Victoria Pileggi, MSc, PhD (C), University of Guelph
In the last 30 years or so, researchers and fatherhood activists have claimed that fathers’ roles and responsibilities in families have shifted from the once-distant breadwinner, male role model, and moral compass towards more direct and intimate care of their children. This contemporary “involved” father model now recognizes and encourages fathers to be engaged with, accessible to, and responsible for their children (Ball & Daly, 2012), given the positive influence it has on children’s intellectual abilities, emotional regulation and maturity, and social competency.
But how did this shift come about? According to fatherhood scholars, there arose a vested interest from within the fatherhood community to better understand what fathers actually do, especially given most of the literature until the 1990s focused primarily on father absence and the impact their lack of involvement had on their children (Pleck, 2010). The community needed a counterpoint to the ongoing argument that men were less capable of providing care to their children than women (Belsky, 1993), especially in a social context that saw an increased need for men to take on domestic responsibilities as women increased their involvement in paid employment outside of the home (Hawkins et al., 2002). While arguably a favourable reconsideration of fathers, some critics argue that “involvement” is limited in its focus on the time fathers spend with their children and the activities they do with them rather than the quality of their interactions and relationship (Hawkins & Palkovitz, 1999).
1- Photograph retrieved from Jason Lee, http://mymodernmet.com/dave-engledow-worlds-best-father/
Despite this shift however, there is still a tendency in sociology, psychology and developmental research to study the mother-child relationship or use moms as the marker for understanding family, and even father –child bonds; we continue to largely overlook fathers’ own experiences of caregiving and their relationships with their children, and so they remain an “untapped resource” in family scholarship (Ball & Daly, 2012). This neglect creates a “peripheral” view of fathers which contributes to the popularized notion that fathers are uninvolved with their children and unable to provide the same quality of care as mothers (Doucet, 2006; Silverstein & Auerbach, 1999). However, research that does speak to fathers directly demonstrates that they are capable of being involved in their children’s lives and providing them with adequate and necessary physical and emotional care when given the opportunity to do so. In fact, Doucet (2006) found that male primary caregivers care and nurture in ways that resemble mothering, even though fathers did not identify themselves or their work in that way and distinguished their parenting style from their female counterparts in a number of ways, including their emphasis on fun, playfulness, physical activity, and practicality.
Another important critique of the involved fatherhood literature is its focus on families with “typically” developing children. There is little recognition of families living with chronic health conditions, and physical or mental differences (Beaton et al., 2012), who confront widely different challenges and pressures that are not adequately discussed in family research. When these families are investigated, mothers remain central to our understanding of them, as noted above. This is problematic given research suggests that fathers’ experiences are fundamentally different than mothers’ (Cashin et al., 2012; Nicholas et al., 2009): fathers are said to experience different types of stress after a child’s diagnosis, and make use of different support and coping strategies. Though mothers are thought to assume primary responsibility for the care of children with disabilities, it is not to say that fathers have no hand in caregiving for their children. In fact, they are thought to maintain family stability, protect and provide for their partners and children, and act as a source of strength and support for them (McNeill, 2004, Peclhat et al., 2007). They stress about their relationship with their children and partners, about maintaining normalcy within their families, and financial provision. These stresses are complicated by the lack of appropriate support afforded to fathers.
Fathers are particularly underrepresented in facial difference; only one published article focused exclusively on fathers of children with facial difference (Klein, Pope & Tan, 2010). The study interviewed nine fathers about their parenting experiences and the results suggested that 90% of fathers were optimistic about their child’s future but remained concerned about it. Fathers described being a part of building their child’s social skills and identified their child’s positive characteristics. However, these results are extremely basic and provide limited insight into the relationship, specific concerns or responsibilities. They do not tease apart the influence of gender in fathers raising sons or daughters, and they do not give any attention to the way in which children and youth experience or perceive their father and their relationship with him. Taking all of this into consideration, we are left with the same notion that fathers are not capable of or do not play an active role in caring for their children with facial differences simply because we have not explored this relationship. To complicate things further, some literature positions the father-daughter relationship as different from the mother-daughter or father-son relationship. Though fathers are understood to influence daughters’ self-esteem, independence, education and career achievements, the relationships between fathers and daughters are considered less conflicted and also less-open and intimate than mother-daughter relationships in many research studies. However, these ideas of the father-daughter relationship are limited by our perspective on gender and how males and females should interact with one another.
