Effects Of Instituionalisation (Romanian Orphanges)

Question 1

What do you talk about if asked about Romanian orphanages?

Answer 1

Intellectual + emotional

Question 2

What do you talk about if asked about institutionalization?

Answer 2

Physical, intellectual, emotional and social

Question 3

Physical effects?

Answer 3

Smaller, stunted growth due to undernourishment.

Question 4

Intellectual?

Answer 4

• Rutter et al (2011) longditudinal study, 165 Romanian orphans adopted by families in the UK
• investigated the extent to which good care can make up for poor early experiences
  Physical, cognitive and emotional development assessed at 4,6,11,15 and 22-25 years
• control group of 52 UK adoptees
• adopted before 6 months 102 IQ
• adopted between 6 month and 2 years 86 IQ
• adopted after 2 years 77 IQ
• shows negative correlation between age of adoption and intellectual development

Question 5

Emotional?

Answer 5

• Rutter et al (2011) longditudinal study, 165 Romanian orphans adopted by families in the UK
• investigated the extent to which good care can make up for poor early experiences
• Physical, cognitive and emotional development assessed at 4,6,11,15 and 22-25 years
• control group of 52 UK adoptees
• most children showed difficulties when they arrived in the UK
• lack of attachment can lead to attachment disorder, two types either: reactive attachment disorder- shy, unable to cope socially VS disinherited attachment disorder - overly friendly, attention seeking

Question 6

Social?

Answer 6

• Quinton et al looked at 50 women raised in children’s home VS 50 control women raised at home
• found women who grew up in children’s homes experienced difficulties as parents (and more likely to have their own children enter care)

Question 7

PIES brief summary

Answer 7

• physically smaller
• lower IQ
• emotionally, attachment disorder
• struggle socially

Question 8

Bucharest (Romania capital) early intervention project

Answer 8

• Zeanah et al (2005)
• 95 Romanian children, 12-31 months
• control group 50 children never institutionalized
• measured using strange situation
• 74% control group = securely attached
• 19% institution group = securely attached, 44% disinhibited

Question 9

AO3 Rutter internal validity

Answer 9

• high internal validity because children has not suffered trauma a before institutionalization, meaning any results must be due to the privation

Question 10

AO3 rutter longitudinal

Answer 10

• study was 6 months- 22-25 years
• good cause no individual differences as you are comparing the child to themselves so you can see development
• bad cause studies have high attrition rates leading to smaller sample sizes

Question 11

AO3 rutter random allocation

Answer 11

• no random allocation on who was adopted was done due to ethics (could distribute children as someone who was gonna get adopted might not anymore)
• means that adopted children may be the healthier, more intelligent, more sociable (cause people wouldn’t want to adopt a traumatized child)

Question 12

AO3 rutter generalizable

Answer 12

• Romanian orphanages conditions are so bad and extreme (due to poor standards of care and intellectual stimulation)
• means results need to be generalized with caution

Question 13

Rutter sensitive

Answer 13

• data is socially sensitive
• to parents as child may have disinhibited attachment style which may leave them feeling judged/concerned
• to child as leads to labeling (lower IQ) and self-fulfilling prophecy (when a label comes true due top self doubt and lack of trying)

Question 14

AO3 practical applications

Answer 14

• practical applications for orphanages, hospitals, schools…
• improved ratios of staff: children
• key workers allocated to allow normal attachments to develop
• knowledge that earlier adoption is preferable and better, as improves all of PIES