Rating: 
Summary: Fatherhood: Essential Life Support
Review: David Blankenhorn's careful research in Fatherless America, documents the decline of fatherhood in America between 1960 and 1990. It is mind numbing to admit that negligence and drift, as well as to know that society's shifting mores and values have robbed fatherhood of form and content. Fatherhood is an art, not merely an act of biological function. It is a life-fulfilling process, not characterized as being a calculated objective.
The problem is that the culture of divorce is subversive to the culture of marriage in America. Blankenhorn's solution is to reconstruct the culture of the family as: "an irreplaceable life-support system" (223), and to recognize: "Our essential goal must be the rediscovery in modern society of the fatherhood idea" (223). The implication is for men and women to move beyond biological capability, and commit themselves to the idea that parenting is a lifetime process involving complementary "father" and "mother" roles within the family context. No-good fathers are one's who Blankenhorn identified as ones considered as unnecessary, patriarchal, deadbeat, visitors, biological necessities, or mother's `friend.'
Good fathers are ones who are able to comprehend their role beyond the traditional triad of provider, protector, and progenitor. Good fathers are active participants in nurturing, caring for, and directly involved with their children from birth!
Negative evidence is clear: "the fastest-growing family-structure trend in the nation has been out-of-wedlock childbearing . . . second has been the formation of stepfamilies . . . third has been divorce" (fn 5, 307). Of the three, divorce is seen as the least harmful, followed by stepfamilies, and out-of-wedlock childbearing. Blankenhorn concluded: "In sum, a perfectly inverse relationship between family-structure trends and child well-being" (fn 5, 307). Child well-being is key! Male sex partner, stepfather, and an out-of-the-way annoyance are not recommended primary roles for fatherhood. In the last third of the twentieth century materialism and narcissism in males and females have relegated the idea of child-well being to Never Never Land!
Blankenhorn's twelve-step program (Chapter 12) began with a pledge to good fatherhood, and included the distribution of consciousness raising information, of good fathers banding together, of the enactment of new legislation, of championing fatherhood affirmative action projects, and then ending with pulpit appeals and educational programs are helpful proposals.
Blankenhorn's final question is really the first question: "Does our society wish to recover the fatherhood idea?" Blankenhorn issued a powerful challenge. How our society reacts to that challenge will be the subject of controversy. The answer will be revealed over the next thirty years as men and women come to terms with the reality of perpetrating the human species in what some regard as a cultured and civilized society.
Rating:
Summary: Fatherhood: Essential Life Support
Review: David Blankenhorn's careful research in Fatherless America, documents the decline of fatherhood in America between 1960 and 1990. It is mind numbing to admit that negligence and drift, as well as to know that society's shifting mores and values have robbed fatherhood of form and content. Fatherhood is an art, not merely an act of biological function. It is a life-fulfilling process, not characterized as being a calculated objective.
The problem is that the culture of divorce is subversive to the culture of marriage in America. Blankenhorn's solution is to reconstruct the culture of the family as: "an irreplaceable life-support system" (223), and to recognize: "Our essential goal must be the rediscovery in modern society of the fatherhood idea" (223). The implication is for men and women to move beyond biological capability, and commit themselves to the idea that parenting is a lifetime process involving complementary "father" and "mother" roles within the family context. No-good fathers are one's who Blankenhorn identified as ones considered as unnecessary, patriarchal, deadbeat, visitors, biological necessities, or mother's 'friend.'
Good fathers are ones who are able to comprehend their role beyond the traditional triad of provider, protector, and progenitor. Good fathers are active participants in nurturing, caring for, and directly involved with their children from birth!
Negative evidence is clear: "the fastest-growing family-structure trend in the nation has been out-of-wedlock childbearing . . . second has been the formation of stepfamilies . . . third has been divorce" (fn 5, 307). Of the three, divorce is seen as the least harmful, followed by stepfamilies, and out-of-wedlock childbearing. Blankenhorn concluded: "In sum, a perfectly inverse relationship between family-structure trends and child well-being" (fn 5, 307). Child well-being is key! Male sex partner, stepfather, and an out-of-the-way annoyance are not recommended primary roles for fatherhood. In the last third of the twentieth century materialism and narcissism in males and females have relegated the idea of child-well being to Never Never Land!
Blankenhorn's twelve-step program (Chapter 12) began with a pledge to good fatherhood, and included the distribution of consciousness raising information, of good fathers banding together, of the enactment of new legislation, of championing fatherhood affirmative action projects, and then ending with pulpit appeals and educational programs are helpful proposals.
Blankenhorn's final question is really the first question: "Does our society wish to recover the fatherhood idea?" Blankenhorn issued a powerful challenge. How our society reacts to that challenge will be the subject of controversy. The answer will be revealed over the next thirty years as men and women come to terms with the reality of perpetrating the human species in what some regard as a cultured and civilized society.
