Putting our baby into nursery at 12 - 13 months. Attachment style outcomes??

Please tell us in what research context you are assessing attachment styles over the life course of a statistically significant number of children who went to nursery compared to those who didn't? Unless you're just using your opinion based on anecdotes to make a completely invalid point?

I've had children in various forms of childcare over the years.

Two non consecutive days in a nursery is going to make things far more difficult than they need to be, your child will be very confused

Couldn’t agree with you both more. The OP sounds more like an over enthusiastic student who has found their favourite theorist than a practising professional.

That is not my experience I am afraid. A poor nursery will lead to a child feeling unsafe. Some babies will find it highly stressful, others will adapt more easily. A child led approach is best. There is rarely any care better in the world than that of a parent however.

Sorry, missed your reply. I completely agree. I can remember being left with a babysitter for the first time at about 10 and I was panicked and devastated as I was always with my parents.

It was great that my parents kept me close, never left me etc until they started to do so as I got older and I was so unused to it that I really struggled.

I think a balance, like most things in life, benefits most children.

I was simply observing that some staff do recognise the struggles SEN children face and tend to notice them more.

You commented that the children in your family who went to nursery all craved attention, the children who didn't attend a childcare setting, settled well. You sound judgemental of the 'mothers who got a pat on the back for giving them life skills' but it seems easier to you to deflect onto me.

@ByHardyRubyEagle exactly, a settling in period is perfectly normal. It would actually be an unusual child who has been at home til a year old who wouldn't cry when being left at first, as separation anxiety peaks around that age.

DH has studied childhood development, not me to be fair, so I’m not going to link to scientific research papers or some such, but from what he tells me, you’d basically have to be a really really shit parent in order for a child to have an unhealthy attachment to one primary caregiver, and even then it doesn’t take that much to improve things. You’re thinking way too much about this in my opinion. All children need a settling in period to a setting too. It’ll be fine.

For a teacher, you do seem to struggle a little with anecdotes don't you? And critical reading.

Why don't you reread my post again, and tell me exactly where it said I was 'dismissing' all children who go in to early childcare. Perhaps you'll find that it actually said the dc that I know, who went before they were ready. Including my own through necessity.

I was talking about my experiences, the same as you were.

Though you do seem heavily invested in insisting the sen dc I know are only praised because of that, and that despite you never having met them, that it can't possibly be because they are unusually well behaved. They go out of their way to be nice and kind to teachers and it is appreciated.

But I'm sure you know best.

Have you looked into a childminder?

As far as I have read, if the child cannot be home with the primary caregiver or with a family member, then being cared for in a home setting is the next best this.

Please don't believe the scare mongering comments about how at only 1yo your child should have gone to nursery earlier and then they wouldn't cry, it's utter utter BS.

My daughter started preschool the month before she turned 3yo having spent all of her time with me and she went off happily day 1, our settling in consisted of me sitting there for 15 minutes before saying "I guess I'm going to go then, see you in a bit" she runs in every day now often forgetting to kiss me goodbye

Yet has spent every day (and night) of her life with me.

Things that have helped, I have never snuck off without telling her first, I don't lie to her ever and I'm a responsive parent, if she cries I respond, we did not do any sleep training or cry it out.

@BefuddledCrumble can't quote your reply but I love how you criticised my reply to you when your post dismissed children going to childcare as being 'hellions' and the children at home until school as 'loved by all'. SEN children often get much more attention from staff (rightly or wrongly) so it was likely to do with that rather than they didn't rough it out in childcare!

Remember that attachment theory is a western phenomenon grounded in misogynistic principles about mothering!

Have a look at some evolutionary psychology and child rearing in hunter gathered societies and you will feel much better
www.instagram.com/elena.bridgers?igsh=MTA1YThqMmtmbXc2aw==

I went back to work when my son was five months so no choice. And even with my second, when I stopped working, I put her in two days a week (full days). They thrived - she'd make a bit more fuss but I could spy her through the window when I left and she seemed content. Really it was essential as my son especially was go go go and having other kids and loads of activities suited him. They are now 19 and 21 and I'm very close up them both. We text (my son moved out at 28 my DD is at uni) every day and I see my son (80 miles away including a ferry) once a month.
I would say having them at nursery from a young age made the transition to school very easy. And they learned the rules of the playground young.

I don't think there's been much aggression or hostility compared to other threads on here! I also think (as happens a lot on here) OP asked a question but then sort of said "but I know more than y'all here anyway because I'm a child therapist, Bowlby is a god and I don't care about attachment research beyond the 1950s and I'm going to educate you instead, here's a bunch of links"

It seems odd to be asking a question of other parents but then saying you know more than them about the thing you're asking about. And as you say theory is all well and good but we need to tune into what our individual DC need and different kids are, well, different. You can get "paralysis by analysis" sometimes when you read too many conflicting things. Or take Bowlby as the gospel.

My oldest daughter went to nursery at 4 months old, this worked very well because by the time separation anxiety hit at 9-12 months she was already used to the carers at nursery so wasn't overly upset at being left with them.

