I am really not sure what I think of that article. Perhaps I just have my back up as someone who was most strongly committed to attachment parenting with my 2E kid? I think Velcro baby describes her nicely. She was "disorganised" from birth, we would have ended up attachement parenting through necessity had we not already planned things that way. I really do not feel than that she developed her problems due to poor attachment. Though I can see that it would be entirely possible for poor attachment to cause issues I feel this would be the exception rather than the rule. I think the reality is that there are many gifted kids whose brains are "interesting" in other ways as well as their giftedness and that that is heavily genetically driven.
Well, I am reading another book right now - What Babies Say Before They Can Talk and he is also talking about the negative effects of babies that are not attached (well, their needs responded to.)
It is making me feel a little bad, because we are also practicing attachment parenting and DD was colicky in the early months and fussy and very serious once I fixed the colic (got rid of dairy and soy.)
We are doing the best we can, but it feels like our best isn't good enough. I feel like she gets frustrated a lot and there is not a whole lot I can do to fix her problems (help her to communicate, help her to move / crawl /walk.) She's gotten happier as she's gotten older and more capable, though...
Might it not be possible that some gifted kids could simply be worse off if they didn't have the proper attachment? I mean, I think any kid is worse off if they get neglected, abused, or don't have their feelings validated.
I think some people get really irritated about this stuff because it is like "blaming the mother" or whatever, but, well, parents do have a profound effect on their children. We just try to do our best...
