I believe that a secure attachment does not directly cause a better outcome in life for the child. Instead I believe that both are caused by various common factors, such as overall well being of the family, stability of the family (both in terms of relationships and in terms of money) and the attentiveness of the mother.
If the family is better off, as in they are happier and/or have more money which allows them more freedom then the child is more likely to be securely attached (due to happy mother and more free time for the mother to spend with the kid) as well as become a better adult.
If mother is more attentive to the child then he/she will have a better attachment to her, and may be better off in life due to the attentiveness of the mother not the attachment.
I think too little is know to jump to the conclusion that better attachment causes better outcomes for the child
I understand your point very well and I agree. Many factors should be considered when determining what leads to the well-being of an adult. Children soak up most of what they are exposed to when growing up, so I definitely see how a stable family other surroundings can affect the well-being of a child later in life. Mothers that pay more attention to their children will know more about what their children are being exposed to and can then better adjust their parenting to cope with the exposure.
-- Edited by 102intro on Tuesday 3rd of November 2009 02:05:32 PM
I agree, as well. I think that many of the qualities in a family that encourages secure attachment will also set up a child to be successful later in life. There is no reason to favor the idea that these two outcomes have a causal relationship.
I agree. it is hard to tell what the exact relation between these factors is, and which factor really is the cause of others. I like the idea of the first response that more attentive mothers will also be better parents later in life, and raise their child to be better off
