New Column: Protect Fathers' Loving Bonds with Their Children
June 16th, 2008 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families
My new co-authored column, Protect Fathers' Loving Bonds with Their Children (South Florida Sun-Sentinel, 6/13/08, Tucson Citizen, 6/18/08), criticizes the way family courts fail to protect fathers' relationships with their children after divorce or separation.
To write a Letter to the Editor of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, a leading newspaper with a circulation in the 300,000 range, regarding Family courts still treating men poorly, click here.
To post a comment about the article, click here.
The column, co-authored with Mike McCormick, Executive Director of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children, is below.
Protect Fathers' Loving Bonds with Their Children
By Mike McCormick and Glenn Sacks
Chicago father Joseph Richardson gave his life to save his child last month. According to one newspaper report, "With an out-of-control car bearing down, Richardson grabbed his 4-year-old daughter and held her up out of harm's way. It was his last act -- and one that apparently saved his daughter's life."
Earlier this year San Francisco father Albert Collins gave his life to save his family. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, "Collins' last act was to throw his body over the top of his daughter to shield her from [errant shots] that would leave him dead...[his mother] watched helplessly, as her son made what would be his final request...'look out for [my] son and [my] daughter.'"
There certainly are fathers (and mothers) who don't come through for their children, but the average dad loves his children as much as Richardson and Collins did. Unfortunately, you'd never know it from the way our family court system treats fathers.
Millions of divorced or separated men are not permitted any meaningful role in their children's lives. Many get to spend only a few days a month with their kids, and once mom finds a new man, they're often pushed out entirely in favor of the child's "new dad." Yet when we talk about fatherless homes, it's only in the context of the "paternal abandonment" script.
Fortunately, some legislators are finally starting to rethink fatherlessness. One of them is former Iowa House Speaker Pro Tem Danny Carroll, who never knew his father. Carroll refuses to make the standard assumption that his dad abandoned him. Rather, he publicly speculates that had the family law system protected fathers' relationships with their children, perhaps he would have had his father in his life.
The benefits that divorced or separated fathers can provide their children are substantial. For example, a recent study of low-income African-American and Hispanic families by Boston College found that when nonresident fathers are involved in their adolescent children's lives, the incidence of substance abuse, violence, crime, and truancy decreases markedly. The study's lead author, professor Rebekah Levine Coley, says the study found involved nonresident fathers to be "an important protective factor for adolescents."
Family courts often facilitate outcomes which damage children's relationships with their fathers. While child custody laws are often neutral on paper, in practice they favor awarding sole custody or primary residency to mothers and visitor status to fathers. Misguided women's advocates such as the National Organization for Women have repeatedly beat back attempts to change this.
These outmoded, reactionary policies are unfair to fathers (and also to some mothers who lose custody), and disastrous for children. What's needed instead is a presumption of shared parenting in divorce or separation. Under this presumption, when parents cannot agree on custody arrangements, courts will order shared custody unless there is clear and convincing evidence that one of the parents is unfit or unable to care for the children. A mediator will then help the parents draft a shared parenting plan awarding each parent substantially equal time with their children.
Research shows that shared parenting is best for kids. For example, according to a meta-analysis of 33 studies of children of divorce published in the American Psychological Association's Journal of Family Psychology, children in shared custody settings had fewer behavior and emotional problems, higher self-esteem, better family relations, and better school performance than children in sole custody arrangements.
Moreover, studies of children of divorce demonstrate that most prefer joint custody and shared parenting. For example, Arizona State University psychology professor William Fabricius conducted a study, published in Family Relations, of college students who had experienced their parents' divorces while they were children. He found that over two-thirds believed that "living equal amounts of time with each parent is the best arrangement for children."
The family law system has for too long given short shrift to a child's love for his or her father and a father's right to parent his child. At the dawn of the divorce age it was perhaps understandable that courts didn't know how to make genuinely beneficial custody arrangements. It no longer is. Shared parenting protects children's loving bonds with both parents, and should be the norm.
This column first appeared in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel (6/15/08).
Mike McCormick is the Executive Director of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children. Their website is www.acfc.org.
Glenn Sacks' columns on men's and fathers' issues have appeared in dozens of the largest newspapers in the United States. He invites readers to visit his website at www.GlennSacks.com.
"));
19 queries. 0.337 seconds.
June 16th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
They published this? That's wonderful! Keep spreading the word!
June 16th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
There are also a lot of men who never wanted a child to begin with. While we can change the laws so that the women in those situations knows she won't get financial support, and can change the culture so that the we recognize that a child needs a father who is wants and is ready for him, the most most effective way to prevent fatherlessness in these situations is probably a male contraceptive pill.
June 16th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Obama has come out against deadbeat dads: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/16/us/politics/15cnd-obama.html
"On Friday, Mr. Obama announced that he would be a co-sponsor of a bill with Senator Evan Bayh, Democrat of Indiana, that his campaign said would address the “national epidemic of absentee fathers.” If passed, the legislation would increase the enforcement of child support payments and strengthen domestic violence prevention services."
