Another factor that would affect attachment style and well-being later in life is how well-off the family is. When a family is financially stable, there are fewer worries in the household because the parents are not stressed from trying to pay bills and other financial pressures. The parents are then better attentive to the baby or child, and they can focus on the baby. Because parents are able to spend more time with the baby, it would foster better development of secure attachment, and this would lead to a better internal working model of the social world.
penname: dreamer1220
-- Edited by 102intro on Tuesday 7th of April 2009 11:51:38 AM
I completely agree. The situation of the family would have a great impact on the baby. If a family is poor and doesn't have much time to spend with the baby because they are working to pay the bills, the baby would get little social interaction and not develop a secure attachment with the mother and subsequently struggle later in life because he/she had little social interaction as a child.
While I agree that the socioeconomic standing is a factor in the attachment style and well-being later in life, I feel that it is not as straight-forward as if you are poor then you have less time with a child. There are situations where parents who are wealthy do not spend time with their children because they just pay a baby-sitter to watch the kids all of the time or have a nanny to take care of the child. Also, there are poverty stricken families in which the parents may have to work hard but can still provide the love and care necessary for attachment and a strong foundation during the times they have with their children.
I believe that it is very likely that there is a correlation between the income level of a family and the well being of the child in the future. A child from a mid-range in come or higher income level will probably be more securely attached to their parents, since the parents will not be afraid to let the child play on its own, but at a lower income parents may interfere more as was stated in lecture.
I agree that the level of wealth of a family is certainly one of many factors which affect the attachment style and well-being later in life. It is true that one can get a lot of stress even as a child when he sees his parents worrying about paying bills or having arguments on financial issues. This might cause a unstable attachment style and bother the child later in life with his own paying problems or money. However, like "tkegs", I would say that financial state of a family does not completely determine the attachment style because the individuals whose parents are viewed to trust each other to solve financial problems and successfully overcome them might unconsciously receive a positive impression about the situation and therefore develop a better attachment style than others who grow up looking at their wealthy parents spending money on everything.
I think that the wealth of the family can play a role in both the attachment style of the child and his well-being as an adult, but I think that such a correlation would not really show cause. Although wealth can make it easier for a parent to tend to their children's needs, it is not an end-all in how their children will turn out. I think that low-income families can get their children to have secure attachment through their parenting, and this may not have much to do with well-being later in life for the child, as fewer opportunities, etc. may hinder the child.
I agree that the financial stability might affect the status of the baby later in life. The current financial stability could also be caused by how the grandparents treated their children (aka the current parents). Since secure attachment tend to have higher well-being later in life, these traits could be passed down from generation to generation together. If the secure baby becomes well off in life, he or she will likely have a secure attachment with their baby... which then might repeat.
