"Are Fathers Irrelevant? Do Only Mothers Matter?" Yes, According to New Study
Supports Presumption of Primary Custody to Mothers
A new analysis on the effect of father absence in children’s lives has found that fathers are largely “irrelevant”.
This supports that there should be a presumption of primary custody to mothers.
Renowned Psychologist, Professor, and prolific author Sam Vaknin has conducted a study that updates his previous work about the importance of fathers in children’s lives.
On Wednesday, Sam posted a video about his research entitled: “Are Fathers Irrelevant? Do Only Mothers Matter?”
His original conclusion—decades ago—had been that fathers are important to children’s psychological development. However, he’s come up with a new, surprising finding after analyzing recent research from around the world.
Sam’s new conclusion: Fathers are irrelevant.
Father absence is irrelevant and has very little impact.
Even Sam is shocked by his own finding!
This shockingly changes everything we thought we knew.
This study is the first time this has been empirically validated. It goes against patriarchally-infused narratives that father presence is crucial for children’s socialization and development.
So, naturally, it’s pissing off the men’s/fathers’ activists, and they are harassing, trolling, and threatening him.
The men who wrote to me, were infuriated and enraged by what I said.
But Sam is holding strong, not intimidated in the least. In fact, he seems to think men’s backlash is kind of funny.
He does not seem to understand why these men’s activists are so upset by his finding. It’s not because their feelings are hurt by not being important.
No, it’s all about power.
This finding diminishes men’s power over children after divorce, the last major form of patriarchal control in the family. It infers, rightly, that children should virtually never be taken away from mothers and, hence, mothers should always retain primary custody unless she is found to be seriously abusive. [More on that in the Takeaways.]
Following are quotes from Sam’s video presentation [linked below]. They speak for themselves…
“ARE FATHERS IRRELEVANT? DO ONLY MOTHERS MATTER?”
BYLINE: Father absence has few negative outcomes on children. This is especially true if the mother is "good enough".
INTRO: In order to raise healthy, functional, pro-social, communal adults with empathy and the ability to collaborate with peers to accomplish goals, [be] self-efficacious, agentic, basically happy, do we need fathers? We know that we need mothers, that is indisputable, that the mother is very critical in the upbringing, shaping and formation of her children. But do we also need fathers?
Children who grow up in single-parent households are largely okay. They are largely functional. They are largely happy.
Socialization is carried out almost entirely by the mother.
Fathers have an extremely limited role in the formation of young people and in molding them and shaping them.
The father is much less important, if at all, in the child's psyche, in the child's emerging psychology.
“On average, those who have been in a single parent family [with a mother] at some point report higher levels of life satisfaction than those children who have never lived in a single parent family. Similarly, those with experience of living in a single parent family on average report more positive feelings about the family than those who have not lived in a single parent family.
Lastly, those children who have experienced or always lived in single parent families tend to report less problematic relationships with their peers than those who have never lived in single parent families.”
They say that what is clear is that this robust data set provides no evidence of a negative impact of living in single parent households on these indicators of children's well-being.
It seems that the problem is not father absence, the problem is the process of divorce which is acrimonious, unsettling, anxiety inducing and depressing.
If the mother is empathic, present, unselfish, loving, caring, holding, containing, supportive, the absence of the father is largely rendered irrelevant.
Maternal warmth is a protective measure and it protects adolescents in homes from which the father is absent...
It seems that the problem is not father absence…The problem is poverty. The problem is demographic…
I'm using studies to demolish one by one all the myths associated with father absence.
Divorce is going to disadvantage children economically, mainly, socially, because of poverty, but it's not going to have other negative effects on their well-being, psychology, gender role or anything else for that matter.
Results suggest early and middle childhood are not negatively affected by the departure of the biological father.
SAM’S SUMMARY: “Father absence has extremely limited impact…By far, the most critical factor is the mother. If the mother is loving, caring, holding, empathic, sympathetic, affectionate, compassionate, almost nothing will happen. The father's absence will go unnoticed…it will not affect [children]; it will not have effects [on them].”
He concludes the two variables that are actually harming kids after separation are poverty and acrimony between their parents.
TAKEAWAYS
First, the word “irrelevant” may seem a bit harsh to some. To be clear, this analysis is not addressing individual fathers’ importance to individual children emotionally but the impact if a father is absent. Of course, a good father will likely be important to a child. Basically, it’s saying that good fathers are frosting on the cake, while mothers are the cake.
Sam’s analysis does not speak to why mothers are vital to children and fathers not. The underlying factor is that mothers are children’s primary attachment figure and they are primed biologically to nurture them. A father is a secondary attachment figure, which is why they are nice but not vital.
It is the uninterrupted continuance of this two-way primary bond between mother and child that leads to all the goodies Sam mentions: children’s accomplishment of goals, being self-efficacious, agentic, happy, and having higher levels of life satisfaction. Conversely, it’s the disruption of this bond that can cause so much harm to children’s development and lives, not to mention mothers’ mental health—both of which impact society negatively.
This study can be used to support our two activism tracks: making Cultural and Legal change.
Culturally, we need to share this new wisdom far and wide in an effort to deprogram the public from the old, false, patriarchal narratives that support fathers are vital to raising healthy children.
Society must come to accept that mothers are the ones who are vital to raising well-adjusted, healthy children. This will, hopefully, lead to public support for children living primarily with mothers after separation.
Legally, this research can be used to change the definition of Best Interests of Children from being equal or frequent contact with both parents to mothers retaining primary custody—unless they are so abusive it outweighs the benefits. However, in the vast majority of contested custody cases, mothers are not abusive and are at least “good enough”.
