re looking to begin, I recommend starting by identifying which attachment style resonates with you and reflecting on your early relationship with your caregiver.
Social and Emotional Wellbeing (SEWB)
This concept is particularly relevant in Indigenous contexts, where it encompasses a holistic approach to health that goes beyond physical well-being to include emotional, social, cultural, and spiritual aspects of a person’s life. According to Indigenous peoples spirituality is anything and everything which interconnects anything living or non-living.
“Aboriginal health means not just the physical well-being of an individual but refers to the social, emotional and cultural well-being of the whole Community in which each individual is able to achieve their full potential as a human being thereby bringing about the total well-being of their Community. It is a whole of life view and includes the cyclical concept of life-death-life.”
(National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation, 2010, page 5)
- You can start here to understand the healing practices better. This is an amazing discussion paper: Aboriginal Spirituality: Aboriginal Philosophy The Basis of Aboriginal Social and Emotional Wellbeing
- Beyond attachment theory: Indigenous perspectives on the child–caregiver bond from a northwest tribal community
- Indigenous Family Engagement: Strong Families, Strong Nations
