“You can close your eyes to reality but not to memories.”
– Stanislaw Lec, Polish writer
From a very young age, we are taught to look another person in the eyes when being spoken to or when speaking. Communication experts teach us to make strong eye contact if we desire connection. The American culture interprets lack of eye contact as showing a lack of interest and being disrespectful.
Beyond this, the eyes are often said to be the windows to the soul. Francis Johnson, an English theologian, is quoted as saying, “The balls of sight are so formed, that one man’s eyes are spectacles to another, to read his heart from within.” This idea of connecting to one’s heart through the eyes has also been at the forefront of attachment therapy. Traditionally, eye contact, or lack of eye contact, has been a principle behavior when referring to children with reactive attachment disorder. The eyes have been seen to be a direct measurement of a child’s attachment and of his ability to give and receive love.
Traditional View
The traditional view believes that eye contact is a crucial component of determining whether a child has a secure attachment.1 It proposes that children with reactive attachment disorder are unable to use eye contact for connection and that they cannot use eye contact for closeness or positive communication.2 Additionally, the traditional view interprets that when a child does use eye contact, it is for negative reasons, such as to manipulate or to dominate. Traditional sources state that the only time attachment challenged children are able to make eye contact is when they are lying,3 extremely angry,4 or controlling. Children are described as using their eyes to seduce or threaten caregivers5 in an effort to disarm them. Eye contact is also described to be skillfully used by these children to charm strangers.6
Traditional attachment therapists use eye contact in sessions as a principal tool for creating attachment. Eye contact is seen as one of the first tasks to be accomplished before significant therapy can be accomplished, and therapists insist on nearly constant eye contact during sessions.7 Attachment-challenged children are expected to maintain this eye contact in order to submit their control to either the therapist or the parent. It is explained that these children will consistently avoid eye contact whenever they do not feel in control of the situation,8 thus it is imperative that they use eye contact in order to form trusting relationships, especially within the therapeutic environment. During other therapeutic techniques where the parent is holding the child, the parent is often instructed to insist and fight for complete eye contact, even at the extent of physically forcing the child to look at the parent.9 Parenting experts recommend that every communication with the child be made with the child looking directly at the parent.10
New View
When it comes to understanding a child’s inability to make strong eye contact, a review of Principle #1 (All negative behavior arises from an unconscious, fear-based state) needs to be conducted. According to this principle, a child who lacks the ability to make eye contact is a child in a state of fear. It is about a child who is scared – a child who is being driven from an unconscious place by fear.
The traditional view of the lack of eye contact, discussed previously, interprets this behavior from a negative posture. This view says that if a child is not making eye contact, then he is not listening, he is not really connecting with the parent or caregiver, and he is trying to stay in charge. These are all fear-based reasons that scare parents when their children exhibit this behavior. These interpretations, in and of themselves, create barriers in the parent-child relationship.
The new view, with a love-based foundation, offers a gentler explanation, backed by neurological research. From brain research, it is understood that contact with the human eye is the most direct way to stimulate the frontal lobe of the brain. This part of the brain is called the orbital frontal cortex (OFC). The OFC is considered to be the executive control center for a human’s social and emotional functioning. Eye contact is the most direct way to stimulate this area. The OFC and the hippocampus both have a direct responsibility for calming the body’s stress response system. Thus, when the OFC and hippocampus are being overwhelmed by stress, it requires an enormous amount of energy for the body to regulate at that Moment. Considering that the eyes are sensory pathways, it needs to be acknowledged that the use of the eyes creates more stimulation. Thus, looking at the parent with direct eye contact in this moment of stress becomes overwhelming. In fact, it is one of the most overwhelming directives a parent could ask a child to do when the child is in a state of stress.
In order to understand fully this principle and relate to this explanation, you will need to see it in yourself in order for you to see it clearly in your child. The next time you are really stressed or have slipped into a high arousal state, be mindful of your response – notice how little you make eye contact. Many times we not only look away from those around us, we also shrug off their physical touch. We cut off the stimulation to our sensory pathways because it is simply too much for us to process.
Eye contact is one of the first responses to cease in the midst of stress for anyone, especially traumatized children. Traumatized children are extremely sensitive to threats in the environment, which trigger their stress reactions. These triggers, or “associational connections,” easily lead traumatized children into an emotional state of fear, which, in turn, dictates their behavior. So what is seen is a child who diverts his gaze and ceases to make eye contact. The child is not purposely avoiding eye contact to control the parent, nor is he maintaining his sense of control by selectively not listening to the parent. The child does not want to look at the parent because any more eye stimulation may drive him out of his body-mind system. Any more may literally make him feel as if his head is going to pop off!
When a child looks away from the parent, the parent needs to “listen” to this behavior from a modality of love, backed by a neurological understanding. The child is saying, “I can’t take anymore stimulation! If I keep looking at you, it will be way too much.”
