Separated fathers and the fathers rights movement

1
Separated fathers and the fathers rights
movement

• Dr Michael Flood
• Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health
  Society
• La Trobe University
• michael.flood_at_latrobe.edu.au

2
The fathers rights movement

• Worldview Fathers are deprived of their
  rights
• FR groups overlap with mens rights groups. And
  have links to conservative Christian groups.
• An organised backlash to feminism
• Comprised of angry and hurting men (and women),
  whove come through
• Separation and divorce
• Loss of contact with children

3
(No Transcript)
4
(No Transcript)
5
Fathers rights rally, Canberra, 20 June 2005
6
Contexts for fathering

• Shifts in gender relations
• Shifts in family structure and relations
• A growing diversity of relationships between
  adult men and children

7
Contexts for fathering contd

• Shifts in images of fathering the New Father
• Both shifts and stabilities in fathering practice
• The best and worst of times?

8
(No Transcript)
9
What brings men to the FR movement

• Separation and divorce
• Acute distress, emotional difficulties, etc.
• Anger and blame at ex-partners (which can worsen
  over time)
• Perception that the system is biased against
  fathers

10
What brings men contd

• (2) Dissatisfaction with loss of contact with
  children
• 75 of non-resident fathers (and 40 of resident
  mothers) would like to have more contact.
• Difficulties in non-resident parenting
• (3) Reassertion of traditional gender roles and
  backlash to feminism

11
Supporting separated fathers

• Three reasons to provide support to separated
  fathers
• To assist them in healing from the negative
  effects of separation and divorce and to support
  them in dealing with other dimensions of
  non-resident parenting
• To support them in maintaining or building
  ongoing relationships with their children
• To help them to manage an ongoing and positive
  relationship with their ex-partners.

12
Fathers contact with children

• Why contact is desirable
• Contact in itself is not a good predictor of
  childrens wellbeing.
• Instead, fathers authoritative parenting
• No particular post-separation parenting
  arrangement is more advantageous for children.
• (Versus arguments for a presumption of joint
  residence.)

13
FR groups constrain the healing process of
separated fathers

• Some men do find support and experience benefits.
• But FR groups also fix men in victimhood, blame,
  anger, and hostility. And intensify misogynist
  discourses.
• While FR groups defend traditional masculinity,
  this in fact leaves men ill-equipped to deal with
  separation and divorce.
• FR groups encourage malicious, destructive, and
  unproductive legal efforts.

14
FR groups fail to promote fathers actual
involvement in parenting

• Focus on formal rights, equality, or status
  rather than the actual shared care of children
• Rhetorical shift in early 21C, from rights and
  discrimination to equal parenting and parental
  fairness
• Neglect of actual shared parenting

15
FR groups fail to promote contd

• Focus on re-establishing paternal authority
  rather than shared parenting
• FR movement and feminism share the belief that
  men should be involved in parenting. But FR
  focuses on fathers control, not fathers care.
• Wants men to father, not to parent.

16
FR groups fail to promote contd

• Ignore the real obstacles to fathers lack of
  involvement with children, (a) before separation
  and divorce
• Fathers lack of involvement. Which is shaped by
  workplace practices and relations, government
  policies, gender inequalities, etc.
• FR groups have opposed the very measures that
  would encourage greater sharing of parenting,
  e.g. promotion of womens economic opportunities.

17
FR groups fail to promote contd

• Ignore the real obstacles to fathers lack of
  involvement with children, (b) After separation
  and divorce
• FR groups
• Focus on mythical legal obstacles to shared
  parenting.
• Ignore what is required to set up shared
  parenting.
• Try to impose shared residence on parents who
  lack the capacity to sustain it and children for
  whom it would be harmful.
• Focus on maternal gatekeeping and sanctions for
  resident mothers breaches of contact orders.

18
FR groups harm children

• Try to force parental (paternal) contact on
  children regardless of childrens desires and
  regardless of potential negative impacts.
• Reduce financial and material support for
  resident parents and children.
• Fuel interparental conflict.
• Privilege fathers contact over childrens
  safety.
• Try to wind back the protections available to
  victims of domestic violence and/or child abuse,
  and to lessen the legal sanctions applied to
  perpetrators.

19
FR groups harm fathers relationships with their
ex-partners

• FR efforts fuel resident mothers hostility to
  their ex-partners and their reluctance to
  facilitate contact.
• FR discourse depicts women in general, and single
  mothers in particular, as parasitical, lying, and
  vindictive
• sofa loafers, gold-diggers, access bitches,
  tramps, whores, etc.
• Fuelling interparental hostility and conflict
• Will lessen fathers contact with children and
  increase fathers use of the courts to enforce
  contact.
• Will lessen childrens wellbeing.

20
Developing positive responses to separated fathers

• Support, education, and other programs among
  fathers do have positive effects.
• The potential positive role of support groups and
  other interventions depends on both process and
  content.
• E.g., teach motivation and skills in managing
  conflict
• Developing service responses to separated fathers

21
Conclusion

• FR groups are harmful for separated fathers
  themselves and for their relations with children.
• We must work with separated fathers
• For their sake
• For the sake of their children and their
  ex-partners
• To lessen recruitment into the FR movement.
• As part of developing positive service responses.