Running head: PARENTING AND INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGY 1 ... Greer MP 2018.pdf · PARENTING AND INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGY 3 Abstract Children are born with different personality traits and

Running head: PARENTING AND INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGY 1

Parenting, Attachment Theory, and Individual Psychology

A Literature Review

Presented to

The Faculty of the Adler Graduate School

_____________________

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for

The Degree of Master of Arts in

Adlerian Counseling and Psychotherapy

______________________

By

Dominique Greer

Chair: Rachelle J. Reinisch, DMFT

Reader: Meghan Williams, MA

_____________________

May, 2018

PARENTING AND INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGY 2


Copyright © 2018

Dominique Greer

All rights reserved


Abstract

Children are born with different personality traits and emotional needs. They respond positively

to certain styles of parenting. The work of Bowlby began the theory of attachment. Aisnworth

and Main’s work advanced the theory of attachment by proving that the quality of the

parent/child bond influences directly how children view the world, themselves and relationships.

Dreikurs’s four goals of misbehaviors pioneered parental education. Modern parenting styles

have since emerged to meet the needs of parents who seek better ways to enhance the

communication with their children. Four modern parenting styles grounded in concepts from

Adler’s Individual Psychology include: active parenting, unconditional parenting, beyond logic,

consequences, and control, and positive parenting. Identified common factors can assist

therapists as they work with children and families. Common factors include parental ability to

promote encouragement, independence, and self-sufficiency that leads to positive adult

relationships and a positive lifestyle.

Keywords: parenting, Individual Psychology, goals of misbehavior, active parenting,

unconditional parenting, beyond logic, consequences, and control, positive parenting


Acknowledgments

Thank you to the following individuals:

- Jeffrey Schuh, for your unconditional support and unwavering faith in me.

- My children, Gabriella, James and Romain, you inspire me every day.

- Sharon Schuh, MA, LMFT, Adlerian true and true.

- Dr. Rachelle Reinisch, DMFT, for being so hard working and supportive.

- Meg Williams, MA, LMFT, for being my Reader and for being so supportive.


Dedication

This paper is dedicated to Romain Schuh, Jeffrey Schuh, James Greer, and Gabriella

Greer.


Table of Contents

Attachment Theory ......................................................................................................................... 7

The Origins of Attachment Theory ............................................................................................. 8

Internal Working Models .......................................................................................................... 12

Attachment Styles ......................................................................................................................... 12

Avoidant Attachment ................................................................................................................ 13

Ambivalent Attachment ............................................................................................................ 14

Disorganized Attachment.......................................................................................................... 14

Secure Attachment .................................................................................................................... 15

Individual Psychology .................................................................................................................. 16

Private Logic ............................................................................................................................. 18

Individual Psychology and Parenting ........................................................................................... 19

Goals of Misbehavior ................................................................................................................ 20

Undue attention. .................................................................................................................... 23

Search for power. .................................................................................................................. 23

Seeking revenge. ................................................................................................................... 24

Giving up. ............................................................................................................................. 24

Active Parenting........................................................................................................................ 25

Attachment Theory and Parenting ................................................................................................ 27

Unconditional Parenting ........................................................................................................... 28

Beyond Logic, Consequences, and Control .............................................................................. 29

Positive Parenting ..................................................................................................................... 32

Precept one: attachment theory. ............................................................................................ 32

Precept two: respect. ............................................................................................................. 32

Precept three: proactive parenting. ....................................................................................... 32

Precept four: empathetic leadership. ..................................................................................... 32

Precept five: positive parenting. ........................................................................................... 33

Discussion ..................................................................................................................................... 33

Implications for Practice ........................................................................................................... 37

Recommendations for Future Research .................................................................................... 39

Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 40

References ..................................................................................................................................... 42



Children are born with different personality traits and emotional needs. They respond

positively to certain styles of parenting (O’Reilly & Peterson, 2014). According to Dreikurs

(1964), parents are often discouraged by a child’s misbehaviors and frustrated by a lack of

knowledge of how to remedy the situation. Dreikurs and Soltz (1964) proposed four goals of

misbehavior and how parents could positively guide children toward social interest, and as a

result, reduce the misbehaviors.

Through the exploration of Bowlby’s attachment theory and Adlerian Individual

Psychology, the purpose of this literature review is to explore different parenting styles and

identify common factors in four prominent parenting theories: active parenting, unconditional

parenting, beyond logic, consequences, and control, and positive parenting (Eanes, 2016; Forbes

& Post, 2006; Kohn, 2005; Popkin, 2014). Common factors uncovered in the four modern

parenting methods are centered around cooperation, respect, independence, secure attachment

styles, and emotional regulation (Eanes, 2016; Forbes & Post, 2006; Kohn, 2005; Popkin, 2014).

Mental health professionals can incorporate common factors from parenting methods

grounded in attachment theory (Bowlby, 1999). Therapists could use the identified common

factors as therapeutic tools to guide therapeutic interventions with children and families.

Attachment Theory

Attachment theory was born from the work of Dr. John Bowlby who believed that the

quality of the bond between infants and their primary caregivers set the stage for how infants will

relate to others in adulthood (Bowlby, 1973; Siegel, 1999). Bowlby believed parental responses

to an infant’s needs are key to the creation of attachment patterns that create internal working

systems (Crain, 2005). The internal working systems become maps for the mind of a child. The


maps mold a child’s feelings, thoughts, and views about relationships. These internal working

systems are tools for individuals to evaluate and guide responses to unfamiliar or stressful

events. In the early 20th century, Bowlby’s attachment theory allowed for a different mindset

regarding the adult view of infants and children. It was not until Bowlby’s message that stated

children are individuals with emotions and needs that they became valued as such. Infants and

children were often dismissed, neglected, and lacked parental concern and affection. Among the

cultural concerns of the time was a deep-seated fear of spoiling a child; however, thanks to the

work of Bowlby, Ainsworth, Main, and other therapists and researchers, infants and children

have achieved an equalitarian status with adults and their parents, and parents are in tune with

the need for attachment. According to Mayo Clinic (2012):

As soon as babies are born, they need and want you to hold, cuddle, touch, kiss, talk, and

sing to them. These everyday expressions of love and affection promote bonding. They

also help your baby’s brain develop. Just as an infant’s body needs food to grow, his or

her brain benefits from positive emotional, physical, and intellectual experience. (p. 25)

The Origins of Attachment Theory

John Bowlby was a psychologist born in London, United Kingdom in 1907 to a surgeon,

his father, Sir Anthony Bowlby and his mother, Mary Bowlby, a homemaker. Bowlby was the

fourth of six children, and typical for this period, interacted with his mother one hour per day

during tea time. Children did not spend time with their parents in upper-middle-class families as

it was thought to spoil the child. Bowlby was cared for, and attached to, his nursemaid, Minnie.

Following in the footsteps of his father, Bowlby attended the Cambridge School of Medicine

where he was expected to become a surgeon; however, Bowlby quickly became more interested


in developmental psychology and gave up medicine to work with children experiencing

psychological problems (van Dijken, 1998).

Bowlby was a child and adolescent during the first world war (van Dijken, 1998). In

England, the children were sent to relatives or strangers and kept away from the dangers of

bombings. Bowlby’s work with the children inspired him as he started to notice the effects of

separation. Bowlby’s separation from his parents was something he had experienced as a child.

Bowlby’s father was often absent, and his mother left Bowlby’s care to his nursemaid. When

Bowlby was 4 years old, the departure of his beloved nursemaid had a great impact on him.

Bowlby felt he had no one to turn to for affection and support. The damage caused by the loss of

his “mother figure” was increased when Bowlby attended boarding school at 10 years of age. In

later writings, Bowlby referred to his time in boarding school as a terrible time for him (Bowlby,

1973). When Bowlby experienced the loss of his godfather, he considered this another tragic

experience in his childhood.

