Reactive Attachment Disorder as Early S⁰ Prevention: Caregiver Absence as Attachment Ground State Blockade, the Inhibited/Disinhibited Bifurcation, and the Developmental Impossibility of Late Return

We apply the Displacement Framework to Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD), formalizing it as a case of S⁰ prevention rather than displacement from an established ground state — a distinction central to this paper's contribution. The attachment ground state S⁰_attach is defined as the five-component developmental configuration of secure base formation, co-regulation capacity, responsive-other internal working model, oxytocin calibration, and trust-cost landscape.

RAD arises not from displacement FROM S⁰_attach but from failure to ESTABLISH it, because pathogenic care (severe neglect, abuse, or institutional rearing) during the sensitive period (0–5 years) prevents the landscape from configuring correctly. Nine formal propositions are derived covering: the five-component S⁰_attach definition (P1), RAD as S⁰ prevention rather than S⁰ displacement (P2), the developmental critical period and HPA/oxytocin/PFC neurobiological constraints on late S⁰ formation (P3), the inhibited/disinhibited bifurcation as two wrong attractors from the same pathogenic cause — W_withdrawal (learned that attachment costs D(ξ_rejection)) vs.

W_indiscriminate (learned that any contact reduces D(ξ_isolation)) (P4), cumulative Φ cascading across emotion regulation, learning, peer relationships, and adult intimacy (P5), the return path problem when there is no S⁰ to return to (P6), late partial S⁰ formation through therapeutic relationship and stable caregiver provision (P7), the RAD/autism/ADHD differential (P8), and the externally imposed displacement ethical framing — the child is never responsible for pathogenic care (P9).

The paper formally distinguishes RAD from insecure attachment and from autism spectrum disorder.