Interesting article I read yesterday (CAUTION, it's a long read) : http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?issueID=13&articleID=35 Summary: Money Separating children from their fathers appears to be a lucrative and booming industry for feminists, attorneys, family courts, and state governments...
You didn't know tht roughly 1/2 of U.S. marriages end in divorce? How many of the divorces end with the father having primary custody of his children do think? not many. We have an entire generation of kids with little or no contact with their biological fathers and the entire issue is being blamed on deadbeat dads when that most possibly is not the case.
that's a change in a fathers role in society....much as a mothers traditional role has changed.....hardly a crisis....
Hardly. It's the forced elimination of the father's role. Did you read any of the article? Growing up without a father increases the liklihood of criminal acts, drug abuse, truancy, suicide, depression, teenage pregnancy and a tendency toward violence. Fathers are not expendable....
nonsense....have you never studied the historical role of the father in a family unit? yes, divorce rates are shocking..yes, the courts often side with the mother and give them sole custody of the children (all cases are diff of course, but i do think fathers often get a rough deal)...yes, there are bastards who will turn their backs on their children, there always has been... but imo, men, as a whole are more loving, caring, considerate and understanding of their children than in any other time in history... the classic "atomic family" ideal is disintegrating.....husband, wife, 2.4 kids etc......Society is changing, single parents are now the norm where they used to be a rarity....and thus, the fathers role is changing...... Shock! horror! some kids who grow up without a father figure do go "off the rails" ... it's very true...but to say those are the only kids to do so/are gauranteed to do so is just stupid. is a kid better off with a father? .......... depends who the father is (and vice versa for the mother)
It's really bad. The guy could be a saint and the mother a crack whore. Guess who's getting the kids?
"A generation of fatherhood advocates has emerged who insist that fatherlessness is the most critical social issue of our time. In Fatherless America, David Blankenhorn calls the crisis of fatherless children “the most destructive trend of our generation” (1995, 1). Their case is powerful. Virtually every major social pathology has been linked to fatherless children: violent crime, drug and alcohol abuse, truancy, unwed pregnancy, suicide, and psychological disorders—all correlating more strongly with fatherlessness than with any other single factor, surpassing even race and poverty. The majority of prisoners, juvenile detention inmates, high school dropouts, pregnant teenagers, adolescent murderers, and rapists come from fatherless homes (Daniels 1998, passim). Children from affluent but broken families are much more likely to get into trouble than children from poor but intact ones, and white children from separated families are at higher risk than black children in intact families (McLanahan 1998, 88). The connection between single-parent households and crime is so strong that controlling for this factor erases the relationship between race and crime as well as between low income and crime (Kamarck and Galston 1990, 14)."
Someone once did an astute and interesting study correlating fatherlessness to crime, which had formerly been attributed to race
"In the largest federally funded study ever undertaken on the subject, Arizona State University psychologist Sanford Braver demonstrated that few married fathers voluntarily leave their children. Braver found that overwhelmingly it is mothers, not fathers, who are walking away from marriages. Moreover, most of these women do so not with legal grounds such as abuse or adultery but for reasons such as “not feeling loved or appreciated.” The forcibly divorced fathers were also found to pay virtually all child support when they are employed and when they are permitted to see the children they have allegedly abandoned (1998, chap. 7)."
I'm surprised that this thread has been in the Men's Issues forum for a week with no fathers commenting...
Sometimes we only get one post every 48 hours here in Men's Issues. The divorce rate pisses me off and makes me really not want to get married. It just shows that most women are monsters, and because the state and some lawyers are making money off of it its not going to change easily.
erm, yes, divorce is primarily the fault of women, men play little to no part in it whatsoever. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a big believer in marriage (as my mother has been through three divorces, two while I was around. My dad in two, one while I was around) but a marriage or relationship takes two to build, and two to tear apart as for this : well, if we're describing unwed pregnancies (often voluntary) and Truancy as social diseases, yes of course it's easy to blame fatherlessness. I realize these weren't your words, that you were quoting from another source, but describing skipping school as a social disease is a little ridiculous. Fatherhood crisis. Hrm. When my parents were splitting up and I was around 3, they each fought for custody of me. Sole custody. They pretty much got into a stalemate and ended up with joint custody (an agreement between the two of them, they're still legally married though seperated). My dad almost one a couple of times, basically using the argument that my grandmother would be a better mother than my real mom. I'm glad I live with my mother now, but I'm also glad I spent my time nearly 50/50 between the two of them when I was younger. I do get along better with my mother. I don't feel like I missed out on a lot in having parents that were seperated, or in getting a stepdad (basically another father, that's awesome!) This is not to make light of the fact that very few fathers do get sole custody of their kids. But it's not always the right decision that they should. It should be weighted on the merits of each person as a parent, regardless of their gender. My mother and father were both screw ups, but my dad lived in the same house as his parents. My mother's father and step mother were in Portland Oregon, her mother dead shortly before I was born. That's just my situation, I think it turned out in a really good way with joint custody. Hell, joint custody is, in my ever so humble opinion, a really good way to go. You get to spend equal time with each parent, learn from both of them but not have to deal with them battling it out in front ofyou, or in the same house as you. /rant
"men play little to no part in it whatsoever."- In some cases they do, but there are a lot of divorces initiated for rediculous reasons by wives. Are you being sarcastic? " but a marriage or relationship takes two to build, and two to tear apart"- I think theres some unrealistic expectations on how a man should treat a woman. Women believe the deserve a man who gives them lots of attention, and who shows affection often. They don't realize that in marriage, there are time periods when the two of them aren't able to see each other or talk much. Just because the husband is busy and doesn't go out of his way all the time to show his love doesn't mean he doesn't love his wife. I think that its just an excuse women use when their boyfriends stop spending money on them in some cases. The article pointed out that this was started and has gotten worse over the past 10 years. I predict it will continue to get worse. Things were different when you were 3.
This thread has a lot of content , but no point. What is wrong is not that father's don't get any children into their care, but the fact that there are so many divorces in this world is itself wrong. They should make a law that unless there is abuse going on in the marriage, one cannot divorce his/her spouse, especially if they have children. But to say women are always divorcing men is ridiculous, if they don't divorce men, who will they divorce? women? and besides, if they are divorcing men, how are they any more liable for divorce than the guy involved?
um, hell no. I'd rather come from a broken home (like I did) than live in one. I'd rather have two parents who are happy and don't live with each other anymore, than two who hate each other and can't stand to be in each others company. and no I wasn't being sarcastic Green. Both genders are bad for blaming the other when things fall apart but realistically there are two people involved there, two people who prevent the relationshiph from working out. Two people who could've said no to marriage to begin with.
What a load of crap. You want to talk about being realistic? It takes ONE person to end a marriage and ruin a family. And why? Because they feel they got married to young or dont feel appreciated or need space, or bullshit bullshit bullshit.... They're called marriage VOWS not marriage "I'll see what I can do until it gets too difficult statements". This isn't simply breaking up with a boyfriend/girlfriend, we're talking about dissolving a family. Your parents stayed friends and you feel there weren't very negative consequences in your home, congratulations you're in the minority. Most broken homes don't make out as well and the parties who bear the blunt of the damage are fathers and children.
one person doesn't magically decide that they suddenly don't want to be married all of sudden. There are factors leading up to it, contributions from both parties. Maybe one person is pushing for it more than another, but from all the divorces that I've heard of (and believe me, a lot of my friends are from split parents as well) both people were glad to get out. and I still beleive that coming from a broken home is better than living in one. So you have to go to a different place to see one parent, it's far far FAR better than living in a household filled with yelling, screaming and hatred.