Bowlby’s work with the children, coupled with his own experience of loss and

separation, fueled his desire to understand the effects and remedies to early separation between

children and primary caregivers (van Dijken, 1998). In the late 1930’s, Bowlby began to study

and research children and attachment. Bowlby noticed that children who had endured prolonged

separation from a motherly figure before the age of 5 years experienced the most critical impact

on their psychological development. These children displayed signs of social detachment and

remained affectionless (Bowlby, 1973).

Bowlby was determined to further his research and understand the patterns of healthy

family interaction and the unhealthy development of children (Bowlby, 1973). Bowlby (1951)

wrote a report on the mental health of homeless children in post-war Europe for the World


Health Organization (WHO). In this report, Bowlby stated infants and young children benefited

from a warm and nurturing relationship with their primary caregivers, and the lack of this

nurturing bond could have damaging short-term and long-term mental health consequences.

This report had an impact on the present and future generations and led the WHO to advocate for

widespread changes in nurturing parenting and the care of children confined in institutional care

(e.g., hospitals).

Secure Base

Bowlby posited that infants and children were hardwired to attach themselves to their

mother or mother substitute (Bowlby, 1999). Bowlby found that as early as birth, children

inherently seek connection with their caregivers especially in times of distress or alarm. In

addition, inconsistent or absent feedback shapes the infant’s responses to the caregiver. When

the mother or caregiver responds favorably to the needs and actions of the infants, the infants

grow to trust and attach themselves to their caregivers and view the caregiver as a “secure base.”

A secure base is a caregiver that remains a consistent attachment figure from the child’s birth to

24 months. Bowlby (1999) observed three separate phases of attachment.

Phase one of Bowlby’s attachment theory includes birth to three months (Bowlby, 1999).

Infants visually seek out their caregiver and are particularly focused on the caregiver’s mouth

and tone of voice. Because infant eyesight is not fully developed, infants will look at the

caregiver and frequently invite the caregiver to hold them and make eye contact (Crain, 2005).

Phase two of Bowlby’s attachment theory includes age 3 to 6 months when the infant

starts to communicate by babbling and reaching for the caregiver (Bowlby, 1999). The infant

will reach for the caregiver through touch (e.g., catching the hair and touching clothing). The


infant is still very focused on the caregiver’s facial expression and tone of voice and begins to

show a deeper attachment with one or two caregivers.

Phase three of Bowlby’s attachment theory includes 6 to 36 months and is marked by an

increase in attachment from the child to the caregiver (Bowlby, 1999). The child may

experience anxiety related to separation during this time. The child is more mobile, able to

crawl, scoot, or walk to the caregiver as needed. If the caregiver positively responds to the

child’s needs, the child feels safe to explore the environment and maintain a connection with the

caregiver through eye contact and verbal communication. When all three phases of attachment

are positively met, the child is poised for the remainder of childhood and can securely adapt

when there is a brief separation from the caregiver (Crain, 2005). That is, the child understands

the caregiver will return. The attachment bond is now internalized, and the child can hold a

mental picture of the caregiver and feel safe (Crain, 2005).

Bowlby (1973) observed that during this crucial time of child development, should

prolonged separation occur between the child and the mother, the child responded within three

different phases. During phase one, the child protests the separation, refuses soothing from

others, and continues to seek out the absent caregiver by calling out or crying. During phase

two, should separation continue between the child and the caregiver, the child falls into despair,

continues to deny soothing from others, continues to cry but will no longer try to reach out to the

caregiver because the child believes comfort will not be provided. During phase three, the child

is detached from the primary caregiver, no longer cries or attempts to reach out to the caregiver

because the bond is already severely damaged. As a result, the child seeks out other caregivers

who could favorably respond. Bowlby’s observation of these three phases led to the creation of

specified patterns of attachment giving life to internal working models. Internal working models


influence the child’s feelings, thoughts, and expectations about relationships. Additionally,

internal working models guide the child’s instincts in times of stress or anxiety.

Internal Working Models

The internal working models are hardwired maps in a child’s brain (Bowlby, 1973).

These maps influence the way children respond to stress and anxiety. Also, the maps inform a

child’s view of interpersonal and intrapersonal relationships. These maps were forged based on

the quality of the child’s attachment with the mother figure. Bowlby (1973) differentiated two

internal working models. The internal or self-working model plays an important role in the

individual’s self-perception, leads to self-esteem, self-confidence, and the ability to trust and

depend on others for safety and comfort. The second internal working model, or other, has an

impact on the individual’s perception of others (e.g., peers) and defines the quality of

relationships children can build with others. As a result, individuals can exhibit a positive or

negative attachment style with others.

Attachment Styles

Bowlby’s student, Mary Ainsworth, created attachment styles (McLeod, 2008; Wallin,

2007). Ainsworth conducted the Strange Situation Experiment and linked scientific work to

attachment theory. Ainsworth’s scientific contributions included her classification of the

different styles of attachment, and the education of individuals about the long-term effects

attachment styles have on relationships during adulthood. Ainsworth revealed how one could

repair a negative attachment style and improve an individual’s life and relationships (Wallin,

2007). Ainsworth identified four different types of attachment styles, avoidant, ambivalent,

disorganized, and secure.


Avoidant Attachment

The avoidant attachment style refers to the quality of the relationship between infants and

caregivers during the crucial bonding phases (Wallin, 2007). Infants perceive the quality of the

bond with a caregiver as an indication of the emotional availability of the caregiver. The

avoidant attachment style is the result of the caregiver’s lack of emotional availability with the

infant. During the time of bonding (from birth through 36 months), the caregiver failed to

adequately respond to the emotional, physical, and psychological needs of the infant. This

failure to respond resulted in the infant’s rejection of the presence of the mother and elevated

levels of cortisol (i.e., the stress hormone) in the infant’s system (Wallin, 2007).

Due to a lack of affection, attention, and care, the infant learned that needs would not be

met despite many cries for attention. During the Strange Situation Experiment (McLeod, 2008;

Wallin, 2007), mothers of children with avoidant attachment failed to understand the signals

from the infants. In addition, the mothers did not exhibit signs of affection, love, empathy, and

displayed flat affect and appeared disconnected from the child.

As a result of an avoidant attachment style, children may grow to become adults who

repeat the same style of bonding with others (Poole Heller, 2015). For instance, adults with an

avoidant attachment style turn away from others, exhibit difficulties with emotional regulation,

experience stress with their partners, are unable to connect, and minimize the importance of close

relationships. With an avoidant attachment style, adults are often reluctant to rely on others, are

unable to trust others, and do not welcome connection with other adults unless they initiate the

interaction (Poole Heller, 2015). Commitment becomes an issue for adults with avoidant

attachment style because of the inability to trust (e.g., a caregiver did not reciprocate affection).

Frequently, adults with avoidant attachment style turn to animals to form close bonds (i.e., they


do not risk rejection). Adults with avoidant attachment style frequently find comfort in failed

relationships. That is, adults with avoidant attachment styles believe they do not deserve a

successful relationship and are better alone. According to Poole Heller (2015), life can be lonely

for adults with an avoidant attachment style because they long for intimacy and love, yet they are

unable to establish trust.

Ambivalent Attachment

Ainsworth, Blehar, Water, and Wall (1978) characterized the ambivalent attachment style

as infants who did not freely explore the environment, remained focused on the caregivers, and

felt great distress when mothers left the room. The mothers exhibited patterns of unpredictable

availability and did not encourage closeness with their infants; however, the mothers did not

reject the infants. This pattern of unpredictability is challenging for infants because they do not

know what to expect from their mothers and are unable to focus on their growth.

Adults with ambivalent attachment styles are prone to never-ending dissatisfaction,

experience a lack of motivation to solve problems, have difficulty establishing healthy

boundaries with peers, and fail to gauge the perceptions of others (Poole Heller, 2015). With an

ambivalent attachment style, adults live in perpetual fear of isolation, rejection, a lack of love,

and experience feelings of deep-seated anger for a partner’s self-confidence and autonomy

(Poole Heller, 2015).

