Conventional and Unconventional Perspectives on Attachment and Attachment Problems: Comparisons and Implications, 2006–2016.
Saved in:
| Title: | Conventional and Unconventional Perspectives on Attachment and Attachment Problems: Comparisons and Implications, 2006–2016. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Mercer, Jean1 jean.mercer@stockton.edu |
| Source: | Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal. Apr2019, Vol. 36 Issue 2, p81-95. 15p. |
| Subject Terms: | *Attachment behavior, *Electronic publishing, Psychoanalytic interpretation, Systematic reviews, Attachment disorder in children, Search engines, Print materials |
| Abstract: | A task force report published 10 years ago (Chaffin et al., Child Maltreatment 11:76–89, 2006) cautioned strongly against potentially harmful unconventional principles and practices related to assessment and treatment of childhood attachment problems. In an exploration of changes over a decade in such assessment and treatment, the present paper reports results of a search for material about attachment problems in children done by means of Academic Search Complete and Google, and by examination of specific websites. The paper examines print and Internet publications on both conventional and unconventional approaches to attachment problems as they have appeared since the 2006 report. The contrast between conventional and unconventional perspectives remained at least as clear in 2016 as it was in 2006. Changes in conventional views of assessment, treatment, research, and theory about attachment have apparently had little influence on unconventional approaches, nor has the reverse occurred. Most of the principles and practices against which Chaffin et al. warned remain in place and may influence families and some mental health professionals. Understanding the contrast between the two perspectives, and the continuing possible effect of unconventional methods, can be advantageous for psychologists and social workers working with children or parents and for those involved with the courts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | A task force report published 10 years ago (Chaffin et al., Child Maltreatment 11:76–89, 2006) cautioned strongly against potentially harmful unconventional principles and practices related to assessment and treatment of childhood attachment problems. In an exploration of changes over a decade in such assessment and treatment, the present paper reports results of a search for material about attachment problems in children done by means of Academic Search Complete and Google, and by examination of specific websites. The paper examines print and Internet publications on both conventional and unconventional approaches to attachment problems as they have appeared since the 2006 report. The contrast between conventional and unconventional perspectives remained at least as clear in 2016 as it was in 2006. Changes in conventional views of assessment, treatment, research, and theory about attachment have apparently had little influence on unconventional approaches, nor has the reverse occurred. Most of the principles and practices against which Chaffin et al. warned remain in place and may influence families and some mental health professionals. Understanding the contrast between the two perspectives, and the continuing possible effect of unconventional methods, can be advantageous for psychologists and social workers working with children or parents and for those involved with the courts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 07380151 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10560-017-0511-7 |
