Rating: 
Summary: Abandonment
Review: A review by Eric Newell
April 9, 2002The passion with which Mr. Blankenhorn writes is apparent. From the home where there is no father, to where the father is only a visitor to where the father has no regard for the children in the home where the father has no concern for the children he has fathered, author David Blankenhorn tells of fatherlessness as blight upon our country. Ultimately the author's recommendation is for a father's club where the men keep one another accountable for the time and investment placed in their families. Among the remaining eleven recommendations that he would give for the "re-creation of fatherhood as a vital social role for men" (p.23) is the pledge which fathers would take: Many people today believe that fathers are unnecessary. I believe the opposite. I pledge to live my life according to the principle that every child deserves a father; that marriage is the pathway to effective fatherhood; that part of being a good man means being a good father; and that America needs more good men." (p. 226) Real strengths in this writing were first that he helped the reader grasp not only the issue of fatherlessness, but he explained the impact that was made because of it. One example was the effect of wartime. War was the situation, but the effect was long lasting. Families torn apart by war leave gaping holes, preventing young boys, (sons) from having their own role models/mentors. Also the author distinguished the fatherlessness that came out of necessity and that which was volitional. Blankenhorn distinguishes the different types of fathers, i.e. the unnecessary dad, the old father and the new father, the visiting father and the sperm father. Intriguing is his use of the term "shadow dad". As this father is not always around he is cautious to make the time that he is with the children the best that money can by. His actions are those admired by all around. The difficulty, the inconsistency of this type of father is that the terms themselves are inconsistent. "Visiting" and "fathering" are terms that do not simply do not go together. (p.150) The sperm father is the logical conclusion to a fatherless society. He is one in whom there is no expectations. Addressing this situation of the "fatherless society," the author outlines a twelve-point approach to the placing father's back in their role as the head of the home and the leader of the family. Still at this point the author seems to make these recommendations for those who are willing to change. In the first portion of the writing he spent time enumerating and describing those who were a part of this fatherless society. The changes proposed are not with them but with the new generations or those who are already doing well. This left the question of what could /would be done with those many families who are caught in the fatherless society.
Rating:
Summary: Abandonment
Review: A review by Eric Newell
April 9, 2002 The passion with which Mr. Blankenhorn writes is apparent. From the home where there is no father, to where the father is only a visitor to where the father has no regard for the children in the home where the father has no concern for the children he has fathered, author David Blankenhorn tells of fatherlessness as blight upon our country. Ultimately the author's recommendation is for a father's club where the men keep one another accountable for the time and investment placed in their families. Among the remaining eleven recommendations that he would give for the "re-creation of fatherhood as a vital social role for men" (p.23) is the pledge which fathers would take: Many people today believe that fathers are unnecessary. I believe the opposite. I pledge to live my life according to the principle that every child deserves a father; that marriage is the pathway to effective fatherhood; that part of being a good man means being a good father; and that America needs more good men." (p. 226) Real strengths in this writing were first that he helped the reader grasp not only the issue of fatherlessness, but he explained the impact that was made because of it. One example was the effect of wartime. War was the situation, but the effect was long lasting. Families torn apart by war leave gaping holes, preventing young boys, (sons) from having their own role models/mentors. Also the author distinguished the fatherlessness that came out of necessity and that which was volitional. Blankenhorn distinguishes the different types of fathers, i.e. the unnecessary dad, the old father and the new father, the visiting father and the sperm father. Intriguing is his use of the term "shadow dad". As this father is not always around he is cautious to make the time that he is with the children the best that money can by. His actions are those admired by all around. The difficulty, the inconsistency of this type of father is that the terms themselves are inconsistent. "Visiting" and "fathering" are terms that do not simply do not go together. (p.150) The sperm father is the logical conclusion to a fatherless society. He is one in whom there is no expectations. Addressing this situation of the "fatherless society," the author outlines a twelve-point approach to the placing father's back in their role as the head of the home and the leader of the family. Still at this point the author seems to make these recommendations for those who are willing to change. In the first portion of the writing he spent time enumerating and describing those who were a part of this fatherless society. The changes proposed are not with them but with the new generations or those who are already doing well. This left the question of what could /would be done with those many families who are caught in the fatherless society.
Rating: 
Summary: Important
Review: An important work that should be required reading for every TV talking head whose ever said anything even vaguely positive about the breakdown of the allegedly oppresive nuclear family of yesteryear.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent on fatherlessness, but more depth is needed.
