Research into and effects

of institutionalisation

Institutionalisation refers to the behaviour patterns of children who have been raised in institutions such as children’s homes or orphanages and instead of having one primary attachment (as children raised in a family would), may have relationships with a number of different staff.

While children in the UK nowadays are likely to be placed with a foster family (due to Bowlby’s pioneering research and theories on the effects of disruption of attachments), children in other parts of the world (particularly developing countries) are regularly placed in institutions. Think about celebrities such as Angelina Jolie and Madonna who have adopted babies from countries such as Cambodia, Vietnam and Malawi.

The civil war in Romania led to many children being orphaned and placed in institutions in extremely poor conditions.

Western journalists managed to gain access to these institutions and showed that babies received a minimum level of care – bottles propped up in cots with the expectation that babies would feed themselves, very few staff and little or no time for human interaction or play.

Rutter et al. (2007) are carrying out an ongoing longitudinal study, comparing Romanian orphans who were adopted by families in the UK with adoptees born in the UK and placed with their family before they were 6 months old. The Romanian adoptees entered the orphanage as small babies between one and two weeks old. The 3 naturally occurring IVs were: a) the 58 babies who were adopted before they were 6 months old, b) 59 babies who were adopted between 6 and 24 months of age and c) 48 babies who were adopted between the ages of 2 and 4 years old. When the Romanian orphans were adopted almost half of them showed signs of severe malnourishment and were in the bottom third of the population for weight and height.

These adopted children have been followed up on at the age of 4, 6 and 11 years old and were tested using a variety of methods including interviews and observations of the child’s behaviour.

Rutter found evidence of disinhibited attachment behaviours in the Romanian adoptees, most commonly in the children who were adopted at an older age. He defined disinhibited attachment as ‘a pattern of attention-seeking behaviours with a relative lack of selectivity in social relationships’ – in other words, children are more likely to seek attention from all adults, even strangers and make inappropriate physical contact without checking back to the parent in a stressful situation. Disinhibited attachment was extremely rare in UK-born adoptees and children who were adopted at a younger age. This evidence shows that children who have spent longer in institutions are more likely to display signs of disinhibited attachment.

Furthermore, on children who were followed up on at age 11, Rutter found that more than half of the Romanian adoptees displayed signs of this behaviour pattern and that many of the children showing disinhibited attachment were receiving help from either special educational and/or mental health services.

However, as with other studies in this field, researchers need to be sensitive to the needs of children and adoptive parents and ensure they protect them from

psychological harm during their investigations. Furthermore, many participants in the study dropped out (attrition) which shows that families may want to remove themselves from the glare of psychological research. It is important that participants have the right to withdraw.

In terms of methodology, this study used a range of measurements to assess behaviour, including semi-structured interviews and observations. This means that a lot of rich, detailed qualitative and quantitative data was gathered. However, we can not always rely upon people to tell the absolute truth in interviews, as some Ps may want to look good in front of the experimenter and may be dishonest (social desirability bias).

Rutter himself acknowledges that it has been difficult to gain accurate information about the quality of care in the Romanian institutions which makes it difficult to fully assess the extent of early privation and the early environments they were raised in.

Studies on institutionalisation and privation show that, to some extent, children can recover from adverse early experiences. However, this depends on a number of factors.

Factor / Description
Quality of care at institutions / Dontas et al (1985) - Greek babies who had formed one specific attachment to a carer in an institution adjusted well when adopted and formed attachments quickly to their new carers. This research shows how important it is for children to be able to develop attachments to staff in an institution between the ages of 7/8 months.
The age of the child when removed from privation/institutionalisation / Children who are removed from privation/institutionalisation when still young (under 6 months) are more likely to make better cognitive, emotional and social progress developmentally than those who have experienced privation for longer. Children are much less likely to develop language after the age of 11/12 years (e.g. Genie).
Quality of care after
privation/institutionalisation / Children need the opportunity to form a one-to-one attachment with an adult who gives them sufficient time, care and attention (e.g. Koluchova). Children are likely to do best in a supportive and loving environment.
Experiences later in life / Quinton and Rutter (1984/88) found that children who had been brought up in care were more likely to experience relationship breakdowns, have criminal records and more difficulties with parenting and their own children compared to children who had spent no time in care. However, there were significant gender differences. Women who had positive school experiences and good relationships/marriages did much better. This shows that positive experiences in early adulthood can help to overcome early effects.

Attachment The Beauchamp College