lesson 09 - maternal deprivation

state the theory of maternal deprivation

bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation (1951) suggests that continuous maternal care is crucial for a child’s healthy psychological development. he argued that if a child experiences extended separation from their mother (or primary caregiver) during the critical period (around the first 2.5 years of life) without a suitable substitute, it could lead to serious and irreversible consequences

• bowlby’s theory influenced childcare policies, such as reducing institutional care and encouraging foster care and adoption. however, it has been criticised for overemphasising the role of the mother and not considering factors like quality of care rather than just separation itself. 

effects of maternal deprivation on development

issues such as affectionless psychopathy (lack of empathy and guilt), low IQ, and emotional maladjustment

long-term consequences of maternal deprivation

difficulty forming relationships, delinquency, and mental health problems.

define separation

infant not in the physical presence of the primary caregiver

define deprivation

the emotional availability and care provided by the caregiver is lost

define privation

the failure to develop any attachments during early life. this is contrasted with “deprivation” or “disruption” where attachment bonds have formed but may be disrupted either through physical or simply emotional separation (the loss of attachments)

define affectionless psychopathy

a behaviour disorder in which the individual cannot experience empathy, shame or guilt and lacks a social conscience. this means that they may find it ‘easier’ to commit crimes 

evidence supporting theory of maternal deprivation

• bowlby’s 44 thieves study - natural experiment (no random allocation) showing association between maternal deprivation and affectionless psychopathy. studied 44 teenage thieves for signs of affectionless psychopathy, then compared to their past for possible caregiver deprivation. 14 of the 44 thieves were affectionless psychopaths, 12 experienced maternal deprivation in their critical period. Only 5 of the 30 remaining experienced separation. 2 of 44 of the control group experienced long separations. limitations: small sample size, biased interpretation potential, results did not necessarily prove causation, low replicability

• research on young primates and rodents who were deprived of maternal care in infancy provided ample evidence even short periods of deprivation can affect the developing brain and later social functioning

• more recent research has partially supported theory by showing poor quality maternal care is associated with high rates of psychopathic traits in adults

• william goldfarb (1943) found lower IQ in children who remained in institutions as opposed to those who were fostered and thus had a higher standard of emotional care - had problems with extraneous variables as the children had experiences early trauma and institutional care as well as prolonged separation from their primary caregivers

evidence contradicting theory of maternal deprivation

• jarmila koluchova (1976) czech twins study - had recovered fully by their teenage years after a childhood of severe physical and emotional abuse

• low replicability for 44 thieves study - hilda lewis (1954) found no association between early separation and later psychopathic traits in 500 adults

issue with theory of maternal deprivation: socially sensitive

socially sensitive because it has significant implications for parenting, childcare policies, and societal views on maternal roles

advantage of theory of maternal deprivation: changes in hospital policies

before bowlby’s research, hospitals had strict visiting hours, and parents, especially mothers, were often not allowed to stay with their hospitalised children for extended periods. bowlby’s work led to changes in hospital policies, allowing parents to visit freely and even stay overnight

applications of theory of maternal deprivation

changes in hospital policies, faster adoption, foster care practices, minimising institutional care

other factors which affect child’s development other than maternal deprivation

poverty and socioeconomic status, genetic and biological factors, trauma or major life changes, parental mental health, child abuse or neglect, quality of parent-child relationship, inadequate education

limitation of theory of maternal deprivation - his confusion between different types of early experience

michael rutter (1981) drew a distinction between two types of early negative experience, deprivation and privation e.g. the children in goldfarb’s experiment may have been prived rather than deprived, children in 44 thieves study had typically experienced disruption in their early lives and may have never formed strong attachments. this means he may have overestimated the seriousness of the effects of deprivation in children’s development