Review: Blankenhorn has done an excellent job explaining the social effects of fatherlessness. The book is so informative and well written that I am citing it extensively in my masters thesis. However, I'd would have liked to see Blankenhorn advocate more male responsibility for the decline of fatherhood. According to much research on fatherhood, just being around to "protect" and provide for the family isn't enough to build a good marriage and raise healthy children. Many of the male batterers I've worked with grew up with their biological fathers in the home. Reinventing ourselves as "participating" fathers and husband must be accompanied by emotional availability that most of us men lack. Without a fuller emotional repertoire, we as men cannot nurture our wives and children and cannot understand our own emotional needs, much less theirs. Being emotionally available doesn't necessary mean becoming a "new father" described in the book. Just ask any male batterer, most are products of biological fathers who didn't know how to nurture themselves or their families. Additionally, the emphasis of biblical morals and other aspects of a "good family man" probably reflects Blankenhorn's own personal conservative christian male values. This makes a otherwise good book a kind of promotion for personal beliefs and I find it a turn-off. Nevertheless, it is a generally good book that calls attention the a very urgent social problem of fatherlessness. But I believe that traditional male socialization is a significant contributor to the problem of fatherlessness. A "good enough" father as described by Blankenhorn is really not good enough. Men, whether fathers or not, must seek to develop a richer emotional repertoire by looking inside ourselves.
Rating:
Summary: A thorough analysis. . . .is an excellent resource
Review: Blankenhorn has written a thorough analysis of fatherlessness in our American culture. Not only is it an excellent resource for anyone in the helping profession, including mental health professionals, but also it will help those who are fatherless.
Blankenhorn confronts not so much the absences of fathers as the absence of our belief in fathers (3). As he describes this, "today's expert story of fatherhood largely assumes that fatherhood is superfluous. More precisely, our elite culture has now fully incorporated into its prevailing family narrative the idea that fatherhood, as a distinctive social role for men, is either unnecessary or undesirable. An essential claim of the script is that there are not-and ought not to be-any key parental tasks that belong essentially and primarily to fathers" (67). Blankenhorn uses the format of a screenplay with eight characters in the script. The leading characters are the Unnecessary Father, the Old Father, and the New Father. The remaining five minor roles are termed as the fatherhood understudies or almost-fathers. They include the Deadbeat Dad, the Visiting Father, the Sperm Father, the Stepfather and the Nearby Guy. Although the first three are biological fathers, they do not live with their children. The latter two are not biological, so they exemplify the contemporary dispersal of fatherhood: the growing detachment of social from biological paternity" (68). In the last scene Blankenhorn introduces the Good Family Man.
Blankenhorn's Unnecessary Father is not needed inspires condescension, a is easily dismissed and forgotten (84). Old Father is destructive, overbearing man whereas the New Father is a good, nurturing man expressing his emotions and deeply involved as a parent (96). The Deadbeat Dad is a bad guy, "morally culpable and is usually in jail" (124). The Visiting Father is hard to see,"a displaced man trying not to become the ex-father" (148). The Sperm Father performed his father role in the "one-act father, whose fatherhood consisted entirely of the biological act" (171). The Stepfather and the Nearby Guy are substitute fathers often called father figures (185).
Blankenhorn reviews Frank L. Mott's 1992 study, "The Impact of Father's Absence from the Home on Subsequent Cognitive Development of Younger Children" which looked at 1,714 children. Although Mott concluded that "fathers are not a major factor" and "not that important," Blankenhorn states "this is directly and repeatedly contradicted by Mott's own research findings" (71). Blankenhorn identifies the five flaws of Mott's study: 1) Mott examines an extremely limited range of problems only within the younger children (5 to 8 years old), while, research demonstrates a wider range of characterological problems that surface during adolescent (71). 2) Mott concludes that for black children, fatherlessness is actually helpful and at worst not very harmful. Blankenhorn address Mott's ignorance of redundant negative influences. 3) Mott claims that "girls need fathers less than boys" and stresses that girls either suffer no harm from fatherlessness, or that they suffer much less than boys (72). Yet, studies clearly show that "fatherless girls tend toward personally and socially destructive relationships with men, including precocious sexual activity and unmarried motherhood (72). 4) Mott's definition of `father' maybe a roughly but accurately defined as: a nearby guy who can do all or most of what fathers do (73). 5) Mott has depended almost solely on `false criteria of causality' (Travis Hirschi and Hannan Selvin) which equates to "nothing causes anything" (73). So Mott claims "either fatherlessness does not cause problems for children or fatherlessness is comparatively less important than other causes" (73).
Blankenhorn discusses Melinda Blau's 1993 book Families Apart, which succinctly captures all the main components of the better-divorce idea as a solution for fatherlessness. Blau's better-divorce idea is "based on the proposition that `parents could be taught to do divorce better' . . . `co-parenting after divorce' is an `ideal family style' and Blau believes that such an improved style of divorce is `the least we can do for our kids'" (159). On the contrary, as Blankenhorn points out, most real-life divorced parents do not achieve postdivorce relationships based on good humor, warmth, mutual respect, rationality, and a commitment to cooperative co-parenting" (168). Actually, they do not get along very well if at all. Most divorcing couples direct their resentments and hurts at each other.
