Sensitive mothering: A theoretical overview Although the nature vs. nurture controversy rages on, regarding the degree to which nurturing can influence childhood development, research does suggest that a particular parenting style is preferred: so-called 'sensitive mothering.' Sensitive mothering is defined as being "highly responsive and available" to a child's needs (Spinrad & Sifter 2011). Mothers who could pick up on their child's nonverbal signals "were more likely to have infants who developed more harmonious relationships with their mothers" (Spinrad & Sifter 2011). These children were also more likely to have positive social relationships with others. While the theory of sensitive mothering began in an era when women were assumed to be the primary caregivers of children, this childhood development theory can be helpful for teachers and other primary caregivers to study, as well as parents of both genders. The style is particularly congruent with the principles of Montessori education.

Attachment theory: Bowlby and Ainsworth

Childhood development theorist John Bowlby conducted pioneering research in the field of infant development and separation anxiety. He was the first to apply Freudian theories to biological research regarding infant development. "Bowlby proposed that 1-2-month-olds' unmistakable attachment behavior is made up of a number of component instinctual responses that have the function of binding the infant to the mother and the mother to the infant" (Bretherton 1992). Bowlby was the first to coin the phrase 'separation anxiety' and also to challenge Freud's notion of over-mothering as the primary source of neurosis. In fact, Bowlby countered that coldness and a failure to acknowledge the child's needs with supportive responses was more psychologically damaging in the long-term for the infant. The child's desire to be with the mother was normal, developmentally speaking, as was the mother's desire to comfort the child.

Three phases of separation response were observed to be manifested when the child was left by a parent, that of a protest (crying, and evident anxiety), despair (a sense of hopelessness regarding the fact that the mother world return), and then, upon the mother's return, denial or detachment as a defense mechanism. The infant communicated to the mother...

Ainsworth's research provided evidence as to what can occur when children's expressed needs, including the need for a parent, are ignored. "Mothers who…rated as highly sensitive, in contrast to other mothers who seemed imperceptive of the nuances of infant behavior" seemed to have infants who were more resilient and experienced less distress (Bretherton 1992). "Three infant attachment patterns were observed: Securely attached infants cried little and seemed content to explore in the presence of their mothers; insecurely attached infants cried frequently, even when held by their mothers, and explored little; and not-yet attached infants manifested no differential behavior to their mothers" (Bretherton 1992).
Ainsworth stated that the first category of child had experienced a secure enough attachment to their caregivers -- enough to interact with strangers comfortably. The second category of child, the anxious-resistant, insecure attached child "was anxious among strangers even when the caregiver is present and becomes distraught if the caregiver leaves. Instead of being happy when the trusted caregiver returns, the child is resentful and resistant to attention" (Mary Ainsworth: Noteworthy psychologist, 2010, Helping psychology). The third, disengaged "anxious-avoidant insecure attachment" child is unresponsive emotionally to both strangers and the parent (Mary Ainsworth: Noteworthy psychologist, 2010, Helping psychology). The second and third children's needs had not been acknowledged appropriately by their parents, and thus manifested anxiety or indifference to their parents and around others.

Bowlby and Ainsworth's theories are also supported by the work of developmental psychologist Erik Erikson. Erikson put forth his theory of developmental stages as a counterweight to what he saw as Freud's over-emphasis on sexual development. Rather than stressing the oedipal conflict and its role in determining human personality, Erickson instead defined the essential conflict of childhood as one of trust vs. mistrust. The child "needs maximum comfort…