Lecture on Attachment Theory and Maternal Deprivation

Introduction

• Focus on mother-infant attachment relationships.
• Impact of disrupted attachment on child development.
• Overview of John Bowlby's theory of maternal deprivation.
• Discussion on privation (complete absence of maternal care).
• Historical context: Romanian orphanages in the 1980s.

John Bowlby's Theory of Maternal Deprivation

• Monotropy: Unique bond between infant and mother, providing a secure base.
• Critical Period: Up to 30 months post-birth for forming monotropic bond.
  • Deprivation during this period can lead to social, emotional, and cognitive issues.
  • Maternal deprivation associated with delinquency, affective disorders, and lower IQ.
• Internal Working Model: Foundation for future relationships, influenced by early attachment.
• Continuity Hypothesis: Poor internal working models result in challenges in future relationships and parenting.

Empirical Evaluation: 44 Thieves Study

• Bowlby’s study compared emotionally disturbed boys (thieves) with control group.
• Findings indicated a link between maternal deprivation, delinquency, and affectional psychopathy.
• Limitations: Correlational nature can't establish causation.
  • Other factors: socioeconomic status, family history, etc.

Impact of Bowlby’s Theory

• Influenced public policies and social welfare systems, e.g., hospital visitor policies.
• Critique of gender bias: emphasis on mother's role potentially downplaying fathers and other caregivers.

Orphan Studies and Effects of Institutionalization

• Institutionalization: Children raised in state care, impacting behavioral and emotional development.
• Romanian Orphanages: Post-1990 revolution revealed severe neglect and poor conditions.

Rutter’s ERA Study (1998-2011)

• Longitudinal study on Romanian orphans adopted by British families.
• Results:
  • Disinhibited attachment in children adopted after 6 months.
  • Delayed physical, emotional, and intellectual growth in late-adopted children.
  • Importance of early adoption for recovery.
• Sensitive vs. Critical Period: Suggests early years are a flexible sensitive period rather than strictly critical.

Evaluations and Implications

• Policy shifts towards promoting early adoption and improved care in institutions.
• Limitations: Non-random selection of adoptees, ongoing research on long-term effects.
• Other studies show potential for recovery with proper intervention (e.g., Tizard & Hoder, 1989).

Conclusion

• Bowlby’s theory and subsequent research highlight the importance of early attachment.
• Interventions and policy changes emphasize the need for timely and appropriate care.

Additional Resources

• Psych Boost offers further learning materials, including exam tutorials and worksheets.
• Patreon supporters can access exclusive resources and ad-free content.

These notes summarize a comprehensive lecture on the implications of attachment disruption and institutionalization, combining theoretical insights with empirical findings.