Blankenhorn's Good Family Man is based on the key words: Good: moral values. Family: purposes larger than self. Man: a norm of masculinity. Blankenhorn's defines him as "the best evidence available that fatherhood is not superfluous. In an increasingly fatherless society, the Good Family Man stands for fatherhood" (202).
Rating:
Summary: A thorough analysis. . . .is an excellent resource
Review: Blankenhorn has written a thorough analysis of fatherlessness in our American culture. Not only is it an excellent resource for anyone in the helping profession, including mental health professionals, but also it will help those who are fatherless.
Blankenhorn confronts not so much the absences of fathers as the absence of our belief in fathers (3). As he describes this, "today's expert story of fatherhood largely assumes that fatherhood is superfluous. More precisely, our elite culture has now fully incorporated into its prevailing family narrative the idea that fatherhood, as a distinctive social role for men, is either unnecessary or undesirable. An essential claim of the script is that there are not-and ought not to be-any key parental tasks that belong essentially and primarily to fathers" (67). Blankenhorn uses the format of a screenplay with eight characters in the script. The leading characters are the Unnecessary Father, the Old Father, and the New Father. The remaining five minor roles are termed as the fatherhood understudies or almost-fathers. They include the Deadbeat Dad, the Visiting Father, the Sperm Father, the Stepfather and the Nearby Guy. Although the first three are biological fathers, they do not live with their children. The latter two are not biological, so they exemplify the contemporary dispersal of fatherhood: the growing detachment of social from biological paternity" (68). In the last scene Blankenhorn introduces the Good Family Man.
Blankenhorn's Unnecessary Father is not needed inspires condescension, a is easily dismissed and forgotten (84). Old Father is destructive, overbearing man whereas the New Father is a good, nurturing man expressing his emotions and deeply involved as a parent (96). The Deadbeat Dad is a bad guy, "morally culpable and is usually in jail" (124). The Visiting Father is hard to see,"a displaced man trying not to become the ex-father" (148). The Sperm Father performed his father role in the "one-act father, whose fatherhood consisted entirely of the biological act" (171). The Stepfather and the Nearby Guy are substitute fathers often called father figures (185).
Blankenhorn reviews Frank L. Mott's 1992 study, "The Impact of Father's Absence from the Home on Subsequent Cognitive Development of Younger Children" which looked at 1,714 children. Although Mott concluded that "fathers are not a major factor" and "not that important," Blankenhorn states "this is directly and repeatedly contradicted by Mott's own research findings" (71). Blankenhorn identifies the five flaws of Mott's study: 1) Mott examines an extremely limited range of problems only within the younger children (5 to 8 years old), while, research demonstrates a wider range of characterological problems that surface during adolescent (71). 2) Mott concludes that for black children, fatherlessness is actually helpful and at worst not very harmful. Blankenhorn address Mott's ignorance of redundant negative influences. 3) Mott claims that "girls need fathers less than boys" and stresses that girls either suffer no harm from fatherlessness, or that they suffer much less than boys (72). Yet, studies clearly show that "fatherless girls tend toward personally and socially destructive relationships with men, including precocious sexual activity and unmarried motherhood (72). 4) Mott's definition of 'father' maybe a roughly but accurately defined as: a nearby guy who can do all or most of what fathers do (73). 5) Mott has depended almost solely on 'false criteria of causality' (Travis Hirschi and Hannan Selvin) which equates to "nothing causes anything" (73). So Mott claims "either fatherlessness does not cause problems for children or fatherlessness is comparatively less important than other causes" (73).
Blankenhorn discusses Melinda Blau's 1993 book Families Apart, which succinctly captures all the main components of the better-divorce idea as a solution for fatherlessness. Blau's better-divorce idea is "based on the proposition that 'parents could be taught to do divorce better' . . . 'co-parenting after divorce' is an 'ideal family style' and Blau believes that such an improved style of divorce is 'the least we can do for our kids'" (159). On the contrary, as Blankenhorn points out, most real-life divorced parents do not achieve postdivorce relationships based on good humor, warmth, mutual respect, rationality, and a commitment to cooperative co-parenting" (168). Actually, they do not get along very well if at all. Most divorcing couples direct their resentments and hurts at each other.
Blankenhorn's Good Family Man is based on the key words: Good: moral values. Family: purposes larger than self. Man: a norm of masculinity. Blankenhorn's defines him as "the best evidence available that fatherhood is not superfluous. In an increasingly fatherless society, the Good Family Man stands for fatherhood" (202).
