A review from someone who heard “you’re spoiling that baby” so many times they needed a book to prove the entire extended family wrong—and found one that went way further than expected
You pick up your crying baby. Your mother-in-law sighs. “You’re going to spoil her.”
You nurse your six-month-old to sleep. The pediatrician frowns. “She needs to learn to self-soothe.”
You mention your baby sleeps in your room. Your coworker looks horrified. “You’ll never get her out of there.”
Every instinct tells you to hold your baby close, respond to their cries, keep them near. Every voice around you says you’re doing it wrong. Creating bad habits. Making a rod for your own back. Raising a dependent, clingy child.
Who’s right? You or everyone else?
Dr. William Sears and Martha Sears’ The Attachment Parenting Book says: you are. Emphatically, research-citingly, philosophically—you are right to follow your instincts. And everyone telling you otherwise? They’re working from an outdated, disconnected model of what babies need.
This is the book that launched a movement. That gave a name to what millions of parents were already doing. That created a tribe, a philosophy, and—depending on who you ask—either a revolution in parenting or a guilt-industrial complex.
Thirty years later, does attachment parenting still make sense? Let’s find out.
🎧 Want the Audiobook for FREE?
Before we dive in, here’s a little-known trick to get this audiobook at no cost:
- Click the link above to view The Attachment Parenting Book on Amazon
- Look for the “+ Audiobook” option when selecting your format
- Sign up for a free 30-day Audible trial
- Receive the full audiobook as part of your trial
- Keep the audiobook forever—even if you cancel the trial before it renews!
Listen while wearing your baby in a carrier, cancel within 30 days, pay nothing, and keep the audiobook permanently. Multitasking is an attachment parenting survival skill. 🎧📚
What Is This Book? 🤔
The Attachment Parenting Book is the manifesto. While The Baby Book is a comprehensive reference covering all aspects of baby care, this book focuses specifically on the attachment parenting philosophy—what it is, why it matters, and how to practice it.
The Seven Baby B’s:
- Birth Bonding — Immediate connection after birth, skin-to-skin contact, delayed interventions when possible
- Breastfeeding — On-demand, extended, for nutrition and comfort
- Babywearing — Carrying baby in a sling or carrier throughout the day
- Bedding Close to Baby — Co-sleeping or room-sharing, nighttime closeness
- Belief in Baby’s Cries — Prompt response, trusting that cries communicate real needs
- Beware of Baby Trainers — Skepticism toward scheduling, sleep training, and “expert” approaches that override instincts
- Balance — Finding sustainability in attachment parenting (theoretically)
The philosophy:
Babies are born with needs, not wants. When we respond to those needs consistently, we build secure attachment—which becomes the foundation for independence, confidence, and emotional health throughout life. Fighting those needs creates insecurity.
The promise:
Parent this way, and you’ll raise a more secure, connected, emotionally healthy child—while experiencing deeper satisfaction and connection yourself.
It’s parenting as relationship-building, not behavior management. 📖
The Good Stuff ✅
It Gives Scientific Language to Instinctive Parenting
The book’s core contribution:
The experience before attachment parenting had a name:
You want to hold your baby constantly. You want to respond immediately to cries. You want to keep them close at night. But everyone—doctors, relatives, books—tells you this is wrong. You feel crazy. You feel weak. You feel like you’re failing at something other parents seem to manage.
The experience after:
“I’m practicing attachment parenting. It’s research-based. Here’s why it works.” Suddenly you have language, validation, and a framework. You’re not weak—you’re responsive. You’re not spoiling—you’re building security.
The research cited:
Attachment theory from John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth. Studies on infant brain development. Cross-cultural research on babywearing and co-sleeping societies. Evidence that responsiveness builds security, not dependence.
The reframe:
What Western culture calls “spoiling” is actually what human babies evolved to expect. What we call “independence training” is often disconnection that creates anxiety.
The tribe:
Finding other attachment parents. Knowing you’re not alone. Having a community that validates your choices.
Naming something gives it power. 🎯
It Takes Infant Experience Seriously
A fundamental respect for baby’s perspective:
The conventional model:
Babies cry to manipulate. Babies need to learn they can’t always get what they want. Babies should fit into adult schedules and expectations.