Our body-mind can only take in a limited amount of stimulation. Deepak Chopra, M.D. explains that our body-mind system can only take in a billionth of the amount of sensory information around us at any given time. Relate this to yourself at this Moment. Are you presently aware of the temperature of the room, the way your clothes sit on your body, the texture of the book you are holding, the noises in the room, the noises coming from outside, the taste in your mouth, the smell of your environment, the muscle tightness in your shoulder or leg? We are incapable of creating an alert awareness of all this at one time while staying engaged and focused on our task at hand. We would go crazy if we had to stay alert to every stimulus within both our internal beings and our external environment.
What prevents us from becoming over-stimulated is our regulatory systems. A well-developed regulatory system is equipped to keep the body-mind from becoming overwhelmed; it modulates, it regulates, it calls upon specific senses when appropriate in a balanced and regulated way. The human body will automatically filter out those stimuli that it deems unnecessary to be at the forefront of our consciousness. It is an ever-changing, ever-balancing system at work to keep us in a balanced and regulated state. Most adults have a well-developed regulatory system that is intact and is able to shift from Moments of overwhelm back to a state of balance, all within a millisecond. These experiences of shifting from a state of balance to a state of overwhelm happen countless times throughout the day. However, traumatized children do not have this regulatory flexibility. It is impossible for their systems. Thus, when it comes to making eye contact when they are stressed, it is not a matter of “making a choice” or “giving over the control” to the parent.
The traditional view for the attachment-challenged child says, “He has to make eye contact with you. Tell him to look at you.” When the child does turn to look at the parent during such demanding and forceful commands, the child will typically either have a glazed look over his face, looking completely blanked out, or the child’s eyes will be shifting and rolling around. When the parent makes such statements to the child as, “Look at me,” the parent is evoking more stress onto an already stressed-out child. The persistent fighting for eye contact only serves to overload the child’s dysregulated system with more fear.
A glazed look is a sign of a child dissociating from the parent – and the world. In an effort to endure the overload of internal stress, the child breaks his connection to external stimuli. Internally he is engulfed with stress, thereby having to cut off any additional intake of stimuli in order to merely survive. Hence, the child then presents a frozen look on his face. Similarly, if a child is shifting and rolling his eyes, he is as stressed as the child with the glazed look. It is a sign of a child who has reached his window of tolerance of stress. Traditional attachment therapists have referred to this type of eye movement as “motor eyes”11 and have interpreted it to be a purposeful behavioral act, targeted directly against the parents. Yet, when the regulatory system is understood, it can be seen that this rolling of the eyes is only a demonstration of the child’s dysregulated state.
So, the parent has to move out of the traditional paradigm that says, “Reciprocal eye contact is a pivotal part of making a connection.”12 The parent now has permission with the new view to stop living in fear of not creating attachment because of the lack of eye contact. The enlightened parent can now see this behavior as a communication that the child is simply stressed out – nothing more. With this understanding, parents have permission from neuroscience to help their children, embrace their children, and accept their children in their fear state. Parents can now respond to their children out of love, instead of reacting out of fear.
When Mom sees that Johnny is not making eye contact, she should just stop talking. The talking is adding to the overload of stimulation. It is too much. Mom can then work to calm Johnny through the parent-child relationship, repositioning herself to the side of him, which puts her in a less threatening position, thereby removing the perceived threat. Mom can then divert her gaze to the same direction as Johnny. If he is looking down at the floor, then she can look down at the floor with him – she joins him where he is. By not pressing Johnny to make eye contact, she has just created a more regulated environment. And by joining him in the direction of his gaze, she is meeting her child in his pain, thereby giving him safety to shift back to a place of regulation.
By accepting Johnny’s inability to make eye contact, Mom in the above example is preventing the development of a negative neurophysiological feedback loop. Suppose Mom says to her son, “Johnny, I need you to go clean up your room.” The negative neurophysiological feedback loop would begin when Johnny puts his head down. If Mom walks over to Johnny and says, “I deserve respectful answers; you need to answer me,” the dysregulation in the environment then heightens. From her traditional view, Mom then demands, “Look at me, Johnny.” Johnny responds, “I don’t want to look at you!” Finally, after more confrontational interactions, Johnny gives Mom a deerin-headlights gaze. At this point, the environment is full of fear and threat.
Instead, once Mom gives Johnny a directive and receives a shut-down response that lacks eye contact, she then has the opportunity to change the negative neurophysiological feedback loop. Mom can move next to him and if he pulls away, Mom does not even attempt to put her arm around him, but simply accepts that physical touch is adding to his dysregulation. Mom looks down at the floor with him. “Son, what’s going on? I can see that you’re struggling right now.” He moans, “I don’t know.” Mom responds, “Well, I can tell you’re stressed and feeling overwhelmed about something because you can’t look at me. You want to talk about it?” “No.” Even at this point, the feedback loop has changed because he says “No.” instead of “Don’t talk to me. I don’t want to talk to you!” At that level, Mom can then say, “Son, I’m with you and we’re going to be okay,” keeping her gaze on the floor. “It is really important that we get this done,” still not looking at him. “I need your help; we can work together on this.” Mom is communicating with a positive feedback loop.
