Bowlby’s Theory of Maternal Deprivation

In this essay I intend to analyse the shackle surmisal of well-k instantern British head-shrinker Dr earth-closet Bowlby. I testament examine both the primary and secondary interrogation behind the theory and look at some of the arguments against it before going on to seek the impact Bowlbys research has had on the other(a) old board setting. Edward John Mostyn Bowlby was born in London on February 26th 1907 to a more or less upper-middle class family. His pargonnts were of the belief that too much nourishal affection would in fact spoil a electric razor and hence spent genuinely little time with him, as little as one minute per day.His primary contend-giver was the family nanny until, when he was four years old, the nanny left. Bowlby subsequent expound this as organism as tragic as the button of a make (www. mentalhelp. net/poc/view_doc. php? type=docid=10104cn=28) He was indeedce sent away to boarding give instruction at the geezerhood of seven. It is at that placefore entirely comprehensible that he became increasingly sensitive to childrens low-d testify and how it appeared to be connected to their future mental health. Bowlby began his study at tercet College Cambridge where he studied psychology.He excelled academically and spent time browseing with remiss children. He then went on to study medicine at University College infirmary and enrolled in the Institute of Psychoanalysis. Upon his graduation he began grazeing at Maudesley hospital as a psychoanalyst. It was while studying medicine that he volunteered in a childrens residential residence and began to develop his interest in children who appeared to him to be ablazely disturbed. While working in the residential home he encountered two particular children who intrigued him.The prototypical of these was a very isolated, affectionless teenager who had no permanent, stable get figure and the second was a preadolescent boy of seven or eight who followed Bowlby around constantly. This led him to ruminate that there was a mathematical link amidst a childs mental health problems and their proterozoic childhood experiences. It was superior generally believed by m both archaeozoic theorists that the need to make a vex with a start out or mother substitute was part of our biological inheritance and Bowlbys experience and observations lead him to whole-heartedly agree.The settlementing body of work and research carried come forward by Bowlby became known as the attachment theory. It was his firm belief that babies are biologically programmed to be dependant on their mother. He went so furthest as to say that there was a critical issue in a childs life from birth to age deuce-ace where the child would be irreparably damaged psychologically by a pro wanted absence from the mother. He referred to this absence as agnate deprivation. He wrote in his book, first published in 1953 Prolonged breaks (in the mother-child relationship) during the first three years of life leave a characteristic smell on the childs personality. Such children appear emotionally locomote and isolated and consequently have no friendships worth the name (pg 39, Bowlby J. squirt Care and the issue of Love, 1974) While working at the Child way Clinic in London in the 30s and 40s Bowlby began to suspect that non only was a childs mental health affected by the inadequacy of obligate with their mother but there may well be a correlation between remiss behaviour in children and maternal deprivation.This led him to carry egress his own study between 1936 and 1939 to try and prove this to be the subject area. The resulting scientific paper was published in 1946 and entitled 44 Juvenile Thieves. The study involved Bowlby selecting 88 children from the clinic. Of this mathematical group of children 44 had been referred to him for theft and 44 had been referred due to emotional problems. Half the children in distributively group were aged betw een five and football team years of age and the other half were between twelve and sixteen. There were cardinal boys and thirteen girls in the first group and thirty-four boys and ten girls in the second.The two groups were roughly matched for age and IQ. On arrival at the clinic, each child had their IQ tested by a psychologist and at the equivalent time a parent was interviewed by a social histrion to establish and commemorate details of the childs early life. Bowlby, the psychiatrist at the clinic, then conducted an initial interview with the child and parent. The 3 professionals then met to compare nones. Bowlby then went on to conduct a series of except interviews with the child and/or parent over the next a couple of(prenominal) onths to get ahead more in-depth information about the history of the child, specifically in their early years. Bowlby considered his findings to be entirely conclusive. Of the 44 thieves Bowlby diagnosed 32% as affectionless psychopaths. He de scribed this intend as involving a lack of emotional development in the children, leading to a lack of concern for others, a lack of guilt and an inability to form meaningful and/or lasting relationships. Bowlby reason out that this condition was the precise reason why these children were capable of stealing.His speculation was gain ground strengthened when he discovered that 86% of the children with affectionless psychopathy had experienced a long period of maternal deprivation in the first five years of their lives. They had spent the majority of their early years either in institutions or in hospital with little or no calamity from their parents. Interviews in like manner showed that the majority of these children had been undemonstrative and unresponsive since approximately two years of age. only if 17% of the thieves who were not diagnosed as affectionless psychopaths had experienced maternal deprivation in the early years.Of the second group not one child be to be affe ctionless and only two of them had experienced prolonged maternal separation. Bowlby concluded in the resulting paper There is a very strong case indeed for believing that prolonged separation of a child from his mother (or mother substitute) during the first five years of life stands foremost among the causes of delinquent character development Bowlby J. pg 41 Many have however argued that Bowlbys findings were not reliable. It has been suggested that as the study was carried out retrospectively this may have taint the results.It is possible that the parents or the children had not recalled events accurately or indeed that they had not responded truthfully to questioning in order to put themselves in a better light. Michael Rutter suggested in 1981 that some of the children in the study had never had a mother figure at all so their delinquency was not due to maternal deprivation but rather to privation of any sort of loving attachment. Bowlby looked at research done by others whic h could fend his own findings. He examined both animal studies done by Hinde and Harlow and Lorenz as well as child studies.He noted in particular the work of Rene Spitz and Katharine Wolf. Spitz and Wolf had observed 123 babies during the first few years of their lives while they were being looked after by their own mothers who were in prison. When the babies were between 6-8 months old their mothers were travel elsewhere within the prison for a period of three months and the babies were cared for by others inmates. Spitz and Wolf noted that the babies lost their