The attachment model:
Babies cry to communicate. Babies have genuine needs they cannot meet themselves. Babies need responsive caregivers to feel safe in a confusing world.
The neuroscience argument:
Baby brains are literally being built through early experiences. Stress responses are being calibrated. When babies experience consistent responsiveness, their brains develop differently than when they experience neglect or inconsistency.
The evolutionary argument:
For most of human history, babies were carried constantly, nursed on demand, and slept with their mothers. Separate nurseries and scheduled feedings are modern inventions—not how humans evolved.
The empathy invitation:
Imagine being unable to move yourself, feed yourself, or communicate clearly—completely dependent on someone who sometimes responds and sometimes doesn’t. How would that feel?
Babies as fully human, not pre-human. ✨
The Babywearing Chapter Is Genuinely Useful
Practical guidance on keeping baby close:
The benefits cited:
- Babies cry less when worn
- Physical contact regulates baby’s systems
- Parents learn to read baby’s cues better
- Practical mobility for parent
- Promotes bonding and attachment
- Babies see the world from secure vantage point
The practical guidance:
- Different carrier types and when to use each
- How to position baby safely
- Wearing while doing household tasks
- Transitioning between carriers as baby grows
- Troubleshooting common problems
The permission:
You don’t need to put your baby down. You can hold them all day if you want. Carriers make this practical, not indulgent.
The benefit for parents:
Hands-free holding. Ability to get things done while meeting baby’s needs. Less crying, more peace.
The research:
Studies showing carried babies cry significantly less than babies left in containers.
Practical tool for constant closeness. 💪
It Normalizes Night Waking and Co-Sleeping
Reframing nighttime expectations:
The conventional message:
Babies should sleep through the night. Waking is a problem to be solved. Sleep training is necessary for healthy development.
The attachment message:
Night waking is biologically normal. Babies need nighttime nutrition and comfort. Co-sleeping facilitates breastfeeding and maintains connection.
The anthropological context:
Isolated infant sleep is a Western, modern phenomenon. Throughout history and across cultures, mothers and babies sleep together.
The practical benefits:
- Easier nighttime breastfeeding
- More sleep for everyone (potentially)
- Less anxiety about baby
- Continued connection overnight
The normalization:
Stop expecting your baby to sleep through the night at three months. Their biology isn’t designed for that. Adjust expectations, not baby.
The relief:
For parents exhausted by trying to “fix” normal night waking, permission to just… stop fighting it.
Different expectations, different experience. 🌟
It Encourages Fathers’ Involvement
Not just for mothers:
The emphasis:
Attachment parenting isn’t only maternal. Fathers can babywear, co-sleep, respond to cries, and build deep attachment bonds.
The specific guidance:
- How fathers can participate when not breastfeeding
- Babywearing as father-baby bonding tool
- Sharing nighttime responsibilities
- Building father’s confidence with infant care
The modeling:
William Sears writes as an involved father, sharing personal experiences of attachment parenting from the dad perspective.
The relationship impact:
When both parents practice attachment parenting, they’re working from the same philosophy. Less conflict about approaches.
The evolution:
Fathers becoming equal attachment figures, not secondary caregivers.
Both parents can attach deeply. 🛡️
It Addresses the “Spoiling” Myth Directly
Taking on the biggest criticism:
The myth:
Responding to babies too much creates dependent, demanding children. You have to let them cry sometimes or they’ll never learn independence.
The attachment response:
Research shows the opposite. Babies whose needs are consistently met develop MORE independence, not less. Security is the foundation of exploration.
The logic:
A baby who trusts that their needs will be met can venture out confidently. A baby who learns their needs won’t be met becomes anxious and clingy—actually more dependent.
The analogy:
A secure base. Like a child at a playground who ventures further when they know a parent is watching and available.
The long-term view:
You’re not creating dependency—you’re building the security that enables independence.
The relief:
For parents who’ve been told they’re spoiling their baby, this is permission and vindication.
Security enables independence. 🧠
It Validates “High-Need” Babies
Recognition that some babies need more:
The concept:
Some babies are simply more intense, more sensitive, more demanding. This isn’t pathology—it’s temperament.
