Fatherless America: Confronting Our Most Urgent Social Problem

Wouldn't do any good. He didn't have a father either. Cycle ends with me.

The breakdown of families, especially in terms of the disappearance of marriage and the collapse of fatherhood, has been carefully studied by a number of authors. One of the most incisive examinations of the problem of fatherless families is Fatherless America. The book is based on a wealth of statistical information, highlighting the dangerous trend of family disintegration in America. Perhaps most disturbing of the information he uncovers is the fact that "tonight, about 40 per cent of American children will go to sleep in homes in which their fathers do not live". "Fatherlessness," argues Blankenhorn, "is the most harmful demographic trend of this generation". The primary results of this trend are "a decline in children's well-being and a rise in male violence, especially against women." The problem is not just that of the absence of fathers, but "the absence of our belief in fathers." Recalling the findings of Margaret Mead and others that the supreme test of any civilisation is whether it can socialise men by teaching them to be fathers, Blankenhorn traces the disappearance of the idea of fatherhood in contemporary culture, and the effects this has on our children and our society While he acknowledges that the so-called traditional family was not without problems, he sees the move to a fatherless society as a far greater dilemma. As fatherhood becomes devalued, decultured and deinstitutionalised, the problems associated with inner city America will only compound themselves. We now know without question that the overwhelming generator of violence among young men is the fatherless family. There are now a multitude of studies available which make it perfectly clear that fatherlessness is the major factor in crime, more than race, poverty or any other social variable. Paternal absenteeism and the erosion of marriage effect every aspect of life. For example, we now know, contrary to feminist doctrine, that domestic violence is much more likely to occur in homes where the partners are not married. A woman is much more likely to abused by a boyfriend, a de facto or a live in than by a husband. The same is true of child sexual abuse. "What magnifies the risk of sexual abuse in children is not the presence of a married father but his absence." Again, a host of studies have clearly established this point. With all these studies confirming the importance of marriage and the presence of fathers, one would hope that our political leaders would be reaffirming our national commitment to marriage. The opposite is the case unfortunately. American society is not intent on making sure marriage works, nor is it intent on making divorce less easy to obtain. Instead, it is in the process of deinstitutionalising marriage and fatherhood. It has become a culture of divorce. Instead of trying to reduce divorce, it seeks to make the process more cooperative and amicable. Divorce reform means simply trying to involve fewer lawyers and more medi

We have no shortage of fathers, in the pro-creative, biological/physiological sense of the word. What is missing in our society is the institution of "fatherhood;" the process whereby the patriarch of the family takes his rightful place in the family as leader, provider, protector, and nurturer. Feminists will hate this book because Blankenhorn uses scientific study, statistics,logic, and, at times, rhetoric and polemics to conclusively state that the absence of true fathers is indeed the "most urgent social problem of our kind."Whether unwittingly, or by design, feminists have played a big part in destroying this sacred institution; their call for the "rights" of women did not stop there. There has been a full-scale diminution of fatherhood, to the detriment of all involved, and, ultimately, society. This jeremiad is a must read for anyone, i.e. parents, teachers, ministers, social-workers, and counselors, who are concerned about the state of our youth today. Blankenship proves that without a father, all is chaos in the family. A truly dynamic and passionate book. I cannot believe that there has not been any noticeable public acclaim for this book,but then again I should not be surprised given the antipathy with which academia, the media, and the various and sundry other members of the literati, view the "traditional family."We see how women and children suffer. Where's the outrage?

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.

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 w