Star-Telegram | 06/18/2006 | For want of a dad, will a child be lost?
For want of a dad, will a child be lost?
By MIKE McCORMICK and GLENN SACKS
Special to the Star-Telegram
A wealth of research confirms that fathers play a unique and important role in their children’s lives. Nevertheless, powerful forces in our society try to marginalize fathers. Unfortunately, these misguided individuals can be difficult to educate. With Father’s Day upon us, it’s worth another try.
The rates of the four major youth pathologies — teen pregnancy, teen drug abuse, school dropouts and juvenile crime — are tightly correlated with fatherlessness, often more so than with any other socioeconomic factor.
For example, according to a long-term study conducted in the United States and in New Zealand and published in Child Development, a father’s absence greatly increases the risk of teen pregnancy. The study found that it mattered little whether the child was rich or poor, black or white, born to a teen mother or an adult mother, or raised by parents with functional or dysfunctional marriages. What mattered was Dad.
A Journal of Marriage and Family study found that the presence of a father was five times more important in predicting teen drug use than any other sociological factor, including income and race.
A published Harvard review of four major studies found that, accounting for all major socioeconomic factors, children without a father in the home are twice as likely to drop out of high school or repeat a grade as children who live with their fathers.
A Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency study concluded that fatherlessness is so predictive of juvenile crime that, as long as there was a father in the home, children of poor and wealthy families had similar juvenile crime rates.
Adult children of divorce realize that dads are important. A published Arizona State University study found that more than two-thirds believed that, after divorce, “living equal amounts of time with each parent is the best arrangement for children.”
Nevertheless, fathers are often under attack by misguided women’s advocates.
Although fatherlessness is almost always blamed on irresponsible males, these advocates’ powerful influence over family law is also at fault. All family law and legislative battles over child custody issues involve the same fight: Fathers want more time with their children, and their opponents fight to limit their role.
For example, several major branches of the National Organization for Women, including those in New York and Michigan, have recently issued “Action Alerts” against shared parenting bills. These alerts rallied NOW’s supporters against moderate legislative attempts to help dads remain a part of their children’s lives after divorce or separation. NOW’s playbook is simple: Portray divorced dads as a threat to their children’s well-being.
In this there is great irony. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ new report “Child Maltreatment 2004,” when one parent is acting without the involvement of the other parent, mothers are almost three times as likely to kill their children as fathers are, and are more than twice as likely to abuse them. But in New York and Michigan, NOW’s scare tactics worked.
The media’s fascination with cutting down dads is another part of the problem.
Former Stanford University gender scholar Peggy Drexler was acclaimed last fall for her highly publicized book Raising Boys Without Men: How Maverick Moms Are Creating the Next Generation of Exceptional Men. Drexler asserts that father-absent homes are often the best environments for boys.
Through her interviews with single-mother and lesbian families, Drexler concludes there’s no need to fear fatherlessness, because fatherless boys play sports and scrape their knees like other boys, and don’t turn out to be effeminate or gay.
On that she’s probably correct. However, fatherless boys often do turn out to be juvenile delinquents, drug abusers and school dropouts. Yet few hailing Drexler’s research looked closely enough to see that her assurances that fatherless boys “do fine” was based on the ludicrous notion that all that really concerns us is that these boys might turn out to be sissies.
Our society spends billions of dollars attempting to combat crime, drug abuse, teen pregnancy and dropouts, without meaningfully addressing fatherlessness, which plays a central role in creating them. There is no easy solution to these problems. There is no solution without dads.
Mike McCormick is the executive director of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children ( www.acfc.org). Glenn Sacks ( www.GlennSacks.com) is a men’s and fathers’ issues columnist, commentator and radio talk-show host.
12 responses so far ↓
1 Kevin Merck // Jun 19, 2006 at 4:53 pm
[”Our society spends billions of dollars attempting to combat crime, drug abuse, teen pregnancy and dropouts, without meaningfully addressing fatherlessness, which plays a central role in creating them. There is no easy solution to these problems. There is no solution without dads.”]
2 Kevin Merck // Jun 19, 2006 at 4:56 pm
Kevin Merck said,
on June 19th, 2006 at 4:53 pm
[â€Our society spends billions of dollars attempting to combat crime, drug abuse, teen pregnancy and dropouts, without meaningfully addressing fatherlessness, which plays a central role in creating them. There is no easy solution to these problems. There is no solution without dads.â€]
Why are people so surprised about this inaction? The people who are orchestrating this injustice are anything but stupid. They know what the numbers are. They are fully aware of the consequences of the destruction of the family.
They know that fatherless homes translate into a booming business for the family courts as well as the criminal courts. They know that the children of divorce will be the next in line. They know that single mother households are factories that supply a steady supply of young men that will fill their prisons and young women that will supply a new generation to perpetuate the “industry†they have created.