Disorganized Attachment

Poole Heller (2015) suggested the disorganized attachment style was the most damaging

of the three dysfunctional attachment patterns. Wallin (2007) stated Mary Main discovered the

disorganized attachment style. This attachment style describes mothers who were thought to be

both harmful and dangerous to their infants. Plagued by mental illness, poverty, or addictions,


caregivers provided an environment both terrifying and abusive to their infants, endangering

their emotional being, and compromising their physical well-being (Wallin, 2007). Wallin

(2007) stated adults with a disorganized attachment style are in severe mental anguish. They feel

despair at every turn, partners tell them they are too controlling, and often expect the worst. It is

a challenge for adults with a disorganized attachment style to feel secure in a relationship and

may elect to dissociate from stressful situations. Flooded with over-reacting emotions, fearing

yet another abandonment, adults with this type of attachment style are prone to “freeze” or

“disconnect” and are easily confused or disoriented when stressed or afraid (Wallin, 2007).

Secure Attachment

Children with a secure attachment style have a very different view of relationships with

themselves and with others (Wallin, 2007). Wallin stated children with a secure attachment style

had mothers who were consistently sensitive to their needs and returned requests for closeness.

As a result, children feel safe, peaceful, and are fully present in relationships.

Adults who experienced secure attachment with their mothers are relaxed with their

partners (most of the time) and enjoy being by themselves (Poole Heller, 2015). Securely

attached adults trust and have faith that whatever issues they may encounter in the relationship,

they can solve those issues without stress. Poole Heller suggested securely attached adults are in

tune with their partners and want to nurture and grow the mutual bond. In addition, secure

attachment allows adults to feel comfortable expressing and receiving love, which leads to

greater intimacy. Finally, securely attached adults facilitate healthier relationships with their

children and other adults and repeat the same loving bond they had with their caregivers.

Attachment styles vary, therefore, without conscious re-wiring of the attachment style,

adults are at risk of repeating the negative patterns they developed as children (Poole Heller,


2015). In the earlier part of the twentieth century, adults were encouraged to disregard the needs

of their children out of fear they would spoil them (van Dijken, 1998). This mindset engendered

much trauma and neglect on children, created generations of ill-equipped adults, prevented the

ability to obtain fulfillment and joy within the self and relationships. Bowlby, Ainsworth, and

Main pioneered this new mindset and shed light on the emotional and psychological needs of

children. Other psychologists, theorists, and educators adopted and expanded the theory of

attachment (Eanes, 2016; Forbes & Post, 2006; Kohn, 2005; Popkin, 2014). For example,

several parenting styles and programs exist to educate and inform parenting; however, before

Bowlby, Alfred Adler’s Individual Psychology informed the way mental health professionals

understood the needs of children and adults (Bluvshtein, Bellangee, & Haugen, 2015).

Individual Psychology

Alfred Adler was born in 1870 and founded the theory of Individual Psychology

(Ansbacher & Ansbacher, 1964). Born into an upper-middle-class family in Vienna Austria,

Adler developed an interest for the socially disadvantaged, and as a physician, Adler focused on

public health and social issues (Manaster & Corsini, 1982). In 1902, Adler joined Freud and his

Psychological Wednesday Society (Leibin & Bluvhstein, 2015). Initially, Adler shared some of

Freud’s views; however, eager to seek his independence, Adler broke away from Freud in 1911

and created the Society for Individual Psychology to improve the social and health climate of

Vienna (Leibin & Bluvhstein, 2015). Facing political pressure, Adler immigrated to the United

States in 1934 where he continued to promote Individual Psychology and died in 1937 in

Aberdeen, Scotland (Leibin & Bluvshtein, 2015).

Adler believed individuals are equipped with the ability to change self-defeating

apperceptions (Ansbacher & Ansbacher, 1964). For instance, Adler emphasized the notion that


humans are not victims; they are in charge of their fate. Adler believed that people need to have

the courage to develop social interest, move toward others, and find fulfillment from service to

others.

According to Dreikurs (1989), Adler’s Individual Psychology centers around the

concepts of social interest, movement, goal-oriented behavior, holism, and subjectivity. Social

interest is the Adlerian assumption that humans cannot thrive without having a role in society

(Bluvshtein et al., 2015). Dreikurs (1989) stated,

Social interest is expressed subjectively in the consciousness of having something in

common with other people and of being one of them. People can develop their capacity

for cooperation only if they feel that, in spite of all external dissimilarities, they are not

fundamentally different from other people, if they feel belonging. A man’s ability to

cooperate may therefore be regarded as a measure of the development of his social

interest. (p. 5)

Similar to a compulsion to seek life, social interest drives humans to fulfill the three Adlerian life

tasks (Bluvshtein et al., 2015). That is, social interest refers to the ability to give more than one

receives and play an active role in the love, social, and work tasks of life. Adler posited that all

significant problems in life are social problems (Manaster & Corsini, 1982). For example, a

social issue relates to what one does, which in turn, affects others. The family is a social

institution, and how one operates within the family affects others. Similarly, society is a greater

social unit, and how one operates in society affects others (Manaster & Corsini, 1982).

Adler stated that being alive implies one is moving toward a better self (Dreikurs, 1989).

Movement is a core value of Individual Psychology because humans are active participants who

act and shape personal destiny. To change destiny, individuals must accept they are not victims


and that they are capable of change. According to Kern and Curlette (2015) movement is rooted

in courage, a dominant component of Individual Psychology.

Humans are social in nature, movement refers to an individual’s drive, and behavior is

purposeful (although individuals are not always aware of the purpose of all behavior). Adler

found that individuals are pulled by goals; therefore, to understand an individual’s behavior is to

understand an individual’s goals (Dreikurs, 1989). In addition to understanding an individual’s

goals, Adler believed that people must be viewed as physical beings with goals, thoughts,

feelings, and desires. Holism is a tenet of Individual Psychology rooted in the Adlerian

assumption that people are whole beings (Angioli & Kruger, 2015; Manaster & Corsini, 1982).

Private Logic

Perception or subjectivity is another tenet of Individual Psychology (Angioli & Kruger,

2015). Adler felt that perception played a major role in how individuals feel about events and

situations. For example, two siblings could experience similar trauma, such as the divorce of

their parents and a subsequent move to a different home, yet both siblings could feel different

about life. One sibling could feel that life is cruel and unfair, and the other sibling could

maintain a more optimistic view of life; therefore, this view affects private logic, or the

unconscious thoughts and perceptions about the self, life, and others. As Dreikurs stated (1989),

it is not what happens to people that matters, but rather how people feel about what happens to

them.

Adler posited that people choose to feel a certain way (Angioli & Kruger, 2015; Manaster

& Corsini, 1982). Thoughts and perceptions directly affect emotions and feelings and have an

impact on actions and behaviors, and people are unique with different personalities or lifestyles.

According to Adler, thoughts are the master of the individual (as cited in Dreikurs, 1989).


Emotions are the product of thoughts and are influenced by one’s lifestyle or the way a person

views life in general. By working on perceptions, and the meaning of those perceptions, an

Adlerian therapist would help clients achieve a better understanding of their behavior through an

understanding of the client’s lifestyle (Manaster & Corsini, 1982).

The discovery and understanding of a client’s lifestyle become therapeutic because it

provides a possibility to change maladaptive perceptions (Bluvshtein et al., 2015). According to

Adler, people want to belong, have purpose in life, and a place in society (as cited in Ansbacher

& Ansbacher, 1964). In a therapeutic environment, clients and therapists can examine

maladaptive perceptions and increase the potential for belonging in society (Bluvshtein et al.,

2015). The lifestyle is how individuals learn to relate to one another, and the lifestyle is directly

correlated to the style of attachment adopted in childhood (Bluvshtein et al., 2015). Bowlby

stated that attachment to a mother figure early in life is determinant of the quality of relationships

individuals have in adulthood (Crain, 2005). Attachment is a felt perception by young children

about the quality of the bond with the mothers. A secure attachment style between children and

mothers may yield a secure attachment when they reach adulthood. According to Crain (2005),

when the attachment style is avoidant, ambivalent, or disorganized, children develop perceptions,

or lifestyles, that affect their thoughts, emotions, and behaviors in childhood and adulthood.