The characteristics:
- Intense reactions
- Hyperactive/always moving
- Draining to care for
- Feeds frequently
- Demanding
- Awakens frequently
- Unpredictable
- Super-sensitive
- Can’t be put down
- Not self-soothing
- Separation-sensitive
The validation:
If this is your baby, you’re not doing something wrong. You got a particular kind of baby who needs more. That’s not failure—it’s reality.
The reframe:
High-need babies become high-capacity adults. The intensity that exhausts you now will serve them later.
The permission:
To do more. To hold more. To respond more. To accept that your baby genuinely needs what they’re asking for.
Naming the experience helps enormously. 📝
The Not-So-Good Stuff 😬
The Guilt Trip Is Baked In
The shadow side of strong convictions:
The structure:
Here’s attachment parenting. Here are the seven B’s. Here’s the research on why this is better. Here are the warnings about alternatives.
The implication:
If you’re not doing attachment parenting, you’re not parenting optimally. Your baby might not attach securely. You might be causing harm.
The experience for struggling parents:
“I can’t breastfeed—am I damaging my baby?” “I can’t wear my baby constantly—is our bond compromised?” “I need sleep—am I abandoning my baby’s needs?”
The irony:
A philosophy meant to support parental instincts becomes another source of anxiety for parents whose instincts or circumstances differ.
What’s missing:
Genuine acknowledgment that secure attachment can develop through many paths. That loving, responsive parents who don’t follow the B’s raise healthy children.
The reality:
Many securely attached children were raised with cribs, bottles, strollers, and sleep training. The book doesn’t really acknowledge this.
Support becomes prescription becomes judgment. 😬
The Science Is Selectively Presented
Research with a bias:
The pattern:
Studies supporting attachment parenting are cited and explained. Studies questioning specific practices or showing no significant differences are minimized or ignored.
The claims:
Benefits of extended breastfeeding, co-sleeping, and constant contact are presented with more certainty than the research supports. Correlation is often conflated with causation.
The confounds:
Parents who practice attachment parenting often differ in other ways—education, resources, temperament. Attributing child outcomes specifically to attachment practices is methodologically difficult.
The nuance missing:
Secure attachment can develop through many parenting styles. The specific practices (breastfeeding, co-sleeping, babywearing) are tools, not requirements.
The honest assessment:
Responsive parenting matters. Whether that responsiveness requires these specific practices is less clear.
Advocacy presented as settled science. 🚩
Co-Sleeping Safety Has Evolved
Guidelines have changed:
What the book presents:
Co-sleeping as natural, beneficial, and safe when done properly. A normal part of attachment parenting.
What current guidelines say:
The AAP recommends room-sharing but not bed-sharing for the first year due to SIDS and suffocation risks. The safest sleep environment is a firm, flat surface with nothing else in it.
The risk factors:
Smoking, alcohol, obesity, soft bedding, couch sleeping—all significantly increase danger. But even without these factors, bed-sharing carries some increased risk.
The tension:
The Sears’ wrote before some of this research. Their “safe co-sleeping” guidelines may not reflect current understanding.
The recommendation:
Check current AAP safe sleep guidelines rather than relying solely on this book for sleep safety decisions.
The complexity:
Many families co-sleep. Harm reduction guidance matters. But presenting it as simply “safe” oversimplifies.
Safety guidance has evolved since publication. 🩺
Breastfeeding Pressure Is Intense
Support becomes burden:
The message:
Breastfeeding is foundational to attachment parenting. Extended breastfeeding is ideal. Nursing for comfort, not just nutrition. On-demand, baby-led, for years.
For parents who can:
Wonderful support and validation.
For parents who struggle:
“Try harder.” More tips. More techniques. The implication that giving up has consequences for attachment.
For parents who can’t:
Medical conditions, medications, adoption, insufficient supply, mental health—many parents can’t breastfeed. The book can feel excluding and judgmental.
For parents who choose not to:
Their choice, but not validated here.
The reality:
Modern formula is nutritionally complete. Bottle-fed babies can be securely attached. The emphasis on breastfeeding as essential to attachment overstates the case.
