Hmm? I don't know if that last one was just impatience. I only show at best twice a week.

Try and catch this now, most of this is about evolution.

Evolution occurs to an entire population, over time through generations, not to an individual. Although, as Darwin observed, the individual is the agent of evolutionary change.

The individual is the special case, the population is the general case. Mixing the two produces equivocation. This is a dilemma but there are approaches to dealing with the dilemma.
The real point is that dependence, behavioral dependence, not the absolute physical dependence of the fetus for instance, is a drive. As such, it is subject to the visicitudes of drives.
But also, it is evolutionarily influential in a sense analogous with the influence of competitive sexual selection, as noted by Darwin.
I spent a long time trying to say that the basically reproductive functions of sexuality were distinct from dependence drive but then suddenly said to myself:
"Numbskull, dependence is a style of reproduction."
Therefore, it is an element of the sexual drive.
--Mate selection, competitive sexual selection--
--Eros--
--Reproduction--
--Dependence--

There goes the bell, gotta close now.