Even now, women’s contributions through earnings are important in reducing the family’s vulnerability to poverty. Families with 1 or 2 children were at the greatest risk of poverty without the earnings of the wife. In 1990, for example, people in households where the husband worked but the wife did not, had a 4 to 6 times higher risk of being in the bottom income quintile then those where both parents were working. Gittins (1993) states that more divorced men remarry showing that women have more independence and less need for a relationship, the family does not need a father or male figure to survive.
The effect on children growing up without a father is one of the main focuses on the debate as there is a great deal of evidence to suggest that this has an enormous impact on the emotional and physical health of the child. Dennis and Erdos (1993) argued that research into the effect of fatherless families showed that “ unless a child is brought up in the constant atmosphere of human beings negotiating, co-operating, controlling their anger, affecting reconciliation’s, he (sic) cannot learn what it is to be an effective member of a social group… for this he needs the presence of two adults in close interaction constantly in his immediate environment.” Fatherless families are seen as contributing to the rise of educational failure, welfare dependency, and involvement in crime and drug abuse among young people, especially young boys from council estates. Indeed, only a quarter of persistent young offenders lived with two parents and that included step parents and mother’s boyfriends, 4 out of 5 children going into care have lone parents and on American and British council estates it was found that the higher the percentage of lone parent households, the higher the percentage of crime and burglary. These statistics show that it is not just families that need fathers; society also needs them as well.
The concern for the effect of divorce on children is being researched more and more as divorce rates are becoming higher, one in three marriages now end in divorce and the effect on children is being examined closely. Rowthorn and Ormerod state that “on every measure of achievement and emotional condition, children living with their married parents usually do better then other children” although it is often hard to distinguish between the effects of marriage and divorce and other factors such as poverty and racism.
Nevertheless, divorce often means poor exam results, damaged health and stress and four times the risk of needing psychiatric help as a child. Dr Richards took 17,000 children from the National Child Development Survey and monitored their lives at intervals until they were 35. He discovered that children, whose parents had divorced before they were 16, were on average less emotionally stable, left home earlier, and divorced or separated more frequently. However, this study was concerned with children of the middle class in 1958, and from then till now, social attitudes have changed as divorce is much more acceptable then it was in the fifties and therefore children are less affected by it, but most studies show the more involved the father; the better developed the child intellectually and socially.
This view that children are affected by the absence of a father in the family is one to be contested. The latest research for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation shows that the absence of one or other parent figure from a household is not the aspect of separation which most effects the child’s development. Children are not necessarily harmed by divorce providing the parents split in an amicable fashion and good regular contact with the absent father can reduce some of the ill effects of divorce.
Even if parents are still together, changes that have taken place in work and employment have meant that fathers - and often mothers – are now working unsocial, flexible hours, so that evening and weekend work prevents them from spending time with their children. Although both parents work, women feel more responsible for the home and the children then the men. Only 20 percent of men have an equal share in coursework whilst over 70 percent do less then half contributing to the fact that perhaps women are not much better off with men.
The nuclear family is seen as traditional in the western society and often other communities and partnerships are seen as deficient in some way. This is a myth as there are plenty of examples to illustrate the fact that children brought up outside nuclear families are as well brought-up as those from them. The best example of this is the Israeli kibbutz, a settlement where members work together and share property. Although there are couples, children are seen as the responsibility of the kibbutz as a whole and are looked after and cared for by specially trained foster parents in a separate children’s house, visiting their parents for only a short time each day. This highlights the fact that organisations that are not families are capable of performing the family’s functions, and with that, the function of the father.
The feminist Joan Smith (2001) asserts that the responsible and mutual care of children, rather than life-long marriage, is the really important issue for partners today. Similarly the feminist writer, Beatrix Campbell suggests that the family reinforces patriarchy and the male/female roles creating inequality between the sexes and promoting the interests of men. There is no evidence to suggest that same sex families are in some way deficient, indeed she claims same-sex parents usually produce very well balanced and “successful” children. This changing view in society was demonstrated by the Children’s Society in July 1999 when they lifted their opposition to gay and lesbian individuals adopting or fostering children. Generally most individuals are much more connected and caring then before with their partner, especially when marriage conventions dictated that unhappy spouses remained tied miserably to each other. Children are not as effected by the lack of a father figure as long as they have a loving and stable environment.
Domestic violence is a concern that effects the family severely including both mothers and children and it is often, although not always men administering violence, indeed the family is the most violent group a person can belong to according to Dobash and Dobash. Statistics from the “Hidden Victims – Children and Domestic Violence Survey conducted in 1994 showed that 90 percent of domestic violence takes place with children in the same or next room and 90-95 percent of victims were women. Perhaps more worryingly 83 percent of violent men were fathers to one or more children in the study, and it was found that girls above all were more vulnerable to sexual abuse from step fathers then any other family member.
However, rates of domestic violence and conflict are much higher for cohabitees and lone parents and it is argued that lack of male role models weakens family discipline but perhaps if a father is going to abuse the mother and child then they are better off without fathers.
Although all research is concentrated on the fact that families need fathers it is often overlooked that fathers need families too. Of the number of lone parents in Britain 90 percent are women and this has doubled in the last twenty years leaving men without families and commitment, in fact the most common way for young men aged 24-36 to live is on their own. Marriage and children provide men a focus for work effort and commitment and without it they feel isolated, which some sociologists believe that this leads to an increase in crime, suicide mentality and other social problems.
The statement, “fathers need families” is neither true nor false, and it does not apply to everyone and every situation. However, generally families do need fathers, if not forever then for the moment as family poverty, concern for child welfare and the values and norms attached in this society do not really allow otherwise for children and loan mothers to function on their own.
