Anonymous wrote:You should read a little about object relations theory, OP. There were several people who became very interested in this exact question following WWII. Following the war, many children were institutionalized and grew up with their physical needs met, but did not have a primary caregiver. Many did not develop the ability to attach or connect to others, and many other children died.
There were several theories proposed at the time as to why, and these are still the theories we use today to help explain the importance of infant attachment. And it isn’t just about the smell or about being fed. You might remember Harlow’s monkeys. There is something else about providing caregiving and nurturing that is important to babies and toddlers.

- an actual scientist

By any chance, have you read Gabor Mate?

Anonymous wrote:It's basic survival. Children are helpless. Therefore, they develop a bond with an adult who cares for them in order to survive. They have no frame of reference. Therefore, they do not evaluate or judge their adult caregivers based on the choices that they make. Et voila! We've got a bond (assuming the adult caregiver cares for their child).

Totally agree with this -- I could "see" my baby's instincts for survival. First babies are designed to be adorable. And second they behave in all kinds of cute and relational ways to ensure you will take care of them. I was disposed to take good care of my baby anyway, but he sure made it easy to love him.

Also OP, I read something about super early facial recognition. Babies are programmed for faces, and especially your face. I think I read babies might know a face more like the ones they know ( and immediately love siblings).

My baby could pick me out at distances and from around a corner. Babies totally love their moms -- maybe because they must get fed, but I will take it!

Anonymous wrote:You should read a little about object relations theory, OP. There were several people who became very interested in this exact question following WWII. Following the war, many children were institutionalized and grew up with their physical needs met, but did not have a primary caregiver. Many did not develop the ability to attach or connect to others, and many other children died.
There were several theories proposed at the time as to why, and these are still the theories we use today to help explain the importance of infant attachment. And it isn’t just about the smell or about being fed. You might remember Harlow’s monkeys. There is something else about providing caregiving and nurturing that is important to babies and toddlers.

- an actual scientist

Applause but the other scientist wasm't wrong, right?

Anonymous wrote:Wtf are you talking about?

Your stupidity is showing

You should read a little about object relations theory, OP. There were several people who became very interested in this exact question following WWII. Following the war, many children were institutionalized and grew up with their physical needs met, but did not have a primary caregiver. Many did not develop the ability to attach or connect to others, and many other children died.
There were several theories proposed at the time as to why, and these are still the theories we use today to help explain the importance of infant attachment. And it isn’t just about the smell or about being fed. You might remember Harlow’s monkeys. There is something else about providing caregiving and nurturing that is important to babies and toddlers.

- an actual scientist

Adoptive mom, here. I think it's because I showed up the most whenever he cried and he got used to associating me with the food, being picked up, the dry diaper, whatever I was doing to try to help the problem he was letting me know about by crying. The next most frequent servant was dad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you the OP of the "The love for your children" thread? It's ok. It's hormones. It will get better.

nope i'm not. I am a mom who didn't breast feed much, had some night help, went back to full time work at 3 months and carried tremendous guilt at the time over all that and had all sorts of meltdowns about "how will my baby ever know i'm his mom" (and had plenty of posters on here say "why did you even have kids"). But he's 3 and I have the special "mommy" position and we have a great and secure relationship that's different from the nanny's or grandmas or anyone elses even though i had a lot of help in the beginning and i'm not the person spending the MOST awake time with him now. I'm just marveling at how that works

This is great, OP! You made the choices that were the best for you an your family and you have a wonderful bond with your child. Enjoy! I am not the person who spends the most time with my children either, but I am probably the most constant person and the one who tucks them in at night and who is there when they wake up in the middle of the night because they are scared or unwell. I think that goes a long way. I am not sure there is any magic to the bond. If there is, that's great, too.

For newborns, it's by smell.

And I think for all young children, it's the emotion of love and physical tenderness that most mothers display, that are hard to break down in a scientifically objective list of measurable variables. Fathers and grandparents and siblings and nannies can and do display these qualities too, but I think that statistically, mothers display them more consistently, and that this is due to particular brain structure or wiring. Is this brain morphology acquired at birth? Does some of the wiring evolve until motherhood? Does anything change during pregnancy, childbirth or in the post-partum period?

A few mothers are not like this. Some fathers are very much like this. Some nannies are like this, and on rare occasions, children prefer the nanny. There are always exceptions.

- scientist

Anonymous wrote:Are you the OP of the "The love for your children" thread? It's ok. It's hormones. It will get better.

nope i'm not. I am a mom who didn't breast feed much, had some night help, went back to full time work at 3 months and carried tremendous guilt at the time over all that and had all sorts of meltdowns about "how will my baby ever know i'm his mom" (and had plenty of posters on here say "why did you even have kids"). But he's 3 and I have the special "mommy" position and we have a great and secure relationship that's different from the nanny's or grandmas or anyone elses even though i had a lot of help in the beginning and i'm not the person spending the MOST awake time with him now. I'm just marveling at how that works

Imprinting.

Are you the OP of the "The love for your children" thread? It's ok. It's hormones. It will get better.

It's basic survival. Children are helpless. Therefore, they develop a bond with an adult who cares for them in order to survive. They have no frame of reference. Therefore, they do not evaluate or judge their adult caregivers based on the choices that they make. Et voila! We've got a bond (assuming the adult caregiver cares for their child).

I think they say that it's first by smell, when babies are very young.

Wtf are you talking about?

All kids seem to know their mom and for better or worse be especially connected to them and feeling secure in their love (when its a healthy relationship) or desperately strive for their love in an unhealthy relationship

That got me thinking though - what makes that bond? Whether the mom birthed a child or adopted, breast or bottle fed, works or stays home, plays on the floor for hours or more just supervises the activity - in healthy environments the mother/child bond is something unique. What do you think creates it? Just the feeling of love a mom gives their kid whenever they're together?

I'm hoping this doesn't devolve into shaming people with different choices b/c it's mean to be a positive post. Also I'm not trying to say dads don't also have a bond or anything else - i'm just not a dad so not reflecting on that bond at the moment