Breastfeeding support crosses into pressure. 😬
The Mother-Centricity Is Exhausting
Despite father inclusion, the burden falls on mothers:
What attachment parenting requires:
Constant availability. Immediate response. Extended breastfeeding. Nighttime proximity. No separation.
Who does this in practice:
Primarily mothers.
The implicit message:
Good mothers are always available. Good mothers don’t need breaks. Good mothers sacrifice everything for attachment.
The cost:
Maternal mental health. Maternal identity. Maternal autonomy. Maternal career.
The seventh B:
“Balance” is supposed to address this, but it often feels like an afterthought. How do you balance when the other six B’s require constant presence?
The missing permission:
To take a break. To let someone else soothe the baby. To prioritize your own needs sometimes. To be a person, not just a mother.
The reality:
Maternal wellbeing matters for attachment too. Burned-out mothers can’t attach well.
Balance is promised but not prioritized. 📉
It Creates an In-Group/Out-Group Dynamic
Tribal parenting:
The setup:
Attachment parents trust their instincts. They respond to their babies. They’re doing it right.
The implication:
Other parents don’t trust instincts. Don’t respond enough. Are doing it wrong.
The effect:
Parenting becomes identity. Attachment parenting communities can become echo chambers. Other approaches are viewed suspiciously.
The judgment:
Sleep-training parents are ignoring needs. Formula-feeding parents are settling for less. Parents who use strollers are creating distance.
The irony:
A philosophy meant to reduce parental anxiety increases it for those outside the tribe—and can create superiority in those inside.
What’s lost:
Recognition that many paths lead to healthy children and families.
Philosophy becomes identity becomes judgment. 😬
The “Beware of Baby Trainers” Section Is One-Sided
Dismissing alternatives:
The position:
Sleep training ignores babies’ needs. Scheduling disrespects natural rhythms. “Experts” who recommend these approaches are baby trainers to be avoided.
The nuance missing:
There are many forms of sleep training, some quite gentle. Sleep deprivation has real consequences. Some families genuinely need structured approaches.
The research ignored:
Studies showing various sleep training methods don’t harm attachment or development when implemented appropriately.
The judgment:
Parents who sleep train may feel accused of damaging their babies. Working parents who can’t do on-demand everything may feel excluded.
The balance needed:
Acknowledging that different families have different needs and constraints. That responsiveness can look different in different contexts.
One approach treated as clearly superior. 🚩
It’s Dated in Important Ways
Published in 2001, showing its age:
What’s changed:
- Safe sleep guidelines evolved significantly
- Formula has improved
- Work-from-home changed parenting landscape
- Mental health awareness increased
- Non-traditional families more visible
- Neurodivergence better understood
What’s missing:
Screens, social media, pandemic parenting, diverse family structures, maternal mental health emphasis.
The cultural shift:
The intensity of attachment parenting as described may not be sustainable for modern families with different pressures and constraints.
The recommendation:
Read critically and cross-reference with current guidelines and research.
Needs updating for current context. 😬
Neurodivergent Families Are Invisible
The familiar blind spot:
What’s not addressed:
- Babies with sensory processing differences who may not want constant contact
- Parents with sensory sensitivities who find constant touching overwhelming
- Autistic babies who may need different kinds of connection
- Parents with ADHD who struggle with the demands of attachment parenting
- When attachment approaches don’t seem to work
The assumption:
All babies and parents are neurotypical and will respond predictably to attachment approaches.
The reality:
Some babies don’t want to be held constantly. Some parents can’t tolerate it. Attachment can look different for different neurotypes.
The gap:
No guidance on when to adapt, when these approaches might not fit, when something else might be needed.
Neurodivergent experiences not considered. 🧠
It Sets Impossible Standards
The perfect becoming the enemy of the good:
The ideal presented:
Always respond immediately. Always nurse on demand. Always wear your baby. Always co-sleep. Always be available.
The reality:
You have to shower. You have other children. You have to work. You get touched out. You need sleep. You need space.
The gap:
Between ideal and reality lies guilt. Lots and lots of guilt.
The perfectionism:
Anything less than full implementation feels like failure.
What’s needed:
More emphasis on “good enough” parenting. More acknowledgment that imperfect attachment parenting is still valuable.
The permission:
To do some of this, not all. To adapt to your circumstances. To be human.
