Attachment trauma occupies a central and contested position in the depth-psychology corpus, designating the specific wounding that occurs when the very relational system designed to provide safety becomes the source of threat. Distinguished from shock trauma by its interpersonal, developmental, and cumulative nature, attachment trauma encompasses the sequelae of caregiver abuse, neglect, chronic misattunement, and the terrifying paradox Main and Hesse identified: the attachment figure who simultaneously frightens and is the only available refuge. Across the corpus, several lines of argument converge and occasionally diverge. Ogden situates attachment trauma on a continuum from secure attachment through disorganized-disoriented attachment to ‘severe, prolonged attachment trauma,’ linking it systematically to integrative failure, dissociative parts, and somatic action-pattern disruption. Heller foregrounds the pre-verbal, physiological substrate, arguing that prenatal, birth, and early relational trauma are mutually potentiating and cumulative. Courtois and the Lanius volume attend to intergenerational transmission and the therapeutic paradox of asking survivors with disorganized attachment to form a healing attachment to a therapist. Van der Kolk, Maté, and Bowlby ground the argument in neurodevelopment and ethology. The animating tension throughout is whether attachment trauma is best addressed through trauma processing, relational re-patterning, somatic intervention, or mentalization — a debate that remains productively unresolved.