Maternal Deprivation Flashcards
Summarise the theory of maternal deprivation
Emotional care as important as Physical care - Bowlby believed if an infant is unable to
develop a warm intimate continuous relationship with its mother (or permanent mother
substitute), then they would have difficulty forming relationships with other people and be
at risk of behavioural disorders. Bowlby used the term deprivation to mean the attachment
between the infant and caregiver is disrupted or broken
Critical Period - Bowlby saw the first two and a half years of life as a critical period for
psychological development. Bowlby believed that if a child is deprived of emotional care
because of frequent or prolonged separation from their mother in the absence of suitable
substitute care then psychological damage is inevitable. Bowlby also felt there was a
continuing risk up until the age of five years, known as the sensitive period.
Long terms effects on Intellectual and Emotional development -
Bowlby believed even short
term disruption of attachment to a primary caregiver resulted in serious and long-term
effects on a child’s intellectual and emotional development.
• Intellectual Development –
Bowlby believed that if children were deprived of maternal
care for too long during the critical period they would suffer intellectual delay,
characterised by abnormally low IQ. This has been demonstrated in studies of adoption.
• Emotional Development –
Bowlby identified affectionless psychopathy as the inability to
experience guilt or strong emotions for others. It is characterised as a lack of affection,
lack of guilt about their actions and lack of empathy for their victims. This prevents the
person developing normal relationships and is associated with criminality (delinquency).
Affectionless psychopaths cannot appreciate the feelings of victims and so lack remorse
for their actions.
What was the procedure of bowlbys 44 thieves study?
Procedure – He conducted a natural experiment which involved analysing the case histories
of 88 patients in the Child Guidance Clinic in London. All the children attending the clinic
were emotionally maladjusted, 44 had been accused of stealing (the ’44 thieves’) and the
other 44 formed a control group of non-criminals but emotionally disturbed young people.
All thieves were interviewed for signs of affectionless psychopathy: characterised as a lack
of affection, lack of guilt about their actions and lack of empathy for their victims. Their
families were also interviewed in order to establish whether the thieves had prolonged early
separation from their mothers.
What were the findings?
Findings – Bowlby found that 14 (32%) of the 44 thieves could be described as affectionless
psychopaths. Of this 14, 12 (86%) had experienced prolonged separation from their mothers
in the first two years of their lives. These early separations often consisted of continual or
repeated stays in foster homes or hospitals, when the children were rarely visited by families.
In contrast only 5 (17%) of the remaining 30 thieves had experienced long separation. Of the
control group, only 2 (4%) out of 44 had experienced long separations.
Conclusion - It was concluded that prolonged maternal deprivation caused affectionless
psychopathy. Therefore a lack of continuous care may cause emotional maladjustment or
even a psychological disorder.
What is the real world application?
is that it
has real world applications. Before Bowlby’s research, children were separated from parents
when they spent time in hospital, because medical professionals believed that hospitals only
needed to look after the physical needs of the child, and discouraged parents from visiting
because children seemed to get distressed by the visits. One of Bowlby’s colleagues
Robertson (1952) filmed a two-year-old girl called Laura during the eight day period she was
in hospital she was frequently distressed and begged to go home. They concluded that
substitute emotional care can prevent bond disruption and prevent the harmful effects of
separation/deprivation. Bowlby and Robertson’s research led to major changes in the way
children were cared for in hospital. This illustrates the positive impact that research into
attachment has had on childcare practices.
What is counter evidence ?
– However not all research has supported Bowlby’s findings. For example,
Lewis (1954) partially replicated the 44 thieves’ study on a larger scale, looking at 500 young
people. In her sample a history of early prolonged separation from the mother did not predict
criminality or difficulty forming close relationships. This is a problem for the theory of
maternal deprivation because it suggests that other factors may affect the outcome of early
maternal deprivation. Furthermore the 44 thieves’ study had some major design flaws, most
important investigator bias; Bowlby himself carried out the assessments for affectionless
psychopathy and the family interviews, knowing what he hoped to find. This questions the
validity of Bowlby’s finding
What are the individual differences ?
individual differences need to be considered. Research has shown that not all children are
affected by maternal separation in the same way. Barrett, after reviewing various studies
concluded securely attached children coped reasonably well with separation, whereas
insecure attachment children become especially distressed. A similar conclusion was drawn
from another study by Bowlby (1956) of children who were hospitalised (because they had
TB) and experienced prolonged disruption of attachment. Bowlby suggested that those
children who coped better may have been more securely attached and thus more resilient to
the separation. Both studies therefore suggest that individual differences such as
attachment types need to be considered when assessing the negative effects of disruption of
attachment.
What is the criticism of deprivation vs privation?
– Rutter (1981) criticised Bowlby’s view of deprivation because
it did not make clear whether the child’s attachment bond had formed but had been broken
(deprivation), or had never formed in the first place (privation). Rutter claimed that the
severe long-term damage Bowlby associated with deprivation is actually more likely to be the
result of privation. He therefore used the term privation to refer to situations where the child
fails to develop an attachment bond with one caregiver, and deprivation to refer to
situations where a bond does develop, but through prolonged or traumatic separations is
disrupted or lost. Therefore, highlighting the importance of distinguishing between
deprivation and privation.
