MYTHS and FACTS About FATHERLESSNESS
By Trish Wilson, © 2004
All rights reserved by author
Excerpts from Michael E. Lamb's "The Role of the Father"
Chapter 1: The Role of the Father: An Overview
Michael E. Lamb
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Review of the Research
[Highlighting my emphasis.]
Pgs. 15-17
Father Absence. From the studies reviewed thus far it seems that
we can state only that an affectionate father-child relationship
appears to facilitate the sex-role development of the children, though
we are unable to be more specific about the outstanding characteristics
of this relationship. The father-absence literature, reviewed more
extensively by Biller in Chapter 3, does not permit us to be more
specific either.
[. . .]
The presence of an alternative masculine model, for example, an older
brother, may inhibit the effects of the father's absence to some degree
(Brim, 1958, Koch, 1956, Rosenberg & Sutton-Smith, 1964; Santrock,
1970a; Sutton-Smith & Rosenberg, 1965; Wohlford, Santrock, Berger,
& Liberman, 1971), though Biller (1968; 1971a) argues that the
father is a superior role model. Nevertheless
this illustrates the point that the effects of father absence cannot be
reasonably be determined without considering important ecological
variables such as the age at separation, the reason for the separation(
(Hetherington, 1972; Illsley & Thompson, 1961; Santrock &
Wohlford, 1970), the family composition and structure, socioeconomic
status and effects (Chilman & Sussman, 1964), the mother's behavior
separation (Biller, 1969a; Biller & Bahm, 1971; Lerner, 1954;
Pederson, 1966; Wylie & Delgado, 1959).
Although many of these studies (and the other discussed by Biller in
Chapter 3) can be criticized for not taking these factors into account,
sufficient
studies have been done to permit a conclusion that father absence can
be detrimental to the social adjustment of children, especially of sons (p. 16)
Implications of the Father-Absence Literature. An
important reason why we are as yet unable to specify the father's
influence when he is present is that we have failed to take into
account these same ecological variables. In effect we have attempted to
characterize a role shorn of its contextual features. As I argue
in later sections, these factors must be taken into account, not only
because methodological requirements must be satisfied, but also because
the role of father exists only in the context of a complex series of relationships within the family and in society at large.
In support of the importance of such factors several studies have shown
that the extent to which the father is seen as the head of the
household appears to influence the sex-role development of his son
(Biller, 1969b; Freedheim, 1960; Hetherington, 1965; 1967; L. Hoffman,
1961; Kagan, 1958; Mussen & Distler, 1959). Correspondingly
sex-role development may be retarded when the father plays a feminine
role at home (Altucher, 1957; Bronfenbrenner, 1958). The greater
father-son similarity has been found in families in which the father
dominates in interaction with his wife (Biller, 1969b; Hetherington,
1965; Hetherington & Brackbill, 1963; Hetherington & Frankie,
1967)
It is not only conceivable but likely that the failure to take such
factors into account in other studies affected the results they
obtained.
A second weakness in many of these studies relates to the techniques used to assess masculinity and similarity.
The most popular means of assessing the child's identification and
masculinity/femininity are doll play, projective tests, and
paper-and-pencil questionnaires. Two decades ago Bronfenbrenner (1958)
called attention to the methodological problems with research of this
nature, but his suggestion for improvement has largely been ignored.
A further problem concerns the assessment of the parents' behavior or
attitudes. It is rare indeed for the fathers to be interviewed directly
(Tasch, 1952, 1955); most often, the children are asked to describe
their parents' behavior, or alternatively, the mothers are asked to
describe their spouses and the father-child relationship. The former is
more common. In
most studies, then there is a serious confounding, in that the sources
of evidence about the child, the father, and their relationship are not
independent. Our ability to draw inferences from such evidence is
severely restricted. At best, most studies should be regarded as
pilot investigations, preparing the way for methodologically and
conceptually superior projects that, regrettably, have never been
undertaken.
The Father And Academic Performance
p. 19
Underachieving boys have inadequate relationships with their fathers, whom they regard as rejecting or hostile (Grunebaum, Hurwitz, Prentice, & Sperry, 1962; Hurley, 1967; Kimball, 1952)
Pgs. 24 -25
The greatest problem with this body of research
is, perhaps, that it is based almost exclusively on correlational
strategies. Thus even if the other methodological problems - the
nonindependence of sources of evidence, the dubious validity of many of
the instruments used - were overcome, researchers would still be unable
to specify either cause or effect. To test the hypothesis that
characteristics of the father-child relationship are causal antecedents
of certain aspects of the child's personality development, it will be
necessary to use those correlational strategies that permit causal
inferences, such as cross-lagged panel correlations, in the context of
short- or long-term longitudinal studies. I have argued, here and
elsewhere, that our discipline would best be served by a serious
attempt to understand the nature of interaction within the family;
reported "nurturance," "punitiveness," or "masculinity" are too vague,
nonspecific, and subjective to be of predictive utility.
