Bowlby's theory of maternal deprivation - 1951

The continual presence of a nurturing mother or mother substitute is essential for the normal psychological development of babies - being separated from a mother in early life has serious repercussions for emotional and intellectual development.

^^separation vs deprivation:^^

Separation: child not being in presence of primary attachment figure

Deprivation: a child loosing an element of their care. Extended separation from the primary caregiver can lead to deprivation which causes harm.

^^critical period:^^

first 30 months = critical period. If a child is separated from their primary caregiver with no suitable replacement and deprived of care as a consequence during this time, psychological damage is inevitable

^^Effects on development^^

^^Intellectual:^^

If children are deprived of care for too long during the critical period they suffer delayed intellectual development. This is characterised by low IQ - Goldfarb found that children who were adopted or fostered had higher IQs than those who were continuously institutionalised

^^Emotional:^^

maternal deprivation leads to stunted emotional development. This in turn can lead to affectionless psychopathy - a lack of empathy and lack of remorse for their actions, this is often associated with criminality.

44 thieves study:

Bowlby studied 44 teenagers accused of stealing, they were all interviewed for signs of affectionless psychopathy and their families were interviewed to determine whether or not they were separated from their mothers in the critical period. A control group was also established of non-criminal but emotionally disturbed young people.

14 out of the 44 thieves could be described as affectionless psychopaths, of these 14, 12 had experienced maternal deprivation during the critical period. Only 2 of the control 44 had experienced maternal deprivation.

Evaluation:

Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation & 44 thieves study -

Poor evidence - some of Bowlby’s sources were orphans in WWII, these orphans were likely to be traumatised for other reasons as they were living through a war. This means that their psychological development was not soley influenced by their maternal deprivation

Counter evidence - Lewis (1954) replicated the 44 thieves study looking at 500 people, she found that maternal deprivation did not predict criminality or affectionless psychopathy

Critical period is more of a sensitive period - some case studies show evidence of children being completely deprived of any maternal care during the critical period and then being provided with loving care and developing at a perfectly normal rate.