AIMS: One of the consequences of psychological research into the effects of institutionalisation
- see Separation, Maternal Deprivation and Evaluating Bowlby - was to greatly reduce
the extent to which children were placed in such care. As a result, there was little
opportunity to replicate such studies until the overthrow of Romanian dictator Nicolae
Ceaucescu at the end of 1989.
Under President Ceaucescu, it had been a legal requirement for women to have 5 children.
In such a poor country, many parents could not afford to keep their children; so
they were handed over to the State where they were kept in massive, very poor quality
orphanages.
After the revolution, the appalling conditions in Romanian orphanages were revealed
to the world. Many of the 40,000 infants and infants in the institutions were referred
to as ‘non-recoverables’. They were found tied to their beds, starving and filthy.
Often they had never been held; no one had talked to them. They had had little opportunity
to develop close attachments.
At a time when there was great media interest in ‘saving’ the Romanian orphans, Rutter
& the ERA Team wanted to investigate the progress of a sizeable number of the orphans
under the age of 2 brought to Britain for adoption in the 1990s.
Rutter et al wanted to find whether it was separation from mother or the severe circumstances
in Romania that was responsible for any negative effects.
PROCEDURE (METHOD): 111 Romanian children were assessed on a variety of measures
of physical and intellectual ability on arrival in Britain. Most of them had been
in institutional care from shortly after they were born - though a subgroup had spent
only a few weeks in an orphanage. The children’s IQ was tested upon arrival in the
UK and the average score for the Romanian orphans was 63. For those over 6 months
old, the average was 45. Physical development was also poor, 51% of them being in
the bottom 3% of the population for weight. They were also shorter in height than
was normal for their age and had smaller head circumferences.
The Romanian orphans were tested again at the age of 4 and compared to a control
group of 52 British-adopted children, all aged 4, who had showed none of the negative
effects suffered by the Romanians.
RESULTS (FINDINGS): At the age of 4 the two groups of adopted children showed no
significant differences in either intellectual or physical development. The average
IQ of the Romanians had increased from 63 to 107. For those adopted after 6 months,
it had gone from 45 to 90. The older adoptees tended to do less well in terms of
physical development too.
CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that:-
- The negative outcomes shown by the Romanian children could be overcome through adequate
substitute care
- Intervention should take place before 6 months of age
- Separation from mother alone is not sufficient to cause negative outcomes as the
British children had been separated but were not developmentally delayed
EVALUATION (CRITICISMS):-
- It is important to note that the children were within what John Bowlby regarded as
the sensitive age - ie: under 2.5 years - when they first came to Britain.
- The results obtained by Jana Kreppner, T G O’Connor, Judy Dunn & Lucie Andersen Wood,
also working with the ERA Team (1999), with 104 Romanian orphans adopted into British
families before the age of 2 were nothing like as encouraging. They had a lower frequency
of pretend play, role play and ability to appreciate others’ mental states than a
UK control group. These differences did not appear to be related to general cognitive
or verbal ability; so the negative outcomes were assumed to be due to their early
privation.
- K Chisholm, M C Carter, E W Amens & S J Morrison (1995), studying Romanian orphans
adopted into Canadian families, found that many of them showed an anxious-resistant
style of attachment. Eg: they would not be easily comforted when distressed.
Nonetheless,
Rudolph Schaffer (1998) surmised that the intellectual recovery of these children
offered hope that they would overcome their emotional problems. - Following orphans until they were 6, Rutter & the ERA Team (2004) found that many
of the children displayed disinhibited attachment - characterised by a lack of close,
confiding relationships, rather indiscriminate friendliness and clingy, attention-seeking
behaviour, a relative lack of differentiation in response to adults (treating them
all alike, a tendency to go off with strangers and a lack of checking back with a
parent in anxiety-provoking situations.
In 2006 Rutter reflected how brain structure
and functioning might have been affected by the child’s attempt to adapt to the poor
environmental conditions they faced in the orphanages at a sensitive period in their
development.
In a further follow-up to the age of 11, Rutter & the ERA Team (2007)
found that disinhibited attachment was still persistent in many of the children,
though it became less frequent as they got older. Interestingly, the children adopted
after 6 months did not display it significantly more.
- Charles Zeanah, Anna Smyke, Sebastian Koga & Elizabeth Carlson (2005) investigated
the relationship between disinhibited attachment and institutionalisation. 95 Romanian
children aged 12-31 months, who had spent most of their lives in institutions, were
assessed using the Strange Situation. Their carers were questioned about indiscriminate
attachment behaviour. Only 19% of the institutional group were classified as securely
attached, compared to 74% of a control group. On a scale of 0-6, 44% of the institutional
group scored 3+ for indications of disinhibited attachment, compared to 20% of the
control group. However, the study was not longitudinal so could not report on change
over a period of time.
