THE ROLE OF THE FATHER

Paternal care is considered a distinct feature of human evolution, setting us apart from other great apes. Unlike most primates, human fathers engage in direct caregiving, foster moral development, and provide long-term support.

AQA SPECIFICATION SAYS: SPECIFICATION: MULTIPLE ATTACHMENTS AND THE ROLE OF THE FATHER.

The word “dad” was first recorded in English around 1500, but its origins are much older. Linguists believe it derives from a child’s first babbling sounds, making it nearly universal. Similar words appear in many languages, including tad (Welsh), daid (Irish), tata (Greek), tete (Lithuanian), and tatah (Sanskrit).

"Patri" is Latin for “father” and the root of many modern words. These include patriarch (male head of a family), patrician (noble class), patrilineal (tracing descent through the father’s line), patriot (one devoted to their “fatherland”), Patrick (meaning “nobleman”), patron (a protector or supporter), and patronise (originally meaning to act as a fatherly guide).

PARENTAL INVESTMENT THEORY

“He adopted a role called being a father so that his child would have something mythical and infinitely important: a protector”  - Tom Wolfe.

Evolutionary theory emphasises that human survival has always relied on cooperative parenting. Like other mammals with complex brains, human offspring require intensive and prolonged caregiving, making shared responsibility the most effective strategy for raising children. Despite this, many psychologists argue that males and females have very different parenting roles and that males are biologically less suited to forming close bonds with their offspring due to evolutionary adaptations that shape their brains differently, resulting in hormonal differences in testosterone and oxytocin.

Trivers' parental investment theory and Bowlby’s attachment theory emphasised the mother as the primary attachment figure, reinforcing that maternal caregiving was more biologically ingrained than paternal involvement. Research by Schaffer and Emerson further showed that multiple attachments with the Father occur several months after the Mother.

EVOLUTIONARY PERSPECTIVE ON PATERNAL CARE

This evolutionary distinction in parental roles is primarily driven by biological asymmetries in reproduction, which shape the level of investment each parent is predisposed to make. While maternal caregiving is reinforced by immediate biological necessities such as pregnancy, childbirth, and lactation, Since fathers could not perform these functions biologically, their early childcare involvement may have traditionally been more indirect, focusing on protection and resource provision.

From an evolutionary standpoint, fathers are believed to encourage exploration and risk-taking, focusing more on play than emotional security. They are seen as secondary attachment figures, more engaged in discipline.

This distinction is further explained by examining the sex differences influencing paternal investment.

BIOLOGICAL FACTORS INFLUENCING PATERNAL INVESTMENT

"If you've never been hated by your child, you've never been a parent" - Bette Davis

FEMALES INVEST THE MOST (ANISOGAMY)

Females typically contribute more to the physical development of their offspring due to anisogamy, which is the significant difference in the size of sex cells (eggs and sperm). This difference results in eggs being more costly to produce than sperm. In the case of humans, this means that females bear the burden of nine months of gestation and subsequent lactation, providing the majority of the energy required for their infants' growth from conception to the age when they can be weaned onto other food. Consequently, if offspring do not survive due to a lack of care, their substantial investment is more costly for females.

Due to this discrepancy in the cost of reproduction, females tend to be more selective in choosing mates, while males compete for mating opportunities, as Trivers (1972) proposed. In other words, females are generally less promiscuous than males and take their time selecting a mate. They seek to ensure that their offspring inherit high-quality genes and access ample resources, thus ensuring their fitness.

For males, the optimal strategy is to invest their efforts primarily in reproduction, given that sperm production is relatively inexpensive compared to the substantial investment made by females. This leads to a division of reproductive labour where females are choosier in mate selection and often take on more parental care responsibilities. At the same time, males focus on maximising their reproductive opportunities.

CONCEALED OVULATION AND OESTRUS

Oestrus is a behavioural and physical change in which a female becomes attractive to males and receptive to sexual advances. Among most species of animals, females are not continually open or able to have sexual intercourse. Their ovulation is limited to a few times a year and is commonly referred to as being in ‘heat’ or ‘season’.

In most species, the hormonal changes associated with oestrus (or heat) trigger biological signals that alert the male that a female is ovulating and is ready to mate. These signals can be blood flow from the vagina, patches of special skin around the vulva and anus that become a noticeable pink or burgundy colour as they swell up (known as estrus swellings) and smell. This does not happen in humans. Ovulation is concealed, and there is no oestrus. This benefits human females as they can offer sex all the time. Their partner is, therefore, likely to stay with them and not look for sex elsewhere when they are not ovulating. This means that females are likely to receive resources and protection continually. The downside of concealed ovulation is that the male is unsure if he is impregnating the female when he has sex with her, as she may not be ovulating. Moreover, he can not be sure of paternity if he does not know when his partner is ovulating because he cannot be certain she has been impregnated by someone else.

SEX DIFFERENCES IN INVESTMENT FEMALES

• Eggs are more costly to produce than sperm, as they are bigger.

• Limited eggs released per lifetime, approximately 480

• Depending on the culture, a limited number of possible pregnancies/children per lifetime, e.g., 1-20.

• Time limit on fertility /egg release, e.g., females go through menopause and become infertile in middle age.

• Nine months of pregnancy, which is energy-consuming and physically limiting. It makes Mothers vulnerable, as she is not so mobile and self-sufficient/independent. A recent study published in Science Advances suggests that pregnancy is an extremely physically demanding process, akin to running a 40-week marathon. Researchers examined elite athletes' basal metabolic rates (BMR) in demanding races like Ironman and the Tour de France. They found that the most an individual can sustain in terms of calorie burn is about 2.5 times their BMR, roughly 4,000 calories a day for the average adult. Pregnant women, on the other hand, operate at approximately 2.2 times their BMR, almost at the maximum sustainable level, for around 270 days. Going beyond this rate would be unsustainable, potentially harmful to the body, and even life-threatening.

• Breastfeeding is time-consuming and energy-consuming, which means the mother is not independent.

• Female brains are generally wired differently. They have less testosterone and more empathy, which makes them more likely to attach to their infants immediately. Oxytocin released during breastfeeding also increases attachment behaviour.

• Childbirth is painful, long, hazardous and can be life-threatening. The SDG target for maternal deaths is for a global maternal mortality ratio (MMR) of less than 70 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births by 2030. The global MMR in 2020 was estimated at 223 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births, down from 227 in 2015 and 339 in 2000.

• Complications in childbirth include:

  Hemorrhage.

  Hypertensive disorders (e.g., preeclampsia and eclampsia)

  Infections (including sepsis)

  Unsafe abortion

  Obstructed labour

  Pre-existing medical conditions (e.g., diabetes, heart disease, HIV)

  Lack of access to healthcare

  Anemia

  Postpartum complications

SEX DIFFERENCES IN INVESTMENT MALES

• Approximately 300,000,000 – 400,000,000 sperm per ejaculation.

• Unlimited sperm per lifetime. There is no time limit on fertility. Men can produce sperm until they die and well into old age.

• Unlimited number of possible children per lifetime. All males have to do is find a willing and ovulating partner.

• Getting a woman pregnant requires little energy! It is estimated that the energy required is equivalent to boiling a kettle.

• No breastfeeding, but the Father may invest resources.

• Male brains are, on the whole, wired differently. They have more testosterone and less empathy, making them less likely to attach to their infants.