Rating: 
Summary: A Necessary Antidote to Liberal Male-Bashing
Review: I am aware that you discourage people from commenting on other reviews, but I think that the following comment is needed nevertheless. A previously posted hostile review said "Just where does David Blankenhorn get off telling mothers that they're not good enough for their kids!!!???? It looks as if David here is stuck in a time warp and the people that believe this piece of trash are too. So...almost half of kids grow up with single moms. I think it's swell that women today have more choices than ever before." This reviewer clearly doesn't grasp the message of the book. First, Blankenhorn isn't saying that mothers aren't good enough for their kids. On the contrary, a careful reading of the book reveals that he believes that good mothers are just as necessary as fathers. He is not denigrating mothers. He is simply saying that neither mother nor father possesses the resources to give a child everything that the child needs. Parenting was meant to be a cooperative effort between a team consisting of husband and wife, each of whom brings unique personal qualities (some of which are gender-related) to the endeavor. It's not sexist to argue that this is the case; on the contrary, it is extremely sexist to argue that women are the only parents who are essential to healthy childhood development. As for the argument that those who agree with the author are in a "time warp," this is nothing but an unintelligent ad hominem attack designed to divert attention from the legitimate substance of the book. Just because one is dismayed by the increasing number of fatherless children, and the undeniably negative effects of that phenomenon on society, it does not make one a Luddite who wishes to return to the past. Responsible people understand that the only way to ensure genuine human progress is to constantly engage in the process of self-evaluation, both as individuals and as members of a larger society. Refusing to acknowledge mistakes which have been made in the recent past is not the path to genuine progress. One last comment: When I read Blankenhorn's description of the negative effects of childlessness, I saw my own story in the book. My Dad, who just died a month ago, divorced my mother when I was a sophomore in high school. He paid the child support payments required by law, but he apparently felt justified in reneging on an earlier promise to finance my college education, mostly because I criticized him for having engaged in the adulterous affair which led to my parents' divorce. As a result of my father's subsequent unwillingness to finance my education (even though, as a successful optometrist, he was more than capable of doing so), I have spent many years struggling financially, in jobs which were only peripherally related to my real interests. My mother loved me, and did the best she could, but the bottom line is that I needed a mom AND a dad, not just for economic reasons, but for a variety of other reasons as well. Instead, I got a mother, and an absentee father who, in terms of adequately preparing me for future life as an adult, might as well have died many years ago. Yeah, that's just "swell." The reviewer refers to the mother's choices. What about the kids' choices? Most of the children affected by the modern disintegration of fatherhood have no choice at all but to suffer the ill effects of that disintegration. Unfortunately, a lot of modern parents today are in a state of arrested development, and they think only of their own needs, not the needs of their children. This is not a sob story. My point is that Blankenhorn's assessment of our current crisis is totally correct. It's time for us, as a society, to admit that the Playboy philosophy, which essentially denies that masculinity has anything to do with parental responsibility, is morally and intellectually bankrupt. We will experience tragic episodes such as the recent massacre at Littleton, CO with increasing frequency unless and until we begin to reverse the decline of the American family.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Book
Review: I believe this book is a compehesive approach to the fatherlessness of this generation of American life. I have seen some of the reviews of the book and some of the criticism. David Blankenhorn, as touched the pulse of the fatherless problem. When he suggest that even having a troubled or bad father at home is better than no father at all. He is not even suggesting that this is the idea but is suggesting that the presence of a father is of extreme importance in the pysche of a growing child and there is no substitute for it. There is all ways room for review, renewal and improvment in fathering, but if a father is not present in a families life there can not be any chance of correction. I have benifited greatly from the content of this book as a father, and suggest that other fathers read this book.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Book
Review: I believe this book is a compehesive approach to the fatherlessness of this generation of American life. I have seen some of the reviews of the book and some of the criticism. David Blankenhorn, as touched the pulse of the fatherless problem. When he suggest that even having a troubled or bad father at home is better than no father at all. He is not even suggesting that this is the idea but is suggesting that the presence of a father is of extreme importance in the pysche of a growing child and there is no substitute for it. There is all ways room for review, renewal and improvment in fathering, but if a father is not present in a families life there can not be any chance of correction. I have benifited greatly from the content of this book as a father, and suggest that other fathers read this book.
Rating: 
Summary: A Mixed Bag
Review: In "Fatherless America : Confronting Our Most Urgent Social Problem", David Blankenhorn brings forth some important facts: We are rapidly becoming a fatherless society. 40 years ago, 17% of all children had no father living at home. Today, 50% of American youths will live without their fathers at some time before they turn 18. Fatherlessness is also the leading cause of many of our most urgent social problems: · 80% of all adolescents in psychiatric hospitals come from fatherless homes.
