Separation-Individuation Theory and Attachment Theory

Abstract

Separation-individuation and attachment theories are compared and assessed in the context of psychoanalytic developmental theory and their application to clinical work. As introduced by Margaret Mahler and John Bowlby, respectively, both theories were initially regarded as diverging from traditional views. Separation-individuation theory, though it has had to be corrected in important respects, and attachment theory, despite certain limitations, have nonetheless enriched psychoanalytic thought. Without attachment an infant would die, and with severely insecure attachment is at greater risk for serious disorders. Development depends on continued attachment to a responsive and responsible caregiver. Continued attachment to the primary object was regarded by Mahler as as intrinsic to the process of separation-individuation. Attachment theory does not account for the essential development of separateness, and separation-individuation is important for the promotion of autonomy, independence, and identity. Salient historical and theoretical issues are addressed, including the renewed interest in attachment theory and the related decline of interest in separation-individuation theory.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ainsworth, M. , Blehar, M. , Waters, E. , & Wall, S. (1972). Patterns of Attachment: A Psychological Study of the Strange Situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bergman, A. (1999). Ours, Yours, Mine. Northvale, NJ: Aronson.

Blum, H. (2000). The Language of affect. Northvale, NJ: Aronson.

——— (2003). Language and rapprochement. Paper presented to the Vulnerable Child Discussion Group, American Psychoanalytic Association, January.

——— & Blum, E. (1990). The development of autonomy and superego precursors . International Journal of Psychoanalysis 71:585—595.

Bowlby, J. (1988). A Secure Base: Clinical Application of Attachment Theory. London: Routledge.

Brody, S. (1981). The concepts of attachment and bonding. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 29:815—829.

Broussard, E. (1970). Maternal perception of the neonate as related to development. Child Psychiatry & Human Development 1:216—225.

Erikson, E. (1968). Identity, Youth, and Crisis. New York: Norton.

10.

Fonagy, P. (2000). Attachment and borderline personality disorder . Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 48:1129—1146.

11.

Freud, A. (1960). Discussion of Dr. John Bowlby's paper. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child 15:53—62.

12.

Gergely, G. (2000). Reapproaching Mahler. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 48:1197—1228.

13.

Jacobson, E. (1964). The Self and the Object World. New York: International Universities Press.

14.

Kernberg, O. (1995). Love Relations: Normality and Pathology. New Haven: Yale University Press.

15.

Kohut, H. (1977). The Restoration of the Self. New York: International Universities Press.

16.

Lacan, J. (1953). Some reflections on the ego. International Journal of Psychoanalysis 34:11—17.

17.

Mahler, M. , Pine, F. , & Bergman, A. (1975). The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant: Symbiosis and Individuation. New York: Basic Books.

18.

Main, M. (2000). The organized categories of infant, child, and adult attachment. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 48:1055—1096.

19.

Pine, F. (1986). The “symbiotic phase ” in light of current infancy research. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic 50:564—569.

20.

Schur, M. (1960). Discussion of Dr. John Bowlby's paper. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child 15:63—84.

21.

Spitz, R. (1965). The First Year of Life. New York: International Universities Press.

22.

Stern, D. (1985). The Interpersonal World of the Infant. New York: Basic Books.

23.

Tronick, E. , Als, H. , Adamson, L. , Wise, S. , & Brazelton, T. (1978). The infants' responses to entrapment between contradictory messages in face-to-face interaction. Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry 17:1—13.

24.

Van Dijken, S. (1998). John Bowlby—His Early Life: A Biographical Journey into the Roots of Attachment Theory. London: Free Association.

25.

Winnicott, D.W. (1965). The Maturational Processes and the Facilitating Environment. London: Hogarth Press .