Rating:
Summary: A helpful and timely look at fatherhood in America Today
Review: Blankenhorn puts forth a well-documented and well-reasoned argument that the crisis in fatherhood in America is our nation's most urgent social problem. Blankenhorn argues persuasively: "A good society celebrates the ideal of the man who puts his family first" (1995:5). He demonstrates that fatherhood is diminishing both as a positive idea and in practice in America. Forty percent of children will go to bed tonight in homes in which their fathers do not live (1995:1). He argues that this loss of fatherhood is not remediable "...by either maternal investment or public investment" (1995:48).
Blankenhorn carefully examines and critiques seven current concepts of fatherhood in America. The first he calls the "unnecessary father". He argues that fatherhood is increasingly being considered irrelevant in our culture. The "old father" is unwanted because of an authoritarian abuse of power in years gone by. The "new father" is widely applauded today. He is nurturing and caring and virtually interchangeable with a mother. Blankenhorn argues that he is another form of unnecessary father as his masculinity is emaciated. The "deadbeat" dad is universally decried. Blankenhorn puts forth that even if all deadbeat dads paid up, their offspring would still be poorer than children with a father at home. His children are still missing the benefits of daily fatherhood. The "visiting father" despite his best efforts is not able to parent as effectively as an equally motivated father who lives at home with his children and their mother. The "sperm father" is merely the provider of genetic material. He has no responsibility for the un-going provision and parenting of children. The "step-father and nearby guy" despite high motivation cannot take the place of an involved father who lives at home with his biological progeny and their mother.
Blankenhorn argues for a return to the "good family man" who puts his family first. The good family man: "is responsible for his family", "spends time on family activities", is a "good and steady provider", "sets a good example", "admits mistakes", is "flexible", shares the household "workload", is a "provider", "shows love of spouse and children through actions", lives "Biblical and moral values",(1995:205-208).
Blankenhorn makes a persuasive case. I recommend this book for all who seek a clear and well-documented understanding of fatherhood in America today.
Rating:
Summary: A helpful and timely look at fatherhood in America Today
Review: Blankenhorn puts forth a well-documented and well-reasoned argument that the crisis in fatherhood in America is our nation's most urgent social problem. Blankenhorn argues persuasively: "A good society celebrates the ideal of the man who puts his family first" (1995:5). He demonstrates that fatherhood is diminishing both as a positive idea and in practice in America. Forty percent of children will go to bed tonight in homes in which their fathers do not live (1995:1). He argues that this loss of fatherhood is not remediable "...by either maternal investment or public investment" (1995:48).
Blankenhorn carefully examines and critiques seven current concepts of fatherhood in America. The first he calls the "unnecessary father". He argues that fatherhood is increasingly being considered irrelevant in our culture. The "old father" is unwanted because of an authoritarian abuse of power in years gone by. The "new father" is widely applauded today. He is nurturing and caring and virtually interchangeable with a mother. Blankenhorn argues that he is another form of unnecessary father as his masculinity is emaciated. The "deadbeat" dad is universally decried. Blankenhorn puts forth that even if all deadbeat dads paid up, their offspring would still be poorer than children with a father at home. His children are still missing the benefits of daily fatherhood. The "visiting father" despite his best efforts is not able to parent as effectively as an equally motivated father who lives at home with his children and their mother. The "sperm father" is merely the provider of genetic material. He has no responsibility for the un-going provision and parenting of children. The "step-father and nearby guy" despite high motivation cannot take the place of an involved father who lives at home with his biological progeny and their mother.
Blankenhorn argues for a return to the "good family man" who puts his family first. The good family man: "is responsible for his family", "spends time on family activities", is a "good and steady provider", "sets a good example", "admits mistakes", is "flexible", shares the household "workload", is a "provider", "shows love of spouse and children through actions", lives "Biblical and moral values",(1995:205-208).
Blankenhorn makes a persuasive case. I recommend this book for all who seek a clear and well-documented understanding of fatherhood in America today.
Rating: 
Summary: based on faulty research
Review: Blankenhorn states that "the principal cause of fatherlessness is paternal choice ... paternal abandonment". What he fails to add is how the gender-biased family courts are creating fatherlessness with unfair support awards and relegating fathers to visitors in most cases. Add to it a lack of enforcement of visitation orders and you have a parentally disenfranchised father who is much more likely to give up ever having any influence on his children. As with many other studies that have proven to be inaccurate, data was obtained by interviewing custodial mothers, many of whom hold a grudge against their ex-husbands.
Rating:
Summary: Prompts more questions than answers
Review: David Blankenhorn's book on Fatherless America is a distubing read. An in depth probe of how men in America came to be replaced by the court system, artificial insemination, and "The other guy". The short answer is that we let it happen. The prognosis however, is not good. The steady erosion of parental rights in the touchy feely 80's went double for Dad's and Father's. It has left us with Murphy Brown's plot device baby, Mrs. Doubtfire's only good enough as a woman, a social welfare system that pushes out dad's by law, and fatherhood as allowed by the court system.
|
