romanian orphan studies: institutionalisation Flashcards
institution
place where people live for long time eg. orphanages
privation
occurs when children have never formed an attachemnt
–> more likely to occur in institutions if poor emotional care
difference between deprivation & privation
deprivation = breaking of attachment
privation = never forming an attachment to begin with
background
- in 1966, romanian communist gov. (under dictator nicolae ceausescu) tried to boost population by encouraging mothers to have large families (5+) & banning abortion
- severe poverty meant babies couldn’t be cared for
- after revolution (1989), more than 100,000 babies in 600 state-run orphanages
- orphanages minimally staffed & over-populated
- children received little cognitive stimulation/emotional care
- many showed severe signs of institutionalisation
who researched the effects of institutionalisation on romanian orphans
rutter et al.
aim of rutter et al. research
investigate long-term impacts of institutional care & see to what extent good care could make up for poor early experiences in institutions
procedure of rutter et al. research
- longitudinal study
- began in early 1990s & followed group of romanian children adopted to uk from institutions in romania
- randomly selected sample of 144 children from romania & adopted by uk families before aged 4 –> studied at age 4, 6 & 11 years old
- comparisons made with sample of 52 non-institutionalised UK children adopted before 6 months
findings of rutter et al. research
- quasi-autism
- disinhibited attachment (eg. behaviours like attention seeking/clinginess & impaired adult relationships)
- emotional problems (eg. temper tantrums)
- physical delay = restricted growth
- differential rates of recovery depending on adoption age
- at 11, if child adopted prior to 6 months their IQ =102 but if adopted between 6 months & 2 years their IQ = 86
- those adopted after 2 years, IQ was 77
what research supported the decrease in IQ for orphans
beckett et al. 2010
which researcher stated that ADHD was more common in 15- & 22-25-year-old samples
kennedy et. al (2016)
characteristics of orphans when adopted (compared to UK children)
- lagged behind eg. physical, cognitive & social development
- smaller/weighed less
- signs of mental retardation
by age 4, what did the orphans adopted prior to 6 months show
caught up with UK children
by age 4, what had the orphans in care for 6+ months show
showed significant deficits & disinhibited attachments/relationship problems with peers
conclusion of rutter et al. research
institutionalisation can have relatively long-term negative effects on social, emotional & cognitive development, but these effects can be minimised if children are taken out of institutional environment before 6 months
name 3 other studies on romanian orpans
- LeMare & Audet (2006)
- The Bucharest Early Intervention Project (Zeanah et al. 2005)
- Hodges & Tizard
describe procedure of lemare & audet (2006) research
- longitudinal study on physical growth & health of 36 romanian orphans adopted by canadian families
- compared to group of children raised in normal canadian families
- data collected for each child at 3 points: 11 months after adoption, 4.5 years & 10.5 years old
describe results of lemare & audet (2006) research
- 1st two sets of results showed adoptees were behind non-institutionalised group
- by 10.5 years old, there was no difference between 2 groups
describe procedure of The Bucharest Early Intervention Project (Zeanah et al. 2005)
- assessed attachment of 95 children aged 12-31 months
- they’d spent avg. 90% of life in institution
- compared to control group of 50 children who’d spent life in ‘normal family’
- attachment type measured via strange situation
- carers also questioned on unusual social behaviour (eg. clingy) directed inappropriately at all adults (measure of disinhibited attachment)
describe results of The Bucharest Early Intervention Project (Zeanah et al. 2005)
- 74% of control group were securely attached
- 19% of institutionalised group were securely attached
- description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children v. less than 20% of control group
describe procedure of hodges & tizard
- studied 65 children brought up in children’s home until 4 years old
describe results of hodges & tizard
almost all of adopted children & some of restored children formed close attachments to parents
BUT had difficulties with peer relationships & were more attention seeking
AO3
-)
P: ungeneralisable
E: evident as standards of care in institutions in romania were particularly poor & unusual for an institution
T: can’t compare to institutions in UK due to severe living conditions so can only compare to similar institutions
-)
P: current lack of data on adult development
E: latest data from ERA study looked at children in early-mid 20s meaning we don’t currently have data to answer some of questions on long-term effects of early institutional care. these questions include long-term prevalence of mental health problems & participants success in forming/maintaining adult romantic & parental relationships. this data will take a long time to gather due to longitudinal design of study.
T: it will be some time before we know more on the long-term effects for the romanian orphans & it’s possible that late adopted children may ‘catch up’
+)
P: practical application to improve conditions for children growing up outside family home
E: improved psychologists understanding of effects of early institutional care & how to prevent the worst impacts (langton 2006). this led to improvements in conditions looked-after children experience eg. children’s home now avoid large numbers of caregivers for each child & now often have 1-2 ‘key workers’ who play a central role in their emotional care. also, institutional care is now seen as undesirable for children in care & foster care/adoption is seen as a better option
T: children in institutional care have a chance to develop normal attachments & avoid disinhibited attachment
+)
P: lack of confounding variables
E: many orphan studies prior to romanian ones where many of the children had experienced degrees of trauma & it’s difficult to remove the impacts of neglect, physical abuse & bereavement from those in institutional care. however, children in romanian orphanages had (mainly) been handed over by parents who couldn’t afford to keep them.
T: results less likely to be confounded by other early negative experiences meaning higher internal validity
-) of research into institutionalisation
P: results lack internal validity
E: hodges & tizard showed children weren’t randomly allocated to conditions
T: could be researcher bias so chose children who were more social making it easier to form attachments so cannot be generalised
