Lesson 11 - Romanian orphan studies and the effects of institutionalisation Flashcards
What is institutionalisation?
Placing an infant into a living arrangement outside of their family home like a hospital, mental home, orphanage etc
What are the effects of institutionalisation?
- The child adopting the rules and norms of the institution that can impair functioning
- Loss of personal identity
Why was Romania studied?
In 1966, the dictatorship of Nicolae Ceausescu tried to boost the population by encouraging parents to birth lots of children and banning abortion. Many babies ended up in orphanages and when the regime collapsed in 1989, this came to light and there were more than 100,000 orphans in 600 orphanages. They were malnourished and uncared for
Rutter and Songua-Barke (2010)
ERA (English and Romanian orphans)
- They studied 165 Romanian children who entered the UK and were adopted by British families since the start of the 1990s
- They fell into 3 age groups:
- 54 adopted before the age of 6 months (least time in institutions)
- 57 adopted between 6 months and 2 years
- 54 adopted between the age of 2-4 years (most time in institutions)
- They were tested at ages 4, 6, 11, and 15 for their cognitive, physical and social development. Information was also gathered from interviews with adopters and teachers
- The group was compared to a control group of 52 British children in the UK adopted before 6 months
- To begin with, they lagged behind the UK children in every aspect, but by age 4, some caught up, especially those adopted before the age of 6 months
- By age 11, the mean IQs were:
Before 6 months - 102
6 months to 2 years - 86
2-4 years - 77
- Those who spent longer in institutions were more likely to suffer social, cognitive and emotional deficits. Many showed disinhibited attachments, meaning that they commonly were attention seeking, clingy and they did not show stranger anxiety, which is strange as children of around 2 still showed this. Rutter (2006) said this was an adaptation of living with many carers, as were institutionalised children
Le Mare and Audet (2006)
Supports the effects of institutionalisation
- Studied 36 Romanian children who were adopted in Canada.
- They lagged behind a matched characteristics control group at the age of 4.5 years but this difference disappeared at age 11.
- The effects of institutionalisation are reversible
Strengths of institutionalisation
- It has real life applications, like giving us insight into how to better our institutions and introducing key workers, which are one or two professionals who take care of an infant. This prevents disinhibited attachment and shows that Rutter (2006) has had a significant impact in our understanding of infant behaviour. Rutter and Songua-Barke have also showed us that it is important that infants be adopted as young as possible and within the critical period of 2-3 years of life
- The Romanian orphan studies were longitudinal, meaning that we can better understand the effect of institutionalisation and whether it can be reversed
- There were fewer extraneous variables in Rutter and Songua-Barke’s study than other studies, as they commonly had other factors like the children were also dealing with trauma, bereavement, abuse etc. Therefore it was difficult to find causation, and Rutter and Songua-Barke had high levels of internal validity in their study
Weaknesses of institutionalisation
- Ethical issues, as there was no consent taken from the orphans or their parents. It may have caused psychological harm for the parents and children, as well as unwanted worry and pressure that being part of a long-term longitudinal study brings.
- While most research suggests that the impact of institutionalisation are irreversible, there are a few children who are not as affected as others, and this could be due to the fact that they possibly had ‘special treatment’ while in these facilities, and this led to them being able to form some type of attachment