There is no greater proof of their guilt than their inaction and indifference. They know exactly what they are doing and are only getting better at their “craft†while the father’s movement can’t seem to understand what the hell is going on.
WAKE UP!!! They know exactly what they are doing. The stupid ones are the people who can’t quite seem to grasp that simple fact.
Do the right thing; stop prostituting your sons and daughters to this domestic enemy.
Kevin Merck
3 4Justice // Jun 20, 2006 at 11:23 pm
Why is this “new” news? Duh! Children NEED their fathers and it’s time that MEN stand up to NOW and the sicko socialist wackos who abuse fathers because of their own chronic cases of penis-envy. The entire system is corrupt and needs to be flushed out. Children are abused, harmed, destroyed, etc. because of our system that permits drive through divorces. When marriages end, men becoming little more than ATM machines for women who take wedding vows with the same seriousness as a piece of toilet paper.
Gosh, I can’t tell you how much “fun” it’s been watching one son flunking out of high school because his mother DOESN’T care. Of course, she also doesn’t care that her young daughter is going after porn freaks on MySpace. There is NO discipline in her home and the kids run wild. Even the school notices all of the problems but what can a father do - jack diddly squat. After all, the BASTARDS that run our system are such BIGOTS and SPINELESS sleazeballs that kids matter almost a little as fathers do. Men need to fight back as long as we can - post your stories all over the Internet - http://stopfatherabuse.org/horrors maybe someone will finally take notice.
4 Kevin Merck // Jun 22, 2006 at 8:11 pm
I just got off a website called “red feminist†and read some of the comments these females had in response to the Mack story on ANCPR. There should be no distinction made between these females and the KKK, Skinheads, Nazi-etc. It’s amazing to me how people who claim to have been the victims of discrimination can take such an active role as the oppressor. I guess it just goes to show that the oppressed will always become the oppressor when given the chance. It’s amazing how these criminals have the audacity to bring up the “best interests of children†when many in their number have undoubtedly left “murdered children†in abortion clinic dumpsters.
I guess none of them can grasp that “systematic violence†is being used against fathers and “their children†on a routine basis by the “out of control†family courts. They have never been subjected to the courts like men have. I’m sure they are mostly “white women†who have never been held accountable for anything. If they can’t stand the idea of sharing custody then they better not get pregnant. Women don’t “own children†just because they give birth to them. Children are not instruments to be used to extort money, nor are they accessories to try and fulfill a meaningless lifestyle, nor are they a “meal ticket†for underprivileged females, and most of all they are not a means to an end for unscrupulous government. You better get used to the idea that abortion is going to be out of the question and so will be the notion that you will get sole custody.
There has been a 700% increase in the prison population in the last forty years … almost all men … and directly attributable to the rise of feminism and the demise of the family. The “vast majority†of men in prison were raised in single mother households. Most “out-of-wedlock pregnancies†are a resulting consequence of children raised in single mother households. Statistically, children raised in single mother households don’t stand a chance. So much for the “best interests of childrenâ€, these criminals are destroying the lives of countless children and could care less.
An insatiable appetite for “federal funding†by bureaucrats and the greed of selfish females is what perpetuates this human rights disaster. As long as there are federal dollars awarded to states for locking-up their male citizens and forcing “child support†on fathers/alleged fathers instead of affording them “equal protectionâ€, this will continue unabated. Subsequently, as long as the victims of this extortion racket continue to finance their own exploitation, by paying the extortion, there is “no reason†for these criminals to change their behavior because money is their “primary motivationâ€.
Being able to stop the vicious circle is “completely†in our control; it always has been. These criminals rely “completely†on our cooperation. If people stop paying the extortion there will be no federal funds awarded and there is “no way†they can lock-up the numbers of people involved. I know it’s easier said than done, but still “necessaryâ€. As more people stop paying, more and more will get involved, having a “snowballing†effect.
I wish it were as simple as getting the victims to go vote for change, but it’s impossible for a minority of 20 million people to change things by voting in a country of 300 million. Black people faced the same odds back in the sixties. Voting didn’t get the job done, riots in all the major cities, with an unforgivable death toll is what changed things. I hope it doesn’t come to that, but it’s headed in that direction. Unless the Republican Party has a “spiritual awakening†there doesn’t seem to be a political solution. A third party victory is a long-shot at best.
One thing for sure is that the longer this injustice continues the harder it will be to set things straight. Ever more men will have paid with their lives or lost their right to vote, along with the rest of their constitutional rights, having been “criminalized†for failing to meet the unconscionable demands of this domestic enemy. These fanatics will have succeeded in disfranchising men to the point that a peaceful resolution will be practically impossible, and violence will seem our only recourse.
