n order to understand the impact of loss and the feelings and behaviour that follow a bereavement, we must have some knowledge of attachment. Bowlby’s attachment theory allows us to understand the human tendency to create strong bonds and the emotional reaction presented when these bonds are broken. Bowlby’s thesis is that these attachments come from the need for security and safety; they develop early in life, are usually directed towards a few specific individuals and tend to endure throughout a large part of the life cycle (Worden, 1991). These attachments can be seen in Darwin’s 1872 work around the expression of emotion in men and animals where he states Children, when wanting food or suffering in any way, cry out loudly, like the young of most other animals, partly as a call to their parents for aid, and partly from any great exertion serving relief. His work would suggest that attachment is imprinted at an early age and this notion is echoed in Lorenz’s 1935 work with goslings. Lorenz believed that A breakdown in the relationship with its mother led to a disruption in the development of a bird’s normal social behaviour, supporting his theory that the first relationship a bird experiences determines the bird’s future. Likewise, John Bowlby claimed that a disruption in the child’s attachment to its mother had grave consequences for his or her adult personality (Vicedo, 2009). It is my understanding that in Bowlby’s attachment theory, an anxious attachment style has a prolonged, more complicated effect upon grieving, a person with an anxious style of attachment may experience deeper levels of depression, contrary wise a secure attachment to the deceased, may indicate less depression and aid the transition through grieving and the recovery from it. This may be that in an anxious state of attachment the deceased may not have been emotionally available to the bereaved, and therefore the bereaved person may over-activate their grief response. There are several limitations to Bowlby’s attachment theory the first being that the model was based upon young children utilising momentary separations, which were stressful for the child, more understanding could come from an observation of how parents interact with the child and what they provide for each other during natural, non-stressful situations. How children interact with their parents in a non-stressful situation may provide more information on how the attachment model works than how the child acts when the mother leaves and then returns. Secondary to this the observations took place utilising only the primary caregiver, for example, the mother and other family attachments may not be characterised by similar reactions. Finally, the father or a sibling may have the same attachment with the child at the same time, relating directly to adults having more than one primary attachment, such as significant other and their children. This shows that attachment is not merely confined to infancy but experienced countless times throughout life including adolescence, early adulthood and beyond.