Fathers’ Day is an opportunity to remember the challenges faced by dads as the shape of the modern family keeps shifting.
The British campaign group Fathers 4 Justice hit the headlines again this week after one of its members defaced a portrait of The Queen as it hung in Westminster Abbey.
According to media reports, the father suspected of spray painting the word “help” onto the artwork has been denied contact with his two daughters in the family courts.
Having been through the court process myself I know just how painful this can be for all involved.
|
I was saddened by the news for two reasons. Firstly, having been through the court process myself I know just how painful this can be for all involved. I now use my experience to support fathers who are caught in lengthy court battles and have met many good dads who are being denied a role in their children’s lives on the way.
I don’t know the personal case of the dad who felt driven to such high profile vandalism to further his case, but I do understand the desperation and helplessness that can lead to such seemingly senseless acts.
I see dads who carry on fighting to be part of their children’s lives for months and years after other less resilient fathers have given up and whatever the rights and wrongs of any individual case, it’s never a happy occasion to see another dad suffering in this way.
♦◊♦
Secondly, it’s now 10 years since Fathers 4 Justice first hit the headlines in the UK with its controversial direct action stunts which are designed to drag the media spotlight onto the shortcomings of Britain’s family courts. And yet for all the column inches the campaign has inspired, it hasn’t prevented a new generation of separated fathers being shut out of their children’s lives.
I was personally involved in the early days of this campaign and met many fathers from different backgrounds who spoke with one voice about the unfairness and discrimination they had experienced.
Detractors still say there isn’t an issue. They claim that only dangerous dads are removed from their children’s lives and the courts should be doing more to protect women and children from such men.
And it’s certainly true that men and women are capable of horrific acts of cruelty when caught up in custody battles, but this is no reason to ignore the unique experience of separated dads.
It’s only by getting under the skin of the problem that we can hope to find solutions that work for everyone.
|
It’s only by getting under the skin of the problem that we can hope to find solutions that work for everyone and most importantly help children have the best possible relationship with both parents.
♦◊♦
The way that most advanced economies handle separation is still largely based on the “man hunt, woman cook” model of parenting. This means that if mum and dad are separated they are placed in two distinct boxes—‘carer’ and ‘provider’.
The ‘carer’ is given ‘ownership’ of the children and then the money—in terms of joint assets and ongoing maintenance payments—follows the children. The ‘provider’ is required to provide money to the carer on an ongoing basis while the ‘carer’ is required to give the ‘provider’ access to the children at agreed times.
The system was built in response to the rigid binary roles of 1940s and 1950s.
|
This system was built as a response to the rigid binary roles that most men and women in modern economies adopted in the 1940s and 1950s, but has failed to adapt to the gender transition that has taken place in family life since then.
According to the recent Pew Report, mothers are now the primary breadwinners in 40% of American families, a headline figure that masks the complexity of the shift that’s taken pace.
What hasn’t happened is a mass role reversal with 40% of men now staying at home baking bread while their partners go out making bread. The shift is certainly substantial and it’s also a highly gendered one.
Two-thirds of those breadwinner moms are lone parents, usually on low incomes, but if we want to understand what happens when parents separate, then we have to first consider what’s happening when they’re together.
♦◊♦
According to the American sociologist, Philip N Cohen, the proportion of married families where women are the main earner has risen from 4% to 23% in the past 50 years.
If mothers are the main financial provider in nearly one in four married families then why do family courts give mums the ‘carer’ role in around 90% of custody battles?
Rather than reversing roles men and women have diversified their roles.
|
Well, the reality is that rather than reversing roles men and women have diversified their roles. Dads, for example, are doing more childcare than ever before while still earning 81% of the family income when they are the main breadwinner.
In families where mum earns most, dad is also a breadwinner bringing home 31% of the family income on average. Meanwhile, in the minority of homes where couples still have one parent staying at home full time, the breadwinner is still dad in around 96% of cases.
♦◊♦
The big change that has happened is that men and women have diversified their roles with over half of married couples in the US now sharing the earning role at a ratio of somewhere between 50:50 and 70:30—with most sharing childcare at different levels in the process.
And yet the proportion of couples being awarded equal custody of their children is said to be around 5% or less—and that’s where the problems arise.
Most couples with kids are sharing the responsibilities of earning and caring to a greater or lesser extent.
|
The way that the majority of mums and dads build their families together is no longer binary. Yes there are still breadwinner dads and stay-at-home mums. There are also some breadwinner moms and stay-at-home-dads. But mostly, couples with kids are sharing the responsibilities of earning and caring to a greater or lesser extent that evolves over time in response to the changing needs of the children (and the adults).
Which is why a binary family court system imposed by the state simply doesn’t work. Our modern family law systems are confusingly discriminatory. They’re confusing because the letter of the law is seemingly equal and gender neutral and yet the reality is they require men and women to be boxed into a defined role—‘carer’ and ‘provider’—when most modern families consist of two ‘carer-providers’.
♦◊♦
Divorce and separation is rarely easy for anyone involved and bringing up children alone can be an enormous challenge. There is no question, however, that there are more separated mums in the ‘carer-provider’ role than there are separated dads.
Part of the reason for this is that it is easier to create a post-separation “carer-provider” role for yourself from the state-sanctioned role of “carer” than it is to do so when the state designates you as the “provider”.
Given the binary choice between ‘carer’ or ‘provider’ when they separate, the majority of mums opt for ‘carer’ and then find a way to define their role from there. Some dads will also play this game, climb into the ‘provider’ box offered to them and find a way to make it work.
Many dads get completely confused by this system, uncertain of what role they want to play.
|
But many dads get completely confused by this system, uncertain of what role they want to play, but clear it isn’t simply the role of ‘carer’ or ‘provider’. The human messiness of separation, combined with the harsh theatre of court, simply adds to the confusion.