One problem underlying our inability to formulate
a definitive specification of the father's role concerns the very
definition of that role, which is currently being reevaluated, along
with the traditional characterization of masculinity. Because of the
recency of these changes in the cultural definitions of
role-appropriate behavior, there is little one can say about the effect
on the children. It is clear, though that the participation of
the father in childrearing is not seen as "unmasculine" by children,
who indeed expect their fathers to be as influential and emotionally
involved as mothers, even if the extent of their involvement (in terms
of time) is substantially less (Bowerman & elder, 1964; Dunn, 1060;
Dyer & Urban, 1958; Hartley & Klein, 1959).
Much of the evidence reviewed has suggested that
the father is the parent most concerned with the adoption of cultural
values and traditional stereotypically defined sex roles. It is
plausible to assume that, if he were to favor more egalitarian sex
roles, these too, would be fostered, particularly if, by his own
behavior, he showed that these were not incompatible with his own
gender identification. There seems little reason to expect that the
fathers' role in child development would be diminished by these
developments; indeed, if they presaged a greater commitment to children
by the many fathers currently uninvolved one might predict that their
importance would increase, and the scope of their influence would
broaden.
p. 29
[ . . .] it is regrettably true that many
fathers have little to do with their children, interact minimally with
them, and hence, make little positive contribution to their
psychological development. As I have demonstrated, an inadequate
father-child relationship may have detrimental effects. Perhaps
then, it is important to emphasize not only the father's role in
contemporary American society (for here it is typically devalued -
Birdwhistell, 1957; Brenton, 1966; Foster, 1964; Kluckhorn, 1949;
Rohrer & Edmondson, 1960) but also the potential power of the role.
The widespread inadequate fulfillment of the role's demands is clearly
not without its inevitable, and often quite serious, effects.
p. 31-32
Several studies attest to the importance of the family unit in
fostering the social development of the child (Schaefer, 1974). These
range from studies showing the effects on the children of extensive
family discord, hostile parental attitudes, and disagreements over
details of childrearing practices and aspirations for the child's
future (Baruch, 1937; Baruch & Wilcox, 1944; Coopersmith, 1967;
Cottle, 1968; Elmer, 1967; Farber, 1962; Farber & McHale, 1959;
Giovannoni & Billingsley, 1970; Gordon & Gordon, 1959; Graham
& Rutter, 1973; M. Hoffman, 1960; Kauffman, 1961; Langner &
Michael, 1963; Medinnus, 1963; Medinnus & Johnson, 1970; Nye, 1957;
Putney & Middleton, 1960; Rutter, 1971, 1973, 1974; Van der Veen,
1965; Wyer, 1965) to studies showing the relatively subtle effects of
the temporary absence of one parent on the other parent's attitude
toward the child (Marsella, Dubanoski, & Mohs, 1974) and, for
example, the enhancement of identification with their fathers in boys
whose mothers feel positively about their husbands (Helper, 1955; Rau,
1960). There is also evidence that the child's attitudes toward an
absent father are related to his mother's feelings about him (Bach,
1946; Biller, 1971b). Some researchers have noted that intimate family
relationships depend on the nature of the mother-father relationship
(Westley & Epstein, 1960) and that the perception of closeness to
the father is the best indicator of family interaction (Landis, 1960).
I have already discussed a number of studies that show how the father's
status in the family influences the sex-role adoption of the children
and their willingness or ability to display responsibility and
leadership (Bronfenbrenner, 1961b).
Such studies indicate the limitations inherent in attempts to specify
the father's effects. It is possible to do this only by recognizing the
context in which the father and child are operating. The focus for our
future investigation must be the family system, and our unit of
analysis must be the interactional round. Further we cannot make
profound advances in our understanding of social development by
searching crudely for "father effects" using currently popular research
techniques. We
need to understand the patterns of interaction within the family, and
then, within the framework of the family structure, understand the
nature of the relationship within the father-child subsystem.
