Disruption of Attachment Flashcards
Deprivation
There are a number of situations in which an attachment can be broken either temporarily, for example by hospitalisation or permanently through death. A broken attachment like this is referred to as deprivation.
Privation
Unfortunately there are also cases of children being so badly treated, perhaps being kept in total isolation for many years, that they never have the opportunity to form an attachment and this is called privation.
Short term effects of Separation
Robertson & Bowlby (1952) PDD Model said that children reacted with ‘PDD’ when separated from caregivers. it is important to note that the initial distress varies according to the temperament of the child.
- The research for the PDD model was carried out on children aged between 1 and 4.
PDD
P - Protest: child cries and calls for its mother. Panic is usual. This can last from a few hours to a few weeks.
D - Despair: Child becomes apathetic (i.e. uninterested in what is happening around them.) They continue to cry occasionally and call for their mother.
D - Detachment: The child cries less and is more interested its surroundings. When the mother returns the child shows little interest and may even be angry or push the mother away. However, the attachment is soon rebuilt.
Support for the PDD model
(Naturalistic Observation)
- John was placed in a residential nursery whilst his mother was in hospital.
- Over the course of 9 days John went from being a happy child to an overly distressed child. For two days John tries to attach himself to a nurse, but because they are not assigned to individual children no nurse attends to John long enough to understand him and answer his needs. He is not mothered or protected from attacks by the other children. Food and routines are strange, and the father’s visits can do little to ease the situation. John becomes increasingly distressed.
John (part one)
- He seeks comfort from an oversized teddy bear, but this isn’t enough.
- He breaks down, refuses to eat, stops playing, cries a lot and gives up trying to get the nurses’ attention. At reunion with his mother, John screams and struggles to get away from her, For many months he continued to have outbursts of anger towards her (he didn’t receive sensitive substitute care)
John (part two)
- Supports the PDD model because it shows that John has gone through the stages of PDD
- But the use for a study or research into the short term effects of separation explain Robertson’s research using case studies. Robertson found that some children go through protest, despair and detachment while others (if they receive sensitive substitute care) do not ( Lucy, Thomas)
- Looked at a number of children. Laura and John went into care they suffered PDD unlike Lucy and Thomas who received sensitive care.
John (part three)
- However, while attempting to draw any conclusions about the short term effects of separation it is important to note that case studies are unique so may lack generalisability
- Low external validity if it cannot be generalised.
Evaluation of PDD model good:-
- It’s important to note that MOST children are able to re-establish an attachment.
- Highlighted the importance of minimising separation effects on young children
- Clearly identified the main stages in a child’s response to separation
Criticisms of PDD model
- Does not consider individual differences and attachment types
- For example, securely attached children may react differently to separation than avoidant children.
Support of the PDD model
- Good because the studies have also been used to minimise the effects of separation
1. Keep the routine as similar to the one they are used to as possible ;
2. Ensure visitations with primary caregiver as often as possible
3. Sensitive substitute care is required
Long Term effects of Separation
Bowlby propsed the Maternal Deprivation Hypothesis
- He stated that Breaking the maternal bond in the early years is likely to have serious effects on intellectual, social and emotional development and that once the bond is broken it cannot be fixed.
ADDIDDAS (a mnemonic for the consequences of Maternal deprivation):
A - aggression D - delinquency D - Dwarfism I - Intellectual retardation D - Depression D - Dependency A - Affectionless S - Social Maladjustment
Bowlby’s 44 Thieves supports MDH.
Bowlby interviewed children, and their families, who attend a clinic where he worked. He compared the background of 44 other non-delinquent children.
Bowlby’s 44: Findings
32% of the thieves were diagnosed by Bowlby as having affectionless psychopathy, the main symptom of which, is lack of oral conscience.
- Most of these had experienced separation for at least one week before the age of 5.
Bowlby’s 44: Conclusion
Separation in early life led to long term ill effects, particularly adversely affecting emotional development.
Bowlby’s 44: Evaluation
- The data collection is retrospective (i.e. the children and their parents had to think back many years to the child’s younger days). This can produce inaccuracies (as you will appreciate being experts in the memory process).
- Some of the children were only separated for short periods, so it is difficult to believe this could have caused such emotional disturbances.
- The results are correlational, so we cannot prove cause and effect.
- Bowbly assumed that the early separation had caused the later disturbance, but many other factors could be responsible. For example children from natural temperament, sensitive substitute care can have an impact on the effects of separation.