On September 15, 2021, Mark Baumann will host the monthly GAIN’s Living Journal webinar, and provide an overview of the Dynamic Maturational Model of Attachment and Adaptation (DMM) and relate it to Interpersonal Neurobiology (IPNB) concepts. The Global Association for Interpersonal Neurobiology Studies (GAINS) promotes IPNB, similar to how the International Association for the Study of Attachment (IASA) promotes the DMM. To provide adequate time for follow up questions for the September 15 session, this special DMM Coffee House session will follow up one week later, September 22, and be devoted to any and all questions we can’t get to on the 15th. This session is open to everyone, even if you weren’t able to attend the Living Journal webinar on the 15th. Membership in IASA or GAINS is not required to attend this session.
Both the DMM and IPNB are transdisciplinary models describing human behavior and thoughts. Both are deeply rooted in attachment theory, incorporate multiple disciplines with a conciliatory (inclusive) approach, and seek to move past a pure psychological perspective as described by the DSM and ICD. Both consider the interplay of the mind, body and relationships. Such models are variously called by the terms relational neuroscience, mind-body-relationship (MBRx) with a strong somatic component, and biopsychosocial. (The body includes the brain, the body, and neural systems throughout the body as they are all interconnected. IPNB describes the mind as the software of the body.)
A primary difference in the two models is attachment model they rely on. Both models utilize the attachment model developed by Mary Ainsworth and John Bowlby, and both use Ainsworth’s ABC attachment patterns. IPNB relies on the traditional ABC+D, which expanded Ainsworth’s model around concepts of safety and disorganized attachment. The DMM expanded Ainsworth’s model around the concepts of danger and comfort, protection from danger, and information processing and transformation.
In 2017, Dan Siegel, founder of the IPNB model, signed on to the Granqvist paper (with 42 other authors and leading attachment experts) which detailed the demise of disorganized attachment as a clinical or forensic concept. In addition to the failure of the disorganized attachment concept to bear fruit, the ABC+D model was never able to publish a coherent and comprehensive statement of the model. In contrast, the DMM never accepted disorganization as a concept but instead assumed that children and adults could always organize their minds enough to find some self-protective strategy. The DMM also focused on better describing the sub-patterns with specific and rich details. (See Crittenden and Landini, 2011)
All of these issues and more are available topics for discussion in the session. We hope you can join us for an open, lively exploration.
Contact us for a link to register for the Zoom session.
Date: Wednesday, September 22, 2021
Time: Noon to 1:30 p.m. Seattle time (3:00 in Miami; 8:00 p.m. in London, and in Sydney Australia at 6:00 a.m. on Thursday)
Host: Mark Baumann
Platform: Zoom meeting
Sponsor: Conflict Science Institute