“Maternal Deprivation Reconsidered”, 1972 (; similar):
In studying the results of maternal-deprivation, children’s responses to separation experiences were noted and tests related to intellect were given. Children were also observed at various stages in their growth on other hypothesized maternal-deprivation factors. While further research is required, evidence to date indicates that the syndrome of acute distress is probably due in part to a disruption of the bonding process (not necessarily to the mother). Developmental retardation and intellectual impairment are both a consequence of experiential privation; dwarfism is usually due to nutritional privation; delinquency follows family discord; and affectionless psychopathy may be the end-product of a failure to develop bonds or attachments in the 1st–3rd yrs of life.
The purpose of this paper is to question these assumptions. It will be suggested that “maternal deprivation” includes many different types of experiences involving lack, loss and distortion; that little progress is likely to occur until the separate effects of each experience are determined;6 that different psychological mechanisms account for different types of outcome; and finally that the term “maternal deprivation” is misleading in that in most cases the deleterious influences are not specifically tied to the mother and are not due to deprivation. Reference to the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary shows that deprivation means “dispossession” or “loss”. While loss is probably an important factor in one of the syndromes associated with “maternal deprivation” a review of the evidence suggests that in most cases the damage comes from “lack” or “distortion” of care rather than from any form of “loss”.
View PDF: