Maternal Deprivation

Bowlby proposed a theory of maternal deprivation that focused on the idea that the continual presence of nurture from a mother/mother substitute is essential for normal psychological development of babies and toddlers both emotionally and intellectually. 'Mother love in infancy and childhood is as important for mental health as vitamins and proteins are for physical health'It is important to remember that separation only becomes deprivation when the child is deprived of something which in turn affects their development.The Critical Period:Bowlby saw the first 30 months of life as a critical period for psychological development. If a child experienced deprivation during this critical period, then psychological damage was inevitable.Effects on development: Intellectual development - Bowlby believed that if children were deprived of maternal care for too long during the critical period they would suffer delayed intellectual development characterised by abnormally low IQ. This has been demonstrated in studies of adoption. For example Goldfarb found lower IQ in children who had remained in institutions as opposed to those who were fostered and thus had a higher standard of emotional care Emotional development - Bowlby believed being deprived of a mother figure's emotional care affects children in their emotional development. Bowlby identified affectionless psychopathy as the inability to experience guilt or strong emotion for others. This prevents the person developing normal relationships and is associated with criminality. Affectionless psychopaths cannot appreciate the feelings of victims and so lack remorse for their actions

Bowlby - 44 thieves study: Bowlby interviewed 44 criminal teenagers, accused of stealing, for signs of affectionless psychopathy Their families were also interviewed in order to establish whether the thieves had prolonged early separations from their mothers A control group of non-criminal but emotionally disturbed young people was set up to see how often maternal separation/deprivation occurred in the children who were not thieves 14 of the 44 thieves were described as affectionless psychopaths Of the 14, 12 had experienced prolonged separation from their mothers in the first two years of their lives Only 5 of the remaining 30 thieves had experienced separations Of the control group, only 2 out of 44 had experienced long separations It concluded that prolonged early separation/deprivation caused affectionless psychopathy The study had some design flaws - Bowlby carried out the assessments and interviews knowing what he hoped to find Lewis replicated the 44 thieves study on a larger scale and found that prolonged separation from the mother did not predict criminality or difficulty forming close relationships Bowlby called it a critical period because he believed that prolonged separation inevitably caused damage if it took place within that period. However later research has shown that damage is not inevitable. Some cases of severe deprivation have had good outcomes, provided the child has some social interaction and good aftercare. For example Koluchova reported a case of Czech twin boys that were kept in a cupboard from 18 months until they were 7. When they were found they were looked after by two loving adults and recovered fully. This shows it is a sensitive period rather than a critical one. Rutter claimed that Bowlby was confusing deprivation - which is the loss of primary attachment after the attachment has developed - with privation - which is the failure to form any attachment in the first place