The challenge is not easy to meet: It demands a complete readjustment
in the manner in which we customarily investigate socialization and
social development. That the father-child relationship is important has
been documented in his and subsequent chapters; that we know little
about the relationship - the way in which the effects are mediated -
should once more be underscored. The new focus should be motivated both
by the realization of the relative fruitlessness of the socialization
studies of the past decades (Caldwell, 1964; Zigler & Child, 1969)
and by the appreciation of the complexity and multidimensionality of
the process of integrating the child into the social world.
Chapter 2
Historical and Social Changes in the Perception of the Role of the Father
John Nash
University of Hong Kong
p. 76
Studies of the effects of father absence have
been said to show an element of sexism in that more attention has been
given to effects on boys than on girls (Herzog and Sudiea, 1973).
p. 81
Women's liberation is frequently accused of being against motherhood,
on the grounds that motherhood interferes with the pursuit of a career.
But a recent study of university students by Eagley and Anderson (1974)
traces the attitude more to a concern about world population, since a
sample of liberated women were quite willing to adopt children. On the
other hand, a meeting of women students at Oxford University in March
1975 (reported in South China Morning Post,
March 5, 1975) denounced the family as an institution to repress women.
It becomes, therefore, a little difficult to decide what the facts are.
It could be that the United States and British liberationists differ on
this or that the Eagley and Anderson evidence is more scientific and
accurate. vI personally agree with Gilder (1975) that women's
liberation has been an antimotherhood movement.
p. 82
Several writers, including Mead and Simone de Beauvoir (see Rosaldo and
Lamphere, 1974) have pointed out that, in many cultures, activities in
which men engage assume enhanced value. The converse is also true. The
medical profession in Russia is said to have lost prestige because of
(or coincident with) the heavy preponderance of women in its ranks. In
Sweden, crane operation lost status when labor shortages brought in
women operators (see Feedback, 1975).
If this is true, then the increased participation of men in
childrearing may be expected to enhance its prestige. At least one
human society regards childcare as the man's concern - the Manus of New
Guinea (Mead, 1930) - childcare enjoys there an important position
(Mead 1935). At the age of 1 year the child is transferred from the
care of the mother to that of the father, who feeds and bathes it,
plays with it, and sleeps with it at night. He may also take it to the
men's "clubhouse," which no women may enter.
A major tenet of Gilder's [George Gilder, "Sexual
Suicide," 1975] argument is what he calls the "male imperative," which
feminists threaten. This has two aspects: first, the mystique of the
job with male companionship, and second, the role of supporter and
provider.
A man's job may serve as a male sanctum, but Gilder presents no
concrete data (except that of Bednarik, 1970) to show that most men in
fact view their job this way. The job itself is often unrewarding and
tedious, but on invasion by females, he maintains, it becomes
intolerable. There are no data regarding the threat to the provider
role, but given the decay of the "Protestant ethic," one might predict
that is less an imperative than in the past.
p. 83
My own observation, unsupported by statistical data, is that there has
been a steady reawakening of the possibilities of fatherhood as a
satisfying life role that predates women's liberation. In 1956, I wrote
an article in the popular Canadian magazine McLeans under the title
"It's Time Father Got Back into the Family." The feedback I received
was convincing that a considerable number of men were thinking that way
too. [ . . .]
It is difficult to charge a history of "father revival." English and
Foster produced a book called Fathers are Parents Too (1953), and
Ostrovsky later wrote a book pleading for more male influence in
schools (1959), but neither of these had the popular success of Greer's
(Female Eunuch - 1971) or Friedan's (Feminine Mystique - 1963) book.
The antimotherhood movement has been much more vocal, and although I
cannot document this accurately, I believe that the women's movement
happened to come at a time when a quieter change was occurring in men,
who were discovering the satisfactions of fatherhood to be greater than
those of career success. The father role was in process of
reevaluation, though the social forces behind this rethinking are
difficult to identify. [ . . .]
Conclusion
Because of the paucity of reliable records of
childrearing practices in times past, the historical factors leading up
to present perceptions of the father's role in childrearing are not
readily documents, and a good deal of conjecture is needed in
attempting to describe them. (Indeed, even in 1976, statements about
how society in general perceives fathers, or how fathers themselves
perceive their role, are to a large degree conjectural, though a body
of factual data is growing.) A review does show a growing interest in fathers by researchers in various disciplines.
The Father and Personality Development: Paternal Deprivation and
Sex-Role Development
Henry B. Biller
University of Rhode Island
p. 90
There are data indicating that the quality of the
father-son relationship is a more important influence on the boy's
masculine development than the amount of time the father spends at home (Biller, 1968a, 1971a).
p. 97
Most of the early studies dealing with the
effects of father absence were done with children whose fathers were or
had been absent because of military service during World War II.
