1. Separated fathers and the ‘fathers’ rights’ movement
Dr Michael Flood
Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health & Society
La Trobe University

2. The fathers’ rights movement
Worldview: Fathers are deprived of their ‘rights’…
FR groups overlap with ‘men’s rights’ groups. And have links to conservative Christian groups.
An organised backlash to feminism
Comprised of angry and hurting men (and women), who’ve come through;
Separation and divorce
Loss of contact with children

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 cont’d
Shifts in images of fathering: the ‘New Father’
Both shifts and stabilities in fathering practice
The best and worst of times?

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… cont’d
(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 children’s 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… cont’d
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… cont’d
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 women’s economic opportunities.

17. FR groups fail to promote… cont’d
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 children’s desires and regardless of potential negative impacts.
Reduce financial and material support for resident parents and children.
Fuel interparental conflict.
Privilege fathers’ contact over children’s 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 children’s 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.