Impossible standards create unnecessary suffering. 😬
Who Is This For? 🎯
Perfect if you:
- Feel drawn to responsive, instinct-based parenting
- Need validation for holding, nursing, and responding constantly
- Want a philosophical framework for your natural inclinations
- Are committed to breastfeeding and want extensive support
- Have capacity to implement intensive caregiving approach
- Can take what works and leave what doesn’t without guilt
- Want to understand attachment theory and its parenting applications
Not ideal if you:
- Struggle with guilt and perfectionism
- Can’t or don’t want to breastfeed
- Need sleep training guidance without judgment
- Are looking for balanced presentation of approaches
- Have limited capacity for intensive caregiving demands
- Have a baby or parent who is neurodivergent
- Want evidence-based guidance on safe sleep
- Are a working parent with constraints on availability
Alternatives Worth Considering 🔄
The Whole-Brain Child by Daniel Siegel & Tina Payne Bryson: Brain science approach to connected parenting. Same emphasis on responsiveness without the prescriptive specific practices. More flexible, more modern. 🏆
Attached by Amir Levine: Adult attachment styles explained. Helps you understand your own attachment patterns and how they affect your parenting.
Cribsheet by Emily Oster: Data-driven approach to infant decisions. Presents evidence on all sides without ideology. Great counterbalance.
Hunt, Gather, Parent by Michaeleen Doucleff: Cross-cultural perspective that challenges Western parenting assumptions—including some attachment parenting premises. Eye-opening alternative.
The Danish Way of Parenting by Jessica Joelle Alexander: Different culture’s approach to raising secure, happy children. Shows attachment can look different across contexts.
Good Inside by Dr. Becky Kennedy: Modern, flexible approach to connected parenting. Same values as attachment parenting with more practical, guilt-free implementation. 📚
The Final Verdict 🏅
The Attachment Parenting Book gave a name and framework to what millions of parents were already doing—and gave them permission to trust their instincts against a culture that told them they were wrong. The core message—that babies have real needs, that responsiveness builds security, that closeness matters—remains valuable and largely supported by research.
For parents whose instincts align with attachment parenting, this book is validation, language, and community.
However, the book’s strong convictions become problems when they create guilt for those who can’t or don’t want to follow every prescription. The science is selectively presented. The safety guidance on co-sleeping is dated. The breastfeeding pressure is intense. And the mother-centricity, despite gestures toward balance, creates unsustainable expectations.
The useful parts:
- Permission to respond: validation of instinctive parenting
- Attachment science: solid theoretical foundation
- Babywearing guidance: practical and useful
- High-need baby recognition: naming a real experience
- Father involvement: progressive inclusion
- Spoiling myth debunked: security enables independence
- Tribal belonging: community for like-minded parents
The problematic parts:
- Guilt machine: prescription becomes judgment
- Selective science: advocacy over balance
- Co-sleeping safety: outdated guidance
- Breastfeeding pressure: support becomes burden
- Mother-centricity: unsustainable expectations
- In-group/out-group: parenting as identity
- Impossible standards: perfection as enemy of good
- Neurodivergent invisibility: typical development assumed
The best approach: Read this book for the philosophy and permission, not as a rulebook. Take the core insight—that responsiveness and closeness build security—and implement it in ways that work for your family, your baby, and your circumstances. You don’t need to do all seven B’s to build secure attachment. You need to be responsive, loving, and present—in whatever way you can.
The bottom line: The Attachment Parenting Book is best understood as one philosophy among many, not the only path to secure attachment. Its core insight—that babies need responsiveness and closeness—is valuable. Its specific prescriptions are tools, not requirements.
Your baby doesn’t need you to implement seven specific B’s perfectly. They need you to love them, respond to them, and be present with them—in whatever way you can manage, given who you are and what your life looks like.
Attachment happens through relationship, not through following rules. Through connection, not through perfection. Through being there—imperfectly, sustainably, humanly—over time.
That’s attachment parenting too. Even if it doesn’t look like the book. 👶✨
Did attachment parenting resonate with your instincts? Did you implement all the B’s or adapt them? What worked for your family and what didn’t? Share your experience below!
Leave a Reply