Therefore, individuals are more likely to have social interest when they have securely bonded

with their mothers in early childhood.

Individual Psychology and Parenting

Adler aligned Individual Psychology with his views on parenting. According to Roger

Ballou (personal communication, 2015), people parent the way they view their role in society.

Based on Adlerian concepts, Ballou distinguished 10 separate laws of parenting:


1. The role of parenting is to prepare children for responsible and independent social

living.

2. Frequently, the parent’s behavior has an impact on the child’s behavior.

3. Parents cannot make children do anything; parents can only win a child’s

cooperation.

4. Parents must not do for children what children can do for themselves.

5. Children need encouragement like plants need water.

6. Children are inherently wired for social interest, and parents must foster social

interest.

7. Violent parents encourage children to be violent.

8. Parents must use natural consequences to teach their children.

9. Parents are not responsible for the child’s behavior but are responsible for their

behavior toward the child.

10. Having the courage to be imperfect is essential to reach our greatest human potential,

and parents must model this philosophy.

Goals of Misbehavior

Dreikurs actively participated in the support and advancement of Individual Psychology

and advanced Adler’s theory by creating the goals of misbehavior (Bluvshtein et al., 2015;

Manaster & Corsini, 1982). Dreikurs and Soltz (1964) posited that children share the same

drives as adults (i.e., behavior has a purpose and movement has a goal). Dreikurs and Soltz

(1964) suggested parents could help their children change behavior if they understand the reason

for the behavior (i.e., movement). For example, children strive to find significance and to

belong. Children attempt to find a place in the environment and within the family of origin.


Dreikurs and Soltz believed social interest is embedded in children and they are given great

powers of observation. Yet, children lack the skills to correctly interpret these observations,

which can lead to conflicts with parents. According to Dreikurs and Soltz (1964), children are

born with a task—to construct themselves. Three factors influence the child’s views of the world

while growing in his family: the family atmosphere, the family constellation, and the parenting

style.

The family atmosphere is representative of the relationship between the two parents

raising the child. Values shared by the parents, such as respect, cooperation, friendliness, humor,

courage, or determination create a climate that the child absorbs and replicates. Parents can have

a positive influence on a child’s views by modeling positive values. Rikuya and Toshiki (2017)

posited that there could be a direct correlation between marital discord and a lack of

development of social skills in preschool children. Rikuya and Toshiki found there was a high

level of correlation between marital discord, low level of parent and child connection, and a

child’s poor social skills. In addition, children with parents who experienced marital conflicts

exhibited lower levels of cooperation, self-control, and assertiveness.

Dreikurs and Soltz (1964) stated the family constellation referred to the Adlerian birth

order. The birth order influences the views of a child’s role within the family. For example, a

first-born child may identify early on with a primary, parental value such as academic

achievement. Seeking acceptance and inclusion in the family, the first-born may unconsciously

choose to excel in school to meet the approval of the parents and gain favor over the siblings.

The second child born into this same family may realize that academic competition with the first-

born may be fruitless and choose to find acceptance in athletic skills, which may be a secondary

value shared by the parents. A third child born into this family may have an unconscious


perception that competing academically or athletically is futile, so the child may choose to find

significance and belonging by becoming the peace-maker or the family clown. A fourth child,

born to this family may choose to find significance in a different manner. For example, if the

fourth child is discouraged, he or she may choose to give up on developing skills and behave like

a baby to incite caretaking from parents and siblings.

According to Allen, El-Beshti, and Guin (2014) and Dreikurs (1989), the parenting style

is another determining factor in the child’s perception of his or her family. Dreikurs and Soltz

(1964) encouraged parents to be willing to make mistakes and try again. According to Dreikurs

and Soltz, children misbehave when they are discouraged, and parents must foster a style of

constant encouragement toward themselves and their children.

Dreikurs and Soltz (1964) stated the observations of Alder and Dreikurs led to several

principles parents could include in parenting. First, parents must make a distinction between the

child and the child’s mistakes. Children lose courage when blame is placed on character instead

of choice. Dreikurs and Soltz observed that courage had two enemies: humiliation and

overprotection. Children are discouraged when they are humiliated for the choices they make

and by shielding them from all responsibility. Overprotecting children prevents an opportunity

to fail, and overprotection could be detrimental to development. Dreikurs and Soltz promoted

the Adlerian concept of encouragement and stated parents must encourage their children through

the unpleasant aspects of life (i.e., difficult choices that build strength and resilience). As a

result, children achieve independence and self-sufficiency, which leads to happiness and

provides a reason to exist. According to Dreikurs and Soltz, children find significance through

this achievement.


Additionally, Dreikurs and Soltz (1964) suggested parents ought to be prudent when

praising children. That is, praise encourages outer rewards instead of inner rewards. Instead of

praise, Dreikurs and Soltz recommended validation of the child’s efforts toward improvement

and independence. When children are discouraged and fail to find positive ways to satisfy their

need to belong, they use different types of misbehavior to reach their goals. Dreikurs identified

specific misbehaviors with four types of goals: Undue attention, search for power, seeking

revenge, and giving up (Dreikurs & Soltz, 1964).

Undue attention. When children demand undue attention, parents often feel irritated or

frustrated (Dreikurs & Soltz, 1964). For example, children may harass their mothers to get

attention while out grocery shopping and fail to see they could be participating in the situation by

helping the mother put groceries in the cart. When children demand constant attention from their

parents, they do so to feel significance and belonging (Dreikurs & Soltz, 1964). These children

fail to cooperate, choose not to participate, and attempt to seek self-realization through others.

Dreikurs posited that a child’s behavior ought to be situation centered, not self-centered. A

mother’s task is then to encourage the child to see that they can participate and be helpful. For

instance, children can be entrusted to gather a few items at the store and make this their “job” or

responsibility. Dreikurs stated that when children seek undue attention they could increase

misbehavior by demanding power (Dreikurs & Soltz, 1964).

Search for power. Children may choose to engage in a power struggle with their parents

when they unconsciously feel dominated by the parental authority (Dreikurs & Soltz, 1964).

Encouraged children cooperate with their parents, and discouraged children will seek to defeat

their parents. When children engage in a power struggle with their parents, they derive

satisfaction from eliciting anger and provoking a reaction. For example, children may choose


not to do weekend chores. Then, parents get angry and try to force the children to comply, and

intuitively, the children sense that the parents are more powerful than the child. The children

may try to gain power by forcing the parents to lose composure and manipulate the parents.

Instead of engaging in a power struggle, parents can recognize that their child’s misbehavior is

generating anger and resentment. By identifying feelings of anger, parents can disengage from

the conflict and enlist cooperation for the weekend chores.

Seeking revenge. When children are further denied in their efforts to belong, their

behavior can escalate to seeking revenge by hurting others and getting even (Allen et al., 2014;

Dreikurs & Soltz, 1964). When parents feel hurt and disconnected from their children, they may

be tempted to hurt the children. Dreikurs recommended parents avoid punishing the revenge-

seeking children and reconnect to courage by becoming friendly and help the children discover

their positive traits.

Giving up. The last goal of misbehavior is when children give up any attempt to find a

place in the family (Allen et al., 2014; Dreikurs & Soltz, 1964). In this scenario, children feel

that no matter what they try to do, they will fail at belonging to this family community and

discontinue all participation efforts. Children feel worthless and inadequate, and parents may

feel desperate to motivate their children. When parents and children feel despair, Dreikurs and

Soltz (1964) suggested parents reconnect with the children without expectations, have faith in

them, and seek a joyful relationship.