• Parental uncertainty. Before DNA tests, men could not be sure they were the fathers. This may have limited their parental investment.

RESEARCH STUDIES ON PARENTING

MOTHERS:

The division of parental roles is reflected in early cognitive and sensory development, where infants show a strong biological preference for their mothers. From birth, infants rely on maternal cues for comfort and security, reinforcing the evolutionary attachment patterns prioritising maternal responsiveness. This early recognition of the mother plays a fundamental role in shaping initial bonding and attachment behaviours, as research on infant responses to maternal voices demonstrates. For example:

INFANT RECOGNITION OF MOTHER'S VOICE

Research indicates that infants can recognise their mother's voice from birth, a recognition developed during gestation. DeCasper and Fifer (1980) conducted a study demonstrating that newborns prefer their mother's voice over a stranger's. In this experiment, infants adjusted their sucking behaviour to hear a recording of their mother's voice, indicating prenatal auditory learning and early mother-infant bonding. science.org

EFFECTS OF SKIN-TO-SKIN CONTACT AND BREASTFEEDING

Skin-to-skin contact immediately after birth has been shown to regulate a newborn’s heart rate and body temperature, promoting neural development. Bramson et al. (2010) reported that 1–3 hours of mother-infant skin contact effectively improved breastfeeding outcomes, leading to exclusive breastfeeding during the hospital stay. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Breastfeeding is associated with numerous benefits, including enhanced cognitive development, improved immunity, and reduced risks of obesity. A study highlighted by the World Health Organization (2020) found that newborns who had prolonged skin-to-skin contact with their mothers were more likely to breastfeed successfully. who.int

MATERNAL MODELLING OF EMPATHY AND EMOTIONAL REGULATION

Mothers play a pivotal role in modelling empathy and emotional regulation for their children. Feldman et al. (2011) found that maternal-infant skin-to-skin contact positively affected mother-child interactions, contributing to developing the child's emotional intelligence and social competence.

These biological findings suggest that fathers play an indirect caregiving role,

FATHERS' DISTINCTIVE CONTRIBUTIONS TO CHILD DEVELOPMENT

Research has highlighted the unique and complementary roles fathers play in their children's development, which are often distinct from maternal influences. Theoretical perspectives, including evolutionary psychology, psychodynamic theories, and cognitive development theories, provide frameworks for understanding these roles.

DISCIPLINE AND BOUNDARY SETTING

Fathers often serve as disciplinarians, establishing boundaries and enforcing rules. This role contributes to children's understanding of societal norms and expectations, promoting self-control and moral development. Evolutionary psychology suggests paternal authority evolved to ensure survival by teaching risk assessment and self-regulation.

RESOURCE PROVISION

Traditionally, fathers have been viewed as primary providers of economic resources. This provision ensures access to necessities and opportunities, influencing children's socio-economic status and access to education. Cognitive theories argue that financial stability reduces parental stress, allowing for more effective parenting and better developmental outcomes.

ENCOURAGING RISK-TAKING AND INDEPENDENCE

Fathers are crucial in promoting risk-taking behaviours within safe boundaries, fostering children's independence and resilience. Paquette (2004) proposed that fathers’ rough-and-tumble play challenges children to push their physical and cognitive limits, strengthening problem-solving skills and emotional regulation.

Geiger (1996) found that fathers' play interactions were more exciting compared to mothers, while mothers' interactions were more affectionate and nurturing. This suggests that the father’s role is primarily one of stimulation and play rather than providing comfort.

Studies by Varissimo show that fathers contribute uniquely to risk-taking behaviours that foster independence and resilience, social skills development, helping children navigate interpersonal relationships, and cognitive stimulation through problem-solving and play-based learning.

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL DEVELOPMENT

A systematic review by Fäthr et al. (2021) found that fathers' engagement in play is associated with better social and emotional skills in children. The study suggests that through interactive play, fathers help children learn to regulate emotions, build self-confidence, and develop social competence.

COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT

Fathers' involvement in play contributes to cognitive development, including problem-solving abilities and academic achievement. Gottfried et al. (1988) found that fathers who engaged in more intellectually stimulating play had children who performed better in school. Similarly, Yogman (1994) demonstrated that fathers’ play interactions encourage flexible thinking and adaptability, both crucial for cognitive growth.

FATHERS AND MASCULINITY IN SONS

These paternal roles are particularly significant for male children. The absence of a father figure may impact a boy's development of traditional masculine traits, potentially leading to challenges in asserting independence and resilience. Psychodynamic theories suggest that single mothers might inadvertently limit the development of these traits, as male children lack a same-gender role model to emulate (Blankenhorn, 1995). However, critics argue that alternative male role models—such as uncles, coaches, or mentors—can mitigate this effect.

CONCLUSION

Fathers contribute uniquely to various aspects of child development, offering distinct benefits that complement maternal influences. Understanding these roles through theoretical lenses enhances our comprehension of family dynamics and their impact on children's growth.

HORMONAL INFLUENCES

Hormonal differences have often been cited as a key reason why fathers may struggle to form strong attachments compared to mothers. Hardy (1999) found that fathers were less able to detect low levels of infant distress than mothers, suggesting that men may not be biologically equipped for early caregiving in the same way as women. This difference may be influenced by oestrogen, a hormone linked to caregiving behaviours, which is found at higher levels in women and may contribute to their heightened sensitivity to an infant’s needs. These findings support the argument that biology imposes certain limitations on the father’s role in early attachment formation.

Oxytocin, often called the "bonding hormone," is crucial in forming emotional connections and is particularly associated with caregiving behaviours, social bonding, and attachment. It is typically found in higher levels in females, especially during pregnancy, childbirth, and breastfeeding, where it facilitates maternal bonding and responsiveness to an infant’s needs. This hormonal influence may help explain why mothers are more naturally attuned to their children’s distress signals and why they often take on the primary caregiving role in early infancy.

Studies suggest that physical contact, such as skin-to-skin interaction and breastfeeding, triggers maternal oxytocin release, reinforcing attachment and enhancing maternal instincts (Feldman et al., 2007). This hormonal surge strengthens maternal sensitivity, making mothers more likely to respond promptly and effectively to their child’s needs.

FATHER-INFANT ATTACHMENT

“It is a wise father that knows his own child.”— Merchant of Venice, Act 2 Scene 2

CAN FATHERS BE PRIMARY CAREGIVERS TOO?

Despite the supporting evidence of parental investment theory, modern research challenges this rigid division, showing that fathers contribute to emotional security and attachment quality beyond playfulness. They believe that fathers actively engaged in caregiving develop strong attachment bonds, suggesting that responsiveness, rather than biological sex, determines attachment strength.

Studies indicate that fathers actively engaged in caregiving develop strong attachment bonds with their children, suggesting that responsiveness, rather than biological sex, determines attachment strength. Strange Situation procedure, developed by Mary Ainsworth, has been instrumental in assessing attachment security. While initially focused on mother-infant pairs, subsequent research has applied this paradigm to father-infant relationships. For instance, studies have found that fathers who report greater involvement are more likely to have securely attached children in the Strange Situation, underscoring the impact of paternal engagement on attachment security.