· 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes.
· 85% of all youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home.
· 80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes.
· 72% of adolescent murderers grew up without fathers.
· 71% of all pregnant teenagers lack a father.
· 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. Fatherhood has two important functions: a biological function and a social function. When a mother nurses her infant, she is playing both a biological role and a social role. She is feeding and bonding. The two can't be separated. A father makes his biological contribution at the moment of conception. Nine months later, the infant enters the world. The phrase "to father a child" usually refers to the act of impregnating a woman, not to the act of raising a child. The social function of fatherhood is that of actually raising the child. Social fatherhood isn't always linked to biological fatherhood, however. Many men don't feel a deep connection between sex (the biological fathering of a child) and love (the emotional fathering of that same child). The problem is well-stated, and the facts here are very compelling. Unfortunately, this information is used as a springboard for some very narrow and fundamental "solutions". For instance, men who care for or support fatherless children ("Big Brothers" are an example) are called "Nearby Guys". These are men who did not biologically father a child, but who have taken on the responsibility of social fatherhood. Blakenhorn states that "the Nearby Guy is a cultural idea aimed explicitly at the deconstruction of fatherhood." This view is taken towards any male who doesn't match Blackenhorne's ideal: "The GOOD family man." "The GOOD family man" is Blackenhorne's solution to a "Fatherless America". Ultimately, Blackenhorne advocates a return to the family model of the 1950's. Traditional roles - father as breadwinner, mother as nurturer - are an essential part of Blackenhorne's "Good family" model. All other possibilities are denounced. It is a "one-size-fits-all" solution. If you agree with this point of view, then you will love this book. If you don't, then you'll have to resolve the important questions raised by this book, in a way that is congruent with your own individual needs and values. Blackenhorne is president of the Institute for American Values, a right-wing think tank. You can find more of his views at americanvalues.org. This will tell you more about the biases of the author. I feel that the facts speak for themselves. The author's opinions border on propoganda and for this reason, the book was docked two stars.
Rating:
Summary: A Mixed Bag
Review: In "Fatherless America : Confronting Our Most Urgent Social Problem", David Blankenhorn brings forth some important facts: We are rapidly becoming a fatherless society. 40 years ago, 17% of all children had no father living at home. Today, 50% of American youths will live without their fathers at some time before they turn 18. Fatherlessness is also the leading cause of many of our most urgent social problems: · 80% of all adolescents in psychiatric hospitals come from fatherless homes.
· 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes.
· 85% of all youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home.
· 80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes.
· 72% of adolescent murderers grew up without fathers.
· 71% of all pregnant teenagers lack a father.
· 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. Fatherhood has two important functions: a biological function and a social function. When a mother nurses her infant, she is playing both a biological role and a social role. She is feeding and bonding. The two can't be separated. A father makes his biological contribution at the moment of conception. Nine months later, the infant enters the world. The phrase "to father a child" usually refers to the act of impregnating a woman, not to the act of raising a child. The social function of fatherhood is that of actually raising the child. Social fatherhood isn't always linked to biological fatherhood, however. Many men don't feel a deep connection between sex (the biological fathering of a child) and love (the emotional fathering of that same child). The problem is well-stated, and the facts here are very compelling. Unfortunately, this information is used as a springboard for some very narrow and fundamental "solutions". For instance, men who care for or support fatherless children ("Big Brothers" are an example) are called "Nearby Guys". These are men who did not biologically father a child, but who have taken on the responsibility of social fatherhood. Blakenhorn states that "the Nearby Guy is a cultural idea aimed explicitly at the deconstruction of fatherhood." This view is taken towards any male who doesn't match Blackenhorne's ideal: "The GOOD family man." "The GOOD family man" is Blackenhorne's solution to a "Fatherless America". Ultimately, Blackenhorne advocates a return to the family model of the 1950's. Traditional roles - father as breadwinner, mother as nurturer - are an essential part of Blackenhorne's "Good family" model. All other possibilities are denounced. It is a "one-size-fits-all" solution. If you agree with this point of view, then you will love this book. If you don't, then you'll have to resolve the important questions raised by this book, in a way that is congruent with your own individual needs and values. Blackenhorne is president of the Institute for American Values, a right-wing think tank. You can find more of his views at americanvalues.org. This will tell you more about the biases of the author. I feel that the facts speak for themselves. The author's opinions border on propoganda and for this reason, the book was docked two stars.
Rating: 
Summary: This is one ridiculous book!
