Lecture Notes: Bowlby’s Theory of Maternal Deprivation

Introduction

Review of Bowlby’s theories
- Monotropic Theory: Explains how attachments form between infants and mothers, critical for healthy psychological development.
- Maternal Deprivation Theory: Explains the effects of broken attachments, leading to emotional, social, and intellectual damage.
Importance of distinguishing between the two theories to avoid exam mistakes.

Practical Applications
- Influenced policies like maternity leave, now extended to fathers, enhancing early child-caregiver attachment.
- Recognized the vulnerability of children separated from mothers due to hospitalization or being placed in institutions.
- Balby’s report to WHO on maternal care and mental health.

Research Limitations
- Lack of Control Group: Bowlby’s 1944 study on juvenile thieves lacked a comparison group of non-referred children.
- Potential Bias
  - Bowlby conducted assessments, possibly leading to conscious or unconscious bias.
  - Data from mothers was retrospective, risking inaccurate recall or selective sharing.
- Temporal Validity: Changes since the 1930s (e.g., introduction of NHS, welfare benefits) may limit the applicability of findings today.
Replication Studies
- Hilder Lewis (1954) found no relationship between maternal deprivation and criminal behavior or relational issues.

Case Study: Kich Chova (1976)
- Andre and Vana’s recovery challenges the idea that consequences of deprivation are irreversible.
Psychologist Michael Rutter’s Critique
- Distinction between deprivation (loss of a caregiver) and privation (never forming an attachment).
- Affectionless psychopathy may stem from privation rather than deprivation.

Bowlby’s theory has significant criticisms despite its societal impact.
Next topic: Romanian orphanages under dictatorship, exploring attachment further.