Traditional attachment, drawing on these and other studies, traditional attachment theory has started to show its weaknesses. By assessing how parents raised their children and comparing this to a predefined “ideal,” Ainsworth and Bowlby used evaluative language such as “competence” and “responsiveness,” effectively passing judgment on parents who deviated from a norm that — conveniently — reflected Western parenting styles. As the theory evolved, modern parents have faced even greater pressure to be constantly attentive and perfectly responsive.

It’s also telling that Bowlby concentrated on the bond between mother and child, as it aligned neatly with his own beliefs about how mothers should act. But how much do parents truly matter? To explore this, I spoke with American anthropologists Sarah and Robert LeVine, authors of Do Parents Matter? (2016), who have studied the question in depth.

Read more about Budget friendly car

Read more about Brazilian parents

In the 1980s, the LeVines were in Nigeria, researching communities in the southern Sahara region. Sarah recalls being startled by the way mothers interacted with their babies — particularly their habit of avoiding direct eye contact with their own infants. Coming from a background in psychology and attachment theory, she initially assumed these children might develop autism. But, as it turned out, they grew up perfectly well.

“Parents matter, but only to a certain extent,” she says. The importance of cultural context becomes clear when looking at immigrant families. Upon moving to a new country, many parents find it increasingly difficult to maintain their familiar parenting practices. The LeVines saw this contrast firsthand when one of their daughters stayed in the US while the other relocated to Berlin. Their two grandchildren, raised in different cultures, grew into notably different personalities. The granddaughter in the US is confident and highly aware of herself as an individual, while the one in Germany is more reserved, reflecting local expectations for children to be polite and composed — though, as Robert notes, they also seem “younger for their age.”

Of course, attachment still plays a vital role. For example, children separated from their parents at the US border often experience severe trauma, sometimes leaving lifelong scars. Even reunification may require years of therapy to restore emotional well-being.

However, this is quite different from today’s trend of “intensive parenting,” which places the entire burden for a child’s success or failure on the parents. Such demands often leave parents drained, uncertain, and unhappy — and may not ultimately benefit the children.

Interestingly, research on chimpanzees has revealed distinct cultural traditions among groups, such as different ways of cracking nuts and passing those techniques to their young. If chimps can have such cultural variety, why shouldn’t humans embrace it too? As a mother blending multiple cultures, languages, and traditions within my own family, I should have trusted my instincts rather than experts insisting I was wrong for not wanting to “wear” my babies constantly. I’ve chosen my own approach, and the kids are thriving.

Building on these and other findings, traditional attachment theory has begun to reveal its limitations. By examining how parents brought up their children and comparing this to a set “ideal,” Ainsworth and Bowlby relied on terms like “competence” and “responsiveness,” which implicitly judged parents who strayed from a model that — not coincidentally — mirrored Western parenting norms. As the theory developed, modern parents have been put under even greater pressure to remain constantly attentive and flawlessly responsive.

It’s also worth noting that Bowlby placed his focus on the mother–child relationship, which neatly aligned with his personal beliefs about maternal roles. But to what extent do parents actually influence outcomes? To investigate this, I spoke with American anthropologists Sarah and Robert LeVine, authors of Do Parents Matter? (2016), who have examined this topic in depth.

In the 1980s, the LeVines conducted research in Nigeria, studying communities in the southern Sahara. Sarah recalls being struck by how mothers related to their babies — especially their tendency to avoid direct eye contact. With her background in psychology and attachment theory, she initially suspected these children might be at risk of autism. Yet they went on to develop normally.

“Parents make a difference, but only up to a point,” Sarah explains. Cultural context becomes particularly evident in immigrant families. When parents relocate to another country, they often find it hard to maintain their customary parenting styles. The LeVines saw this clearly when one of their daughters remained in the United States Traditional attachment while the other moved to Berlin. Their two grandchildren, raised in these distinct cultural settings, developed noticeably different traits. The granddaughter in the US is self-assured and strongly aware of her individuality, while the one in Germany is more reserved, reflecting local norms that value politeness and composure — although, as Robert observes, German children may also appear “younger for their age.”

That said, attachment still holds significant importance. For instance, children separated from their parents at the US border frequently suffer profound trauma, which can leave lasting effects. Even when reunited, they may need years of therapy to regain emotional stability.

This, however, is not the same as the modern phenomenon of “intensive parenting,” which assigns total responsibility for a child’s achievements or failures to the parents. Such expectations often leave parents exhausted, doubtful, and unhappy — and may not actually serve the children’s best interests.

Interestingly, studies of chimpanzees have uncovered distinct cultural behaviors between groups, such as varying methods for cracking nuts and teaching these skills to their young. If chimpanzees can maintain such cultural diversity, why shouldn’t humans celebrate it as well? As a mother raising children in a blend of cultures, languages, and traditions, I realize I should have trusted my own instincts instead of following experts who told me I was wrong for not wanting to “wear” my babies all the time. I’ve chosen my own path, and my children are thriving.

My child is a mini-version of me for a reason. Most of her behavior and communication skills come from living with me. If I’m sarcastic, she picks that up. If I’m unkind to her or others, she learns that too. So when I choose to respond and speak in a respectful, calm, and encouraging way, that becomes her main example of how to act.

Will that stop every meltdown? Not at all—she’s still a kid, and her brain is still developing (as we covered in the Traditional attachment class). But I can focus on being a stronger role model for her as she absorbs everything during these growing years.

As I mentioned earlier, the parenting course I took was held in a group format over Zoom. They even call it a “Parenting Cloup” — a blend of “class” and “group”!

Before that, most of the online courses I’d taken were self-paced, meaning I worked through them on my own schedule.

That kind of setup has always seemed more flexible and more private for a sensitive topic like Traditional attachment. But I discovered that the weekly group discussions offered three big advantages:

1. Having a set time on the calendar meant I actually showed up and completed it. All those self-paced courses? They’re just sitting in my account collecting virtual cobwebs because I stopped making time for them. I actually finished this one!
2. Discussing challenging parenting situations with other parents was incredibly helpful. Not venting or trading complaints like I used to at playdates, but genuinely working together to solve problems, grow, and improve.
3. Hearing people share in real time kept me far more focused and committed than watching pre-recorded lessons. With self-paced courses, I’m easily tempted to multitask and end up missing important points.
4. A big focus of this course was the different ages and stages children experience.
5. When I was pregnant and during my kids’ early months, I relied on the “What to Expect” books, but I stopped reading them once they were past infancy.
6. The truth is, people go through ages and stages throughout their entire lives—it doesn’t stop after the so-called terrible twos. It was eye-opening to learn that so many of the challenges we’ve faced are actually typical and part of normal developmental patterns.
7. Hearing that lying or throwing tantrums is simply part of a child’s growth might sound like common sense — something we all assume.
8. But for me, realizing that these behaviors are actually developmentally normal helped me slow down and respond with more patience when they came up. It gave me a mental “warning light” — like, okay, this is expected, and here’s how we’ll respond.
9. It’s a bit like baseball. The opposing team is going to connect with the ball sometimes. It might be a short bunt, or a towering pop fly. If you weren’t expecting it and haven’t prepared your response, your odds of making the play are much lower. That’s why athletes rehearse those moments again and again.
10. In the same way, if you want to stay ahead — or even just get up to speed — understanding child development stages is like having a parenting game plan. You can walk through your strategies before the “game” begins.