I remember hearing once that God made babies smile around the age of 2-3 months because new moms needed some incentive to keep getting up in the middle of the night. Reciprocity in a relationship is a critical component that insures both parties find enjoyment or something positive in the interaction. Trying to build, nurture or maintain a relationship when reciprocity is absent is a much more difficult task. It is my opinion that the absence of reciprocity in our relationships with our attachment-challenged kids is one of the most significant factors in our building resentment levels.

I once heard Katherine Leslie, Ph.D., CFLE, author of When a Stranger Calls You Mom, speak at a conference. In her book she states the following:

The way most people think of behavior is to picture positive and negative behaviors on opposite ends of a spectrum. However, this is not an adequate conceptualization because in fact all people manifest a variety of positive and negative behaviors at the same time. Therefore, a better conceptualization is to picture negative and positive behaviors on two separate continuum's, each ranging from high to low, as opposed to a single continuum with negative on one end and positive on the other. This means for example, that a child may manifest many negative behaviors and many positive behaviors. It also means that another child may manifest very few negative behaviors and very few positive behaviors.

This is an important distinction for several reasons. First, almost all behavior assessment tools measure the quantity and frequency of occurrence of negative behaviors, but have no means of accounting for the quantity and frequency of positive behaviors (or lack thereof). They (the tools) are assuming that if there is a plethora of negative behaviors that the positive behaviors do not exist, or are not important. However, positive behaviors reveal healthy family functioning. Without knowledge of what these are and how often they occur how can we truly measure family functioning or relationship satisfaction?


Secondly, because all children manifest some negative behaviors, and parents still love, value, and care for them, perhaps it is the quantity and frequency of positive behaviors that actually predict relationship quality as opposed to the quantity and frequency of negative behaviors. In other words, would a parent-child relationship in which the child is manifesting many negative behaviors plus many positive behaviors be of higher quality than a relationship in which the child was manifesting few negative behaviors but few to no positive behaviors? I predict the answer to this question is “Yes.”


Furthermore, I contend that it is actually the lack of positive behaviors (the function of healthy parent-child relationships) that is so very problematic for foster and adoptive parents of traumatized children, as opposed to the plethora of negative behaviors. The negative behaviors that are occurring can be somewhat controlled and perhaps diminished/changed. It’s very hard and time consuming, but it can be accomplished. But how do parents control what is not occurring -- with what is not being given? How do parents interact with a child who does not love or care about the parents?


Many children are difficult to parent; it seems almost inherent in the fact of being a child. However, most children give so much back to the relationship (positive behaviors) parents find the job of raising them fairly worthwhile and satisfying. It is a complementarily reciprocal relationship. And, even when some children’s negative behaviors are quite pronounced, perhaps they are more bearable because authentic positive behaviors are also present.


But many traumatized children fail to manifest pro-family behaviors, attitudes and beliefs, while manifesting a plethora of negative behaviors, attitudes and beliefs. These manifestations make sense given that traumatized children were not exposed to positive family functioning in their birth homes, and therefore their negative engagement behaviors, although adaptive, became hard wired over time, and their positive social engagement capacities were sorely damaged, or not activated at all. However, while it makes sense, it also makes the job of raising them fairly worthless and unsatisfying. There is nothing reciprocal about these relationships.


A third reason the concept of dual continuum's is important is for understanding that reducing negative behaviors does not automatically result in increasing positive behaviors. That is, it appears that helping traumatized children to reduce the quality and quantity of their negative behaviors through appropriate parenting strategies and/or medication does not automatically increase or activate their positive spectrum of behaviors. This further helps to explain the lack of parent satisfaction in these relationships and the high incidence of placement disruptions.

This concept makes so much sense to me. My daughter is a prime example. She really has fairly mild negative behaviors, all things considered. But she also has almost no positive behaviors. Very little depth to her at all... and little genuine and spontaneous reciprocity. Very sad.

Come hear Katherine speak at ADN's first national conference in June! She really "gets it"!