"Addressing
the problem of absent fathers must be a national priority because
it impacts the well-being of America's children, families and
communities."
--Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind.
By
Alan W. Dowd
[Reprinted with permission of Alan W. Dowd and The American Legion
Magazine (c) June 2001]
Hang up the baseball glove and put away the bedtime stories.
No need to take that long walk with your daughter or have that
long talk with your son. Keep the advice and hugs to yourself,
and don't worry about coming home. If you're a father, you're
no longer wanted or needed in 21st-century America.
This news may come as a shock with another Father's Day upon us,
but it's just some of what Louise Silverstein and Carl Auerback
concluded in a jaw-dropping study on fathers and fatherhood aptly
titled "Deconstructing the Essential Father." Published in American
Psychologist, a journal of the American Psychological Association,
the study's radical conclusions further undermine what was once
beyond debate--the idea that fathers play a crucial role in the
health of families and children. Still sending shockwaves through
public-policy circles more than a year after its initial publication,
the study is just one of countless indicators that "Dad" is an
endangered species.
Dangerous Dads? Chipping away at some of our
most basic conceptions of parenting, the APA study declares that
fathers are not essential to child well-being; the institution
of marriage does not serve broader interests of society; divorce
is not necessarily harmful to children; fathers contribute nothing
special to child development; and the traditional family unit--headed
by a mother and father--is not any better at protecting children
than anything else. In other words, fathers are no longer relevant.
America's 25 million fatherless children might disagree. However,
as Dr. Timothy Dailey, an analyst with the Family Research Council,
uncovered in his cogent response to the APA study, Silverstein
and Auerback go beyond merely arguing that fathers are irrelevant: "The
authors actually suggest that the traditional father can be harmful
in the home," a flabbergasted Dailey explains.
In fact, in their view, "dear old Dad" is downright destructive
and dangerous. Taking their counter-initiative argument to the
extreme, Silverstein and Auerbach contend that the traditional
two-parent model of the family "fails to acknowledge the potential
costs of father presence."
According to Silverstein and Auerbach, many fathers do little
more than waste family resources on gambling, alcohol and other
vices.
Of course, fathers guilty of that kind of selfishness are out
there, but they are the exception. Even so, it is the model of
imperfection which seems to drive Silverstein and Auerbach's research.
Given such a brutish and bleak picture of the typical father,
it's easy to see why they arrive at their skewed conclusions.
But what would make them draw such a depressing caricature of
the American father? A recent study by the National Fatherhood
Initiative, a non-profit organization dedicated to increasing
the number of children growing up with responsible fathers, has
a possible answer: television.
Today's most powerful cultural institution is television [and]
children are its most ardent consumers," the NFI study begins. "Given
the current scope of fatherlessness, it is no exaggeration to
say that for millions of children the primary contact they have
with the idea of a father is the time they spend watching a father
on television."
Regrettably, what they usually see is similar to the distortion
offered by Silverstein and Auerbach. The NFI study found that
TV fathers are eight times more likely to be shown in a negative
light than TV mothers. "On television," the study concludes, "fathers
are less involved, provide less moral guidance, are less competent
and place less of a priority on the family than do mothers."
NFI found that fully 65 percent of Hollywood's depictions of fatherhood
provide either ambiguous or negative portrayals. In fact, 26 percent
of the portrayals are completely negative. "This overabundance
of 'bad dads' on television undermines a cultural ideal of responsible
fatherhood at a time when that ideal is most needed,"
according to NFI's researchers.
Grim Numbers. From academia to pop culture, fatherhood
is obviously under assault. What's happening to fathers and families
is truly sobering. Indeed, the consequences of Dad's disappearance
from America's family landscape illustrate how disconnected from
reality Siverstein and Auerbach are.
Numbers and statistics sometimes distort the facts, but on rare
occasions they truly illuminate. This is such an occasion.
Almost 25 million children live without fathers; 4 million don't
even know who their fathers are; and 33 percent of the babies
born in America today will be the sole responsibility of unmarried
mothers.
Indeed, during the past three decades, fathers have disappeared
from America faster than the spotted owl. According to the Family
Research Council, 85 percent of all children lived in two-parent
families in 1968. In 1980, it was 77 percent. Today, it's just
68 percent and falling. During those 30 years, the number of single-parent
families in the United States quadrupled; the number of two-parent
families inched up by just 8 percent.
This destabilizing trend of single-parenthood is continuing as
we enter the 21st century. According to the Forum on Child and
Family Statistics, a research arm of the federal government, birth
rates have increased sharply for unmarried women in every age
group during the past 20 years. And there's no evidence that what
some have called "the epidemic of fatherlessness" will end.
