Part One
Part Two
Part Three
Part Four

After discussing misapplications of the RAD diagnosis, the report addressed “The Attachment Therapy Controversy”.


The bulk of this section discussed “holding therapy” and what exactly that means. It was stated the terminology for this therapy has changed repeatedly and the report gave several examples of different labels used.

They may be known as “rebirthing therapy,” “compression holding therapy,” “corrective attachment therapy,” “the Evergreen model,” “holding time,” or “rage-reduction therapy” (Cline, 1991; Lien, 2004; Levy & Orlans, 1998; Welch, 1988).

Although my intent is to address the content of this report after sharing the salient features of it, I can’t keep myself from interjecting here… Please note the dates of the references for these terms. Other than Forrest Lien’s use of the term “The Evergreen Model” (which has been completely revamped in the past decade), all the other references are 8-18 years old. It is widely accepted in the attachment community in 2006 that the children are trauma-affected, not full of rage, and approaches and treatments have changed accordingly. And “holding time” is what moms have been doing to kiddos for generations.


And now for the response from ATTACh… Quoting again from the APSAC report, it says:

Position statements against using coercion or restraint as a treatment were issued by mainstream professional societies (American Psychiatric Association, 2002) and by a professional organization focusing on attachment and attachment therapy (Association for Treatment and Training in the Attachment of Children [ATTACh], 2001). Despite these and other strong cautions from professional organizations, the controversial treatments and their associated concepts and foundational principles appear to be continuing among networks of attachment therapists, attachment therapy centers, caseworkers, and adoptive or foster parents (Hage, n.d.-a; Keck, n.d.). As Berliner (2002) noted, parents and caseworkers may turn to these treatments out of desperation. For many foster or adoptive parents, the reality of foster or adoptive parenting may be quite discrepant from their expectations. Children\ may be emotionally distant or difficult to manage. On rare occasions, children may be violent. In some cases, radical treatments advertising dramatic successes may appeal to these parents. Although criticism of the controversial attachment therapies has been widespread in mainstream professional and scientific circles, efforts to disseminate these criticisms and concerns to the lay public have been minimal, and most foster or adoptive parents are probably unaware of the risks and poor foundation for some treatment claims.

Photo Credit