To what extent can the effects of privation be reversed?
Privation is where you never form an attachment with the caregiver. It is different to deprivation which is where you lose the attachment with the caregiver after the bond has already been formed.
Rutter in 1981 claimed that the effects of privation are more likely to be serious than the effects of deprivation. Evidence for this came from studies of children that have been carried out by different people on children who have suffered cruelty.
The case of Genie is a big example of Privation that was carried out Cutiss in 1977. This reported the case of a girl who was looked in a room for 13 years by her parents and never formed an attachment. She was strapped to a potty chair for most of her childhood and was beaten if she made any noise. This led to her being physically undeveloped and could only speak to animals with animal like-sounds. After a lot of help she learned some language skills but her social and intellectual skills never fully developed. This case shows that the effects of privation can be reversed if you give the child lots of love and support.
Another example of the effects of privation is the case of the Czech twin boys and that was carried out by Koluchova in 1976. This was the case where a step mother treated the twins very cruelly by locking them in a cellar, beating them up and had no toys. They were seven when they were and had rickets (bone development disease that is caused by lack of Vitamin D) and very little and social and intellectual development. However they were later adopted and by adulthood they had above intelligence and had normal social relationships. This case study again shows that the effects of Privation can be reverse.
The case of Louise and Mary is also an example of privation that was carried out by Skuse in 1984. Both were raised in a small room, tied to a bed with dog leads. Their mother suffered from severe learning difficulties and would cover then if they were noisy. They were found by social service when they were aged 3⅟ and 2⅟. They hadn’t learnt and language and didn’t play. Both went to speech therapy but Mary never developed language skills and was eventually to a care centre. Whereas Louise was able to pick up language skills and started school at the age of five. This also shows the effects to privation can be reversed but it depends on individual difference, to how they cope with situations and it comes down to situation vs disposition. Mary might not have developed any social skills because she might have not been able to cope with what happened to her in the past like Louise did.
Differences between the cases might explain why Czech twins are covered better than Genie. We could consider the length of privation and how old the children were when they were discovered. The Czech twins were younger than Genie which mental that they still had time to develop. Also the twins were kept together during isolation, so they might have attached to each other. The quality of day care they received after the isolation could also be taken in consideration, as the twins were adopted, whereas Genie was passed between psychologists and eventually put in institution. The most important is the Individual difference, including their ability to recover.