Bowlby’s maternal deprivation hypothesis says that a child’s attachments form since birth to 2.5 years old. He uses
the monotropic theory to say that the child has only one more important attachement, the one he forms with his
primary caregiver, usually the mother, idea that he also uses in the maternal deprivation theory, explaining that if a
child has an attachement that breaks, is separated from its attachment figure or has no attachment at all during in
what he calls a critical period, 0 to 2.5 years of age, there are going to be some problems with the childțs
development if there is no substitute to take care of them or no other attachement figure available, such as lack of
emotions, lower IQ and other diagnosis as affectionless psychopathy or retardism. This could also lead to difficulty
forming relationships and a higher risk of mental health issues.
In the case of Joe, he was taken away from his biological parents at six months old and placed in care, potentially
disrupting the opportunity for him to form a secure attachment to his primary caregiver. Furthermore, Joe was
adopted when he was seven years old which had an impact on the formation of an attachment with his adoptive
parents as he was older than the critical period and was raised with no other forms or examples of natural
attachment. This can make it difficult for him to form secure relationships and may contribute to the aggressive
behavior towards his siblings and difficulty with classwork and disregard for the feelings of others as described in his
school report.
However, Bowlby's theory should be considered as one of many factors that can influence a child's development,
and that other experiences and factors may also play a role in Joe's difficulties. For example, Joe's early exposure to
alcohol by his biological parents may have had a negative impact on his development, and his difficulties with his
adoptive parents may be related to other factors such as cultural or ethnic differences, or lack of a sense of
belonging. Additionally, the quality of care received during his stay in care and the quality of the adoption process
itself may have an impact on his current difficulties.
In Bowlby’s 44 thieves theory, those 44 out of 88 children who stole were further studied by Bowlby and he
discovered that 14 children were affectionless thieves and 12 of those were frequently separated from their
mother/attachement figure. Also, he discovered that 39% of the 44 thieves experienced separation at an early age,
supporting therefore the hypothesis of maternal deprivation causing emotional and intelectual issues, such as anger
and emotionless acts.
The theory has been influential and widely researched, but it has also been criticized for being overly simplistic and
not taking into account other factors that can influence a child's development. For example, research has shown that
children can form secure attachments with other caregivers, such as fathers, grandparents, or foster parents, and
that the quality of care provided by the primary caregiver is more important than their identity. Additionally, some
studies have found that the effects of maternal deprivation are not always as severe as Bowlby suggested and that
they can be mitigated by other positive experiences.
However, Bowlby has been criticised by Rutter for not comparing children who have been privated from maternal
care and children that have been deprivated. He says that deprivation should have worse effects and that the ones
they already have are simplistic and impact the validity of the research.
However, it has been used in real world after war. It has helped with post-war vision over childbearing and health
care, therefore, Bowlby’s work helped social thinking to improve.