If you read the whole article you can see it sees as though hes saying nice wonderful things about men and fathers, but hes really just setting up some high ideal so that he can blame men for failing to live up to it.
But, as with most of stuff like this, its really ultimately a condemnation of the US and our political system, rather than anyone candidate or political party.
June 16th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
Glenn,
Have you seen the following article?:
http://www.tallahassee.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080615/OPINION01/806150307/1006/OPINION
June 16th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
How can you father a child, if you're given only limited time/ Even worse, how can you father your child if your ex refuses to allow it? Obama blames black men for ignoring their children, without offering any relief/recognition to all those black men deprived of their fathering rights by the courts. Those children don't need more child support, they need their fathers. Money is not a substitute for a father.
June 16th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
If you are interested in seeing what can happen when society and family courts make stupid decisions... please review the articles and video below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIbG3s0HP6M
http://www.cccjustice.org/HighProfileCaseNews.htm
www.cccjustice.org
June 16th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Yep, Obama's little rant made him sound like some wind-up feminist doll... Fathers are not AWOL, they're expendable and very often expelled by the very women Obama is trying to suck up to. Just so long as the dough keeps flowing in...
I used to kinda half-way like Obama (certainly better than Sillary or McCain) but there's no way now I'd ever vote for this mangina. And I'm in a swing state, so my vote counts. Glad his true colors finally came out. And on Dad's Day, no less! Truly horrendous.
Had to come here to Glenn's for a little breath of sanity. Great piece, Glenn. Hope you and yours had a blowout tenth birthday party!
June 16th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
This Presidential election is starting to shape up as another one of those "hold your nose and pull the lever" voting charades.
Since I don't want U.S. kids getting blown up in Iraq for 100 years, I can't vote for McCain.
But the more I witness Obama's pandering to feminists, I'm getting progressively more uneasy about who he really is beyond a charismatic speech-maker.
If he picks Joe Biden for Veep, I'll have to leave the country.
June 16th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
The most dissapointing thing about Obama's railing against "AWOL fathers" is that he should know damn well that it's not as simple as "irresponsibility." He's worked firsthand in poor, African-American inner-city neighborhoods; he's seen how people lose hope under the weight of fear of poverty and crime. He SHOULD KNOW that those factors are most likely an important part in why the father's role isn't taken seriously; they're still expected to fulfill the typical role of provider and wage-earner, which is (duh) hard to do in poor neighborhoods. Because of the frequency of loveless promiscuous sex, coupled with the family court rulings favoring mothers, conception earns them little more than a lifetime of paying Baby Momma support; all responsiblity, no rewards. The problem of fatherlessness in poor black communities has so much deeper and more complicated root causes than simple "irresponsiblity," and HE KNOWS THAT.
Out of all the candidates, Obama is still the one I'm leaning most positively towards, and I actually feel like he might be more likely than any one of them to at least be receptive to Men's Rights messages. But hearing him tow the line like this just makes my blood boil, and just makes me keep the emigration option continuously on the table.
June 17th, 2008 at 3:06 am
It is highly unlikely that the far left liberals are going to support men’s rights. I believe that the moderate conservatives will support men’s rights but we need to give them the reason to. We need to unite to be heard. We need to identify one issue; one that we can all rally around. One that we can get most men to stop in their tracks and pay attention… One that can generate a 5 to 10 million men march. This would get McCain’s attention which can use to rally both democrats and republicans to support. March to the 50 state capitals by a minimum of 100,000 men each on one day (Labor Day?).
As for Roy and his worries of having our boys fighting for the next 100 years by electing McCain… I would not worry about McCain. Worry about the radical Muslims that wish to kill the infidels (you and I). With those radicals out there, I would not want another Jimmy Carter in office. As for our boys… We need to get them to understand honor, respect, country above self, family above self… It is time to reinstate the draft. MTV, video games (Grand Theft Auto), RAP music are destroying the American male… Time to teach our young man what President Kennedy meant by “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country!”
June 17th, 2008 at 11:29 am
I believe today that it does not matter what the politicians party, or if he/she is conservative or liberal, that they will say anything to appease the group they are talking to. Unfortunately, the feminuts have a bigger voice right now and more money.
Why is it such a surprise to people that men would die for their kids? I think a natural reaction for me would be to save my children first and foremost. And I would guess that mothers would do the same, but why second guess fathers all of the time? I am so happy when I read the stories of fathers that gave themselves for their kids. Truth is, a lot of fathers sacrifice on a daily basis just to survive FOR their kids. Especially when ordered to pay more child support than what they make, or are alienated by a vengeful mother and ridiculous court system.
June 17th, 2008 at 11:31 am
Leo said: "It is time to reinstate the draft. MTV, video games (Grand Theft Auto), RAP music are destroying the American male… Time to teach our young man what President Kennedy meant by “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country!”"
