Why is the family so important for children


Why is the household so of import for kids?

Hire a custom writer who has experience.
It's time for you to submit amazing papers!

order now

The household construction is of import for the healthy development of kids. This may mention to their physical and mental wellness. The household refers to a societal system that provides societal stimulation and support to the kid – this is frequently through the household environment – and therefore involves a figure persons that the kid may interact with – for illustration, parents, siblings, relations and adult household friends. Therefore, the treatment below will concentrate more on the impression of a household environment – and the support, interactions and stimulus it provides – and the affects to the kid if this environment is altered in some manner, or non received at all.

A organic structure of grounds suggests that a meaningful relationship to a household member is indispensable for the development of a healthy and unafraid kid. Bowlby ( 1944 ) footings this relationship ( normally with the female parent, or the chief health professional ) as ‘attachment’ . It is believed that human existences are biologically replete to keep propinquity to their chief health professional in the demand for endurance. Attachment has psychological benefits for the kid every bit good – in that in the presence of their chief health professional, the kid feels more secure. Bowlby ( 1944 ) argues that kids need to organize a individual tense fond regard with a individual ever-present grownup who is available to them for the first five old ages of their life. If this fond regard is non available Bowlby ( 1944 ) argues that there will be harm to their societal and rational development. As a consequence they will be unable to successfully organize emotional relationships in the hereafter. Bowlby footings this ‘Maternal Deprivation’ . These decisions come from Bowlby’s ( 1944 ) ain survey – Forty-four juvenile stealers: their characters and place life – whereby he found that the bulk of the juvenile boys that he interviewed had ‘afflectless’ features due to an early and drawn-out separation from their female parents. This was concluded from the male childs being in surrogate places or infirmary before the age of two. Therefore, Bowlby suggests that the male childs juvenile behavior was a effect of a deficiency of fond regard formed in their earlier old ages. Therefore, the household construction ( in the signifier of attention giving ) is of import to kids, as a lacking of it, may do break to the physical and mental public assistance of the child-such a juvenile delinquency. However, these findings have a negative influence on stereotypes – and picture the societal background of the typical juvenile – these premises may non be valid – and therefore may promote bias and favoritism against kids who have been separated from their chief attention giver for whatever ground. However, to add support to Bowlby’s ( 1944 ) findings, Spitz and Wolfe ( 1946 ) observed 123 babes in the first twelvemonth of their life. They found that a 3 month separation from their mother’s caused negative development forms – i.e. weeping, loss of appetite and small weight addition ) . This was concluded to be the consequence of the separation, as on the female parents return, the symptoms disappeared. However, although this research may back up the impression of maternal want and fond regard, cautiousness must be taken when comparing Spitz and Wolfe’s ( 1946 ) research with Bowlby’s, as it proves debatable due to the different age ranges that the two surveies are look intoing. Therefore, it is questionable that the two surveies can be considered to be mensurating the same variable.

To cast farther visible radiation on the importance of a stable household environment Goldfarb ( 1943 ) carried out a longitudinal survey on households with adoptive kids. A step of the child’s linguistic communication, intelligence, accomplishment and degree of societal adulthood were taken at the ages of 3, 6, 8 and 12. Goldfarb ( 1943 ) found that those adopted in their earlier old ages of life scored higher than those put into a household unit subsequently on. Those adopted earlier were thought to hold had more chance to organize a unafraid fond regard with a changeless attention giver, opposed to those who were adopted subsequently in old ages, who had possibly formed an fond regard with their biological parents and so suffered separation. These findings support the position that a changeless household environment is of import. However, it is non made clear whether the lower tonss for intelligence, societal adulthood and linguistic communication accomplishments are a effect of a deficiency of emotional bond with a changeless attention giver or due to a deficiency of stimulation. In add-on, Tizard and Hodges ( 1978 ) besides looked at adoptee surveies at a ulterior age and found that children’s’ who’s maternal want lasted for up to and more than three old ages were likely to demo emotional, societal and rational troubles. However, they besides revealed that fond regards to an adoptee parent could successfully organize subsequently in childhood. Therefore, it would look that a household environment is of import for the societal and rational development of the kid. However, in the instance of constructing relationships – kids are capable of organizing fond regards subsequently in childhood. Therefore, this adds support to the impression that an attachment figure is of import to the kid – but, can be formed at any clip during childhood. One may criticised the above surveies discussed as missing cogency. For illustration, in the instance of Bowlby ( 1944 ) his research relies on retrospective histories of adolescent male childs. Therefore, the information is unfastened to deformation, amplification or misunderstandings. Furthermore, Bowlby’s ( 1944 ) research sample is really narrow – and non representative. It would hold been utile to demo a control survey group to compare informations with, or deriving a assortment of positions of the male childs may hold lead to a more representative position of them and their behavior. In the instance of Spitz and Wolfe ( 1948 ) research, although their sample was comparatively big – the sample was based on hospitalised babes. Therefore, the separation anxiousness may hold been a effect of the child’s new milieus. Furthermore, these types of behaviors displayed by the sample babes were common of babes in their first twelvemonth of life. Therefore, the findings may non accurately associate to the separation they endured from their female parents.