More importantly, this analysis underscores the fact that fathers should never be given primary or sole custody; nor should children ever be taken away from their mother, or the father allowed to alienate them from her.
Now, of course, this will not matter while custody cases remain in the rigged Family Court system. Judges would do what they always do to overcome a presumption that it’s in children’s best interest to remain living with Mom. They will lie about Mom being “mad or bad” and use that to justify switching custody to the father.
That’s why custody cases need to be heard in a regular court with a jury as fact finder, not a judge. Mothers are so important to children’s well-being (and, hence, society’s) that mothers should only lose primary custody when a jury makes a finding the mother is abusive and detrimental to the child’s well-being—in a real court that affords women equal protection and due process.
Recent columns have highlighted the importance of mothers in children’s lives and how being separated and alienated from mothers causes mental health problems in children (the Florida State University mass shooter). There have also been numerous columns about the serious mental health issues stemming from fathers having been judicially-enabled to alienate children from mothers, such as the recent suicide of Virginia Giuffre.
It’s about time the truth emerged about the difference in importance of mothers and fathers to children, in the form of a well-researched analysis—by a man, no less! [It would likely be given little credibility if by a mere woman.]
KUDOS TO SAM!
Please take a moment to like and comment here and on his channel and SHARE!
Join The Women’s Coalition to help fight for the power to keep and protect our children.
IN OTHER NEWS
SIS FORUM
We had a great Sisters in Solidarity forum yesterday. Thanks to all the mamas who joined us!
More info on SIS: Sisters in Solidarity
To join the discrimination lawsuit: fill out this form for the U.S. and for other countries this form.
More info about the discrimination lawsuit.
CHAPTER 28: PART 5: NEXT SECTION IS OUT!
CHAPTER 28: The Opera: Act III; Pt. 5 [cont. 2]
Legion arrives in West Virginia and rents a car. She dons her well-prepped disguise as a man and proceeds to get the lay of the land in “Grubtrop”, the small town Herry has taken her boys to live. She finds the perfect place for a clandestine meeting on the far end of a cemetery, which is only blocks from their house…if only she can find and connect with them.
After dark, she parks near their house and waits for hours in hopes of seeing her boys. She’s about to give up but spots Zane walking home. After a brief but joyous reunion, he says he’ll try to sneak his brothers away and meet her at the cemetery the next day. Legion is beyond thrilled that she will be finally be with her boys after so long.
In the last section, Legion must fork out more money than she has left for the appeal of the third custody ruling, so she relies on friends to lend her money while she works multiple jobs. She decides to defy court orders and clandestinely visit her boys in disguise. She embarks on the long trip from Iowa to West Virginia, anxious to see them again after years apart…
CHAPTER 28 of Mother-Fucking: The Saga of One Fucked Mother begins with Act III, Part 4 of “The Opera” from Book 3. The Opera has three Acts with five Parts—one for each of the three Family Court and two Appellate Court trials. Chapter 28 covers all of Act III: Part 4: the third Family Court trial, and Part 5: the second Appellate trial. This is a long chapter and will be published in newsletter-sized bites.
Dr. Blue’s novel is based on her own experience of the Custody Crisis. It uniquely conveys how Family Court judges are “mother-fucking” women—a form of systemic oppression—as protagonist Legion is systematically and methodically deprived of her children and money and reduced to “one fucked mother”.
Chapters are stand-alone interesting so you can begin reading anywhere. A Cast of Characters follows to help readers at any point. All published chapters are included in the Section: “Saga of One F**ked Mother” accessible on the top bar of the home page of Women’s Coalition News & Views. Sequential chapters are emailed out every Wednesday so make sure to subscribe if you haven’t yet!
TEASERS
“Mom … Mom, stop for a sec! What’s with the man-getup?! Ya’ think Herry won’t find out you’re here?! Ya’ think this’ll stop him an’ Fannie from knowing you’ve come out here to Grubtrop?” … “So, Z, can you bring yourself and your brothers to the far east side of the Grubtrop Cemetery tomorrow on Sunday at, O, let’s say, noon?”
I found ‘em! At last, I’ve found them all!
If, as it most surely is, war is the leaving behind of every child, then “civil” family court in custody battles is the leaving behind of every mother who has ever stood up and finally said something which daMan and daJudge did not want to hear, certainly did not want to be held accountable for and absolutely with what neither man wanted to––justly––deal!
You may also give a gift subscription to a friend who is a victim of the Custody Crisis.
Or feel free to support the Coalition’s work through a one-time or recurring contribution through the Paypal Giving Fund.
All contributions are greatly appreciated!
Fathers are very important in the lives of their children. But not in the same way or as essential as mothers. Family law operates under the premise that fathers are equally capable of parenting their children as mothers are. It’s an easy one-size-fits-all approach to thorny custody issues designed to benefit fathers right groups and for the smoother operation of ill run family courts.
Viewing the mother in the same manner using the same criteria for assessment as a father in a custody dispute is like comparing apples and oranges. Especially if the mother is a stay at home mother who has assumed the traditional role of primary nurturer for her children since they were born while the father is employed to financially support the household.
The mother has invested herself in care of her children and lacks financial means for legal representation while the father has the financial resources of retaining an attorney. So, yet again, to pit a mother against a father in a custody battle involves discrepancies and inequality on numerous levels.
The children are the most impacted by custody being given to the father as they are uprooted to a new household, neighborhood, and school district. This is not in children’s best interest.
Especially if there are issues of abuse, domestic violence, criminal activity, and substance abuse, and coercive control that benefits from a mother’s less empowering position.
This validates what was known for 9500 yrs when paternity wasn't even a thing. Brilliant!