Cultural practices further illustrate the variability in paternal roles. In societies such as the Aka in Central Africa, fathers are notably involved in childcare, frequently holding and comforting their infants. Similarly, among the Hadza and !Kung communities, fathers actively carry children, engage in play, and teach survival skills. These examples demonstrate that paternal involvement is not solely a product of biological predisposition but is significantly influenced by cultural norms and expectations.

This raises the question: Is the nurturing role of fathers a result of nature or nurture? Exploring this further involves examining how hormonal factors, such as changes in oxytocin and testosterone levels, may influence paternal behaviours.

EVOLUTION AND ADAPTABILITY

While oxytocin levels are generally higher in women, research indicates that fathers also experience an increase in oxytocin levels when they engage in caregiving activities. Studies have shown that fathers who spend more time playing, holding, and interacting with their infants exhibit elevated oxytocin levels, suggesting that bonding and caregiving behaviours are not biologically exclusive to mothers but are shaped by active involvement (Gettler et al., 2011). Paradoxically, evolutionary theory also explains why this occurs.

Despite sexual dimorphism, humans are uniquely adaptable. Unlike animals with fixed neurological programming that restricts them to specific environments, human brains develop dynamically in response to cultural and environmental inputs. This adaptability has allowed humans to thrive in vastly different settings, from Arctic regions with meat-based diets to desert societies with plant-based nutrition. Rather than being born with a fully pre-programmed brain, human infants rely on postnatal experiences to "complete the wiring" of their nervous system, making them highly flexible learners.

This adaptability is also evident in shifting parental roles. Research shows that men’s testosterone levels fluctuate based on their parental involvement. Married or cohabiting fathers have lower testosterone levels than single or divorced men, while their levels of oxytocin—a hormone associated with bonding and caregiving—increase. This biological shift facilitates paternal sensitivity and nurturance, demonstrating that men can play an active and caring role in their children’s development. Similarly, women can be successful breadwinners, challenging traditional gendered divisions of labour. Human flexibility means that while specific parenting roles may be evolutionarily favoured, they are not biologically fixed, allowing individuals to adjust their responsibilities according to societal and personal circumstances.

TESTOSTERONE LEVELS IN FATHERS

TESTOSTERONE CHANGES IN MARRIED MEN AND FATHERS

• DECREASE IN TESTOSTERONE – Research indicates that men experience a reduction in testosterone levels after marriage and fatherhood. This hormonal shift is an evolutionary adaptation to promote caregiving behaviours.

• EVOLUTIONARY TRADE-OFF HYPOTHESIS – Some research suggests a trade-off between mating effort and parental investment. Studies have found that fathers more involved in childcare tend to have smaller testes, indicating a biological adaptation where energy is shifted from reproductive competition to offspring care.

WHY IT’S SIGNIFICANT

• FACILITATES NURTURING BEHAVIOUR – Lower testosterone levels are associated with reduced aggression and increased nurturing tendencies, making fathers more attentive and responsive to their children’s needs.

• PROMOTES ATTACHMENT AND STABILITY – The hormonal shift may function as an evolutionary mechanism that enhances family bonding and long-term parental investment, increasing stability within the household.

• ALIGNS WITH PATERNAL INVESTMENT THEORY – This biological change supports parental investment theory, which suggests that both biological and psychological adaptations occur to enhance offspring survival.

CONTEXTUALISING WITH BROADER FATHERHOOD RESEARCH

• COMPLEMENTARY TO PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIETAL FACTORS – The biological changes in testosterone levels complement psychological and cultural factors, reinforcing that a combination of biology, environment, and social expectations shapes fatherhood.

• CHALLENGING TRADITIONAL STEREOTYPES – The idea that testosterone levels decrease to support caregiving behaviours challenges the stereotype that men are naturally less nurturing than women, showing that fatherhood is a biologically adaptive role.

Thus, while higher baseline oxytocin levels in women and high testosterone levels may contribute to traditional maternal and paternal instincts, both father-child bonding and father-child bonding are influenced by hormonal adaptability, environmental factors, and caregiving engagement. This demonstrates that attachment is a dynamic process rather than purely biologically determined and that Fathers can develop sensitive caregiving abilities, challenging the traditional notion that caregiving is exclusively maternal.

• Field (1978) found that primary caregiving fathers engaged in nurturing behaviours similar to mothers, including smiling, imitating, and physical affection. This suggests that fathers, when placed in a primary caregiving role, can develop maternal-like responsiveness, reinforcing that attachment quality is determined by sensitivity rather than biological sex.

• Lucassen et al. (2011) examined observational studies and the Strange Situation procedure, finding that higher paternal sensitivity was strongly associated with secure infant-father attachment. This indicates that fathers who respond appropriately to their children’s needs—like sensitive mothers—are likelier to develop strong attachment bonds.

• Michael Lamb’s research emphasises that the quality of interaction, rather than the sheer quantity of time spent with a child, is the key determinant of attachment strength. His findings highlight that paternal sensitivity, responsiveness, and attachment style are central to shaping father-child relationships, reinforcing that secure attachments are built through emotional engagement and attuned caregiving.

CONCLUSION

Biological changes in fatherhood, particularly the reduction in testosterone levels in married and parenting men, highlight the biological basis of paternal behaviour. This shift challenges traditional notions of masculinity, demonstrating that nurturing and caregiving are not merely social constructs but deeply ingrained biological processes. Fatherhood blends biological, psychological, and social influences, shaping paternal involvement in ways that extend beyond cultural expectations.

FATHER INVESTMENT AND ABSENT FATHERS

"A man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man.” - Vito Corleone, The Godfather.

Despite research findings and evolutionary theory supporting that fathers can be effective as primary caregivers, male parental involvement is very varied. Data on the average time fathers spend on childcare varies across countries and is influenced by cultural, economic, and policy factors. While comprehensive statistics are not available for all countries, existing research provides some insights:

• UNITED KINGDOM: Fathers spend an average of 8.3 hours per week on childcare, up from 2 hours per week in the 1960s (UK Time Use Survey, 2015).

  UNITED STATES: Fathers spend an average of 8 hours per week on childcare, reflecting increased paternal involvement over recent decades (Pew Research Center, 2016).

  AUSTRALIA: Fathers spend an average of 5.5 hours per week on childcare, depending on employment status and family structure (Australian Institute of Family Studies, 2020).t

• JAPAN: Fathers of children under 6 spend an average of 1.81 hours per day on housework and childcare, while those with children aged 7–12 spend about 1.04 hours per day. Factors such as working fewer hours and having shorter commutes are associated with increased paternal involvement. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

• OECD COUNTRIES: On average, fathers in OECD countries spend approximately 42 minutes per day on childcare, whereas mothers spend about 1 hour and 40 minutes daily. Notably, fathers in Australia, Austria, Canada, and the United States report higher involvement, averaging more than 1 hour daily. At the same time, those in Belgium, Estonia, France, Japan, and South Africa spend less than 30 minutes daily. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

• Specific data on paternal childcare time is limited or not readily available in other countries.

PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT AND CUSTODY

According to United States Census Bureau data, around one-third of U.S. children grow up without their biological father.

