As suggested by Feeney and Collins (2019), many people understand the importance of the attachment system and its role in providing children with comfort and safety in times of perceived threat or discomfort. However, many people appear to overlook the role and importance of the caregiving system. I used to be one of those people until I discovered the concept. Since then, it has remained at the forefront of my mind when undertaking safeguarding assessments.
Before I share my own personal reflections, I would like to briefly explain my understanding of what the caregiving system is and how it differs from the attachment system.
According to George and Solomon (cited in Cassidy and Shaver, 2008), the behavioural system’s approach to caregiving begins with Bowlby’s (1969/1982, 1973) belief that the caregiving system is reciprocal to and evolved in parallel with the attachment system. For example, as the attachment system is activated when a child experiences internal or external cues of perceived danger or stress, similarly, the caregiving system is activated by internal or external cues associated with situations when a parent perceives danger or stress for their child.
These situations could include, but are not inclusive of:
- Separation
- The child being placed in danger or;
- The child signalling discomfort or distress.
Once the caregiving system has been activated, parents can call upon an innate range of behaviours that serve the system’s protective function.
These behaviours may include:
- Maintaining close proximity to the child
- Retrieval, following or signalling for the child to follow or;
- Calling, looking or smiling at the child.
Similarly, and like the child’s attachment system, which becomes terminated by proximity or physical and/or psychological contact with the attachment figure, the caregiving system is also terminated by signs of physical and/or psychological proximity and signs that the child is comforted, content or satisfied (George and Solomon, cited in Cassidy and Shaver, 2008).
With the intention of creating a ‘safe haven’, whereby a child feels confident to return to their parent for comfort and safety when feeling stressed, overwhelmed, and/or unsafe (O’Shaughnessy et al, 2023), the parent and their ability to effectively manage their caregiving system supports a child’s exploratory behaviour. For example, by creating a ‘secure base’, the child feels able to explore their environment and develop autonomy, safe in the knowledge that if they encounter danger or stress, they can return to their parent (safe haven), who will provide them with comfort and protection.
A key question for all safeguarding professionals…
If, like me, you support the importance of the summary above, I believe a primary question for all safeguarding social workers when assessing parents should be – ‘What has happened or is happening in the parent’s life that is preventing them from utilising innate behaviours that have evolved to help them provide comfort and safety to their child?’
Before I continue, I know from past experience that my thoughts on caregiving may potentially raise questions relating to me taking a parent-centric focus and therefore not placing the child and their voice at the heart of my thinking. This is not the case and never has been. I strongly feel however that there is a need for safeguarding social workers to better understand the needs of parents and how the challenges within their lives, or the representations they hold about their child/ren, is impacting their caregiving system.
As highlighted by Gillath et al (2005) – and what I believe is greatly overlooked within children’s safeguarding practice – under conditions of threat, adults generally turn to others for support and comfort rather than thinking first about being support providers. During these times, individuals can often become so focused on their own vulnerability, that they lack the mental resources necessary to respond compassionately and provide others with help and care. Furthermore, only when relief is attained and a sense of attachment security is restored, can people easily direct attention and energy to other behavioural systems, such as the caregiving system.
Understanding a parent’s own needs, including their need for safety
Considering the number of parents (all in my experience) whose children are involved in safeguarding services, who have experienced or continue to experience, significant adversity within their lives, would it not be wise to explore and understand their attachment needs and how their needs may be influencing their caregiving system? This is not to suggest that every parent who is assessed by safeguarding services should undertake some form of attachment informed assessment (such as the Adult Attachment Interview); rather I believe more of an emphasis needs to be placed on understanding parents’ needs (including the need for safety), and how their needs may, at times, compete with those of their child/ren.
As an experienced Independent Social Worker, who predominately assesses parents under the Public Law Outline, I always ensure I allocate adequate time to focus on a parent’s understanding of their own needs, i.e. their emotional, psychological and self-care needs.
I achieve this by undertaking a visual exercise called the Body Budget, where I ask parents to think about the things they need on a daily basis to enable them to function at their optimal level. I then ask them to consider the things that drain their daily budget. I often give an example of what I need for my own daily budget, such as a minimum of eight hours sleep every night, a healthy diet and regular exercise, and that when my budget is disproportionately drained from pressures from work or family life, I explain how I am unable to function effectively. The parents I have worked with to date have been extremely receptive to this idea. They have also been keen for the exercise to expand into discussions about their support network and who they turn to when they feel unsafe and in need of protection, including when they need physical, emotional and/or psychological safety.
The power of discussing parental safety – openly & honestly
On the topic of parental safety, I often communicate my assumption to parents that my presence and role as the assessing social worker could be one of, if not, the greatest danger in their life. For example, the danger of me recommending their child should not remain in their care. Sharing this realistic and honest message with parents helps them see that I am aware of the power dynamic between us. It then enables transparent conversations about how my presence may be triggering their attachment needs, which may then impact on their caregiving system. In particular, this approach has been effective when assessing parents, who have had significant histories of childhood adversity, and who have developed maladaptive strategies for managing anxiety and stress.
On reflection of the above and to conclude my thoughts, I would like to pose another equally important question: ‘By not placing value and an emphasis on understanding parents’ needs, can we really achieve our goal of cherishing our children?’
Other key considerations I believe need to be considered when trying to understand a parent’s caregiving system are as follows:
1. The child is not the parent’s attachment figure – if a child is providing care or protection for a parent, what does this mean from an attachment perspective for the child?
2. What is the impact/influence of the parent’s home environment and their intimate relationship(s) – on their caregiving system?
3. Events within a parent’s (e.g. trauma, domestic abuse) and a child’s life (e.g. disability) – can act as an assault on the caregiving system (George and Solomon 2008).
4. What external factors within the community are impacting on a parent’s sense of safety, and subsequently, on their capacity to respond to their child’s needs? For example, is the parent experiencing difficulties with racial discrimination or difficulties with anti-social behaviour. If so, is this threatening their sense of safety and then subsequently impacting on their caregiving system?
5. What is the parent’s perception of their child – and is there something about the child that is leading to a lack of connection? For example, a mother’s perception of her baby as physically unattractive or abnormal can elicit rejection, neglect, abandonment or infanticide (Feeney and Collins, 2019).
6. And finally – difficulties with caregiving occurs when the child shifts from the goal of the parent’s reproductive strategy to a threat to their own survival.
References
Feeney, B. C. & Collins, N. L. (2019). The importance of relational support for attachment and exploration needs. Curr Opin Psychol. 2019 Feb; 25:182-186
George, C., & Solomon, J. (2008). The caregiving system: A behavioural systems approach to parenting. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (2nd ed., pp. 833–856). The Guilford Press.
Gillath, O., Shaver, P. R., & Mikulincer, M. (2005). An attachment-theoretical approach to compassion and altruism. In P. Gilbert (Ed.), Compassion: Conceptualisations, research and use in psychotherapy (pp. 121–147). Routledge.
O’Shaughnessy, R., Berry, K., Dallos, R., & Bateson, K. (2023). Attachment Theory: the basics. Routledge