Dreikurs and Soltz (1964) stated children might experience one goal of misbehavior at a

time or all goals in no particular order. Dreikurs and Soltz advocated for parents to have faith

and be courageous in their efforts while raising families. Individual Psychology combines

several principles in parenting children, and Dreikurs promoted several rules to aid parents in


their tasks. Popkin’s (2014) Active Parenting Program incorporates the concepts presented by

Dreikurs and Soltz into a parenting curriculum.

Active Parenting

Cooperation and equality are rooted in the Individual Psychology parenting style

(Dreikurs & Soltz, 1964). Parents and children are considered equal in the right to respect and

the courage to cooperate within the family. According to Adler (1924), rewards and

punishments are useless in parenting because they are interpreted as a display of power and

authority over a child. Instead, parents are urged to use a firm, equalitarian parenting style

(Adler, 1924). In this style of parenting, parent’s use natural and logical consequences and allow

for the child’s mistakes to become the child’s teacher. For example, if a child wants to go

outside and play in the snow without snow boots and wears running shoes instead, the child’s

feet will get cold and wet. The logical consequence is wet and cold feet, and cold feet teach the

child to wear snow boots. Parents must not force or plead with the child to wear snow boots but

allow the child to experience the discomfort of cold and wet feet and decide if this is an

unpleasant physical sensation they do not want to repeat. If the parents force or cajole the child

into wearing the snow boots, they enter a power relationship and assert dominance over the child

(Dreikurs & Soltz, 1964). At this point, the child could feel powerless and incompetent. In

contrast, when a child makes a mistake, parents continuously encourage the child to try again

and remember to refrain from overprotection. Parents have faith in the child’s capabilities and

guide the child to independence. Above all, parents seek cooperation with, not dominance over,

the child (Dreikurs & Soltz, 1964).

Michael Popkin believed in maintaining a family atmosphere of cooperation, cordiality,

purpose, and a loving bond between parents and children (Popkin, 2014). It is this spirit of


mutual respect and cooperation that led to the creation of active parenting (Popkin, 2014). The

word active describes the actions of the parents and the movement motivated in the child. Active

parenting is heavily grounded in Adlerian parenting principles and psychology and teaches

parents how to understand the reasons behind the child’s behavior (i.e., to see past the

misbehavior). In the active parenting program, there are five key traits children must acquire and

cultivate in order to find fulfillment in society. Similar to Adler’s social interest, these traits are

responsibility, cooperation, respect, courage, and self-esteem. According to Popkin (2014), in

active parenting, parents actively promote and model these five qualities for their children.

Rasmussen (2014) established that responsibility, cooperation, and respect are the foundation of

parenting. Adler (1924) posited that courage is the cornerstone of Individual Psychology and

represents an individual’s willingness to seek purpose and elevate self-esteem. As in Individual

Psychology, active parenting is rooted in the belief that parents must guide their children through

the challenges of life and allow them to experience the disappointment of failure as well as the

rewards of self-improvement.

Active parenting promotes responsibility (Popkin, 2014). That is, the responsibility may

belong to the parents, children, or both. Armed with the FLAC Method (i.e., feelings, limits,

alternatives, and consequences) when parents contribute to a problem, they take ownership of the

problem and work at a solution. Using a disciplinary approach, parents target feelings, limits,

alternatives, and logical consequences. Parents are encouraged to validate the child’s feelings,

place limits, offer alternatives, and implement consequences. Popkin (2014) used the following

example: A young boy is angry about having to go to bed when he was not sleepy, and he kept

finding excuses to get out of bed. His father knew that his son was trying to initiate a power

struggle, so he calmed himself first and validated his son’s feelings by acknowledging that going


to bed on time and giving up fun is not always easy. The father placed limits by explaining that

his son’s body needs sleep to be healthy. The son protests by saying he is not tired, and the

father offered an alternative when he suggested that his son stay awake a half hour longer and

read a book in his bed. The consequence will be that the son will have to go to bed on time the

next night if he gets out of bed after the extra half hour or if he is late getting out of bed the next

morning.

Another principle of active parenting (Popkin, 2014) is parents and children meet once a

week for a family meeting. Family meetings offer the opportunity for families, parents, and

children to come together for twenty to sixty minutes and examine the plans or issues for the

upcoming week. Popkin (2014) proposed several topics such as compliments, plans, allowances,

family outings, and rules of the house. Depending on the age of the children, parents should

keep the family meetings short and convey a friendly and convivial atmosphere.

Combining elements of positive discipline, encouraging support, nurturing, confidence

and cooperation, active parenting finds its roots in Individual Psychology, and Popkin (2014)

adapted active parenting to modern society to help parents successfully guide, prepare, and

encourage children to lead a purposeful life in our current democratic society.

Attachment Theory and Parenting

In the last fifty years, society has seen a growing demand for parenting tools (Mullin,

2006). Parents are no longer satisfied with raising their children in an authoritarian way. Instead,

parents want to be part of their children’s lives, connect with them, and have a meaningful

impact not only on their children but also on their own lives. In the recent decades, several new

parenting methods have emerged such as (a) unconditional parenting, (b) beyond logic,

consequences, and control, and (c) positive parenting.


Unconditional Parenting

Unconditional parenting is a parenting method centered around the innovative idea of

loving children for who they are, and not what they do (Kohn, 2005). Alfie Kohn authored

several books on parenting and unorthodox educational views. Overall, Kohn challenges

practices such as the parental use of rewards, and the dominance of parents over children.

Additionally, Kohn does not support the typical educational system that uses grades and

homework.

Grounded in Individual Psychology, unconditional parenting places at its core the need

for parents to establish and maintain a relationship of cooperation and mutual respect with their

children (Kohn, 2005; Mullin, 2006). Kohn stressed that children have three fundamental needs:

to be autonomous, to belong, and to be competent (Kohn, 2005). Kohn asserted that a parent’s

task is to guide and support a child through growth toward a purposeful life (e.g., social interest).

Kohn (2005) stated parents should see things through the eyes of their child (e.g.,

experience their feelings and have empathy). Kohn discussed the need for parents to have

genuine conversations with their children and ask questions such as: What are your needs? How

can I help you grow? How do I sound when I argue with you? It is by creating a channel of

open communication that parents and children learn to trust one another and establish

cooperation (O’Reilly & Peterson, 2014). Kohn (2005) recommended parents cultivate a

genuine relationship with their children by apologizing when they make mistakes. Kohn

believed it was important for parents to model authenticity, listen more, and talk less. A

common question parents asked Kohn is what parents and children should do when children

refuse to cooperate. Kohn suggested asking: What can we do to solve this problem? For

example, children may refuse to set the table every night and argue over who sets the plates and


who sets the silverware. The parents can ask the children their opinions about what can parents

and children do to solve the present problem. The children may suggest they take every other

night, or perhaps each child has a week to set the dinner table. Kohn suggested the important

aspect of unconditional parenting is that parents elicit cooperation from their children; to do with

them and not to them.

According to Kohn (2015), parents ought to love their children for who they are and not

for what they do. Kohn introduced the idea that parents can reject negative behavior and still

accept the children. Kohn advocated for the discontinuation of rewards and punishments

because they breed self-centeredness and dishonesty. In his research, Kohn noticed that when

parents bribe children with rewards or praise, they lose interest in what they are being rewarded

for and perform the required task solely for the purpose of the incentive. To Kohn, praising

children is similar to telling them that they have pleased their parents by doing something.

Instead, Kohn proposed that parents foster an environment where their children are encouraged

to feel a sense of accomplishment and pride for improvement. For instance, parents move away

from a parenting style where parents do to their children, and instead, do with their children.