My youngest daughter wouldn't have coped at all with being left at the age of 1, she wasn't really ready until age 3 and I am lucky that I was a SAHM until then, at 3 she could understand that I would be back in a few hours to pick her up and she was happy to be playing with friends.

I do think that because of the maternity leave now babies are often being left at the "wrong" time in their development, right when separation anxiety hits. I'm not sure what the answer is really.

DD started nursery at 14 months and was very happy to go in without me, just waved and said "Bye!"

She's now very securely attached to us and very confident, she trusts we always come back when we go away, loves school and extra-curricular clubs and also loves being at home with us.

It probably depends on the child to an extent.

FWIW, growing up I knew 2 girls (eldest was in antenatal class with my Mum so we knew them well.) The Mum was a SAHM and criticised my Mum for "leaving me" in nursery, spent all her time with the kids and didn't leave them anywhere. They became painfully shy and clingy and last I heard the eldest had dropped out of Uni on the very first day because she couldn't bear to leave home.

I believe in building village of secure attachments

This is the problem with this thread and discussion of attachment in general. You're not talking about attachment in the way the OP is trying to. Referring to Bowlby and Ainsworth means the OP is talking about a specific theory of child/parent/carer dynamic. You can't have a 'village of secure attachments' as by definition they would not be secure! You're talking about relationships. Children can have lovely strong bonds with any number of people, grandparents, aunties, nannies, teachers etc but they are not attachment relationships and using words like secure and insecure is incorrect in the context of attachment theory which is what the OP is trying to refer to.

My daughter and I were completely inseparable during the first year of her life—she was always by my side. Full on attachment style parenting.

Since my daughter was one year old, my husband spent a couple of hours with her every day so that I could work. When she turned two, she started going to a childminder full-time. She has grown into a very confident and social little girl, and I’ve seen no signs of attachment issues at all, even though plenty of people would argue its a lot of time away from the parents.

I think a child’s temperament, and the connection between the nursery staff and the child all play a role. I believe in building village of secure attachments so we went with a childminder instead of nursery.

Based on my anxious research in to this, parental attitudes and beliefs are crucial here, as they shape how the child perceives the situation, ultimately influencing the impact on attachment or whatever they perceive nursery as a trauma or stress.

Unfortunately some people mistake 'attachment' as being 'mother must be present 24/7 for the first 3 years of a child's life.' It's nothing to do with that.

As many of us have patiently pointed out, it's an entirely normal reaction for a child who is left for the first time at a year old to experience separation anxiety. (As an aside - the one huge benefit of short maternity leave 30 years ago was the fact that 3 or 4 month old babies didn't cry when being left with other carers. I'm not proposing maternity leave should be cut, but I think people need to recognise that it's really hard to start leaving a child for the first time at the peak of separation anxiety.)

The OP doesn't seem to genuinely understand attachment theory (not surprising if she refuses to acknowledge research post-Bowlby) She's panicking about switching to a different nursery rather than acknowledging that her child's reaction is normal. He will quickly learn that nursery is a safe, fun place and he will form positive relationships with key people. It's a normal part of development.

If individuals are really anti any form of childcare and don't wish to use it then fine- but don't use spurious arguments to try to claim it's harmful. The thousands of well adjusted adults who went to nursery or childminders when small are testament to the fact that good quality care does not affect attachment.

Me twins went into nursery 3 days a week from 11 months and then 4 days from 3yrs old. They are 7 now and have wildly different attachment styles and personalities to each other, despite having had the same upbringing and treatment since birth. For this reason I strongly tend to think that kids just are who they are.

If you're a therapist can you not just use Google Scholar?
I have a science PhD and that's what I do with any parenting intervention I come across.
My understanding of the literature on childcare is that it's highly dependent on quality of care but no UK setting is going to fall under "poor standard".

I think that you can look at the entire population of Central and Eastern Europe.

For most of Europe SAHMs weren't a thing, and children would go to childcare earlier than yours.

Zero evidence to suggest that healthy childcare settings affect parent-child attachment relationships. You're welcome, carry on with your day.

Anyone that works within this sphere will understand the fallout and consequences due to early attachment issues and ruptures.

nonsense! Childcare has nothing to do with ruptured attachment relationships! Anyone who works within this sphere will understand why the OP is completely misapplying a little bit of very out of date theory.

I think you are right to be concerned. Anyone that works within this sphere will understand the fallout and consequences due to early attachment issues and ruptures.
It is a field and an area that would benefit parents, they could be better informed and understand the true importance of attachment, and the complications.
Highlighting the danger of not prioritising a small child’s fundamental and essential foundation to all future relationships.

It’s almost impossible to reverse, which is why it can make professionals in this field some what nervous and cautious. It becomes hard wired as the child grows into adulthood, and even when it is challenged and understood by an adult with attachment disorders it can’t actually be repaired, only mitigated.

The blue print for trust and safety in relationships are built in the early years, and irreversible to a large degree. You are completely right to be considering this aspect carefully op.

Maybe an institutional setting is not right for your child op, and your plans need a rethink?