Observing Development: A Comparative View of Attachment Theory and Separation–Individuation Theory

Attachment theory and psychoanalysis are enjoying a reconciliation. After decades of mutual antagonism, clinicians and researchers alike have renewed interest in examining common underpinnings of attachment theory and psychoanalytic theories of development, evaluating overlapping concepts to determine how these theories can be mutually enhancing. This reconciliatory work appears to be primarily the impetus of attachment researchers, students of psychoanalysis themselves, who are curious about the internal worlds of the infants, and children they evaluate (e.g., Fonagy and Target 2007; Fonagy et al. 2002; Steele and Steele 1998). Fonagy et al. (2002) attribute this interest partly to the surge of relational psychoanalytic work in the United States, which prioritizes the impact of real relationships in contrast to classical psychoanalysis, which focuses on fantasy. Also, while attachment researchers offer abundant demonstrations of the centrality of the attachment system for psychological functioning throughout life, the limitations of attachment theory are also known (Fonagy and Target 2007). For example, an infant who demonstrates an avoidant attachment organization in infancy will likely demonstrate a dismissing attachment organization in adulthood, which includes discomfort with intimacy and minimization of the importance of emotions and emotional life. However, why one dismissing infant develops strategies like idealization to manage these discomforts, and another uses devaluation and derogation, is not well elucidated in attachment theory. Additionally, there are a number of individuals who defy predic-