"No Such Thing as a Baby": Attachment and Physiology

In 1960, the British pediatrician and psychoanalyst D. W. Winnicott wrote, “There’s no such thing as a baby.” He clarified: “There is a baby and someone.” Then he added, “Meaning of course that whenever one finds an infant one finds maternal care and without maternal care there would be no infant.”

It seems obvious to anyone who has observed an infant or a pup (or any mammalian life form) that the baby would die if left alone for very long. It would be unable to find food. It would be unable to find shelter. It would be at the mercy of predators. But there is another basic factor. A baby without "someone" would be unable to regulate its core physiology. This "someone" has been identified as infant/pup’s "hidden regulator."

And, so, Winnicott was right—“There is no such thing as a baby.” A baby does not survive very long without someone.

Reptiles

This is not a problem that evolution was concerned with from the beginning. Reptiles do just fine without "someone." When hatched, turtles make their way through the shell and the sand, to find daylight, to find a river, a lake, or the sea. Most are eaten before their first swim. But that’s not the issue. Evolution based the survival of reptiles on their numbers. Because of their numbers, only a few hatchlings need to survive for the species to survive. Neither maternal protection nor care really mattered. And, so, neither maternal protection nor care were provided. Newborn reptiles are physiologically able to self-regulate. They are able to care for themselves. The presence of "someone" would be redundant.

And, thus, “There is a baby and someone,” does not apply to reptiles. It only applied when mammals, and then birds, came into existence some 200 million years ago. It was only then that “someone” had to be found.

And if this "someone" is so critical to survival, how does the neonate find her? It depends on the species. Ducks find "someone" with sight—by imprinting. And, so, the Austrian psychologist Konrad Lorenz positioned himself in front of eggs about to open so that he would be the first moving thing the ducklings saw as they pecked through the shell.

Rat pups—deaf and blind at birth—find someone by smell. Rat pups attach to the smell of the dam. Her smell draws them to her body for warmth. Her smell attracts them to her teats for succor. Her smell calms them. Her smell dampens their response to stress. Her smell reduces her pups’ level of corticosterone (the pup’s principal stress hormone). Her smell is an indication that they are safe. Her smell is an indication not to fear.

Fear Learning

In all mammals, fear learning occurs in a collection of neurons in the brain’s temporal lobe called the amygdala. In rat pups, the amygdala is not functional until 10 days of age. Thus, fear learning does not occur until the pups reach day 10. It was as if evolution decided it best not to allow the pup to fear anything that related to the nest or the dam. It was as if only safety should be "smelled’" and should be found.

And then the tenth day.

On the tenth day, the amygdala comes into play. On the tenth day, a pup is biologically able to sense, to smell, to learn, and to fear. On the tenth day, the biology of safety is tempered by fear.

But then something else happens. Something else comes back into play. Just as the dam had been able to generate a sense of safety in the newborn, her presence is able to quiet the fear in her 10-day-old pup. Just as she had before, she is still able to block the rise of corticosterone. So, while on the tenth day one element of fear (the amygdala) has come into play, another element of fear (the rise of corticosterone) is still in the control of the dam. For the next five days of the pup’s life, she controls the corticosterone levels in her pup—her presence acts as a "social buffer." If she is there, corticosterone levels stay low, and the pup continues to feel safe. If she is gone, levels fluctuate and the pup reacts according to its perceived sense of threat.

It is as if evolution wanted to make sure that until it actually left the nest and started life on its own, the pup appreciated how much it owed to "someone." It is as if evolution decided that everything the pup learned, until it was actually able to take care of itself, should draw it toward that "someone." It was as if everything the pup learned until that day was that it was safe. It was as if everything the pup learned until that day, was that "someone" was not to be feared. It was as if everything the pup learned until that day was to stay close to that "someone" whose smell it had learned from the very first. It was as if everything the pup learned until that day was that “there is no such thing as a pup.”