Huh? Or, to put it more succinctly, Huh?
The question was, "What came first? The modern day human mother able to fully care for all the needs of the modern day human infant or the modern day human infant that will grow up to be such a mother?"
The implication is that one must exist first to make the other one possible.
The answer, as I posted, was that such "evolution" takes place gradually with small changes to generations of both mothers and infants over time. They therefore "evolved together".
What is so hard to understand about that?
An analogous question would be, "What what came first? The Modern English-speaking mother or the Modern English-speaking offspring?
The answer is, "Neither".
English, as all languages, is constantly evolving with changes in each generation. The evolution from the English of Chaucer to American Modern English was a gradual change with both mothers and offspspring "evolving that language together" in the time between Chaucer and today.
Your post said:
"A question; the human infant can not fend for itself for many years after birth. Did the parent evolve before the child?
They evolved together."
How can you have a child before you have a parent (at least physically)? If you are talking about having a parent (first) and then a child (second) and that within that species they "evolve," I have no problem with that. Except that children are not always like their parents. So to assume that a protective parent would have a protective child is a bad assumption.