In ADBB clinical practice, we used to speak of chronic relational withdrawal. This term made sense for a long time, as it highlighted a central difficulty: the infant who withdraws, who turns away from connection, who reduces contact as if to economize.
Today, we are choosing a shift in vocabulary. From now on, we will refer to it as chronic social withdrawal behaviour in infants (or early withdrawal behaviour).
Why this change?
The main goal is clear: to avoid embedding an implicit etiology in the very name of the phenomenon. By speaking of “relational withdrawal,” one might assume that the infant’s behaviour is caused solely by relational difficulties, for instance with parents or caregivers. Yet clinical experience shows us it is more complex.
Chronic social withdrawal in infants can arise from multiple sources: medical, neurological, sensory, environmental, relational… or often a combination. By naming it as an observable behaviour, without assigning a cause by default, we preserve clinical rigor and avoid premature conclusions.
This shift in wording may seem minor, but it is far from trivial. The words we use shape the way professionals understand, investigate, and respond. By adopting the term chronic social withdrawal behavior in infants, we remind ourselves that our task is first to observe, describe, and open up the clinical thinking — not to close it down too quickly with a single explanatory frame.