Research indicates that a significant proportion of fathers disengage from their children's lives following divorce. Studies show that 27% of fathers abandon their children entirely after divorce, while 40% lose contact within a year. Additionally, 29% of fathers see their children only 1–4 times monthly. Maintaining paternal involvement post-separation presents several challenges, including forming new families, parental conflict, lack of motivation from either parent, children's reluctance to leave their familiar environment, logistical barriers such as distance, and conflicting schedules. Research indicates that fathers' involvement with their children often diminishes post-divorce. A study by Amato, Meyers, and Emery (2009) found that the percentage of non-residential fathers with weekly or more frequent contact with their children increased from 18% in 1976 to 31% in 2002. However, this still suggests that a significant proportion of fathers have infrequent contact with their children post-divorce. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Evidence suggests that fathers who remarry or have children in a new relationship are more likely to lose contact with their children from previous partnerships. In contrast, mothers maintain relationships with all their children, regardless of new family structures. The notion that fathers' low levels of contact are primarily due to maternal alienation—a claim often associated with organisations like Fathers4Justice—oversimplifies the issue. Regarding custody battles, statistics indicate that fathers who actively pursue custody are usually successful. However, concerns have been raised about cases involving allegations of abuse. A report by the Centre for Research on Families and Relationships (2019) highlighted that mothers who allege abuse are more likely to lose custody of their children, with 59% of perpetrators being granted sole custody. Additionally, nearly 90% of these children reported new abusive incidents post-custody decisions. crfr.ac.uk

While some cases of parental alienation do exist, it is essential to recognise that only a tiny percentage of men apply for full custody, and organisations such as the Child Maintenance Service (formerly the Child Support Agency) exist to enforce financial responsibility for children. Additionally, research indicates that the majority of mothers encourage their children to maintain contact with their fathers, recognising the potential psychological harm of parental alienation.

Specific statistics on the number of mothers who intentionally prevent fathers from seeing their children post-divorce or separation in the UK are limited. However, a survey conducted by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) in 2020 found that 56% of separated families had some form of child maintenance agreement, indicating cooperation between parents. gov.uk

While some fathers' rights organisations, such as Fathers4Justice, claim that 40% of mothers admit to obstructing contact between non-resident fathers and their children, it's important to approach such figures cautiously, as they are not derived from peer-reviewed studies. fathers-4-justice.org

Since 2008, UK law has ensured that unmarried fathers listed on a child’s birth certificate have equal parental responsibility, granting them legal rights concerning their upbringing. This makes claims of institutional bias in custody cases more complex than often portrayed.crispandco.com

In custody disputes, fathers actively seeking custody are highly successful, with 94% of fathers applying for sole or joint custody. However, only a tiny proportion of fathers actively pursue custody, suggesting that factors beyond legal bias contribute to post-divorce paternal disengagement.

WHY DO FATHERS INVEST LESS?

“Who would be a father! “— Othello, Act 1 Scene 1

Cultural and social expectations – In many cultures, mothers are expected to be the primary caregivers, which may influence fathers’ involvement in parenting. This suggests that attachment roles are shaped by social norms as well as biology. Stereotypes surrounding fatherhood contribute to the perception that men are less capable caregivers, influencing both societal attitudes and legal outcomes. Traditional gender roles position mothers as primary caregivers, while fathers are often viewed as secondary, particularly post-divorce. This bias can discourage fathers from seeking custody and reinforce the assumption that courts favour mothers. However, research suggests that when fathers actively pursue custody, they are often successful. In the USA, for example, joint custody arrangements have become increasingly common, and some states now presume shared custody to be in the child’s best interests (Carlson & McLanahan, 2010). Despite this, the perception that men do not receive fair treatment in custody cases persists, even though many fathers do not actively seek full custody (Cancian et al., 2014).

Biases also extend beyond legal decisions. Single fathers often face lower expectations and less societal support than single mothers (Coles, 2015). Fathers who take on primary caregiving roles may be seen as unmasculine or assumed to be struggling, while mothers in the same position are more readily viewed as competent. Moreover, men are less likely to access parenting support services, as many programmes are designed with single mothers in mind (Arendell, 2000). However, single fathers do often receive practical and emotional support from female relatives, particularly grandmothers and sisters, who step in to help with childcare responsibilities. In contrast, single mothers are typically expected to manage independently, as they are perceived as natural caregivers. This highlights another gendered bias, where women are seen as inherently capable of parenting alone, while men are assumed to need additional support.

OTHER FACTORS

• CHILD'S TEMPERAMENT:
  The temperament of the child plays a significant role in paternal involvement. Belsky et al. (1991) found that fathers are less likely to engage with temperamentally difficult infants, whereas easygoing infants receive more paternal involvement. Braungart-Rieker et al. (2014) further noted paternal responsiveness is lower when infants are highly irritable, which can negatively affect attachment formation.

• FATHER'S ATTACHMENT HISTORY:
  A father’s early attachment experiences influence how he bonds with his child. Main et al. (1985) found that fathers with secure attachments with their parents were likelier to foster secure attachments with their children. This effect is powerful in single-father households, where the father takes on primary caregiving responsibilities (Lamb, 2010).

• BELIEFS ABOUT FATHERHOOD:
  A father’s belief in the importance of his role as a caregiver affects attachment, particularly for children with challenging temperaments. Volling et al. (2002) found that fathers who highly valued their caregiving role were more likely to have securely attached infants, particularly in cases where the child exhibited high levels of fussiness. This supports the idea that difficult children are more influenced by their caregiving environment than children with a more leisurely temperament.

• FAMILY DYNAMICS:
  The father-mother relationship also influences paternal involvement, with harmonious co-parenting leading to greater paternal engagement. Studies by Belsky & Rovine (1988) show that high marital intimacy is linked to stronger father-infant attachment, while declining marital intimacy correlates with less secure father-child bonds. Additionally, Brown et al. (2012) found that supportive co-parenting contributes to secure father-child relationships, even after controlling for paternal sensitivity. However, this effect appears stronger for boys than for girls, with sons being more affected by parental conflict (Paquette, 2004).

• TIME SPENT WITH THE CHILD:
  Fathers who spend more time with their children tend to develop stronger bonds. Pleck (2010) found paternal involvement in daily caregiving predicts greater attachment security. Conversely, Lamb (1997) observed that fathers who work long hours or are frequently absent are less likely to have securely attached children. Moreover, research suggests fathers report higher life satisfaction and greater emotional fulfilment than non-fathers. However, this is influenced by relationship quality, financial stability, and level of involvement in their children’s lives.

  FINAL CONCLUSIONS

  Despite clear evidence that men are biologically capable of sensitive caregiving, most fathers still invest significantly less in parenting than mothers. While hormonal changes in testosterone and oxytocin and cross-cultural examples of highly involved fathers demonstrate that men can form strong attachment bonds, the reality remains that fathers do not function as primary caregivers in most societies.

  Research by Van Holland De Graaf et al. (2018) highlights that key differences persist while fathers’ and mothers’ parenting behaviours are becoming more similar. Fathers engage in caregiving less frequently, and their involvement is more dependent on external factors, such as work demands, social support, and their partner’s employment status. Unlike mothers, whose caregiving is obligatory mainly due to pregnancy, birth, and breastfeeding, fathers’ parenting is often flexible and influenced by circumstances rather than biological necessity.

  DIFFERENCES IN PARENTING BEHAVIOUR

  Statistical data from Van Holland De Graaf et al. (2018) further confirms that fathers consistently report lower scores than mothers on key parenting behaviours:

  • Affection: Fathers scored significantly lower than mothers (M = 5.26 vs. M = 5.45, p < .001), meaning they engaged in less frequent expressions of affection, such as hugging, kissing, and verbal warmth.

