What Makes IFS Different From Attachment Therapy
Internal Family Systems Therapy and Attachment Therapy
Modern therapy has evolved to include a variety of approaches that allow the care-seeker the choice of modalities that are right for them based on their unique needs, preferences, and lifestyles. In addition to Internal Family Systems, Attachment Theory is one of the most common ways in which we can understand our psychological processes and emotions and a perspective from which we can provide therapeutic interventions designed to improve our relationships with ourselves and others.
What Is Attachment Theory?
Developed by John Bowlby, Attachment Theory focuses on the relationships we have with others, particularly our early childhood caregivers and proposes that early interactions with caregivers set the foundation of an individual’s worldview, belief systems, and develops into the internal scripts that we rely on to guide our relationships later in life. For proper child development, children need to form a secure attachment with at least one caregiver.
Of course, it's not as simple as just ‘being there” for a child. Despite parents’ and caregivers' best intentions, their actions can result in some attachment injury. For example, parents who wish to instill qualities of self-reliance and independence may choose the ‘cry it out’ method with their babies and young children. Others may wish to demonstrate to their child that they are loved and can be confidently relied upon to provide for their needs, namely emotional regulation from an external force so that they can sleep.
In the first example, the child may indeed learn to be self-sufficient, but also that those caregivers cannot be trusted to always fulfil their needs. In contrast, as demonstrated by the second scenario, the child may form a strong bond with their caregiver and enjoy warm feelings of comfort, but they may also begin to think they are incapable of self-regulation and that they are unsafe in the world without their caregiver. As this demonstrates, events that affect attachment need not necessarily be caused by traumatic events. That said, for those who were exposed to negligence, abuse, and/or trauma, the resulting attachment injury can have profound lifelong effects.
“The propensity to make strong emotional bonds to particular individuals [is] a basic component of human nature.”
What Are Attachment Styles?
While each person’s experiences and the way they later manifest themselves in their relationships and worldview is different, there are clear themes that emerge based on common thoughts, behaviours, and interactions with caregivers. These sets of characteristics can be organized into “Attachment Styles”.
There are 5 major Attachment Styles with the possibility of overlap:
Secure
Anxious
Avoidant
Ambivalent
Disorganized
Secure
A securely attached individual believes that the world is a relatively safe place and that they are capable and lovable. They exhibit characteristics of confidence and calmness and can communicate their needs and be receptive to the needs of others. Rarely do they demonstrate insecurity, jealousy, or a feeling of unworthiness.
Anxious
Individuals with anxious attachment styles often struggle with feelings of insecurity and unworthiness. They desire close relationships but fear that they will be abandoned, rejected, or that their needs will not be met. They are often quick to draw conclusions and frequently experience distress over the thought that any minor issue could severely damage or ruin their relationships. Those who experience neglect can become anxiously attached.
Avoidant
An avoidant individual may view relationships as threats to their independence. They may desire intimacy and close relationships, but ultimately believe that others are incapable or unwilling to meet their needs. Even when they are in relationships, they may experience feelings of being alone. It is not uncommon for folks with avoidant attachment to be preoccupied with developing ‘escape plans’ for when they will need to survive on their own. They may push people away or preemptively isolate themselves as self-preservation. Children who are subjected to abuse commonly develop an avoidant attachment
Ambivalent
Individuals with ambivalent attachment styles often can be described as ‘fawners’ or ‘people-pleasers’ who will silence or mould their own needs to meet the needs of others. They view others as capable of providing for their needs but have a deep fear that if they really got to know them, they would be abandoned. As such, they often will hide any negative emotions to try to prevent this potential outcome. As they become attached to their own needs, they begin to experience anxiety over where they stand in their relationships. They wonder how the person really feels about them and take further measures (like people-pleasing) to mitigate the risk of their fears coming to fruition.
Disorganized
Disorganized attachment features characteristics of both insecure and avoidant attachment styles. They desire to have close, intimate relationships but struggle to trust their relationship and may be preoccupied with thoughts that they don’t deserve love and affection. Generally, they have a fairly negative view of themselves and others, viewing the world as a dangerous place and themselves as unworthy and unlovable. They may even be suspicious of their partner’s intentions, as they consider themselves so unworthy of love that the person must have ulterior motives. They often present paradoxically, as they oscillate between an intense need for intimacy and a desire for isolation. This attachment style is seen in Individuals whose parents failed to consistently provide adequate emotional support. It is also common in those who experienced abuse at the hands of a caregiver, whom they otherwise have warm feelings towards, which is not uncommon when the abuser is a parent.
While our attachment styles are formed in early childhood, they are not necessarily permanent. Depending on experience, these styles can be altered in either positive or negative ways at any point in an individual's life.
What Are The Similarities and Differences between Attachment Theory and Internal Family Systems?
There are several key differences between Attachment Theory and Internal Family Systems as well as notable similarities. While each theory places the concept of the family at its foundation, Attachment Theory focuses on the external caregiving family of the individual whereas Internal Family Systems theory focuses on the familial relationships between the parts and how they interact with the Self. The individual's relationship with their Self in IFS is akin to the individual's relationship to their caregiver in Attachment Theory. The Self can be regarded as the internal parent who is the leader and primary organizing unit of the parts. IFS takes the position that the Self is the central unit, whereas, in Attachment Theory, it is externally focused on relationships.
“Our parts can sometimes be disruptive or harmful, but once they’re unburdened, they return to their essential goodness. When we learn to love all our parts, we can learn to love all people―and that will contribute to healing the world.”
One can also see parallels in the behaviours associated with each attachment style which can be viewed through the lens of parts and Self. For those whose caregivers failed to provide care that consistently met their needs, they may go on to develop an anxious attachment style where they exhibit a lack of confidence, feelings of unworthiness, and are acutely aware of any real or perceived threats to their relationships. These actions can be interpreted using the IFS model to be understood as protectors. These behaviours are manifestations of protector parts who have taken on roles intended to shield the individual from the pain that they felt as a young child whose needs went unfulfilled.
Furthermore, the perspective towards healing that each theory takes is markedly different. The goal of IFS therapy is to access the Self by looking inward with self-compassion and welcoming respect for all parts, even the unpleasant ones, to rebalance systems via role reassignment and the unburdening exiles. This approach promotes Self-led healing so that any subsequent damage to our parts can be rectified, empowering the individuals to harness their energies to repair their wounded parts. In this perspective, the therapist serves as a guide, helping the individual navigate their internal systems, and access their Selves and their innate ability to self-heal.
This is in contrast with the treatment goals and methodology of Attachment Theory, which focuses on limiting and mitigating the negative effects of the early attachment experiences so that future relationships can enjoy a more secure type of attachment. In this perspective, the therapist becomes a new external relationship for the individual who can affect them and their relationships by teaching the individual new ways in which it can ‘re-parent’ itself with the nurturing love and compassion that they needed as a child but were denied. It likewise provides practical skills to help the individual acknowledge when one’s attachment experience is affecting them and how to remediate this. The therapist is the healer In Attachment therapy. In Internal Family Systems, they are the facilitator to help clients access their healer within.