John Bowlby's Theory of Attachment: Do Children Suffer Psychological Damage Due to Separation? Essay Example
What was John Bowlby's Theory of attachment and do children always suffer psychological damage as a result of separation?
In this essay I am going to describe John Bowlby's theory of attachment and provide evidence to support and refute his theory, also providing evidence to support or deny the claim that children always suffer psychological damage as a result of separation. John Bowlby is widely credited as the father of attachment theory due to his extensive research into the concept of attachment. He revolutionized our thinking about a child's bond to its mother and the emotional and social impact created as a result of separation, deprivation and bereavement describing his theory as "a lasting psychological connectedness between human beings" (Bowlby 1969) pg 194. Believing that early childhood experiences have an important influence on development and behaviours later in life His theory was based on psychological, evolutionary and ethological ideas to explain our ability to form special emotional relationships and exchange comfort, care and pleasure. His theory argued that a child is born innate need to attach to one main figure usually the mother, although he agreed with Rutters argument that multiple attachments can be formed. Bowlby used monotropy to describe this primary bond, it is said to be the first to appear, unique, strongest and far more important than any other and forms the basis for successful future relationships, describing it as "a mother's love in infancy is as important for mental health as vitamins and proteins are for physical health" (Bowlby 1951). He claims that we are all born biologically pre programmed to form an instinctive bond with our mother that has progressed through evolution to maintain our survival activating attachment behaviours such as crying and clinging to remain close and safe from threat and danger. However Schaffer and Emerson (1964) found that on a study of 60 babies from a working class background in Glasgow
In this essay I am going to describe John Bowlby's theory of attachment and provide evidence to support and refute his theory, also providing evidence to support or deny the claim that children always suffer psychological damage as a result of separation. John Bowlby is widely credited as the father of attachment theory due to his extensive research into the concept of attachment. He revolutionized our thinking about a child's bond to its mother and the emotional and social impact created as a result of separation, deprivation and bereavement describing his theory as "a lasting psychological connectedness between human beings" (Bowlby 1969) pg 194. Believing that early childhood experiences have an important influence on development and behaviours later in life His theory was based on psychological, evolutionary and ethological ideas to explain our ability to form special emotional relationships and exchange comfort, care and pleasure. His theory argued that a child is born innate need to attach to one main figure usually the mother, although he agreed with Rutters argument that multiple attachments can be formed. Bowlby used monotropy to describe this primary bond, it is said to be the first to appear, unique, strongest and far more important than any other and forms the basis for successful future relationships, describing it as "a mother's love in infancy is as important for mental health as vitamins and proteins are for physical health" (Bowlby 1951). He claims that we are all born biologically pre programmed to form an instinctive bond with our mother that has progressed through evolution to maintain our survival activating attachment behaviours such as crying and clinging to remain close and safe from threat and danger. However Schaffer and Emerson (1964) found that on a study of 60 babies from a working class background in Glasgow