CANADIAN ADOPTION RESEARCH SUMMARIES

Chisholm, Kim., Carter, Margaret., Ames, Elinor & Morison, Sara. (1995)
"Attachment security and indiscriminately friendly behaviour in children adopted from Romanian orphanages."

Development and Psychopathology, vol. 7 (1995), p. 283-294.

 CONTEXT

For the 1998 follow-up study, see Chisholm, Kim. (1998) "A Three Year Follow-up of Attachment and Indiscriminate Friendliness in Children Adopted from Romanian Orphanages." Child Development. Vol 69, Number 4, p1092-1106.


The study, on which this article is based, explored attachment and indiscriminately friendly behaviour in forty-six children who had spent at least eight months in a Romanian orphanage prior to their adoption to Canada (RO group). The average age of these children upon adoption was nineteen months. At the time the adoptive parents were interviewed, the average age of the children was thirty months.

Findings were compared with two groups, one consisting of forty-six Canadian born nonadopted children (CB group), and the RC group which consisted of twenty-nine children who were adopted from Romania by Canadian families before the age of four months (RC group). The average age of adoption for the RC group was 2.3 months. At the time the adoptive parents were interviewed, the average age of the RC group was twenty-five months.

The CB and RC groups were matched in sex and age within one month to the RO group.

Attachment

The researchers found that RO children scored significantly lower on the security of attachment measure than did the CB and RC group. The RC children's security of attachment did not differ from the CB children.

The authors found that the primary difference in attachment patterns between the RO and CB group is the ambivalent attachment behaviour exhibited by RO children. Ambivalent attachment behaviour is characterized by ambivalence toward a caregiver when distressed. The adoptee combines contact seeking with angry resistant behaviour and is not easily comforted. The researchers provide the example of a child wanting to be put down and then fussing or wanting to be picked right back up.

Although RO, RC and CB parents did not differ on their parent attachment scores i.e. levels of commitment to the parenting role, it was only in the RO group that parent attachment was correlated significantly with the child's attachment score. Although even low scores on the parent attachment may be good enough for CB and RC children, the RO children may require a higher level of parental commitment in the form of more emotional warmth and a greater ability to read children's cues. The researchers hypothesize that the uncommunicative behaviours and behavioural problems exhibited by RO children may have made it more difficult for their parents to respond to them in ways appropriate for the development of secure attachment.

The researchers note that the RO children's attachment security scores were unrelated to both their age at adoption and the length of time they had been in their adoptive families. RO children's lower scores of security of attachment are most likely attributed to the extended period of neglect and social deprivation they experienced while institutionalized.

Indiscriminately Friendly Behaviour

RO children displayed significantly more indiscriminately friendly behaviours than did RC children. Forty-three percent of RO children were reported to wander without distress compared to 24% of RC children, 65% of RO children were reported to be very friendly to all new adults compared to 45% of RC children, 42% of the RO children never act shy with new adults compared to 14% of RC children, 61% of the RO children approached new adults compared to 34% of RC children and 52% of the RO children were willing to go home with a stranger compared to 28% of RC children (Chisholm et al, 290). Only three of the forty-six RO parents mentioned their child's indiscriminate friendliness as a behavioural concern.

The authors highlight that in their follow up work they will ask families in all three groups questions concerning indiscriminate friendliness in order to determine whether this behaviour decreases with time and to obtain information on indiscriminate friendliness in the Canadian born nonadopted children.


Kim Chisholm is affiliated with the Department of Psychology at Saint Francis Xavier University in Antigonish, Nova Scotia.

Full text available at:

University of British Columbia*, (604) 822-6596

McGill University, (514) 398-4732

University of Ottawa, (613) 562-5210

Université du Québec à Montréal, (514) 987-3000 x3173

Queen's University, (613) 533-2526

University of Regina, (306) 585-4290

*Available online to registered users.


This summary was prepared in 2003 by Inter-country Adoption Services (www.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/hrib/sdd-dds/cfc/content/interAdopt.shtml) at the federal Department of Social Development.

Home | About the ACC | Organizations | News | Viewpoints | Legislation | Events
Publications | Research | Glossary | Newsletters | Links | FAQs | Statistics | Principles
Canada's Waiting Children

Adoption Council of Canada 
Bronson Centre, 211 Bronson Ave., #210, Ottawa, ON K1R 6H5
phone: 613-235-0344. e-mail: acc@adoption.ca