bowlbys theory of maternal deprivation

• intro>>>

  - Bolwby is known for his monotropy theory but he also proposed the theory of maternal deprivation

  - This focuses on the idea that the continuous presence of care from a mother is important for normal development of babies

  - Prolonged separation from the adult causes serious damages to their emotional and intellectual development - this leads to maternal deprivation

  - Bowlby ( 1953) said that ‘mother-love in infancy and childhood is important for mental health as are vitamins and proteins for physical health’
• seperation vs deprivation>>>

  - separation means the kid isnt in the presence of the primary attachment figure

  - Only becomes a problem if if the kid becomes deprived of emotional care

  - Extended separation leads to deprivation which can cause harm
• critical period>>>

  - Bowlby saw the first 2 ½ years of life as the critical period for psychological development e

  - If kid is separated from mother and becomes deprived of the of their emotional care for an extended time during the critical period, Bowlby believed psychological damage was inevitable

  - Also believed there was a continuing risk up to the age of 5
• effects on development>>>

  - Intellectual development

  - Emotional development
• effects: intellectual development>>>

  - Bowlby believed if kids were deprived of maternal care for too long during the critical period, their intellectual development is delayed – characterised by abnormally low IQ

  - This is shown in studies e.g. Goldfarb (1947) found lower IQ in kids who remained in institutions compared to those who got fostered who had a higher standard of emotional care
• effects: emotional development>>>

  - Bowlby identified affectionless psychopathy – inability to experience guilt/ strong emotions towards others

  - Prevents people developing normal relationships

  - Often associated with criminality – cant appreciate the feelings of victims and lack remorse for their actions
• bowlbys research>>>

  - Bowlby's (19440 44 thieves study examined the link between affectionless psychopathy and maternal deprivation
• bowlby's research : procedure>>>

  - Sample of 44 teen criminal who were accused of stealing

  - All thieves were interviewed for signs of affectionless psychopathy

  - Characteristed by lack of guilt, lack of empthay for victims

  - Their families were also interviewed to establiseh whther the theives had early prolonged sepration from their mothers

  - Sample was compared to a control group of 44 non-criminals but were emotionally disturbed
• bowlbys research: findings>>>

  - Found 14/44 thieves were describes as having affectionless psychopathy

  - 12 of them experienced prolonged separation from their mothers within the first 2 years of life

  - 5/30 remaining had experienced separations

  - Only 2/44 in the control group experienced long separations

  - … concluded that prolonged early seperation caused affectionless psychopathy
• ao3 flawed evidence + cp>>> (1/3)

  - Bowlby's 44 theives study is flawed because its bowlby himself who carried out both family interviews w/ affectionless psychopathy

  - He's open to bias – knew in advance which teens he expected to show signs of psychopathy
• ao3 flawed evidence + cp>>> (2/3)

  • Bowlby was also influenced by findings of Goldfarb (1943) research on the development of deprived kids in wartime orphanages

  - this confounding variables – kids had experienced early trauma, institutional care and prolonged separation from their primary caregiver

  - Means the Bowlby’s original sources of evidence of maternal deprivation had flaws and would be reliable data
• ao3 flawed evidence + cp>>> (3/3)

  cp// However, theres some research that provides support that maternal deprivaiton can have long-term effects

  - Le'vy et al (2003) sowed that separating baby rats from their mother for a day had a permanent effect on their social development

  - … shows that although Bowlby relied on flawed evidence , their are other sources that support his idea on maternal deprivation.
• ao3 deprivation vs privation>>>

  - confusion between different types of early experience

  - Rutter (1981) made a distinction between 2 types of early negative experience

  - Deprivation ~ the loss of the primary attachment figure after attachment has developed

  - Privation ~ the failure to form any attachment in the first place

  - often happens when kids are brought up in institutional care
• ao3 deprivation vs privation>>>(2/2)

  - Rutter also found that the severe long-term damage Bowlby associated with deprivation is more likely to be a result of privation

  - So kids studied by Golfarb may have been ‘prived’ rather than deprived

  - many in the 44 thieves study had disrupted early live (e.g. in hospital) and may never have formed strong attachments

  - … means Bowlby may have overestimated the seriousness of effect of deprivation in kids development
• ao3 critical vs sensitive periods>>> (1/2)

  • to bowlby, damage was inevitable if a child didn’t form an attachment within the first 2 ½ years of life (critical period)

  - Evidence shows that good quality aftercare can prevent most/ all this damage
• ao3 critical vs sensitive periods>>>(2/2)

  • Jarmila Koulchova’ reported the case of the Cezch twins

  - Experienced severe physical and emotional abuse from the age of 18 months – 7 years old

  - Even though they were damaged emotionally, they received good after care – by the time they were teens, they had fully recovered

  - .. means that lasting harm is inevitable even in cases of privation – shows that critical period is better seen as the sensitive period.