CASE STUDY #2 Assignment: Read the following Case Study and then answer the following provided questions directly after the case. Students are asked to apply knowledge gained from the textbook readings. Students MUST follow all noted assignment guidelines to earn full credit. Therefore, please use APA writing style – however, do not need an abstract, reference, or title page – but name and other header info required – Additionally, double space responses – Limited responses will result in deduction – Minimum 100 word requirement for each question – CASE STUDY #2 – Chapter 2-3 Theory and Research- Case Study: taken from (used by permission) Newman, B.M., Newman, P.R., Landry Meyer, L., Lohman, B. J. (2003). Life span development: A casebook. CA: Thomson Wadsworth. The Concept of Maternal Bonding (p. 23) In the 1970’s studies were conducted that focused on the nature of mother-infant contact in the first hours and days after childbirth. The research was based on observations among mammals in which mothers were seen to reject their offspring if contact with the offspring was prevented or delayed for several days (Fraser, 1976). The work of John Kennell and Marshall Klaus (1979) highlighted the benefit of early and continuing physical contact between mothers and their infants immediately following childbirth. The idea was that this opportunity for “bonding” helped to establish a sense of emotional connection that sets the stage for the continuing formation of a secure attachment. Other studies suggested that prolonged separation between mothers and infants following childbirth interfered with the release of a critical maternal response that is evoked by holding one’s infant (Salk, 1970). The concept of bonding took on a very specific meaning in the hospital environment. Health professionals were encouraged to provide skin-to-skin contact for mothers and their infants immediately after childbirth. Mothers were led to believe that there is a critical period for the establishment of an emotional bond with the newborn, and that mothers and infants who were not able to have this type of contact would face relationship difficulties. Subsequent research found many methodological weaknesses in the early research that focused on mother-infant bonding (Lamb, 1982). A cross-cultural comparison looked at birth practices in 186 non-industrial societies. The study reported no systematic relationship between postpartum practices and mother-infant affection in those cultures that did or did not encourage immediate mother-infant contact after childbirth (Lozoff, 1983). Many articles were written suggesting that the concept of bonding as it was being discussed and practiced oversimplified the adaptive capacity of human parents to make emotional connections to their offspring. These studies found that the nature of the hospital experience was not a meaningful predictor of long-term attachment between mothers, fathers, and their infants. Nonetheless, hospital practices have embraced the bonding concept. Nurses in neonatal care units are encouraged to give mothers photos of their premature newborns to help promote bonding. Mothers are still encouraged to have immediate skin-to-skin contact with their infants. Many fathers believe that their presence at the birth is important to their ability to bond with their newborn. Thus, modern health care practices and common beliefs about what is good for mothers and infants has been influenced by an early line of research that has been accepted despite contradictory evidence (Eyer, 1994; Crouch & Manderson, 1995). Developmental Analysis Questions What type of theory of human development might underlie the concept of bonding? Contextual Analysis Questions Why might the skin-to-skin bonding approach (that was later shown to be incorrect) be taken up so readily by the medical professionals and become so popular among parents? How does research in the field of human development make its way from the specialized journals to professional practice and popular belief? How might a parent or “lay person” go about evaluating research that has implications for personal or family life? What are the contextual questions that should be addressed in this evaluation?
