Attachment Theory In Social Work

The conversation among social work professionals, until recently, has largely regarded nature’s effect on the human disposition as opposed to the nurturing one receives throughout the life cycle. Ecological systems theory states that a person is largely reliant on their environment. The two are so intricately woven that it is nearly impossible to separate the two in an effort to assign responsibility for human characteristics. In basic terms, the environment affects the person just as significantly as the person affects the environment. Concepts which contributed to the development of this theory have been recognized since the conception of the social work profession in the late 1800’s. (Rothery, 2007). Moreover, Bowlby’s Attachment Theory, lends relevance to the effect of loss or detachment of caregivers on young children as it pertains to their psychological development. (Stalker, 2007). These two theories have provided an outlet for investigating
nurture argument, also sometimes referred to as the nativist–empiricist debate (Spencer et. al., 2009), hinges on the belief that the two concepts are distinct from one another. In theory, a person’s nature is determined by a very rigid and unchanging genetic code. Additionally, the “nurture” perspective holds that person’s environment is ever-shifting and can alter a person’s belief system, morals, and values. This theory, however, is flawed based on new research which lends credibility to an evolving concept which is the epigenome. (Watters, 2006). Resting between the static set of genes that a person is born with and the dynamic environment in which a person interacts, is the epigenome. It is a highly intricate and interactive component which blurs the line between “nature” and “nurture” arguments. Discussing the human condition cannot be reduced to a position of nature or nurture. Human growth and development is largely reliant on both and the discovery and study of the epigenome supports