In 2014, I conducted a study on the mother-daughter relationship when the daughter was living with a facial difference, which led to many interesting findings (CLICK HERE to read a summary report from my master’s thesis). My intention was not to endorse the omission of fathers as caregivers in a facial difference context or reproduce the stereotype of mothers and daughters as closer and more attune than fathers and daughters. Instead, I believe that when provided the opportunity, it is entirely possible that fathers do just as well to guide their children, including daughters, through systems, secure services and opportunities for their children, and participate in the rewarding, though sometimes challenging, identity and emotional care work as mothers, forging close and honest bonds. However, the way these things are achieved may look different than they do for female caregivers.
Thus, more research is needed to explore the ways fathers experience and understand their caregiving and this can only be done by speaking with them directly. My study builds off the work of Doucet, other fatherhood scholars, and my own Master’s thesis, and explores the ways in which fathers and their daughters experience and understand their relationship with one another, and the influence facial difference has on that relationship. I want to undo the mother-centered lens in research on facial difference and other disabilities, while still respecting the invaluable work of mothers. I want to explore fathers’ experiences and understandings of caring for their daughters living with facial differences, as well as daughters’ experiences of this care. I hope to explore more deeply how father-daughter relationships are experienced and either conform to or transcend confining gender norms. I want to highlight the roles that fathers may or may not assume in their daughters’ lives and the strategies they develop and impart to their daughters as they encounter various systems and social interactions. It also looks to explore whether fathers and daughters draw on distinctions or similarities to female caregivers when describing their practices.
Moreover, as a critical feminist scholar, it is vital that research captures an accurate and complete picture of fathers’ involvement of care and this includes speaking with those who occupy various social positions, even those who may be unable to assume the “involved” father role. If we look critically at the research on fathers, most of it assumes that all fathers are part of nuclear families, white, heterosexual, able-bodied, middle to upper class, and living with their children. Fathers who are living away from their children, step-parents, queer, disabled, living in poverty, and belong to different racial and cultural groups are often overlooked. My proposed study hopes to recruit fathers of varying genders, embodiments, sexualities, races, and family structures to explore and validate meaningful caregiver strategies and practices in their relationships with their daughters who are living with facial differences. Ultimately, I want to give voice to fathers and daughters and honour their experiences and understandings of their relationship with one another.
RECRUITMENT IS UNDERWAY AND I’D LOVE TO CHAT WITH YOU! If you are a young woman living with a facial difference (age 14-35) or are a father of a daughter with a facial difference in this age range who is or is not personally living with a facial difference, I would like to invite you to participate in the study. Your father or daughter does not have to participate in an interview for you to take part. CLICK HERE for more about the study and my contact information!
References
Ball, J., & Daly, K. (2012). Father involvement in Canada: A transformative approach. In J. Ball & K. Daly (Eds.), Father involvement in Canada: Diversity, renewal, and transformation (pp. 1-25). Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.
Beaton, J., Nicholas, D., McNeill, T., & Wegner, L. (2012). The experiences of fathers of a child with a chronic health condition: Caregiving experiences and potential support interventions. In J. Ball & K. Daly (Eds.) Father involvement in Canada: Diversity, renewal, and transformation (pp.190-204). Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.
Belsky, J. (1993). Promoting father involvement- An analysis and critique: Comment on Silverstein (1993). Journal of Family Psychology, 7(3), 287-292.
Cashin, G. H., Small, S. P., & Solbert, S. M. (2008). The lived experience of fathers who have children with asthma: A phenomenological study. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 23(5), 372-385.
Doucet, A. (2006). Do men mother? Fathering, care and domestic responsibility. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
Hawkins, A. J., & Palkovitz, R. (1999). Beyond ticks and clicks: The need for more diverse and broader conceptualizations and measures of father involvement. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 8(1), 11-32.
Hawkins, A. J., Bradford, K. P., Palkovitz, R., Christiansen, S. L., Day, R. D., & Call, V. R. A. (2002). The inventory of father involvement: A pilot study of a new measure of father involvement. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 10(2), 183-196.
Klein, T., Pope, A. W., Getahun, E., & Thompson, J. (2006). Mothers’ reflections on raising a child with a craniofacial anomaly. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, 43(5), 590-597.
Nicholas, D. B., Gearing, R. E., McNeill, T., Fung, K., Lucchetta, S., & Selkirk, E. K. (2009). Experiences and resistance strategies utilized by fathers of children with cancer. Social Work in Health Care, 48, 260-275.
Pelchat, D., Lefebvre, H., & Levert, M. J., (2007). Gender differences and similarities in the experiences of parenting a child with a health problem: Current state of knowledge. Journal of Child Health Care, 11(2), 112-131.
Pleck, J. H. (2010). Paternal involvement: A revised conceptualization and theoretical linkages with child outcomes. In M.E. Lamb (Ed.), The role of the father in child development (5th ed.) pp. 58-93). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Silverstein, L., & Auerbach, C.F. (1999). Deconstructing the essential father. American Psychologist, 54(6), 397-407.