Counting the Costs. This explosive increase in
fatherless homes may seem irrelevant to traditional families or
those who have already raised their children, but it isn't. In
fact, it should send chills down their spines. Like a scythe,
fatherlessness is cutting a swath of destruction through our nation
that touches every American. Indeed, to look at these numbers
is to look at the root cause of America's most intractable problems.
An ancient proverb warns, "When a father gives to his son, both
laugh; when a son gives to his father, both cry." The children
of absentee fathers are now paying back their parents and society
for what they have been given--and deprived of--during the past
30 years. Their pain and anger are wreaking havoc with our country.
And if we are not moved by their plight, we should at least be
moved by self-interest. The longer the epidemic continues, the
more profound and costly the consequences for every American.
According to Robert Maginnis, a specialist on fatherhood and family,
fatherless kids are two times more likely to quit high school
than those from two-parent families. They are 70 percent more
likely to be kicked out of school, and 10 times more likely to
abuse alcohol and other drugs.
The Forum on Child and Family Statistics found that children in
one-parent households "are substantially more likely" to live
in poverty. To be exact, they are five times more likely to live
in poverty when compared to children lucky enough to be living
with a mother and a father.
But the consequences of Dad's disappearance aren't limited to
economics or education. In most cases, the legacy of an absentee
father is criminal behavior in his children.
"The likelihood that a young male will engage in criminal activity
doubles if he is raised without a father," Maginnis said. No less
than 72 percent of teen-age murderers grow up without a dad. And
according to Cato Institute research, a 1-percent increase in
births to single mothers triggers a 1.7-percent increase in violent
crime. In fact, the Institute for Responsible Fatherhood and Family
Revitalization has found that children from fatherless homes are
20 times more likely to end up in prisons as their two-parent
counterparts.
This should not be misunderstood as an attack on single mothers.
Single moms are among the most creative today. Working two and
three jobs outside the home, they face the toughest job on earth
inside the home alone. Many of their children grow up to be productive
members of society. But the odds are against them. Most of their
children will be forever scarred by Dad's absence and will pass
the cycle of brokenness on to another generation. The old saying "like
father, like son" is all too true.
Nor is this an endorsement of the misguided notion that any father--regardless
of his behavior--is preferable to no father at all. The health
and safety of a child or mother should never be sacrificed for
the sake of a marriage. Indeed, it's better for some fathers to
leave, but today one-third of them are walking away. That's far
too many. Children grow up best when Mom and Dad raise them together.
Ninety percent of single moms agree, and so do their kids, according
to the Department of Health and Human Resources.
Turning Point. Thankfully, a handful of people
and organizations are fighting for America's fathers and families.
Were it not for them, there would be fewer of both.
Groups such as NFI, the Family Research Council, the Institute
for Responsible Fatherhood and Family Revitalization, and hundreds
of other nonprofits are partnering with churches and public agencies
to promote fatherhood and thereby protect mothers and their children
from the long odds faced by fatherless homes. And their influence
is being felt beyond the family room. After decades of indifference
and outright contempt for fathers, the federal government is finally
realizing the necessity of fathers and the value of two-parent
families.
The examples abound--from the Department of Health and Human Services'
Fatherhood Initiative to stronger child-support laws, from high-tech,
interstate tracking of deadbeat dads to a wide array of pro-fatherhood
legislation in Congress.
As Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., recently observed, "Addressing the
problem of absent fathers must be a national priority because
it impacts the well-being of America's children, families and
communities." And since families are the building blocks of society,
the epidemic of fatherlessness impacts the well-being of America
itself.
Bayh's Responsible Fatherhood Act of 2000, which he co-wrote with
Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., sought to develop an information clearinghouse
to help states and agencies promote responsible fatherhood. The
bill also would have reworked key aspects of the federal-state
welfare system "to encourage the formulation and maintenance of
two-parent families." However, the measure died in the Senate
Finance Committee last year.
The Fathers Count Act proposed by Rep. Nancy Johnson, R-Conn.,
would have provided grants to promote marriage and assist struggling
fathers in job training. The bill also sought to ease some of
the eligibility criteria on the Welfare-to-Work program. The bill
passed the House with 328 votes. But it succumbed to the same
fate as the Bayh-Dominici bill.
Congress clearly has plenty of ground to make up. Even so, perhaps
the nation has reached a critical turning point. As NFI president
Wade Horn notes, "Virtually everyone now agrees: Fathers matter."
Everyone, that is, except Hollywood and the APA.
[Alan W. Dowd is a freelance writer and a former associate editor
of The American Legion Magazine.]