The more positive Mom can be, the less Johnny has a need to escalate in his dysregulation. Remember, the more regulated amygdala has the ability to soothe the more dysregulated amygdala. This fear receptor in our brain communicates via vibrations through the other person. If Mom stays in a positive state, it will encourage Johnny to move to a positive state.
The traditional attachment therapist will say that when a child makes eye contact, it is “on his own terms.” When consideration is taken regarding the child’s stress state when he is able to make eye contact, it can be easily seen that the child is making eye contact because his neurological system is then in a peaceful, balanced state. He is neurologically able to make eye contact. Thus, these Moments of regulation should be more appropriately celebrated and seen as opportunities to make deep connections with the child. An opening has presented itself for the parent-child relationship to occur. What a shame it would be to miss it!
It is important to recognize that in parenting a child overwhelmed with stress, the parent must allow the process to take its course naturally. Eye contact will happen, but it can only happen when the child is shifted out of his heightened stress state. Lack of eye contact is not “us against them” or “them against us.” And is not a “must have” in order for attachment and regulation to occur. Eye contact does not have to be forced, and if it is forced, it is not real.
Scenario: Kelly is a seven year old child, adopted from a Russian orphanage at the age of four years old. While in a therapy session one day, her mother was embracing Kelly with soft physical touch. As her mother encouraged Kelly to express and talk about the incident that happened the other day when Kelly turned on all the burners of the stove to “high,” Kelly became noticeably anxious and turned her head towards the floor, breaking the eye contact she had previously had with her mother.
Traditional View
The traditional therapist working with this mother and daughter quickly realizes that Kelly needs to be reminded of the first rule of therapy: to have good eye contact while talking together. It is imperative at this point to have Kelly reconnect with her mother in order for Kelly to take ownership of her behavior, and then of her feelings. All discussion of the incident with the stove at this point ceases and Kelly’s mother is instructed to insist on eye contact from Kelly. Kelly’s mother is instructed to actually demand eye contact from Kelly, not to just ask for it. “Look at Mommy! I’m in charge and you need to look at me, Kelly.” Kelly resists and the struggle between Kelly and her Mom continues. Kelly refuses to make eye contact. Mom is then instructed by the therapist to show her anger towards Kelly by saying, “Kelly, you make me so mad when you don’t look at me. It hurts me and I need you to look at me. Look at me, Kelly!” Kelly turns slightly and begins to look at her mother with a half-focused glance. As this session continues through Kelly’s resistance, Mom continues to engage in a vigorous manner, expressing her anger in order to “pop the cork”15 of all other emotions. Kelly is ultimately able to reach the final stage of resolution with her mother and accept her mother’s comfort. With sweat dripping off both Mom and Kelly, Kelly says to her mother, “I was so scared that you were going to send me back to Russia yesterday when the visitors at our house were leaving to go back to Russia.” Mom cries with Kelly; they hug and kiss each other. The session ends after two hours with Mom and Kelly feeling close and content.
New View
The therapist working with this mother and daughter, using the principles outlined in Part I, quickly realizes that Kelly has become overwhelmed with the topic of conversation. Kelly’s shift in her eye contact demonstrates an underlying fear of the stove incident. Kelly’s mother gently pulls her in closer and says, “Kelly, when you look away from me like that, it only tells me that you’re getting too upset about what we are talking about.” Kelly’s mother reassures her verbally, “Kelly, I love you and nothing you do will ever change my love for you. We’re safe and nothing is going to happen to you, sweetheart.” Kelly’s mother holds her and begins to caress her hair and simply stays present with her, working to calm Kelly’s stress response system. After a few minutes, Kelly’s mother opens the discussion again by saying, “Kelly, I know it is really hard for you to talk about what you did with the stove, but I’m here with you.” As her mother begins to talk about the incident, the therapist encourages the mother to softly request Kelly to make eye contact. The mother, empowered by her own motherly instincts, says to the therapist, “It’s okay; she will look at me when she is ready.” Kelly’s mother expresses her fears over the incident and continues to gently encourage Kelly to talk about her feelings, as well. Spontaneously, Kelly turns to her mother, looks her straight in the eyes, and says, “I was so scared that you were going to send me back to Russia yesterday when the visitors at our house were leaving to go back to Russia.” Mom begins to cry and reflect on how scary it must have been to think about being sent back to Russia! Mom relates to Kelly’s fears and they hug and embrace each other. Mom reassures Kelly that she will never be sent back to Russia. This 20-minute session ends with Mom and Kelly feeling close, connected, and safe together.
Quick Reference LACK OF EYE CONTACT
Remember that lack of eye contact:
When seeing this behavior, recognize that your child needs you to: