Back to all issue guides
Quick research guide

Infant and toddler overnight care

Direct studies, attachment concerns, later outcomes, father dropout, and the move from blanket rules to conditional planning.

The question

Does research show that infant overnights cause attachment or developmental harm?

Short answer

No study has shown that infant overnights by themselves cause attachment insecurity or later emotional and behavioural problems. Some studies reported concerning differences in selected groups. Those studies could not separate the schedule from conflict, instability, earlier caregiving, and other family differences.

Research behind this answer

Start with these papers

These are the main papers supporting the answer above. Open a research record for the findings, limitations, full citation, and original publication.

Tornello, Emery, Rowen, Potter, Ocker & Xu (2013)

Overnight custody arrangements, attachment, and adjustment among very young children

Read the mixed result that is often reduced to only its infant attachment finding.

Richard A. Warshak, with endorsers listed in the article (2014)

Social science and parenting plans for young children: A consensus report

Read the discussion of overnights, high-conflict labels, child exposure, neutral transfers, and the competing risk of father dropout.

Richard A. Warshak (2018)

Night shifts: Revisiting blanket restrictions on children’s overnights with separated parents

Read the detailed challenge to broad restrictions and the interpretation of the direct studies.

When this guide is useful

Use this guide when someone argues that a child's age alone proves overnights are harmful, or when someone claims that every overnight arrangement is safe.

The boundary to keep

The strongest defensible conclusion is conditional. Safety, established care, conflict, routines, transitions, the child's responses, and the risk of losing an important parent-child relationship all need to be considered.

The evidence at a glance

Findings worth knowing

The earliest direct study raised a real concern, but could not isolate the schedule

Solomon and George found attachment differences between groups. The families also differed in conflict, restraining orders, relationship stability, and caregiving history.

Solomon and George, 1999: read the evidence record

The Australian findings were narrower than a general harm claim

McIntosh and colleagues reported poorer results on selected parent-reported measures for some very young frequent-overnight groups. Other ages and measures did not show the same broad pattern.

McIntosh and colleagues, 2010 and 2013: read the evidence record

An infant attachment concern did not become proven later adjustment harm

Tornello and colleagues reported a concerning infant attachment association. Frequent overnights did not predict more emotional or behavioural problems when the children were assessed at ages three and five.

Tornello and colleagues, 2013: read the evidence record

A report endorsed by 110 researchers and practitioners opposed age-only overnight restrictions

Warshak's central recommendation was that shared parenting should normally include children of all ages, including very young children. The report opposed delaying ordinary father-child overnights until kindergarten solely because of age. It also recognised that shared parenting is not suitable for every family and kept safety, caregiving capacity, relationship history, and the child's circumstances central.

Warshak, 2014, Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 20(1), 46-67: read the evidence record
Test both sides

The strongest objection and the evidence in response

What the opposing argument may say

Infants were more often classified as insecure in some frequent-overnight groups. A court should avoid that possible risk until overnights are proven safe.

What the research supports in response

The concern should be examined, not dismissed. The studies did not prove that overnights caused the difference, did not show a consistent increase in problems as nights increased, and did not establish later emotional or behavioural harm. Avoiding overnights can also weaken or end a parent-child relationship. The evidence supports examining the actual child and caregiving context instead of applying a universal ban.

Recommended reading

Open these papers next

Each link opens a plain-language record with the report summary, researchers’ conclusions, limitations, full citation, and original publication link.

Next recommended reading

Overnight custody arrangements, attachment, and adjustment among very young children

Read the mixed result that is often reduced to only its infant attachment finding.

Tornello, Emery, Rowen, Potter, Ocker & Xu (2013)
Next recommended reading

Social science and parenting plans for young children: A consensus report

Read the discussion of overnights, high-conflict labels, child exposure, neutral transfers, and the competing risk of father dropout.

Richard A. Warshak, with endorsers listed in the article (2014)
Next recommended reading

Night shifts: Revisiting blanket restrictions on children’s overnights with separated parents

Read the detailed challenge to broad restrictions and the interpretation of the direct studies.

Richard A. Warshak (2018)
Next recommended reading

Parental separation and overnight care of young children, Part I: Consensus through theoretical and empirical integration

Read how attachment caution and the importance of both parent-child relationships were brought together.

Marsha Kline Pruett, Jennifer E. McIntosh & Joan B. Kelly (2014)
Next recommended reading

Should infants and toddlers have frequent overnight parenting time with fathers? The policy debate and new data

Read the evidence linking early overnights with later relationships with both parents.

William V. Fabricius & Go Woon Suh (2017)