The impression of the household conjures up a belief of kids and their biological parents. However, the above surveies by Goldfarb ( 1943 ) and Tizard and Hodge ( 1962 ) show how meaningful relationships can be obtained in adoptive households. It is of import to advert that the impression of a critical period ( Bowlby, 1944 ) that an fond regard has to be formed in the first three old ages of one’s life is non accurate – as found by Tizard and Hodges ( 1962 ) . Furthermore, the above surveies indicate that an fond regard is normally with the female parent / caregiver person of the household. This besides assumes that one fond regard is made. However, Schaffer and Emerson ( 1964 ) argue that the bulk of kids have one or more fond regards with grownups in their life. For illustration, biological parent, another female, the individual who satisfies the kid demands and person who gives continual attention. These persons could be relations, household friends, instructors etc. Schaffer et Al ( 1964 ) argues it is the quality of the interaction between the kid and the grownup which is of most importance. Therefore, this leads us to oppugn why the household is so of import and non merely any societal interaction. For illustration, Dunn, Davies, O’Connor and Sturgess ( 2001 ) study that friendly relationships with other kids are of great importance when they need to discourse household affairs. Dunn et Al ( 2001 ) asked 238 kids to studies on their experiences in different household scenes ( stepfamilies, single-parent households, and unbroken households ) , how much clip they spent with friends, and the quality of their friendly relationships. Dunn et Al ( 2001 ) peculiarly focused their research on how kids confided and communicated with others about household issues. The findings revealed that friends were found to be cardinal intimates. Therefore, this demonstrates how of import bonds are made outside the household environment. This may supply the kid with a safe and soothing individual to discourse and behaviour with in a supportive relationship, if this is non available to them through a household. In add-on, there is grounds to propose that societal interactions with equals are extremely of import for a child’s societal and mental development every bit good as emotional development. For illustration, when paired with a somewhat elder kid and the younger one watches them execute on a cognitive undertaking – the younger kid picks up on what they did – and attempts to execute the undertaking similar. When assessed before and after, it is found that the some acquisition has taken topographic point ( Light and Littleton, 1999 ) . Although, it has been commented that all that is taking topographic point is inactive acquisition, whereby the kid is merely copying the senior one and hasn’t learnt to pant why he is now executing otherwise ( Miller and Brownell, 1975 ) . However, it can non be ignored the importance of how function theoretical accounts can move as a valuable beginning of larning for the kid ( Bandura, 1962 ) . The kid is exposed to this beginning of larning stuff in many facet of life –therefore, the exposure to a peculiar household environment is non indispensable for development to take topographic point.