Similar to active parenting, unconditional parenting refers to parents assuming an active

role, a sense humility, and flexibility as they raise their children (Kohn, 2005; Rikuya & Toshiki,

2017). Similarly, Rikuya and Toshiki (2017) found that a positive family atmosphere increases a

child’s social skills. When family members are cooperative, respectful, and fair, the emphasis is

placed on the connection between the individuals, and children grow feeling included and loved.

Beyond Logic, Consequences, and Control

Bowlby’s research and discoveries on attachment theory asserted the need for children to

develop a secure attachment style with their mother figures (Bowlby, 1973). Children with


histories of disrupted attachments struggle with relationships, and when children have insecure

attachment styles, parents struggle to connect with their children.

Grounded in Bowlby’s attachment theory, Forbes and Post (2006) stated children

struggling with trauma are sensitive to chronic stress and have issues attaching securely to

parents. Forbes, a licensed social worker, author, and founder of the Beyond Consequences

Institute, has worked primarily with parents and children with difficult and severe behaviors.

Forbes and Post (2006) researched the effects of chronic stress on children who have experienced

trauma and found that in stressful situations, the brain’s emotional side (i.e., right brain) controls

the rational side (i.e., left brain). As a result, when children have experienced trauma, parents

may be faced with challenging behaviors.

Forbes and Post (2006) used a preventative approach that allows a bond to form between

parents and children. The bond will bridge the gap between a child’s trauma and the parent’s

ability to empathize. This approach is aimed at decreasing the child’s pain levels to gain self-

regulation. Forbes and Post (2006) also advocated for parents to make relationship building a

priority (e.g., engaging in fun activities).

Forbes and Post (2006) cited the need for parents to give up using parent-formulated

consequences. Instead, the authors proposed that parents use natural consequences. For

instance, naturally occurring consequences that have a negative impact after a child makes a

mistake or a choice. For example, children may make the choice to refuse to do their homework.

Parents may be tempted to give a parent-formulated consequence (e.g. force the children to stay

in all weekend to do homework). Instead, Forbes and Post (2006) proposed that parents allow

their children to experience the natural consequence (e.g. the teacher may give the child a low

grade or additional homework). The concept of natural consequences allows children to take


responsibility for their actions. Additionally, natural consequences prevent overwhelm and

dysregulation (Cox & Connelly, 1983; Forbes & Post, 2006). Forbes and Post believed that

along with giving up control over children, parents do not benefit from excessive emotional

involvement with their children’s choices. Therefore, decreased enmeshment has the potential to

reduce the child’s stress levels. When children avoid getting into a power struggle with parents,

cooperation exists between parents and children (Cox & Connelly, 1983; Forbes & Post, 2006).

Additionally, Forbes and Post (2006) believed that when parents have children with

challenging behaviors, eliminating or decreasing the factors that contribute to stress in the home

is key to connecting parents with children. Using the stress model, Forbes and Post explained

that because stress ignites challenging behaviors for children with self-regulation deficiencies,

parents must create a calm environment where children can safely express their emotions and

experience self-regulation.

Following Bowlby’s attachment theory, Forbes and Post promoted the notion that

children need to be securely attached to their caregivers and grow in a nurturing environment.

Forbes and Post (2006) and Ubba and Cahill (2014) recognized that a child’s environment has a

great impact on the ability to self-regulate, both at home and school; therefore, parents and

caregivers must be attentive to the child’s needs and be affectionate, patient, and nurturing.

According to Ruckstaetter, Sells, Newmeyer, and Zink (2017), parental behavior has a

large impact on a child’s ability to regulate emotions. For instance, if parents are attuned, loving,

and encouraging, children are less likely to develop behavior problems. If the parents have an

abrupt style, rushed, and devoid of empathy, the child may develop responses that seem out of

control and will develop an insecure attachment style. As a result, Forbes and Post (2006)

encouraged parents to be mindful of their emotional style and the impact it has on a child.


Positive Parenting

Rebecca Eanes (2016) created positive parenting and discussed the importance of using a

mindful approach with children, specifically with toddlers and preschoolers. Positive parenting

is centered around five precepts: attachment theory, respect, proactive parenting, empathetic

leadership, and positive parenting.

Precept one: attachment theory. Children are hardwired to connect with their mother

figures or caregivers (Bowlby, 1973). A child perceives the quality of the parental bond and

determines how secure relationships will be in the present and future. When the childhood

attachment is insecure, it impedes a child’s ability to relate positively to others and prevents

optimal development (Bowlby, 1973).

Precept two: respect. Respect is mutual between parents and children. Children are

respectful of their parents, but the parents are respectful of children as well. According to Eanes

(2016), corporal punishments and timeouts are considered disrespectful to children. Eanes stated

that parents could show respect for their children by positively encouraging and supporting them

and not trying to dominate or break their will.

Precept three: proactive parenting. Parents should continuously communicate with

children about positive behavior in everyday situations and not wait until issues occur. Parents

can be proactive by role-playing situations that may be new or stressful for their children. In

proactive parenting, parents equip their children with tools to manage emotions such as anger or

disappointment.

Precept four: empathetic leadership. Positive parenting demands that parents exercise

empathetic leadership, which is an attempt to understand the child’s emotions (Eanes, 2006).


Empathy allows parents to strengthen the bond with the child. Through empathy, the child feels

understood and connects with the parent.

Precept five: positive parenting. Eanes (2006) posited that typical parenting styles that

include punishments and time-outs harm the connection between parents and children. Instead,

Eanes (2016) recommended that parents put the emphasis on responsibility and allow children to

experience natural consequences. Also, Eanes encouraged parents to guide children through

ownership of their mistakes and acquiring skills to repair mistakes.

Discussion

According to Adler, from birth, humans strive to fulfill their need (i.e., goals) to belong,

feel safe, achieve significance, and have a meaningful purpose (as cited in Ansbacher &

Ansbacher, 1964). The behaviors individuals display to meet their goals are dictated by the

lifestyle or personality and molded by experiences since birth.

Attachment styles are created in infancy (Bowlby, 1999). Infants depend on their

caregivers or mother figures for biological and psychological needs, the response from the

caregiver is essential to infant development. When the caregivers or mother figures respond

favorably to the needs and actions of an infant, the infant learns to trust and attach to the

caregivers and view them as a secure base; therefore, the caregiver and the child form a secure

bond (Crain,2005). Securely attached children are poised for the remainder of childhood and can

safely adapt to times when they may be briefly separated from their caregivers. Securely

attached children understand that the separation is only temporary (Crain, 2005). According to

Wallin (2007), children with a secure attachment style had mothers who were consistently

sensitive to their needs and returned requests for closeness. As a result, children learned to feel

safe, trusting, and peaceful in relationships with others.


Adults who experienced secure attachment with their mothers have an optimistic view of

life and have faith that whatever problems they may encounter in the relationship can be solved

without stress (Poole Heller, 2015). In addition, secure attachment allows adults to feel

comfortable expressing and receiving love. Consequently, securely-attached adults repeat the

same patterns of attachment with their children, which leads to a greater sense of personal

fulfillment.

When the caregivers or mother figures do not respond favorably to the needs and actions

of the infants, the insecure attachment styles are developed and have immediate and long-lasting

consequences for infants. Insecure attachment styles include avoidant, ambivalent, or

disorganized (Wallin, 2007).

The avoidant attachment style refers to the quality of the relationship between infants and

caregivers during the crucial bonding phases (Wallin, 2007). Infants perceive the quality of the

bond with a caregiver as an indication of the emotional availability of the caregiver. The

avoidant attachment style is the result of the caregiver’s lack of emotional availability with the

infant. Children with an avoidant attachment style may grow to become adults who repeat the

same style of bonding with others (Poole Heller, 2015). For instance, adults with avoidant

attachment styles experience difficulties with emotion regulation and have stressful relationships

with their partners. According to Poole Heller (2015), life can be lonely for adults with an

avoidant attachment style because they long for intimacy and love, yet they are unable to trust

others.

According to Ainsworth et al. (1978), the ambivalent attachment style is the result of

mothers or caregivers who provide unpredictable responses to their infants and do not encourage

closeness with their infants. This pattern of unpredictability is challenging for infants because


they do not know what to expect from their mothers. With an ambivalent attachment style

created in infancy, adults experience great difficulty establishing healthy boundaries with peers

and fail to gauge the perceptions of others (Poole Heller, 2015). With an ambivalent attachment

style, adults live in isolation and experience great anger regarding a partner’s self-confidence and

autonomy.

According to Poole Heller (2015), the disorganized attachment style has the most

damaging effects of the three dysfunctional attachment styles. When caregivers or mother

figures respond to an infant’s needs with violence and abuse, the disorganized attachment style is

created. Often, the environment is permeated with drug use, untreated mental illness, poverty, or

addictions (Poole Heller, 2015). Caregivers provide an environment that is both terrifying and

abusive and compromise the physical well-being of the infant (Wallin, 2007). According to

Wallin (2007), adults with a disorganized attachment style feel great despair as they are

emotionally dysregulated, prone to “freeze,” or “disconnect” from others. Adults with

disorganized attachment style are easily confused or disoriented when stressed or afraid (Wallin,

2007).

According to Adler (as cited in Sperry, Carlson, Sauerheber, & Sperry, 2015), individuals

develop their lifestyle based on childhood experiences. From these experiences, children

develop a life goal, which becomes the lifestyle or the ability/inability to develop mastery, or

cope with, the tasks of life. This conviction, or lifestyle, is created and reinforced by the child’s

perception of a hostile, demanding, frustrating, punishing, or depriving environment at home and

at school. These apperceptions leave children feeling discouraged and fearful as they are unable

to engage in other efforts involving mastery and achievement (Poole Heller, 2015). To

compensate for these exaggerated feelings of insecurity and anxiety, children become self-


centered and uncooperative. Children and adults with dysfunctional lifestyles cannot cope with

the tasks of life (i.e., social interest) and are unable to fully enjoy relationships with others.

Dreikurs and Soltz (1964) posited that children share the same drive as adults in the sense

that behavior has a purpose and movement has a goal. Children attempt to find a place in their

environment (home and school). Dreikurs and Soltz believed that social interest is embedded in

children and that although children are good observers, they are not skilled at interpreting those

observations, which can give way to conflicts with parents. According to Dreikurs and Soltz

(1964), children commonly exhibit four goals of misbehavior when they lack the courage to meet

the demands of the life tasks (i.e., undue attention, power struggle, revenge, and giving up).

Dreikurs and Soltz (1964) suggested parents could have a more positive impact on a

child’s behavior if they improved the family atmosphere and the parenting style. The family

atmosphere constitutes the relationship between the two parents and is indicative of the values

shared by the parents, such as respect, cooperation, friendliness, humor, courage, or

determination. The family atmosphere creates a climate that the child absorbs and replicates, and

parents can have a positive influence on a child by modeling positive values.

As stated by Dreikurs and Soltz (1964), parents must foster a style of constant

encouragement toward themselves and their children by choosing a supportive parenting style.

Dreikurs and Soltz recommended that parents make a distinction between the child and the

child’s mistakes as children lose courage when the blame is placed on their character instead of a

choice they made. Dreikurs and Soltz observed that humiliation and overprotection are

counterproductive to courage. Children are discouraged when humiliated for the choices they

make and experience discouragement when parents shield them from all responsibility. When

parents are overprotecting, they deny their children the lessons that come from failing. A


different approach is to encourage (instead of praise) a child to tackle the unpleasant aspects of

life, gain insight through natural consequences, and develop mastery and significance through

achievement. Achieving independence and self-sufficiency leads to happiness and provides a

reason to exist (Dreikurs & Soltz, 1964).

From the basic need to create secure attachments and understand the needs of their

children, it appears as though parents have been searching for parenting approaches that would

enable them to have a long-lasting, positive impact on their children. In the recent years, several

parenting approaches have surfaced that appear to have a positive impact on families. These

parenting approaches are centered around Adlerian parenting principles and share several

precepts.

Implications for Practice

Active parenting, unconditional parenting, beyond logic, consequences, and control, and

positive parenting are modern methods of parenting that focus on attachment to improve the

parent/child connection and communication. All four parenting methods share several principles

or common factors (Eanes, 2016; Forbes & Post, 2006; Kohn, 2005; Popkin, 2014):

• Attachment,

• parent/child respect,

• cooperation/no control of the child,

• equal rights and responsibility,

• use of natural consequences and unconditional support,

• encouragement and humility, and

• shared optimism and love.


Although similarities exist among the four parenting methods, unique differences exist as

well (Eanes, 2016; Forbes & Post, 2006; Kohn, 2005; Popkin, 2014). Differences in the

approach to parenting include the following:

• Active parenting proposed the use of weekly family meetings to enhance cooperation and

dialogue.

• Unconditional parenting emphasized equalitarian relationships where parents and

children look for solutions and solve problems together.

• Beyond logic, consequences, and control advocated for parents to gain a deeper

understanding of the damages chronic stress can cause children and learn methods to

decrease stress and improve the family atmosphere.

• Positive parenting defined how important it is for parents to develop empathy for their

children. Additionally, a secure attachment style is considered paramount to a prosperous

parent/child connection.

The essential factors necessary to create secure attachment between parents and children

include a conscious focus from birth to develop and enhance a parenting style that reflects

attunement and empathy (Ubba, & Cahill, 2014). A secure bond between caregivers and

children is key because it has an impact on the ability to acquire and build healthy relationships.

Bowlby’s work (1999) revealed the inherent need for children to bond with their caregivers.

More recently, parenting experts and clinicians have advanced Bowlby’s theory with new

parenting styles that encourage parents to securely bond with their children. These new

parenting styles encourage parents, educators, and therapists to develop the ability to join with

children, to listen with empathy, and to love unconditionally. According to Voort, Juffer, and

Bakermans-Kranenburg (2014), numerous empirical studies confirmed the importance for


parents and caregivers to participate in creating a secure attachment with children because their

social and emotional development depends on this attachment.

According to Dash and Verma, (2017), emotional regulation is the ability to stay

emotionally regulated in stressful situations. Dash and Verna posited that there was a direct

correlation between children with high emotional regulation and parents who had high levels of

self-regulation. Parents and educators are encouraged to control their emotional responses in

stressful situations to promote connection and communication with children. Parents (as well as

educators) who have high levels of self-regulation are better equipped to model a calm aptitude

with children (Dash & Verma, (2017).

Perhaps, in the near future, mental health professionals will be able to implement two

separate, but equally important, measures. First, professionals could create a mandated

educational video demonstrating the impact of a secure attachment style on a child’s future. For

instance, it is common knowledge that when babies are born, parents are required to watch

videos about the shaken baby syndrome and how to bathe and care for an infant. An attachment

video designed to educate parents about the child’s physical and psychological needs could be

considered just as essential for the child’s future.

Second, parents could be educated to recognize and tend to symptoms associated with

stress (e.g., fatigue, depressive mood, and irritability). When the ability to recognize stress

becomes common practice, parents could learn to cultivate ways to decrease sensitivity to stress,

strengthen resistance to stress, and develop healthy family communication.

Recommendations for Future Research

There is much to gain through a deeper understanding of the connection between the

neurophysiological system (brain/body) and the interaction with the cognitive and logical


(psychological) of the brain (Forbes & Post, 2006). By studying the

neurophysiological/psychological connection, mental health professionals can recognize how the

connection affects behavior. According to Forbes and Post (2006), the brain is composed of the

left hemisphere (logical thinking) and the right hemisphere (emotional center). Children are

learning how to regulate their emotions throughout childhood and therefore are not fully able to

make logical or rational decisions. Ultimately, it is the “right brain” that determines how the

“left brain” will react. Under stressful situations, or when children are suffering from

dysregulation due to an insecure attachment style, the brain is highjacked by the emotional center

of the brain as it becomes flooded with powerful chemicals and renders logical or rational

thinking impossible (Forbes & Post, 2006).