  • Responsivity: Fathers also reported lower responsiveness to their children's emotional and practical needs (M = 5.14 vs. M = 5.40, p < .001), indicating they were less attuned to their child’s signals.

  • Explaining: Fathers scored lower than mothers in providing clear instructions and explanations to their children (M = 5.13 vs. M = 5.35, p < .001), which may reflect differences in communication style or involvement in daily routines.

  In contrast, no significant differences were found in autonomy support, punishment, or reward, suggesting that while fathers may engage less in emotional caregiving, they participate in setting boundaries and reinforcing behaviour at similar rates to mothers.

  FATHERS’ PARENTING IS MORE INFLUENCED BY EXTERNAL FACTORS

  One of the study's most striking findings is that external factors significantly influence parents' parenting more than mothers' parenting.

  • Partner's Work Hours: Fathers granted more autonomy to their children when their partners worked more hours (p < .05). This suggests that father involvement is often reactive, increasing when mothers are less available. In contrast, mothers’ caregiving did not significantly change based on their partner’s work hours.

  • Social Support: Fathers were more likely to adjust their caregiving behaviours in response to external social support, whereas mothers’ parenting was less affected by advice or assistance from family, friends, or institutions (p < .05). This reinforces the idea that mothers engage in caregiving more consistently, whereas fathers require external reinforcement to maintain active involvement.

  PATERNAL INVESTMENT AS A FACULTATIVE STRATEGY

  One reason for this disparity in paternal investment may be biological incentives. Unlike mothers, fathers do not experience direct biological costs associated with child-rearing—they do not carry the child through pregnancy, give birth, or breastfeed. This lack of immediate biological involvement means their investment is not mandatory for infant survival like maternal investment. While many fathers engage in caregiving, less evolutionary pressure is required, particularly in environments where alternative caregiving structures (e.g., extended family, social support) exist.

  Another key factor is paternal uncertainty. Unlike mothers, men can never be entirely certain of their biological relatedness to their offspring without external confirmation (e.g., modern DNA testing). This historical uncertainty may have made men less predisposed to invest heavily in caregiving, mainly when resources could be unknowingly directed toward raising another man’s child.

  Moreover, the male reproductive strategy differs from the female strategy. While women have a limited number of reproductive opportunities, men, in theory, can father an unlimited number of offspring. This biological reality means that male reproductive success traditionally depended more on securing multiple mates than investing in any single offspring. As a result, historical pressures have shaped men to prioritise mating effort over parental effort, making fatherhood a more flexible rather than obligatory role.

  Additionally, social expectations continue to reinforce traditional gender roles. The study found that external support influences fathers' caregiving more than mothers’, suggesting that men may require more social reinforcement to engage in childcare. This aligns with broader research showing that motherhood is more central to female identity. In contrast, fatherhood is often seen as an optional role that can be defined in various ways.

  However, this does not mean that men are inherently incapable of caregiving. As discussed, paternal roles vary greatly across cultures. In societies like Aka and Hadza, fathers are highly involved, challenging the notion that men are universally disengaged from child-rearing. This suggests that paternal investment is highly responsive to environmental, cultural, and social factors rather than being purely dictated by biology.

  FINAL THOUGHTS

  Ultimately, while men can be as sensitive as women in parenting roles, most do not engage at the same level simply because they do not have to. Unlike mothers, who are biologically required to invest, male parental involvement remains facultative—highly influenced by external conditions rather than an innate necessity. The key question is not whether men can be sensitive caregivers but what conditions encourage or discourage them from taking on this role.

PART TWO

FROM EXTENDED FAMILIES TO SINGLE PARENTS:

“It takes a village to raise a child.” Old African proverb.

Historically, humans thrived in extended kinship networks, where child-rearing was communal. Multiple generations cohabited, providing emotional, financial, and practical support. Grandparents, aunts, uncles, and siblings all contributed to raising children. Over time, however, families have become smaller, and the decline of extended family living has introduced significant challenges, particularly for nuclear families and single parents.

THE HISTORICAL RISE OF THE NUCLEAR FAMILY

The nuclear family model—comprising two parents and their children without extended family members—emerged prominently during the Industrial Revolution in the 18th and 19th centuries. Before this period, families typically lived in multi-generational households. Industrialisation prompted mass migrations to urban areas for factory employment, disrupting extended family networks and giving rise to smaller, self-contained family units.

Legislative changes, such as the Factory Acts of the 19th century, restricted child labour and limited working hours for women, reinforcing the notion of the male breadwinner and the stay-at-home mother. This idea became prevalent during the Victorian era, particularly among the middle class, although many working-class women continued to engage in employment out of necessity.

The mid-20th century witnessed the peak of the nuclear family, especially in the post-war period when economic prosperity and suburban expansion promoted the model of a working father and a full-time mother at home. However, this arrangement was relatively short-lived, as economic realities eventually necessitated dual incomes, prompting both parents to participate in the workforce.

WORKING MOTHERS HAVE ALWAYS EXISTED

Contrary to the perception that maternal employment is a modern development, women have historically engaged in work alongside child-rearing responsibilities. In agricultural societies, women laboured in fields while caring for children. Many working-class women were employed in factories, domestic service, and cottage industries during the Industrial Revolution. The World Wars further accelerated this trend, with women entering the workforce en masse, and many did not return to full-time homemaking afterwards.

The primary challenge is not maternal employment per se but the reduced number of caregivers in modern nuclear families. In extended families, multiple adults share child-rearing duties, mitigating the impact of one individual's absence. In contrast, nuclear families often lack this support, leading to financial instability if one parent leaves the workforce or childcare challenges if both parents are employed.

THE STRUGGLES OF NUCLEAR FAMILIES

Today, many nuclear families find it financially unfeasible for one parent to remain at home, yet childcare costs are substantial. Without affordable childcare or extended family support, parents face difficult choices:

• If one parent ceases working, the family may experience financial hardship.

• If both parents maintain full-time employment, they may struggle to secure affordable, high-quality childcare.

This financial strain, coupled with the emotional stress of raising children without extended family support, places immense pressure on parents. Some studies suggest that high divorce rates may be associated with these pressures. Divorce often increases following the birth of children, indicating that the stress of child-rearing in isolated nuclear family setups may contribute to marital breakdowns. For instance, research suggests that among couples who had a live birth, more than 40% separated within 10 years.

SINGLE PARENTS: THE CHALLENGE DOUBLES

Transitioning from extended families to nuclear families has already placed immense pressure on parents. When this structure is reduced even further—leaving a single parent without a partner, extended family, or sufficient income—the challenges become exponentially greater. The journey from extended to nuclear to single-parent households illustrates a clear trend: as the number of caregivers in a family decreases, the burden on the remaining parent increases, affecting child outcomes.

Research consistently shows that children of single parents—whether raised by their mother or father—face similar challenges when lacking adequate support systems such as education, financial stability, and social networks (McLanahan & Sandefur, 1994). The issue is not the absence of a father or mother per se, but the lack of multiple caregivers who can share responsibilities. Historically, families functioned within wider kinship networks, where multiple adults could support a child’s physical, emotional, and cognitive development. As family structures have shrunk, these responsibilities have fallen onto fewer individuals, and when that number reaches just one, the demands can become overwhelming.