Review: Just where does David Blankenhorn get off telling mothers that they're not good enough for their kids!!!???? It looks as if David here is stuck in a time warp and the people that believe this piece of trash are too. So...almost half of kids grow up with single moms. I think it's swell that women today have more choices than ever before. This is nothing more than sour grapes on the progress we humans have made. I know a lot of single moms and 99.9 percent of their kids turn out successful, happy, independent, compassionate adults. It's hig time we knocked down ALL gender stereotypes and applaud the single moms out there who are doing a swell job of raising kids. Sometimes, painful as it is at the time, divorce is the BEST thing that can happen to a family. Moreover, it is better to have a stable single-mom home than two parents who are miserably married. Some of the interviewed parents made really dumb and sexist comments. Only in this author's delusions and other conservo-nazis fantasy do all fathers hang around to fix the house, protect the kids, and "provide" for the little woman who waits around for rescue. This book is SEXIST NUTWASH!!!!
Rating:
Summary: Flawed, but thought-provoking
Review: Much reading requires a temporary suspension of judgment in order to really hear what the author is trying to say; however, when reading social science commentary, I make it a practice to increase my critical faculty with every occurrence of "always" and "never." If you are like me, you will be tempted to miss what Blankenhorn is saying because of his penchant for overstating the case. Nonetheless, beneath his polemics and hyperbole, he presents an interpretation of contemporary American society and family life that is worthy of a hearing. He contends that fatherlessness is the most significant American demographic trend. By this he is referring to the absence of the biological father as the paternal figure in a nuclear family. In chapter one Blankenhorn chronicles the statistics. In chapter two he relates the decrease in biological fathers-at-home to increases in youth violence, domestic violence against women, childhood sexual abuse, childhood poverty and adolescent pregnancy. Chapter three is a historical interpretation of the consequences of wartime fatherlessness. Critics should note that taking issue with Blankenhorn means to engage historical and statistical analyses, not to attack his tendency to exalt a mythic Rockwellian past. Chapters four through ten are the heart of the book. In these chapters he extends his thesis to claim that there is a feminist and media-led denigration of fatherhood. Fatherhood is unnecessary (chapter four), harmful (chapter five), and undependable (chapter seven). A father is a part-timer (chapter eight), a sperm-donor (chapter nine), or a figurative image (chapter ten). Only the New Father in chapter six is honored by Blankenhorn, but the conflicting expectations for this New Father lead to ambiguity and confusion. For many absence is preferable to ambiguity. Blankenhorn closes with a two chapter plea for re-institution of the Good Family Man, coupled with social policy and governmental decisions that might assist this process. In my opinion, no thinking American can advocate a return to the monochromatic and patriarchal past. The injustices practiced in the name of cultural homogeneity were, and are, unconscionable. That Blankenhorn is blind to these implications can be infuriating, but my ire does not erase the importance of Blankenhorn's thesis. Fatherhood, as once envisioned, may be ending in America. How, and with what, will it be replaced? I cannot endorse Blankenhorn's answer, but I am grateful that he raised the question.
Rating:
Summary: Flawed, but thought-provoking
Review: Much reading requires a temporary suspension of judgment in order to really hear what the author is trying to say; however, when reading social science commentary, I make it a practice to increase my critical faculty with every occurrence of "always" and "never." If you are like me, you will be tempted to miss what Blankenhorn is saying because of his penchant for overstating the case. Nonetheless, beneath his polemics and hyperbole, he presents an interpretation of contemporary American society and family life that is worthy of a hearing. He contends that fatherlessness is the most significant American demographic trend. By this he is referring to the absence of the biological father as the paternal figure in a nuclear family. In chapter one Blankenhorn chronicles the statistics. In chapter two he relates the decrease in biological fathers-at-home to increases in youth violence, domestic violence against women, childhood sexual abuse, childhood poverty and adolescent pregnancy. Chapter three is a historical interpretation of the consequences of wartime fatherlessness. Critics should note that taking issue with Blankenhorn means to engage historical and statistical analyses, not to attack his tendency to exalt a mythic Rockwellian past. Chapters four through ten are the heart of the book. In these chapters he extends his thesis to claim that there is a feminist and media-led denigration of fatherhood. Fatherhood is unnecessary (chapter four), harmful (chapter five), and undependable (chapter seven). A father is a part-timer (chapter eight), a sperm-donor (chapter nine), or a figurative image (chapter ten). Only the New Father in chapter six is honored by Blankenhorn, but the conflicting expectations for this New Father lead to ambiguity and confusion. For many absence is preferable to ambiguity. Blankenhorn closes with a two chapter plea for re-institution of the Good Family Man, coupled with social policy and governmental decisions that might assist this process. In my opinion, no thinking American can advocate a return to the monochromatic and patriarchal past. The injustices practiced in the name of cultural homogeneity were, and are, unconscionable. That Blankenhorn is blind to these implications can be infuriating, but my ire does not erase the importance of Blankenhorn's thesis. Fatherhood, as once envisioned, may be ending in America. How, and with what, will it be replaced? I cannot endorse Blankenhorn's answer, but I am grateful that he raised the question.
|
