Childhood is generally considered to be a natural biological stage of development or a modern idea or invention. Theories of childhood are concerned with what a child is, the nature of childhood, the purpose or function of childhood and how the idea of the child or childhood is used in society. It is argued whether childhood is biologically or socially constructed, nature or nurture. Functionalists argue that childhood should be explained in a biological way and child have and always will be compliant. They regard childhood as a stage in development unique to humans, the function of which is the preparation for becoming an adult.
What Jung wanted to do, as said in his own words was “bring order to chaos”. In the essay below I shall outline how Carl Jung’s personality type theory could help a therapist determine therapeutic goals drawing on my own examples or those of my volunteer clients. Our personalities are born, but at the same time they will be to a greater extent influenced by the experience of our upbringing as well as our adult life. Personalities can be moulded to suit a particular purpose, can change as a result of an illness or counselling, sometimes dramatically. Children from one family can be so different and this will not only be determined by their genes but by their position in the family and therefore how the parents respond to them or what their expectations of them are.
Bronfenbrenner Ecology theory has been renamed by some as the bioecological systems theory. The name changed came about so that people will better understand that a child’s own biological surroundings are stimulated by the associations between the child and the environment they are in. For example family/community (Addison 1992). Bronfenbrenner believe that it if you want to learn the development of a child you must not only look at their immediate surrounds and environment you must look at the interaction of their entire environment as well. Bronfenbrenner’s identifies four systems that have a active role in the development of a child the microsystem, the mesosystem, the ecosystems, and the macrosystem.
In analyzing as well as comparing the humanistic and biological approaches to personality one can result to difference in opinions. Abraham Maslow did study the development of personalities based on the human needs. His needs hierarchy portrays the influence of human needs to formations of peoples’ unique and individual personalities. There are some biological factors which does influence formation of one’s personality which usually plays a major role. Through reviewing the relationships that are there between Maslow’s theory and biological factors we will be in a position to see some focused similarities as well as its upcoming.
Personality is influenced by genetic factors through temperament. For example, genetics influence individual differences based on how individuals respond and react to their environment. The contribution of genetics to psychological differences has been studied in research focused on behavioral genetics (e.g., Plomin, 2000). The second biological influence is the brain structure and neurotransmitters. As Pinel (2003) explains, gene expression determines how cells may develop and how it can function at personal maturity.
Another specialty area is the control of transmissible diseases, in which epidemiology provides a comprehensive understanding of the magnitude, causes, and consequences. “Age influences people's susceptibility to disease or dysfunction (Adler, 1993).” This quotes relates to my current environment because in my current work environment, we see people from a variety of age ranges. I plan on using epidemiology by helping collecting more data/ information and being able to educate the patients through past experiences. “Theory specifies that environmental effects, such as parenting or peer and neighborhood influences, on health outcomes are perplexed with genetic effects because family generation share the same genes, and there is increasing evidence that genes play a role in the selection of one's social environments (Bergner, 1993).” The choices that we make in our lifestyles affect our health but we cannot let that determine our health outcome. The principles that I learn during course are very valuable.
The nature versus nurture is an idea on whether a person’s genetic factors (nature) or their environment (nurture) i.e. social class, culture, moral beliefs determine your personality and behaviours. 3. Explain the concept of genetic inheritance and how it applies to counselling. Genetic inheritance theory is the inherited factors that shape our development and personality.
Or another example is a cancerous chromosome, in which some children can inherit from their parents. In nurture, I believe the environment can greatly affect the way the child grows up to be. For instance if a child grows up in an abusive environment, it is very likely that when he or she grows he will be affected by it and will do the same. That is why I believe a person is affected by both; some factors of nature or
What does research show about the effects of day-care on children’s social development? Day-care can be defined as being: regular temporary separation; outside the home environment and not with a family member. However the effects of day-care on social development of infants and into later life is a controversial debate between psychologists. Some such as John Bowlby saw that maternal deprivation caused by separation of infant from mother, due to day-care caused harmful effects - such as mental health issues and behavioural problems - on the infants social development. Bowlby believed in the evolutionary theory of attachment suggesting that humans were born biologically programmed to form attachments in order to successfully survive.
How does early childhood attachment affect child development? Describe the relationship between temperament and 'best fit' parenting. Does kids develop their characteristics through their genetic makeup or by the environment and parenting? These questions present a never-ending debate, presented by two campaigns: the behaviorists who believe that nurture plays the main role in shaping the children’s behaviours and future outcomes; and the geneticists who believe that the genetic makeup is the blueprint of children’s behavior towards which the parents can do very little. Evidence for both campaigns will be presented in this article, and the interaction between both sides will be described.