WHY SINGLE PARENTHOOD IS SO DEMANDING

Raising children alone—especially without financial stability or external support—is challenging and near-impossible. It is not about moral failings or parental incompetence—it is about the practical impossibility of managing everything alone.

Children need:

• Attention – Emotional engagement, supervision, and quality time.

• Good food – Nutritious meals that require time, money, and planning.

• Supervision & discipline – Consistent guidance and structure.

• Help with education – Parental involvement in learning and schoolwork.

• To feel wanted – Stability, emotional connection, and a sense of belonging.

Studies have found that parental stress and economic hardship are strongly linked to reduced emotional warmth and lower cognitive stimulation in children" (Conger et al., 2002).

A single parent working full-time (or even part-time) faces impossible choices. If they prioritise work, childcare becomes inadequate. Financial instability increases if they reduce working hours to care for their child. In two-parent or extended family setups, these responsibilities are distributed—but when one person is left to do it all, something inevitably suffers:

THE SAFETY NET OF EXTENDED FAMILIES

Research shows that children in extended family households do better than those in isolated nuclear or single-parent households (Waldfogel, Craigie, & Brooks-Gunn, 2010). South Asian and Chinese families in the UK and USA, for instance, consistently demonstrate strong academic and professional outcomes (Platt, 2005). One of the key explanations for this is the presence of extended family members, who provide:

• Financial stability – Reducing the strain on one individual.

• Childcare support – Allowing parents to work without neglecting childcare.

• Educational reinforcement – Multiple adults reinforcing academic expectations.

This model mimics the traditional kinship networks of human societies, where children are raised by multiple caregivers, not just one or two. t is essential to recognise that while extended family structures are associated with better educational and professional outcomes in some ethnic groups, correlation does not imply causation. Factors such as cultural attitudes toward education, parental expectations, and socioeconomic status may play a more significant role than family structure alone.

THE SHRINKING FAMILY AND SOCIAL INEQUALITY

The decline of extended family networks means that many parents—particularly single parents—are left without any support. The fewer the caregivers, the harder it is to balance work, childcare, and financial security. Wealthier single parents can buy social support—hiring nannies, tutors, and private childcare—but the situation becomes unmanageable for those without financial means.

Economic and social policies that promote affordable childcare, parental leave, and community support systems are vital to counteract these pressures. Without such support, the trend of shrinking family structures will continue to leave struggling parents overburdened and children at risk of neglect—not due to lack of love but due to the impossibility of managing everything alone.

The core message remains: it takes a village to raise a child. The fewer people in the family, the harder it becomes—unless financial resources can compensate.

PERCENTAGE OF SINGLE-MOTHER FAMILIES:

More single-mother households exist than single-father households, a trend that may reflect both biological factors (more excellent maternal investment) and societal norms (gender expectations in parenting roles).

• United Kingdom: As of 2023, there are approximately 3.2 million lone-parent families, accounting for about 15% of all families. ons.gov.uk

• United States: In 2011, single-parent households constituted about 10% of all households. en.wikipedia.org

• Australia: In 2011, single-parent households comprised approximately 10% of all households. en.wikipedia.org

CHILDREN GROWING UP WITHOUT FATHER CONTACT AND CHILD SUPPORT:

• United Kingdom: A report indicates that 41% of single parents do not receive any child maintenance payments.

  theguardian.com

• United States: Many non-custodial parents do not contribute to the financial support of their children or do so only sporadically. legalmomentum.org

• Australia: Single parents are owed approximately AU$3.7 billion in unpaid child support. theguardian.com

SINGLE FATHERS

• In the United Kingdom, as of 2022, there are approximately 457,000 single-father families, making up 16% of all lone-parent families (ONS, 2022).

• In the United States, as of 2023, there are about 7.21 million single-father families. With 123 million families, single-father families account for approximately 5.86% of all families (Statista, 2023).

  NUMBER OF WOMEN ELECTING TO USE SPERM DONORS:

• United Kingdom: In 2022, approximately 4,800 single women underwent fertility treatments using sperm donors, a significant increase from 1,400 in 2012. thetimes.co.uk

• United States: Recent estimates suggest that nearly half a million U.S. women have used donor insemination, with a notable increase between 2015 and 2017. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

• Australia: Specific national data on the number of women using sperm donors is limited. However, there is a growing trend of women seeking sperm donations outside traditional clinical settings, often through online platforms. theguardian.com

Single parents face many challenges that span financial, social, and psychological domains. These hardships are often exacerbated by societal stigmas and systemic barriers, making their parenting journey difficult. Because most single parents are Mothers, the following discussion centres around females.

FINANCIAL HARDSHIPS

Single mothers often bear the dual responsibility of being the sole provider and primary caregiver, leading to significant economic strain. In the UK, 42% of children in single-parent households live in poverty, compared to 25% in two-parent households (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2023). Single mothers are also more likely to be in low-paid or part-time work, with 39% earning below the living wage (ONS, 2022).

SOCIAL STIGMA AND MENTAL HEALTH

Single mothers frequently face negative societal perceptions, with some viewing them as contributing to social decline. A 2021 Pew Research survey found that 47% of people believe single motherhood is bad for society, reinforcing outdated gender norms. This stigma contributes to higher rates of mental distress, with 32% of single mothers experiencing moderate to severe psychological distress, compared to 19% of married mothers (Brookings Institute, 2022). Balancing nurturing and discipline without a co-parent can also create confusion for children and stress for the mother.

BALANCING WORK AND CHILDCARE

Single mothers often struggle with inflexible work schedules and limited childcare support. In the UK, 70% of single mothers are in employment, yet they are more likely to work part-time due to childcare responsibilities (ONS, 2023). High childcare costs—with the average full-time nursery place costing over £14,000 per year—make it difficult for single mothers to advance in their careers, often leading to economic instability (Coram Family and Childcare, 2023).

HOUSING CHALLENGES

Single mothers are at higher risk of housing insecurity, with 32% living in overcrowded or substandard housing (Shelter, 2023). A quarter of all homeless households in the UK are headed by single mothers, often due to rising rents, benefit cuts, and lack of social housing (Crisis, 2023).

LOW MATING OPPORTUNITIES AND INTRODUCING STEP-PARENTS

Single mothers face challenges forming new romantic relationships, as societal attitudes often perceive them as less desirable partners. Studies show that single mothers have lower remarriage rates than single fathers, with only 55% of single mothers remarrying compared to 70% of single fathers (ONS, 2022). Additionally, introducing a step-parent can be emotionally complex, as children may resent or struggle to adjust to a new parental figure.

STIGMA

• MEN’S RIGHTS ACTIVISM (MRA) AND RED PILL IDEOLOGY – Promoted by figures like Andrew Tate, this movement reinforces traditional gender roles, often portraying single mothers as financially and romantically undesirable (BBC, 2023).

• GROUPS like Fathers for Justice campaign for fathers' rights, often arguing that single mothers unfairly restrict paternal access, sometimes portraying them as gatekeepers in custody disputes (F4J, 2022).

• RELIGIOUS BACKLASH – In conservative religious communities, single mothers may be stigmatised and viewed as going against traditional family structures, leading to social exclusion and reduced support (British Social Attitudes Survey, 2023).

