Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation

• Define maternal deprivation.

  Maternal deprivation refers to the loss of an attachment which, in turn, leads to the infant losing an element of their care. This can happen after an extended period of separation.
• Outline Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation.


  Bowlby's theory of maternal deprivation proposes that the continual presence of a mother is essential for their child's development.

  This is because extended separations can lead to maternal deprivation i.e. when an infant loses their attachment and, in turn, loses an element of their care.

  Bowlby proposed that if maternal deprivation occurs within a critical period of 2.5 years, it could lead to negative, potentially irreversible consequences.
• Outline Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation.


  Once of these consequences includes low IQ whereby the child may experience difficulties keeping up with other children at school.

  Another is affectionless psychopathy whereby the child may have little regard for the feelings of others and so may be more likely to engage in delinquent behaviour.

  A final example is a poor internal working model whereby the child perceives future relationships in a negative way (e.g. may fear being abandoned again) and so are less likely to form or maintain relationships.
• Evaluate Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation: supporting evidence.

  Bowlby's 44 juvenile thieves study involved interviewing thieves for signs of affectionless psychopathy. Bowlby found that 14 of the thieves were affectionless psychopaths and 12 of these 14 had experienced maternal deprivation in the first couple of years of life. In contrast, a control group who had low levels of affectionless psychopathy had low rates of maternal deprivation. This is a strength because it supports a link between maternal deprivation and affectionless psychopathy.
• Evaluate Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation: methodological flaws.


  Bowlby's 44 juvenile thieves study was conducted by Bowlby himself and only examined a relationship between maternal deprivation and affectionless psychopathy. This is a limitation because Bowlby may have displayed researcher bias whereby he could have interpreted the findings in a way to suit his own theory.
• Evaluate Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation: cause and effect cannot be established between maternal deprivation and affectionless psychopathy due to the correlational evidence. I


  ndeed, it could be argued that confounding variables may play a role e.g. the reason why the individuals were separated from their caregiver (e.g. abuse/neglect) could be the cause of their affectionless psychopathy rather than the loss of an attachment itself. Therefore questions credibility.
• Evaluate Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation: severe effects he identified may be due to privation (the failure to form an attachment) rather than deprivation (the loss of an attachment). 


  This is because such effects can be seen in Harlow's research whereby the baby monkeys grew up in isolation (i.e. was not able to form an attachment to a real monkey mother) and later had social and emotional disturbances. This is a limitation because it suggests Bowlby may have confused maternal deprivation with privation, drawing doubt on his entire theory.
• Evaluate Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation: practical applications.


  E.g. hospitals now allow parents to stay with their infants who may be hospitalised for long periods of time. Day care practices have also improved whereby they now avoid having large numbers of carers for each child. Instead, each child is given a key worker who acts as a substitute for the primary caregiver so they do not lose an element of their care. This is a strength because it has helped to reduce cases of maternal deprivation and, in turn, helped to prevent the negative consequences Bowlby identified.