Once they come to terms with what’s happening, most separated dads want to be carer-providers, but they generally don’t know how to make that work either emotionally or practically.
Even if they do, the court system doesn’t offer a box called ‘carer-provider’, it offers a binary choice and as mums generally opt for the ‘carer’ role, that leaves dad with one choice—‘provider’.
♦◊♦
The court system is not the only cause of this problem. Mums and dads rarely behave at their best when they separate and that doesn’t help with the complex challenge of working out how to share parenting with someone you no longer want to live with.
We are also part of a culture that still places a huge expectation on men and women to conform to gender roles when it comes to parenting. The Pew poll found that half of Americans think that children do better when their mum stays at home full-time, but only 8% say children are better-off with a full-time stay-at-home dad.
There is a lot of cultural and legal pressure on a separated father to be the provider.
|
There is a lot of cultural and legal pressure on a separated father to be the provider, but very little understanding or support for separated dads who want to be “carer-providers”. The discrimination experienced by women wanting to break out of the “full-time mum” mould is mirrored by discrimination against dads who want to be more than just a full-time breadwinner.
♦◊♦
Some will see a disenfranchised dad daubing the word “help” on the portrait of the Queen as a clear demonstration that he isn’t a fit father and conclude it is no wonder he isn’t allowed to see his kids.
There were people who said similar things when the Suffragettes marched down Oxford Street in London smashing shop windows. The fact that they resorted to such acts, said their critics, was more proof that women weren’t fit to vote.
You may think that a dad vandalizing a painting or a Suffragette smashing a shop window is an unforgivable criminal act or you may think it is a justified action in the fight for sex equality.
What actions can we take to help all children have the best possible relationship with their dads.
|
Either way, history records that in the binary laws defining who can and can’t vote, men and women are now equal. Fathers’ rights campaigners want a similar black and white law that says all biological parents can be involved their children’s lives, with the exception of mums and dads who are a proven risk.
The lesson of the Suffragettes is that there is a massive gap between an equal right to vote and equal participation in politics. Similarly, there is a huge gap between an equal right to be an involved parent and being equally involved in your children’ lives.
As we celebrate Fathers’ Day and take time to consider our relationship with our own fathers, it’s also worth considering the many different challenges men face as parents and asking ourselves what actions we can take to help all children have the best possible relationship with their dads.
Happy Fathers’ Day!
Read more on Father’s Day.
♦◊♦
—Photo credit: Flickr/fjfungo
But just to clarify, men have privilege via the patriarchy, right?
I mean, why on earth would the all-powerful oppressor class need to perform desperate stunts like graffiti or dressing up as Spiderman to climb monuments to get people’s attention when they have all the power anyway?
-_-
Great article Glen and so true, until Shared or Equal Parenting is emphasised in legislation then we will not move much further forward. The law needs to change first. Karen Woodall, I notice other people have asked you this question previously and you have avoided giving a straight answer. Karen, will you now say there must be Shared Parenting laws put in place by this government? Yes or no? It’s good to hear about all the good things you do once again from yourself and they are tremendous but please now confirm if you and your organisation will at last… Read more »
no Alison M I shall not be drawn nto the argument that you and others perpetuate around me, you follow your path and I shall follow mine. Your belief in shared parenting laws is something you must put faith in yourself, it serves no purpose for me to engage in pointless arguments with you about this issue because you are blind to the reality of the wider issues that must be tackled.
A big ‘yes’ to shared parenting laws in the UK, the news would be huge as it was in Oz and in itself would help to change attitudes towards dads. The ozzies benefited from new laws, so would we.
Whatever the wider issues, supporting shared parenting laws does not hinder dealing with them, it would make it easier to deal with them for sure. So lets all get onboard and drive this presumption of shared parenting train into the outdated family courts station.
I agree with Eagle35. And it would have been better for there to have been outright support of Tim’s action in the article. Actions will have to be both constant and high profile for any change to stand a chance. But it does stand a chance; because you find if you speak with veteran campaigners that actions are, still, constant. The courts and their staff are genuinely, and deservedly, under threat, but the press have been conned into classing these less-than-suffragette style disruptions and protests as ‘terrorism’, so they default to the no publicity position. As so many in the… Read more »
The reason why our society does not allow men and fathers to be valued anymore is four decades of feminist social policy, starting with the wallet to the purse and continuing to this day with the Child Maintenance Act as well as the Children Act. A Gender Analysis (this is part of what I do in my work at the Centre for Separated Families) demonstrates clearly that social policy, written by feminists and underpinned by feminist academic research, has built gender bias into the policy. It began with the gateway benefit which is Child Benefit and has continued ever since.… Read more »
Karen: “I firmly believe that our society will, one day, look back and realise that the men who are suffering, the appalling sorrow of their forced separation,from their own beloved children, by the state were done a great wrong. Any society based upon true equality in which men and women are valued for the difference between them as a basic right, would not tolerate what is happening in the UK, in this arena today.” Call my cynical but I’m not holding my breath. You said yourself that people in your circle have been working since 1974 to change the laws.… Read more »
At the Centre for Separated Families we have said the same thing for fifteen years, the core of what is wrong with our post separation policy is that the role of who will be carer is defined, if there is conflict about it, by the one who receives the Child Benefit (CB). CB is paid almost 100 percent to mothers, it was designed to be that way when it was first brought into being as Family Allowance under the Wallet to the Purse raft of social policies which were based upon the idea that women spend money on children whilst… Read more »
All well and good Karen but will you now lobby for Shared Parenting legislation? Without a change in law nothing will happen.
A change in law is only the start of course, it would then need to be pressed home for further changes in the system and laws but we have to start somewhere.