Abstract: "Federal and state governments spend a lot of money on encouraging nonresident fathers to be involved in their children’s lives. Is this money well spent? Social scientists, politicians, and commentators widely assume that children with involved fathers have higher rates of well-being than do those with absent, uninvolved fathers. Turning this assumption on its head, Daniel Hawkins, Paul Amato, and Valarie King ask whether paternal involvement is influenced by children’s well-being. Using nationally representative data on adolescents, their findings suggest that fathers who live with their children both influence and are influenced by their kids. In other words, adolescents and resident fathers are “engaged in reciprocal patterns of influence.” That is, a well-adjusted child might encourage nonresident fathers to be more involved, while a less well-adjusted child might discourage a father from investing more time. Poorly-adjusted adolescents are likely to avoid visits with fathers or make visits uncomfortable, while well-adjusted adolescents are likely to seek out visits with fathers (and vice versa). The results for nonresident father–child relationships differ dramatically as fathers react to the behavioral and emotional characteristics of their children. According to the authors, “Our findings suggest that low levels of adolescent well-being may be a barrier to, rather than a result of, nonresident father involvement.” Source: American Sociological Review
Download full pdf report | Link to abstracts
No comments:
Post a Comment