Therefore, is societal interaction the key to the child’s healthy development? The household environment can supply much stimulation for the kid to develop physically and larn and research new accomplishments. To oppugn this theory, what would go on in the instance of a kid that was deprived from any societal interaction? This was the instance of Genie ( Curtiss, 1977 ) – Genie was a immature miss who was locked in a room by her male parent, until the age of 13. This meant that Genie had really small contact from her parents and no contact with anyone else within her 13 old ages of life in this environment. Genie was discovered when she was 13 and as a effect of life in such disadvantaged fortunes, she had failed to develop physically – and had the organic structure of a 6 twelvemonth old, she could non masticate any solid nutrient, was incontinent, could non concentrate beyond 12 pess and had acquired really small linguistic communication ( about 20 words in all ) . However, Genie did get linguistic communication and behaved like a normal kid during seven old ages of clinical rehabilitation and observation. Obviously, this is an utmost instance survey ; nevertheless, it does demo how the deficiency of stimulation and societal support affected a immature girl’s physical and mental development. Therefore, the deficiency of a household environment shows the deficiency of kid development, it may be the instance that the presence of a household environment may ensue in more progressive development. In add-on, these findings conclude that non merely does the loss ( want ) of a household environment affect kid development, but the deficiency ( want ) of a household environment can hold similar if non worse effects on the kid. Therefore, it may be suggested that a household environment, even if broken for a period of clip, is more good to the kid, than non having any household environment at all.

In visible radiation of the grounds discussed above, there is a strong belief that the household is an of import construction to a child’s life. The research discussed sheds visible radiation on how the household environment can hold an affect on a child’s emotional, physical and mental upbringing. Although, it must be noted that a kid may come into contact with other signifiers of societal interaction –i.e. friends, school, nines etc that may besides supply a valuable environment to help healthy development. It must be noted that the treatment relies on grounds complied by several pieces of research that are flawed with methodological jobs. For illustration, the sample techniques of participants are non-random and therefore unrepresentative. Participants were assigned to their peculiar status due to their fortunes. Therefore, it is difficult to retroflex the consequences yielded from the research findings. Furthermore, generalizing the significance of household to household environment is rather obscure – and therefore deficiencies intending. It was done to enable comparings to be made between the different research surveies. However, this may hold caused cogency jobs – due to the hard nature of comparing different pieces of research from that may hold non shared a similar end or findings that referred to the same variable. Last, the research discussed above, does account for a possible relationship between household environment and kid development – nevertheless, it can non claim to set up a relationship of cause and affect – as none of the surveies were correlation surveies.



Ainsworth, M.D.S. Blehar, M.C. , Waters, E. , & A ; Wall, S. ( 1978 ) . Patterns of fond regard: A psychological survey of the unusual state of affairs. Hillsdale, NJ: Eribaum.

Bandura, A. ( 1962 ) .Social Learning through Imitation. University of Nebraska Press: Lincoln, NE.

Curtiss, S. ( 1977 ) . Genie: A Psycholinguistic Study of a Modern Day ‘Wild Child.’ New York: Academic Press.

Light, P. , & A ; Littleton, K. ( 1999 ) . Social procedures in Children ‘s Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University imperativeness


Bowlby, J. ( 1944 ) Forty-four juvenile stealers: their characters and place life. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 25: 19-52and107-27.

Dunn J, Davies L.C, O’Connor T.G, Sturgess W. ( 2001 ) . Family lives and friendly relationships: the positions of kids in step- , single-parent, and non-step households.Journal of Family Psychology. Jun ; 15 ( 2 ) :272-87

Goldfarb, W. 1943. The effects of early institutional attention on adolescent personality.Journal of Experimental Education 12: 106-129.

Miller, S. A. , & A ; Brownell, C. A. ( 1975 ) . Peers, persuasion, and Piaget: Dyadic interaction between conservers and non-conservers.Child Development, 46, 992-997.

Schaffer, H. R. , & A ; Emerson, P. E. ( 1964 ) . The development of societal fond regards in babyhood.Monographs for the Society for Research in Child Development, 29 ( 3, Serial No. 94 ) .

Spitz, R.A. , & A ; Wolf, K.M. ( 1946 ) . Analytic depression: An enquiry into the generation of psychiatric conditions on early childhood.Psychoanalytical Study of the Child, 2,313-342.

Tizard, B. and J. Hodges. ( 1978 ) . The consequence of early institutional raising on the development of eight-year old kids.Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 19: 99-118.


Berk, L. E. ( 2003 ) . Child development ( 6th edition ) . Boston: Allyn and Bacon

Muncie, J. , Wetherall, M. Langan, M Dallos R and Cochrane, A ( 1997 ) . Understanding the household, edited by Sage, London

Schaffer, H. R. ( 1996 ) Social Development. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers

This assignment will explore the concept of<< >>Using Microorganisms To Produce Commercial Substances Young People Essay

About the author : admin

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.