In the light of recent shootings in schools across the United States, researchers can

investigate the possible connection between stress reduction practices and student safety.

Questions for further study could include: What is the impact of a potential inclusion of positive

parenting techniques within a school environment? If parents and educators learn to recognize

the signs of stress and/or emotional dysregulation, would school shootings decrease over time?

Finally, through the process of a longitudinal study, researchers could determine the

impact of the common factors in parenting styles grounded in attachment theory. Mental health

practitioners could use this information to establish a best practice protocol for parents

attempting to engage in positive, proactive parenting.

Conclusion

Children are born with different personality traits and emotional needs and respond in a

positive manner to certain styles of parenting (O’Reilly & Peterson, 2014). According to


Dreikurs (1964), parents are often discouraged by a child’s misbehaviors and are frustrated with

a lack of knowledge about how to remedy the situation.

Bowlby (1973) created the theory of attachment. Ainsworth and Main advanced the

theory of attachment by asserting that attachment styles are created in infancy as a result of the

primary caregiver’s response to the child (Crain, 2005). The attachment style developed in

infancy sets the stage for adult relationships and influences the individual’s world views

(Ansbacher & Ansbacher, 1964).

Dreikurs and Soltz (1964) proposed four goals of misbehavior and how parents could

positively guide children toward social interest, and as a result, reduce the misbehaviors.

Modern parenting styles have emerged in response to the demand for parenting methods that can

meet the needs of children and enhance the parent/child communication, and ultimately, the

parent/child bond. Common factors in modern parenting methods such as active parenting,

unconditional parenting, beyond logic, consequences, and control, and positive parenting (Eanes,

2016; Forbes & Post, 2006; Kohn, 2005; Popkin, 2014) are centered around cooperation, respect,

independence, secure attachment styles, and emotional regulation.

Mental health professionals can incorporate common factors from parenting methods

grounded in attachment theory (Bowlby, 1999). Therapists could use the identified common

factors as therapeutic tools to guide therapeutic interventions with children and families.

Through the lens of Individual Psychology (Ansbacher & Ansbacher, 1964), active parenting

(Popkin, 2014), unconditional parenting (Eanes, 2016), beyond logic, consequences, and control

(Forbes & Post, 2006), and unconditional parenting (Kohn, 2005) all methods promote

encouragement, independence, and self-sufficiency, which leads positive to adult relationships

and a positive lifestyle.


References

Adler. A. (1924). The practice and theory of Individual Psychology. New York, NY: Routledge.

Ainsworth, M. D., Blehar, M., Waters, E. & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A

psychological study of the strange situation. Oxford, UK: Erlbaum.

Ansbacher, H. L., & Ansbacher R. R. (Eds.). (1964). The Individual Psychology of Alfred Adler.

New York, NY: Harper Perennial.

Allen, K., El-Beshti, R., & Guin, A. (2014). An integrative Adlerian approach to creating a teen

parenting program. The Journal of Psychology, 70(1), 6-20.

Angioli, A., & Kruger, P. (2015). A genealogy of ideas in Alfred Adler’s psychology. The

Journal of Psychology, 71(3), 236-252.

Bluvshtein, M., Bellangee, S., & Haugen, D. (2015). Adler’s unlimited universe. The Journal of

Psychology, 41(2), 328-337.

Bowlby, J. (1951). Maternal care and mental health. Prepared for the World Health

Organization. Geneva.

Bowlby, J. (1973). Separation: Anxiety & anger attachment & loss (2nd ed., Vol. 1). London,

UK: Hogarth Press.

Bowlby, J. (1999). Attachment: Attachment and loss (2nd ed., Vol. 1). New York, NY: Basic

Books.

Cox, J. G., & Connolly, S. G. (1983). Adlerian parenting skills and the parents of hearing

impaired children. Individual Psychology: Journal of Adlerian theory, Research &

Practice, 39(4), 431-435.

Crain, W. (2005). Theories of development: Concepts and applications (5th ed.). Upper Saddle

River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.


Dash, S. S. & Verma, S. K. (2017). A psycho-social study on the role of parenting and emotional

regulation on intergenerational support: A youth perspective. Indian Journal of Positive

Psychology, 7(4), 591-597.

Dreikurs, R. & Soltz, V. (1964). Children: The challenge. New York, NY: Hawthorn Books.

Dreikurs, R. (1989). Fundamentals of Adlerian psychology. Chicago, IL: Alfred Adler Institute.

Eanes, R. (2016). Positive parenting: An essential guide. New York, NY: TarcherPerigee.

Forbes, H.T., & Post, B., B. (2006). Beyond consequences, logic, and control: A love-based

approach to helping attachment-challenged children with severe behaviors. Boulder, CO:

Beyond Consequences Institute.

Kern, R. M., & Curlette, W. L. (2015). The Individual Psychology perspective: Positive

psychology, Freud and Adler in Paris, philosophy, neuroticism, and classroom

techniques. The Journal of Individual Psychology, 71(4), 359-361.

Kohn, A. (2005). Unconditional parenting. New York, NY: Atria Books.

Leibin, V., & Bluvshtein, M. (2015). Paris: Freud and Adler. The Journal of Individual

Psychology, 71(4), 399-414.

Manaster, G. J., & Corsini, R. J. (1982). Individual Psychology: Theory and practice. Chicago,

IL: Adler School of Professional Psychology.

Mayo Clinic. (2012). Your baby’s first year. Boston, MA: Da Capo Press.

McLeod, S. A. (2008). Mary Ainsworth: Attachment styles. Retrieved from

http://www.simplypsychology.org/mary-ainsworth.html

Mullin, A. (2006). Parents and children: An alternative to selfless and unconditional love.

Hypatia, 21(1), 181-200.


O’Reilly, J., & Peterson, C. C. (2014). Theory of mind at home: Lining authoritative and

authoritarian parenting styles to children’s social understanding. Early Child

Development and Care, 184(12), 1934-1947.

Pool Heller, D. (2015). Know your attachment style mini questionnaire. Retrieved from

https://dianepooleheller.com

Popkin, M. H. (2014). Active parenting: 30 years of video-based parent education. The Journal

of Psychology, 70(2), 166-176.

Rasmussen, P. R. (2014). The task, challenges, and obstacles of parenting. The Journal of

Psychology, 70(2), 90-113.

Rikuya, H. & Toshiki, K. (2017). Marital relationship, parenting practices, and social skills

development in preschool children. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry & Mental Health

11, 1-8.

Ruckstaetter, J., Sells, J., Newmeyer, M. D., Zink, D. (2017). Parental apologies, empathy,

shame, guilt, and attachment: A path analysis. Journal of Counseling & Development

95(4), 389-400.

Siegel, D. J. (1999). The developing mind: How relationships and the brain interact to shape

who we are. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Sperry, L., Carlson, J., Sauerheber, J. D., & Sperry, J. (2015). Psychopathology and

Psychotherapy: DSM-5 diagnosis, case conceptualization, and treatment (3rd ed.). New

York, NY: Routledge.

Ubba, N. & Cahill, S. (2014). Building secure attachment for primary school children: A mixed

methods study. Educational Psychology in Practice 30(3), 272-292.


Van Dijken, S. (1998). John Bowlby: His early life: A bibliographical journey into the roots of

attachment theory. London, UK: Free Association Books.

Voort, A., Juffer, F., & Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (2014). Sensitive parenting is the

foundation for secure attachment relationships and positive social-emotional development

of children. Journal of Children’s Services 9 (2), 165-176.

Wallin, D. J. (2007). Attachment in psychotherapy. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Documents

Running head: PARENTING AND INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGY 1 ... Greer MP 2018.pdf · PARENTING AND INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGY 3 Abstract Children are born with different personality traits and