Every day that people postpone refusing to pay can be measured in loss of life, freedom and happiness.
Help save lives; refuse to pay the extortion.
Kevin Merck
All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.
Thomas Jefferson
5 Jim Deeny // Jun 23, 2006 at 5:49 am
Kevin Merck said,
on June 22nd, 2006 at 8:11 pm
“There has been a 700% increase in the prison population in the last forty years … almost all men … and directly attributable to the rise of feminism and the demise of the family. The “vast majority†of men in prison were raised in single mother households. Most “out-of-wedlock pregnancies†are a resulting consequence of children raised in single mother households. Statistically, children raised in single mother households don’t stand a chance. So much for the “best interests of childrenâ€, these criminals are destroying the lives of countless children and could care less.”
This is the insatiable appetite for revenue at fatherless men and young men in America Kevin, on one hand the same judge will give mom custody no matter what, and on the other hand the judge will send a fatherless young man to prison for stealing, it’s the revolving door they’ve created. Most prisons are not really owned by the states, they’re usually privately owned. If I owned a prison I know how I would get my customers, I’d make them fatherless. I think Stephen Baskerville’s study showed the 73% of young men in prison are fatherless. This revolving door lines the pockets of lawyers and judges. Some psycho analyst said one day that children growing up fatherless are the one’s 10 times more likely to go to jail, and walla, revenue was created at the expense of you, me and our children’s future.
6 Jim Deeny // Jun 23, 2006 at 5:52 am
Kevin, I looked for that site you mentioned, no luck finding it here.
7 Kevin Merck // Jun 23, 2006 at 7:21 am
redstatefeminist.blogspot.com/2006/ 06/fathers-rights-and-mens-rights-groups.html - 133k -
8 Jim Deeny // Jun 23, 2006 at 8:23 am
Thanks Kev, I know exacly who she is. You’ll find allot of her posts also at http://www.reclusiveleftist.com
9 Jim Deeny // Jun 23, 2006 at 9:43 am
Thanks Kevin! I read allot of their posts and it’s freaky. It’s almost like they think they are perfect in every way, like they have an answer to everything. I used to post some things on their blogs and no matter what it always seemed to get twisted and corrupt. I feel sorry for thise people. It’s crazy to think that women can kill their babies through abortion, kill them like Yates did or whatever and it’s justified because they are women and it’s NORMAL for them to be depressed and kill.
10 Jim Deeny // Jun 23, 2006 at 10:03 am
BUT…..When a man kills it’s totally different. I would be willing to bet that if the courts would take their property, kids and 60% of their pay, and, child support awards that exceed their pay I would be willing to bet that those same people that bad mouth fathers would do something like Mack did. Maybe not to that extreme in all cases, but it would be bound to happen. I guess I have to be careful now as to what I say since the RedStateFeminist posted everything we say on their blog by copying and pasting it. Pesonally I don’t give a shit what they think or do because they’re going to be a minority soon, and I think with what their doing now and the way they’ve become in their Nazi ways Alice Paul would literally turn over in her grave.
11 Kevin Merck // Jun 23, 2006 at 8:44 pm
http://www.la-legal.com/forum/index.php?topic=7706.msg63044 - 59k -
12 Kevin Merck // Jun 24, 2006 at 6:46 am
For all you misinformation junkies out there private prisons house less than 5% of the current prison population and there is plenty of controversy over their implementation. It looks as though state and local governments are increasingly alarmed that they are losing a substantial portion of the incarceration pie.
This “incarceration boom†is big business. Remember 3 out of 4 prisoners are from “single mother householdsâ€; therefore, any change in the present child placement policies would directly affect the numbers of future prisoners available to the state to fill their prisons.
In order for prisons to operate at their maximum earning potential they must be full to capacity. New prisons are filled to capacity in short order upon their completion, which always gives the impression that a new one is desperately needed.
It’s another vicious-circle created by the state in order to drain the pockets of the taxpayer through matching federal dollars to house prisoners. As long as the feds dole out huge sums of money to lock-up our citizens, (almost all men) the “incarceration boom†will flourish.
In my opinion, this can only be honestly seen as a modern day slave trade predicated on the lie that we are protecting our citizens. It’s also a not-so-clever way of disfranchising a large percentage of our male population for political purposes.
These prisons once built become necessary to the local communities they are built in. They are usually built in rural communities where other opportunities are virtually non-existent due in large part to the reduction of our industrial base. Once built, they become like the “military base†that no one can seem to do without.
Everyone in America should be “alarmed†by this trend.
http://www.stateaction.org/issues/ issue.cfm/issue/PrivatizingPrisons. –xml - 25k
Kevin Merck
You must log in to post a comment.