Speaking as a 20-year-old male who grew up in the MTV and video game generation, I can safely say that the draft is the LAST thing we need. One of the main purposes of Men's Rights is to change the cultural perception of men so that our lives are valued and protected just as much as women's, and reinstating a draft where a young man (but not a young woman) can, by the government's order, be forced against their will to be shipped off to war and get killed, is not going to help male lives become equally valued.
Regarding MTV and video games: I was only a fan of MTV when they actually had MUSIC, but that's not the point. The point is: those are not the problem. Those are just entertainment; video games, in particular, are just the latest technological advancments in entertainment and storytelling. I myself am an avid gamer and have been playing video games since I was 3 years old, and I'm still a straight-A Honor student with no legal problems at all. Just like comic books were not to blame for child violence in the 50's as people liked to claim, video games aren't to blame today either.
As for JFK, I think it's about damn time we start asking what our country can do for us at this point. Look around at what men already do: we still work the longest hours, take the riskiest jobs, are becoming more involved in raising our children, and make so many sacrifices that establish the foundation of our society. And what thanks do we get for it? Laws that make it easy for our children to be ripped from our lives, constant cultural messages telling us that we're lazy good-for-nothings or abusive monsters, mediocre attention to our health care concerns, and desensitization to abuse and violence against us. Considering how much we already do for our country, it's about time to ask if we're going to get anything worthwhile in return.
June 17th, 2008 at 11:55 am
Although I can see that you fit my description you are one of the few that are making a difference; most of America is not. Frankly most of the world is not. We are primarily focused on number one. Most of us that are involved in the men's rights movement are looking to devote time to making a difference. We are willing to take the heat in order to bring attention to the problems. We are part of the solution not the problem.
Please keep in mind that JFK's America is much different that where we live today. JFK's America was willing to secrifice self for everyone's benefit. We are primarily focused on number one. Most of us are focused on quick and easy results. In doing so; we are losing our edge. We are losing our rights. It is time for change... No I don't mean Obama... I mean for all men to stand together and demand change.
June 17th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
CNN had an interesting analyst on over the weekend who said that a common characteristics of many of our Presidents and Presidential candidates have been that they did not have strong father figures in their lives-
George Washington
Bill Clinton
George W. (absent Dad)
McCain ( absent Dad )
Obama ( abandoned)
These leaders are letting us down as men today. Is it because they didnt get critical male influences early? The cycle is being perpetuated in an even more vicious way through their stated policies.
The most important job in society right now, for the good of all, against the odds, is being a Father.
I have such tremendous respect for all those doing it under the brutal conditions caused the State and Courts during divorce. Its tough enough under "normal" circumstances .
June 17th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Alex said: "reinstating a draft where a young man (but not a young woman) can, by the government's order, be forced against their will to be shipped off to war and get killed, is not going to help male lives become equally valued."
Draft is not necessarily a precursor to war but rather to build strength in men. To refocus men... To build discipline in men... Freedom is not free. We should be prepared to fight for freedom as our forefather did so we can have what we have today. Examples are the 300 Spartans, the men that defended the Alamo... And many more like them. These MEN gave their lives to change the ultimate outcome. If they had not, I can assure you that our today would be much different.
Hopefully at some point society will appreciate the fact that men and women are wired different by our Maker and we all have our purpose. This purpose is not uniform. The problem today is that we don't value our differences equally. A stay at home mom (although she herself doesn’t believe it) is now valued much much higher than the idiot that puts food on the table, roof over our heads, does whatever it takes to make sure that the family is taken care of, puts up with crap in the office to bring home the green stuff, etc. It is our fault that this is happening because we just keep taking the crap from them thinking that we will appease them with our compliance and the problem will go away. It is time to replace those shriveled up peas between our legs with some Spartan balls and take a stand for our rights. Don’t count on any politician to come to the rescue; you and I need to drive change.
June 17th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Leo, I would never advise drafting Alex. Or anyone like him.
Men capable of his degree of critical thinking are too dangerous. They question orders. Their concept of honor does not end with barking out - "Yes, sir!" You can't rehabilitate them in a boot camp. They are beyond redemption.
Thankfully.
You might be able to come up with laws to try to draft them, but they would fail. You can draft compliance, but you cannot ever draft actual commitment.
There is a reason why our heroic "all-volunteer army" in Iraq is disproportionately composed of young men from economically marginal parts of America. (The Army even accepts felons and drug-addicts now!)
BTW, how many draft-age sons do you have?
June 17th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
Roy,
I don't know Alex and don't care to challenge his sense of patriotism and honor. Yes our all volunteer armed forces have done amazing things in the Middle East. Along with the heroes you will also find a handful of knuckleheads that screw things up. I'm proud of the men and women who are serving our country. They are truly heroes.
I have one son who is of draft age and I would gladly support the draft. It would do him some good.