CHILD SUPPORT AND ABSENT FATHERS

Many single mothers face financial instability due to unpaid child maintenance. In the UK, over 50% of single parents do not receive the full child support they are owed, and 41% receive nothing at all (Child Maintenance Service, 2023). Fathers who remarry or have new families are also more likely to lose contact with their previous children, with 40% of absent fathers having little to no contact within a year of separation (Gingerbread, 2023).

SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS, NOT PARENTAL GENDER, DRIVE OUTCOMES
Research consistently shows that poverty, inadequate housing, and exposure to crime are the key risk factors for poor outcomes in children,

LIMITATIONS OF FULL-TIME WORK AND CHILDCARE COSTS
For single parents in low-income jobs, the ability to work full-time and afford childcare is almost impossible without external support. The high cost of childcare relative to wages means that many single parents struggle to balance employment with caregiving, leading to greater financial instability and fewer opportunities for social mobility.

POOR OUTCOMES FOR CHILDREN FROM DEPRIVED SINGLE-PARENT FAMILIES

.For example, the association between single-parent households and crime, particularly in low-income communities, reveals some significant insights. Research indicates that family structure and the lack of paternal involvement are predictive of juvenile delinquency. Children with more opportunities to interact with their biological fathers are less likely to commit crimes or have contact with the juvenile justice system. In studies, a higher percentage of teenagers from father-absent homes were found to have higher incarceration rates compared to those from two-parent families. This trend was observed in general and specifically in black communities.

The absence of a father in a child’s life may increase the odds of the child associating with delinquent peers and involvement in criminal activities. Boys from father-absent homes often lack male role models, which can affect their development and behaviour, including a higher likelihood of gang involvement. Furthermore, fatherless homes have been linked to various adverse outcomes, such as higher rates of childhood obesity, substance use, poor school performance, and mental health issues. In the UK (the US has similar stats), family structures vary significantly by ethnicity. Black Caribbean families have the highest proportion of lone parents at 57%, followed by Black African families at 44%. And then White British families at 22%. In contrast, Asian households have the lowest proportion of single-parent families, at only 5.7%. This highlights the diversity in family structures across different ethnic groups.centreforsocialjustice.org.uk pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

THE EFFECTS OF FATHER ABANDONMENT

When a father abandons his child, the psychological impact extends far beyond financial hardship, shaping emotional development, attachment patterns, and long-term well-being. Bowlby’s (1969) attachment theory suggests that early relationships form the foundation for future emotional security, and the absence of a father—mainly when he actively raises children in a new family—can create profound feelings of rejection and unworthiness. Rohner et al. (2005) found that perceived parental rejection is strongly correlated with low self-esteem, emotional instability, and behavioural problems in both childhood and adulthood. The child, faced with the painful reality of being replaced, may struggle with anxious or avoidant attachment styles (Ainsworth, 1989), making it difficult to form trusting relationships later in life. Studies have also linked father absence to higher rates of depression and anxiety (McLanahan et al., 2013), with boys more likely to externalise distress through aggression or risk-taking, while girls may experience heightened vulnerability in romantic relationships, often seeking paternal validation. Witnessing a father’s involvement in a new family can intensify feelings of disposability, reinforcing the belief that they were never "good enough" for paternal love. Rather than placing blame solely on single mothers, greater attention must be given to the psychological effects of paternal abandonment, recognising its role in shaping a child's emotional resilience, identity, and future interpersonal relationships.

SINGLE FATHERS VS SINGLE MOTHERS

Some statistics suggest that children raised by single fathers have better outcomes than those raised by single mothers. However, this claim can be misleading. Only a tiny proportion of fathers—around 4%—actively seek full custody. The overwhelming majority do not, possibly due to social norms, lack of desire, or a belief that they will not win custody.

The minority of fathers who do petition for custody typically have the financial and emotional stability to do so, meaning they represent a highly selective group. These men are more likely to have the resources necessary to provide their children with stable homes, legal representation, and financial security. Furthermore, single fathers are more likely to receive support from female relatives in caring for their children. In contrast, single mothers are often expected to manage alone, as they are perceived as natural caregivers by being female.

Comparing the outcomes of these fathers with the entire population of single mothers is misleading. Single mothers come from a range of demographic backgrounds, including teenage mothers, women in poverty, those with low levels of education, and individuals struggling with substance abuse. Research suggests that parenting outcomes are comparable when single fathers are compared with single mothers from similar socioeconomic backgrounds.

The association between single motherhood and adverse outcomes such as crime or low educational attainment is correlational rather than causal. While studies suggest that children from single-parent households may face higher risks of these challenges, the same outcomes happen with single fathers who did not elect single parenthood (e.g. through bereavement or abandonment) as they often face the same challenges as low-income single mothers, notably when lacking financial or social support. This suggests that parental gender is not the determining factor—economic and social resources are. Thus, the primary issue is not the biological sex of the parent but the difficulty of balancing work, parenting, and the dual roles of disciplinarian and nurturer without adequate support. This distinction is crucial, as single mothers are often unfairly blamed for poorer child outcomes based solely on their gender rather than the broader socio-economic factors that contribute to these disparities.

This is exemplified by research that shows that children raised by lone parents who are educated professionals with robust family support and financial stability often experience outcomes comparable to those from two-parent households. For example, a study published in the Journal of Family Psychology found that children of single mothers by choice—typically older, well-educated, and financially secure women—exhibited similar levels of well-being and academic achievement as their peers from two-parent families.

Conversely, children exposed to family discord, such as dysfunctional relationships, substance abuse, and domestic violence, face increased risks of adverse outcomes. While it's argued that children of single parents are overrepresented in the criminal justice system, it's essential to recognise that children from dysfunctional two-parent households also face elevated risks.

IMPORTANCE OF SUPPORTIVE INTERVENTIONS

• Policies and community programs should focus on:

• Providing financial assistance for low-income single mothers

• Ensuring access to quality education and childcare

• Creating mentorship initiatives to offer positive role models for children

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

"The greatest mark of a father is how he treats his children when no one is looking." - Anonymous.

OPERATIONALISING FATHER

Evaluating the role of fathers in child development is complicated by difficulties in operationalising and defining fatherhood. Unlike motherhood, which tends to have more apparent societal and biological roles, fatherhood varies significantly across contexts, making it difficult to establish consistent research parameters. The lack of a universal definition creates fundamental issues in measuring paternal involvement, leading to inconsistencies in how fatherhood is studied and understood.

One of the primary challenges is that fatherhood does not fit into a single, standardised category. Some fathers are primary caregivers, staying at home to raise their children, while others are highly involved despite working full-time jobs. Others take on a more peripheral role, seeing their children only occasionally due to distance or custody arrangements. Defining what constitutes an "involved father" complicates research efforts. Is involvement measured in terms of time spent with the child, financial contribution, emotional availability, or all of these factors combined?

Furthermore, the "working fathers" category is particularly hard to define, as work commitments vary widely. A father who works 40 hours a week but spends evenings and weekends actively engaging with his child may have a different impact than one who works long shifts or travels frequently for work, limiting his direct interaction. Simply categorising fathers as "working" does not capture these nuances. Similarly, "weekend fathers"—those who see their children only on specific days—may maintain strong emotional bonds, yet their role is often undervalued in studies prioritising daily caregiving.

