According to Joseph Pleck, how did the role of fathers change in the
Pleck traces the changing role of fathers in the
Colonial fathers were well-respected, authoritative heads of household who clearly held greater responsibility and influence on children than mothers of that era. Fathers were expected to provide moral instruction as well as literacy education if able. They guided sons into suitable occupations and played a dominant role in marrying off their children. Men were expected to rigorously supervise children and were given custody in case of marital separation. Fatherhood was easily integrated into family life because of his 24/7 presence in the home, which was also the location of his work.
In the early 19th to mid-20th centuries, a gradual shift in parent-child relationships brought about a greater role for mothers and a diminished role for fathers. The shift reflected a changing ideology about gender, in which a woman’s purity was thought to be more suited to child-rearing and education. The elevation of the maternal role naturally coincided with new paternal work patterns away from the home, a phenomenon which came about with the industrial era. Physical distance between home and workplace was directly proportional to a father’s direct involvement with his children. The new father image was associated with breadwinning and reduced paternal authority. He maintained his status as ultimate disciplinarian and decision-maker, but at a distance.
Post World War II years brought another shift, in which the distant-breadwinner-father became vital as a sex role model. His influence for healthy sex role identification became a new moral imperative for the father figure.
According to Pleck, the father breadwinner model remains culturally dominant to this day. It grew out of the increased importance of the economy (over the centrality of the church and moral leadership responsibilities in colonial times), a focus which prevails in our present day society. The sex role model of fatherhood, which emerged as a challenge to a mother’s influence of being too strong and a father’s influence perceived as being too weak, and remains a secondary counterpoint to this image.
Over the past couple of decades, the call for more fatherly input has been gaining strength. The new image places him at births, changing diapers, bathing children, and being involved with both sons’ and daughters’ activities. With increased outside employment of mothers, increased paternal involvement with children has become part of the reality of social structural change of the family. The paternal breadwinner model is slowly changing and the fathers’ rights movement and broadening of parental leave policies is helping the cause, albeit at a snail’s pace.
I see the fathers of some of my friends more willing to take over home and family responsibilities as the mothers hold more demanding jobs outside the family. I also notice more fathers taking small children shopping with them, to restaurants, and to play. More men seem to be more family-minded and willing to share and even enjoy the responsibility of raising their children. That said, I also notice many fathers who have high pressure jobs who tend only to connect with their family on vacations.
According to Francine Deutsch, why do couples with children decide to work alternating shifts, and how is that decision related to their social class? How does these families’ division of labor compare to their gender ideologies? Would you select an alternating shift arrangement for your family?
This article explores parental attitudes and the extent to which child care is shared in blue collar families in which mothers and fathers decide to alternate work shifts. These couples arrange their work schedules so that they do not have to pay for child care. Driven by financial need to such an arrangement, both parents discover unexpected perks. Fathers are able to bond with their children and mothers obtain a desirable break from intense mothering and are able to fulfill other goals and attain a sense of worth besides being a successful parent.
Couples with children decide to work alternating shifts for a few reasons. The main reason is economic. Some cannot afford outside childcare, while others decided it would be impractical to spend hard-earned money on childcare when there was an alternative, and still others wanted to use the saved income in order to afford a few luxuries. The second reason has to do with the belief that children should be cared for by the family. Couples expressed fear of putting their children into the hands of strangers who could potentially harm them. Furthermore, parents felt that it was their responsibility to instill their own values. These opinions may be based on the fact that blue collar families have limited funds to spend on high quality childcare, have fears of losing control over their child’s care, and even if they could afford better care, they dislike the idea that such care would reflect middle class values and concerns rather than their own.
In alternating-shift families, the wife’s contribution tends to carry significant weight since her wages per hour are often similar to the husband’s and are economically necessary. Interestingly, even though their economic situation does not allow for it, their belief in traditional gender roles is the norm. The mother cannot be at home full-time, it is not possible for the husband to assume the role of traditional breadwinner, and therefore, he has no other choice but to contribute to household work and childcare. They are forced into flexibility in gender issues. Men are required to perform domestic chores while their wives are at work. The actual division of labor is more equal than their gender ideologies. Even with both parents working and sharing household duties and child care, the mentality is that mothers are in charge at home, and fathers “help” while the mother is not available. The couples try to maintain these features of gender identity: the father is the breadwinner, mothers work only to ensure financial solvency of the family, and the mother is the primary parent because she is more attuned to a child’s emotional needs. Fathers do not admit to nurturing even if that is what they do. The importance of the wife’s income gives the woman permission to work in spite of the husband’s preference for her to be at home.
Although it can and does work for many families, the alternate-shift arrangement can be hectic, and the family rarely enjoys quality time all together. It forces each party to pull his/her own weight in both the work force and household shift, which can be a good thing. Men admitted to slacking off when both husband and wife were present at home, giving the wife an unfair “double shift.” I would elect this arrangement if my wife wanted it for non-economic reasons, but I do not expect that we would need it to make ends meet.
According to Dorothy Roberts, what are the societal forces that discourage family participation of Black fathers? What elements of Black fatherhood led to the myth of the Absent Black Father, and what patterns of Black men’s behavior contradict this myth?
Roberts’ article explains how negative societal forces are to blame for “fatherlessness” in many Black families. Society, in turn, erroneously blames the irresponsibility of African-American fathers for the dire situations in which numerous African-American families find themselves. It encourages the myth that the problems of Blacks are a result of their own immoral lifestyles, rather than an unequal social structure.
According to Roberts, some argue (mistakenly) that the availability of welfare promotes having children out of wedlock. Others reason that it is cultural tradition that embraces unmarried mothers in the black community. Besides these opinions, it is clearly chronic poverty that works against the creation of stable marriages. The predominance of Black female headed households tends to result from Black male unemployment. Improving men’s economic status would likely increase the numbers of fathers who live with their children. Another link to poverty, imprisonment, is another prevalent situation that separates fathers from their families. Then, as ex-convicts, their possibilities for gainful employment are even less than before.
The elements of Black fatherhood which led to the myth of the Absent Black Father are his marital status (unmarried) and economic status (poor), not his lack of connection with his children. Black men seem to have, instead, their own way of fathering. So called “absent” fathers often play a significant role in child rearing. They stay closely tied to offspring even if they are not married to the mother and are unable to help out financially.
According to the article, it was misguided welfare policy that actually drove Black men out of their homes, since many states granted aid only if a parent was consistently absent from the home, refusing to pay if a father lived in the house. Current welfare laws are attempting to encourage Black fathers to remain with their families.
The article reminds us that we live in a country that is able to help its poor, but unwilling because of misconceived notions as to why poverty exists. If lawmakers and more of the general public had a better understanding of social structure, perhaps more helpful programs would exist to offer solutions to eradicate the poverty of Black children. Poor Black families could have the opportunity to become whole again without negative judgment and forced values that typically do not apply to their communities.