.[ . . .] Compared to father-present boys,
the father-absent boys were less aggressive and also had less sex-role
differentiation in their doll play activity. (Sears - effects of father absence on 3- 5-year old boys, 1951.)
[ . . .](Stoltz et al. (1954) - 4- to 8-
year old children separated from fathers for first two years of their
lives.) Interviews revealed that the boys were generally perceived by
their fathers as "sissies." Careful observation of these boys supported
this view. The boys were less assertively aggressive and independent in
their peer relations than boys who had not been separated from their
fathers. They were more often observed to be very submissive or to
react with immature hostility, and they were actually more aggressive
in doll play than boys who had not been separated from their fathers.
However, the facts that the fathers were present in the home at the
time of this study and that the father-child relationships were
stressful make it difficult to speculate about what influence father
absence per se had on the children's personality development.
p. 100
Surrogate Models
Paternal absence or paternal inadequacy does not rule out the possible presence of other male models.
A brother, uncle, grandfather, or male boarder may ensure that the boy
has much interactions with a competent adult male. An important role
can be played by male neighbors and teachers. Male teachers,
particularly, may influence father-absent boys (Biller, 1974a, 1974b,
1974c; Lee & Wolinsky, 1973).
The child may even learn some masculine behaviors by patterning himself
after a movie or television star, an athlete, a fictional hero, and so
froth.
p. 103
Methodological Issues
In addition to the obvious theoretical and practical relevance of
studying the effects of father absence, a possible methodological
justification is that father absence is a naturalistic manipulation. It
can be argued that father absence must be an antecedent rather than a
consequence of certain behaviors in children. However, a
general problem with studies comparing father-absent and father-present
children is that investigators have usually treated both types of
children as if they represent homogeneous groups. There has been
a lack of concern for the meaning of these two conditions. For example,
there have been few attempts to ensure that a group of consistently
father-absent boys is compared with a group of boys who have a high
level of quality of father availability.
Most researchers have treated father absence in
an overly simplistic fashion. In many studies variables such as type,
length, and age of onset of father absence have not been specified.
Potentially important variables such as the child's sex, intelligence,
constitutional characteristics, birth order, relationship with his
mother, and sociocultural background, as well as availability of father
surrogates, are often not taken into account, either in subject
matching or in data analysis. When careful matching procedures are
followed, more clear-cut findings seem to emerge (e.g., Biller, 1969b, 1971a; Blancarrd & Biller, 1971; Hetherington, 1966).
Investigators have made inferences about the effects of father absence
and variations in paternal behavior on sex-role development and the
identification process, but measurement of hypothesized dependent
variables has often been indirect or included only a very narrow range
of behaviors. Data on a limited measure of masculinity have frequently
been used to make inferences about overall patterns of identification
and sex-role development; multidimensional assessment procedures are
needed if we are to gain a clearer understanding of the influence of
father absence on the child's sex-role development (Biller, 1968a,
1971a).
p. 106
Stolz et al. (1954) reported that 4- to 8-
year old children, whose fathers were away on military service during
their first few years of life, were more anxious than children whose
fathers had been consistently present. Previously
father-separated children were observed to be more anxious with peers
and adults in story completion sessions when the situation involved the
father, and in maternal reports of the seriousness and number of fears.
The fathers were not absent at the time of the study but were having
stressful relationships with their children [ . . .]
There is much evidence suggesting that males who perceive themselves as
being similar to their fathers, particularly when their fathers are
masculine, are likely to be relatively free of serious psychological
difficulties. (Biller & Barry, 1971; Cava and Rausch, 1952; David,
1968; Heilbrun, 1062; Heilbrun & Fromme, 1965; Helper, 1955;
Lockwood & Guerney, 1962; Lazowick, 1955; Sopchak, 1952).
Some very extensive longitudinal data underscore
the importance of both the father's behavior and the father-mother
relationship in the personality adjustment of the child. In general,
block (1971) found that males who had achieved a successful emotional
and interpersonal adjustment in adulthood had both fathers and mothers
who were highly involved and responsible in their upbringing. In
contrast poorly adjusted males had fathers who were typically
uninvolved in childrearing and mothers who tended to have a neurotic
attachment.
