Exploring the intersection of neuroscience, migration, and childhood development in Chile's ambitious early childhood programs
Imagine a world where a child's future brain development is mapped even before their first steps, where government policies are explicitly designed to shape infant neurology, and where migrant families find themselves at the crossroads of science and citizenship. This isn't science fiction—it's the reality unfolding in Chile, where neurosciences have become central to national early childhood policy.
The fascinating and somewhat controversial program "Chile Crece Contigo" (ChCC) represents a groundbreaking approach to child development, particularly affecting Haitian and Dominican migrant communities who encounter what researchers call the "neuroscience of poverty" 2 .
Through an intricate blend of attachment theory, early stimulation practices, and neurobiological understanding of development, Chile is attempting to engineer the future of its nation literally from the brain up, creating what anthropologists term "(neuro)migrants"—families whose very identity and value become intertwined with neurological ideals 2 .
of institutionalized infants showed normal psychomotor development before intervention
of institutionalized infants demonstrated attachment insecurity pre-intervention
Since the early 2000s, Chile has made massive investments in early childhood development policies, particularly after UNESCO assessments revealed disappointing educational outcomes compared to countries with similar economic development 1 . The centerpiece of this effort is "Chile Crece Contigo" (Chile Grows with You), a comprehensive cross-sectoral system that coordinates activities across nine ministries from the prenatal period up to age nine 1 .
What makes this program particularly innovative—and controversial—is its strong foundation in developmental neuroscience, which posits that the first five years of life are of paramount importance for learning and health across the entire life course 1 .
"The entanglements between attachment theory, neurosciences, and epigenetics gained authority for health practitioners and shaped migrants' representations of motherhood and child-rearing anchored in neurobiology" 2 .
Chile's policies are explicitly designed around brain development science, creating a unique approach to early childhood intervention.
Initial investments in early childhood development following UNESCO assessment results 1 .
Launch of "Chile Crece Contigo" as a comprehensive early childhood system 1 .
Increased migration from Haiti and Dominican Republic, bringing new challenges and perspectives to the program 2 .
At the heart of Chile's early childhood policy lie two powerful psychological frameworks: attachment theory and the concept of early stimulation. Attachment theory, originally developed by John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth, suggests that the quality of the early child-caregiver bond creates enduring patterns that affect relationships throughout life.
Focuses on the emotional bond between child and caregiver as foundational for healthy development.
Activities designed to promote optimal brain development during critical periods of growth.
| Psychological Concept | Policy Application | Intended Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment Theory | Training caregivers in "attachment sensitivity" | Secure child-caregiver relationships |
| Early Brain Development | Early stimulation programs | Optimal neural connectivity |
| Epigenetics | Support for vulnerable families | Prevention of stress-related biological changes |
| Developmental Milestones | Regular screening using tools like M-CHAT-R/F | Early detection of developmental differences |
In Chile's public health system, these frameworks have been translated into specific practices that health practitioners encourage—and sometimes insist upon—with migrant families. The focus is on providing neurobiologically-anchored care that promises to optimize children's future potential 2 .
While the broader "Chile Crece Contigo" program represents a natural experiment in population-wide neuro-policy, smaller controlled studies have examined similar questions in more detail. One particularly revealing study commissioned by the Chilean government offers compelling evidence about how targeted interventions can affect child development—with implications for how we understand the larger national program.
In a quasi-experimental study with a pre-/post-intervention design, researchers examined 62 institutionalized infants and their alternative caregivers . The study had two primary aims: first, to assess the infants' psychoaffective developmental levels before any intervention, and second, to evaluate whether a specific intervention based on promoting socioemotional development could modify the infants' developmental trajectory .
The intervention consisted of training caregivers according to an "attachment sensitivity manual" designed specifically to enhance their ability to form secure, responsive relationships with the infants in their care . This approach reflects the same theoretical foundation that underlies the broader national policies—that caregiver sensitivity can fundamentally shape child development.
The pre-intervention assessments revealed a complex picture of institutionalized children's development. Surprisingly, most children (64%) showed normal psychomotor development, with only 9% displaying significant delays . However, the attachment assessments told a different story—53% of the institutionalized infants demonstrated attachment insecurity, a rate dramatically higher than typically found in the general population .
After the attachment-sensitive intervention, researchers observed significant improvements across multiple developmental domains. The intervention enhanced social orientation and object orientation, and also positively affected activity and reactivity levels .
| Developmental Domain | Pre-Intervention Status | Post-Intervention Change |
|---|---|---|
| Psychomotor Development | 64% normal, 9% delayed | Not specifically remeasured |
| Attachment Security | 53% insecure (elevated) | Not specifically remeasured |
| Social Orientation | Baseline measures | Significant improvement |
| Object Orientation | Baseline measures | Significant improvement |
| Activity & Reactivity Levels | Baseline measures | Significant improvement |
Source:
Perhaps most importantly, this study had real-world policy impact—its findings helped initiate a shift from institutional care to a foster family system and prompted various modifications in strategies for adopting institutionalized children .
Researchers and practitioners in early childhood development draw upon a diverse set of tools and frameworks to understand and support children's growth. The table below outlines some essential "research reagents"—both conceptual and practical—that shape this field:
| Tool/Concept | Function | Example in Chilean Context |
|---|---|---|
| M-CHAT-R/F Screening | Autism spectrum disorder screening | Used for children 16-30 months in public health services 1 |
| Attachment Sensitivity Manual | Caregiver training protocol | Implemented in institutional care settings |
| Developmental Milestone Assessment | Tracking typical development | Integrated into national health surveys since 2005 1 |
| Inclusive Rooms | Interdisciplinary therapeutic settings | Pilot programs for children with developmental disabilities 1 |
| Neuroscientific Frameworks | Guiding policy decisions | Shapes Chile Crece Contigo program implementation 2 |
| Cultural Competency Training | Addressing diversity | Encouraged but not always effectively implemented 2 |
This toolkit represents the practical application of theoretical frameworks, with each component playing a role in the larger project of optimizing child development. What makes the Chilean case particularly interesting is how these tools are deployed at a population level, creating what some critics call the "neuroscience of poverty"—a focus on the neurobiological development of children from vulnerable backgrounds that may overlook broader structural inequalities 2 .
Chile's ambitious experiment in neuro-focused early childhood policy represents a fascinating frontier in the relationship between science, government, and human development. The creation of "(neuro)migrants"—families whose identity and practices become framed through neurological lenses—highlights how scientific frameworks can reshape everything from individual parenting choices to national policy priorities.
The promising results from targeted interventions, such as the institutionalized infants study, suggest that attachment-sensitive approaches can meaningfully improve child outcomes .
At the same time, the challenges faced by migrant families in navigating the "Chile Crece Contigo" system remind us that science is never implemented in a vacuum—it always reflects and sometimes amplifies existing power dynamics and cultural values 2 .
Perhaps the most pressing question is what happens when governments embrace a particularly neurocentric vision of human development—one that may inadvertently minimize the importance of cultural context, structural inequality, and the diverse ways of being human that have existed across cultures and throughout history.
As Chile continues to refine its approach, the world watches an unprecedented experiment unfold: can we engineer better neurological futures through policy, and at what cost to the rich tapestry of cultural diversity that migrants bring with them?
The story of Chile's neuro-migrants is ultimately about all of us—about how we value different kinds of knowledge, how we balance scientific authority with cultural wisdom, and what kind of future we want to build for the next generation. As one researcher aptly notes, these interventions have "shaped moral ideals of children's development and a migrant citizenship project for the future of Chile" 2 —a future that is being built, one developing brain at a time.