appetite, cried more often and failed to thrive during this period of separation. Once the babies were returned to their mothers their behaviour returned to what it had been previous to the separation.These results certainly appeared to support Bowlbys theory however others disagreed. In Czechoslovakia in 1972 Koluchova wrote of twin boys who had suffered extreme deprivation. Their mother had died soon after the boys wer e born and their father struggled to cope on his own. At eleven months of age the boys were taken into care and were considered to be normal, healthy children. A few months later their father remarried and at the age of cardinal months the correspond returned to their fathers care. unfortunately the father worked away from home a great deal and their step-mother hard-boiled the boys horribly.They were beaten, given very little food, made to sleep on a plastic sheet on the floor and sometimes locked away in the cellar. This continued for five and a half years and when the boys were examined at the age of seven they were found to be severely mentally and physically retarded. The twins were hospitalised until they were able to be placed in a special trail for mentally disturbed children. They coped well with their schooling and went on to be fostered by a very affectionate, kind lady and in her care they blossomed.By the age of 15 the boys IQ was normal for their age and their emo tional health had ameliorate immensely. Koluchovas work would appear to demonstrate that it is in fact possible for a child to recover from maternal deprivation in their early years if they are given the love, support and security required later in their childhood and that the results of maternal deprivation need not be permanent. Schaffer and Emerson withal disputed Bowlbys findings and argued that, although an infant needed to form a bond, children could form multiple attachments and they could benefit greatly from the charge of the extended family.They performed a study in Glasgow in 1964 where they observed 60 children from birth eighteen months. They met with the mothers once a month and interviewed them to ascertain who the infant was smiling at, who they responded to etc. They found that many of the infants were forming numerous attachments. Twenty of the children studied were not devoted to their mothers but to some other adult, in some cases the father and in others another family member or even a neighbour. Schaffer states There is, we must conclude, vigor to indicate any biological need for an exclusive primary bond Davenport G.C. pg 38 In 1950 the World Health Organisation, who had been following Bowlbys work closely, commission him to write a report on the mental health of unsettled children in post-war Europe. While researching the report Bowlby visited several countries and met with many childcare professionals and experts liberal him the opportunity to look further into his theory on attachment and the vastness of a strong bond between mother and child. His findings supported his intellection entirely and the report was written in six months and published in 1951, entitled Maternal Care and Mental Health.Bowlby went on to publish further papers and books and his findings and research on attachment and the mother child bond has had a profound impact on childcare in general and that of the early years setting. As Juliet Mickleburgh s tates in her article Attachment hypothesis and the Key Person betterment Bowlbys research is recognised as the floor for our understanding of the centrality of making secure attachments in infancy. Juliet Mickleburgh, www. eyfs. info There have been numerous changes to childcare practice since the 1940s and Bowlbys influence must be acknowledged.It gouge be no coincidence that family allowance was introduced in 1946 in the UK, the same year 44 Juvenile Thieves was published, making it affordable for mothers to vex at home with their children. Bowlby made a plea for reforms in the care of young children in hospital and advocated rooming in where the baby stays with mother from birth in the maternity ward. Although some childrens hospitals were already extending visitation obligations of parents many more followed their lead after the publication of Bowlbys W. H. O report, ensuring that the mother/child bond remained as strong as possible.In the early years setting we have witn essed the implementation of the Key Person Approach pioneered by Elinor Goldschmied. This approach recognises that an infant will be comforted by a secure relationship with one specific adult. We can now see this in practice in the nursery, each child has their own Key Worker who has the duty of observe the childs involve and development. This approach also accepts the need for parents and early years practitioners to work unitedly rather than independently and the key worker regularly liaises with the parents envisioning their child.Parents are also encouraged to become actively involved with the life of the nursery and to work in partnership with the nursery staff to provide their child with a positive, stable and stimulating learning environment. In my view as a parent and an early years practitioner I believe that Bowlbys research has benefitted both children and families immensely. As a mother I savor that society supports my right to be at home with my children until the y go to school and that I am the childs most vital pick in their early years, not only for nourishment but for their emotional development.To echo the words of John Major, Bowlby laid the foundation for mothers in the twenty-first century to go back to basics. As a practitioner I believe that the implementation of the key person approach can be immensely beneficial for both the child and the parent. The child knows that there is always someone there to whom they can turn if necessary and the parent knows that there will always be someone looking out for their child in the setting and that he/she is being given the attention and care of a trained adult in their absence.I have witnessed first-hand in the nursery how a child who is upset by the departure of their mother can be comforted by the attention of their key worker. I have also observed how the key workers are constantly monitoring the children to pinpoint any needs, to witness the achievement of developmental milestones and t o document this for the parents in the form of the Personal Learning Plan, a written and photographic record of the childs achievements within the setting.In conclusion, although there have been arguments against Bowlbys research methods many professionals agreed with his findings regarding the importance of a secure attachment in the early years. These findings, and undoubtedly those of others in the field, have led to positive reforms in childcare. As we progress through the 21st century women are notion the need, either for financial reasons or the belief that they too have the right to work, I find myself asking will society continue to regard the bond between a mother and her child as dominant or will maternal deprivation increase and society as a whole be damaged as a result?Bibliography www. mentalhelp. net/poc/view_doc. php? type=docid=10104cn=28 Bowlby J. 1953. Child Care and the Growth of Love, 2nd ed, England, Pelican Books Davenport G. C 1994. An Introduction to Child Development, 2nd ed, London, Collins educational www. eyfs. info/articles/article. php? Attachment-Theory-and-the-Key-Person-Approach-66 .