In a related investigation, Block, von der Lippe, and Block (1973) reported that well-socialized
and successful adult males were likely to have had highly involved
fathers and to have come from homes where their parents had compatible
relationships. In contrast adult males who were relatively low
in socialization skills and personal adjustment were likely to have
grown up in homes in which the parents were incompatible and in which
the fathers were either uninvolved or weak and neurotic.
p. 112
Herzog and Sudia (1970) cited much evidence demonstrating that lack
of general family cohesiveness and supervision, rather than father
absence per se, is the most significant factor associated with juvenile
delinquency. Many familial and nonfamilial factors have to be
considered, and in only some cases is father absence directly linked to
delinquent behavior. For example, boys in father-absent families who
have a positive relationship with their mothers seem to be less liable
to become delinquent than boys in father-present families who have
inadequate fathers (Biller, 1971a, 1974c; McCord et al., 1962).
Father-present juvenile delinquents appear to have very poor relationships with their fathers.
Bah and Bremer (1947) reported that pre-adolescent delinquent boys
produced significantly fewer father fantasies on projective tests than
delinquent control group did. The delinquents portrayed fathers as
lacking in affection and empathy. Similarly Andry (1962) found that
delinquents characterized their fathers as glum, uncommunicative, and
as employing unreasonable punishment and little praise. Father-son
communications was particularly poor.
Andry's findings are consistent with those of Bandura and Walters (1959), who reported that the relationship between delinquent sons and fathers is marked by rejection, hostility, and antagonism.
McCord, McCord, and Howard (1963) found that a deviant, aggressive
father in the context of general parental neglect and punitiveness was
strongly related to juvenile delinquency. Medinnus (1965b) obtained
data suggesting a very high frequency of negative father-child
relationships among delinquent boys. The delinquent adolescent boys in
Medinnus's study perceived their fathers as much more rejecting and
neglecting than their mothers.
p. 131
Additional data in Hetherington's study emphasize the importance of
taking into account the context of, and reason for, father absence. Daughters
of widows recalled more positive relationships with their fathers and
described them a s warmer and more competent than daughters of
divorcees did. The divorced mothers also painted a very negative
picture of their marriages and ex-husbands. Daughters of divorcees were
quite low in self-esteem, but daughters of widows did not differ
significantly in their self-esteem from daughters from father-present
homes. Nevertheless both groups of father-absent girls had less
feelings of control over their lives and more anxiety than
father-present girls did.
Inadequate Fathering
The father-mother interaction can have much impact on the child's
personality development. Family stability and cohesiveness help to
provide a positive atmosphere for the developing child. An
inadequate father is often also an inadequate husband. The father may
influence his daughter's personality development indirectly in terms of
his relationship with his wife. If the father meets his wife's needs,
she may, in turn, be able to interact more adequately with her children.
Bartemeier (1953) emphasized that the wife's capacity for appropriately
nurturing her children, and her general psychological adjustment, are
much influenced by her relationship with her husband. A number of
investigations have suggested that a warm and nurturant mother-daughter
relationship is more important in positive feminine development (e.g.,
Hetherington, 1965; Hetherington & Rankie, 1967; Mussen &
Parker, 1965; Mussen & Rutherford, 1963).
Inadequate fathering or mothering is frequently a reflection of
difficulty in the husband-wife relationship, difficulties that may be
particularly apparent in the husband's and wife's inability to provide
one another adequately with affection and sexual satisfaction. The
parents' interpersonal problems are usually reflected in their
interactions with their children and in their children's adjustment.
For example, clinical studies have revealed that difficulties in
parental sexual adjustment, combined with overrestrictive parenting
attitudes, are often associated with incestuous and acting-out behavior
among adolescent females (e.g., Kaufman, Pec & Tagiuri, 1954;
Robey, Rosenwald, Snell, & See, 1964).
Severe marital conflict can have a disorganizing effect on both parental and maternal behavior.
Baruch and Wilcox's (1944) results showed that marital conflict
negatively influences the personality development of both boys and
girls. Some of their data suffer more because of their interpersonal
sensitivity. Some research points out that familial factors seem to
have more impact on girls' than on boys' personality development (Lynn,
1969, 1974).
p. 136
Father Substitutes
The availability of father surrogates is important for father-present
children with inadequate fathers, as well as for father-absent
children. Many
paternally deprived children have very effective father surrogates in
their own families or find an adequate role model among teachers or
older peers. Older, well-adjusted boys can be very salient and
influential models for younger, paternally deprived children. When it
is impossible or impractical to deal with the child's father,
therapists can strengthen their impact on father-absent or paternally
disadvantaged child by also working with the child's actual or
potential father surrogate. This could be accomplished by consultation,
by engaging the father surrogate and child in joint sessions (or in
groups with other children and father surrogates) can be even more
beneficial.
|