Geographical proximity further complicates operationalisation. Some fathers live in the same household as their children, while others reside nearby and visit regularly. In contrast, some live far away and maintain relationships through digital communication or infrequent visits. Should researchers treat these fathers as equally involved? If fatherhood is measured solely by physical presence, non-residential fathers may appear disengaged despite actively supporting their children in other ways.

Stepfathers and adoptive fathers add another layer of complexity. Some stepfathers take on a full parental role, while others act more as supplementary figures. Similarly, adoptive fathers may form deep bonds with their children, yet their role may differ depending on whether the adoption occurred in infancy or later in childhood. These variations make it challenging to create a single measure of paternal involvement applicable across all family structures.

The lack of consensus on what defines a father, how involvement is measured, and the extent to which different fathering roles contribute to child development creates inconsistencies in research. Without a clear operational definition, studies may inadvertently overlook key aspects of paternal influence or misrepresent the role of fathers in child development. Addressing these methodological challenges requires more refined research models that capture the diverse realities of modern fatherhood.

WHAT IS A FATHER?

SINGLE FATHERS – Fathers who are the sole caregivers of their children without a co-parenting partner.

WORKING FATHERS – Fathers who are employed while also fulfilling parenting responsibilities.

STEPFATHERS – Men who marry or partner with someone with children from a previous relationship.

ADOPTIVE FATHERS – Fathers who become legal parents to a child not biologically theirs.

FAMILIES WITH TWO FATHERS – Households where two male parents raise children together.

WEEKEND FATHERS – Fathers who see their children primarily on weekends due to custody arrangements.

METHODOLOGICAL CHALLENGES IN FATHERHOOD RESEARCH

Studying fatherhood presents significant methodological difficulties, making it one of the more challenging areas of developmental and social research. Unlike maternal roles, which are often more clearly defined across cultures, fatherhood is highly variable, influenced by shifting social norms, economic conditions, and family structures. This variability complicates how researchers operationalise and measure paternal involvement, leading to inconsistencies in findings and difficulties in establishing causality.

One major limitation is the difficulty of conducting longitudinal research on father-child relationships. Long-term studies, which track paternal involvement over time, are resource-intensive and often suffer from participant attrition. Fathers, particularly those who do not live with their children full-time, may drop out due to changes in their personal lives, work commitments, or disengagement from the study. This leads to incomplete datasets, making it difficult to assess the long-term impact of father involvement on child development.

A further issue is the over-reliance on self-report measures, such as surveys and interviews, which introduce social desirability bias. Fathers may overstate their level of involvement to align with social expectations, while others may underreport their engagement due to differing perceptions of what constitutes meaningful participation. Government surveys, often used in large-scale fatherhood studies, provide broad population-level insights but lack the depth to capture the quality of father-child interactions.

Additionally, much research on fatherhood relies on correlational studies, making it difficult to determine causality. Many studies assume that children raised in single-mother households have poorer outcomes, but this fails to account for the confounding effects of economic hardship and lack of social support rather than the absence of a biological father. Separating the effects of the father's absence from other socio-economic variables remains a major challenge, as financial stability and access to resources often have a stronger impact on a child's well-being than paternal presence alone.

The etic bias in research, particularly in Western societies, further complicates the study of fatherhood. Much of the literature assumes a Western nuclear family model, where fatherhood is shaped by social and economic changes such as increased maternal employment. However, this perspective overlooks cultural variations where fathers may play significantly different roles. Fathers are the primary caregivers in some cultures, whereas in others, their involvement is more indirect. Similarly, same-sex parenting challenges conventional models that assume a father-child relationship must be based on biological ties. Many studies fail to adjust for these variations, leading to findings that are not universally applicable across different social structures.

Another key difficulty is the lack of standardised definitions of paternal involvement. Fathers can be stay-at-home parents, full-time workers with active caregiving roles, or occasional fathers who live near or far away. How does a researcher quantify engagement? Is it measured in hours spent with the child, financial contributions, emotional availability, or all of these factors combined? The lack of a clear framework makes it difficult to compare findings across studies.

Moreover, experimental research in this field is rare, as ethical and practical constraints prevent researchers from manipulating paternal involvement in a controlled setting. Unlike laboratory-based psychology experiments, fatherhood studies often rely on naturally occurring variations, which means they are vulnerable to confounding variables. For example, when studying the effects of paternal warmth on child development, it is difficult to isolate whether positive outcomes stem from father involvement specifically or from broader family dynamics, maternal support, or socio-economic status.

Future studies must incorporate mixed-method approaches, integrating qualitative insights with objective measures such as direct observations or time-use diaries to improve research in this area. Increasing naturalistic observational studies, such as video recordings of father-child interactions, could reduce reliance on self-reports and provide more accurate data. Additionally, developing more nuanced measures of father involvement—ones that account for the diversity of fatherhood experiences—will be essential for producing reliable and meaningful conclusions about the role of fathers in child development.

SOCIALLY SENSITIVE RESEARCH IN FATHERHOOD STUDIES

Research on fatherhood is inherently socially sensitive, as it intersects with deeply held beliefs about family structures, gender roles, and child development. Findings in this area can have significant policy implications, influence public perceptions of parenting, and even reinforce or challenge existing stereotypes. However, the sensitive nature of fatherhood research creates several ethical and methodological challenges that researchers must carefully navigate.

One of the primary concerns is the risk of stigma and misrepresentation. Studies that highlight the negative effects of father absence, for example, can inadvertently stigmatise single mothers and overlook the broader socio-economic factors that contribute to child outcomes. Many studies assume that children in father-absent households experience poorer developmental outcomes. Yet, they often fail to control for variables such as poverty, social support, and maternal stress, which may have a more significant influence than the absence of a male parent. Research that does not address these confounding factors risks reinforcing the moral panic surrounding non-traditional family structures, perpetuating the idea that a nuclear family with a biological father is the only model for successful child development.

Similarly, fatherhood research often carries political and ideological baggage, particularly in debates about custody arrangements, parental leave policies, and the legal rights of fathers post-divorce. Findings that suggest fathers play a crucial role in child development may be used to support arguments for greater paternal custody rights, while research highlighting the difficulties of absent fathers may be weaponised to justify punitive policies, such as restricting benefits for single mothers. Researchers must, therefore, be cautious about how their findings are framed and interpreted, as misrepresentations can have unintended social and political consequences.

Another challenge in socially sensitive fatherhood research is gender bias in both research design and interpretation. Historically, psychological research has focused on maternal influence, with fathers often viewed as secondary or supplementary caregivers. Even within fatherhood studies, there is often an implicit expectation that "good" fathering should mirror mothering behaviours rather than recognising that paternal involvement may take different forms. This can lead to an androcentric bias, where fatherhood is either undervalued in child development research or assessed through a maternal lens.

Additionally, stereotypes surrounding masculinity can affect how fathers participate in research. Social expectations that fathers should be emotionally reserved or financially dominant may lead to demand characteristics in studies, where participants alter their responses to align with perceived societal norms. This is particularly relevant in self-report measures, where fathers may either exaggerate or downplay their involvement in childcare depending on their cultural or personal beliefs about masculinity.

Ethical concerns also arise when studying marginalised father groups, such as fathers with criminal records, unemployed fathers, or those from ethnic minority backgrounds who may already face societal prejudice. Research that focuses on the struggles of these groups without acknowledging structural inequalities can reinforce harmful stereotypes rather than provide a nuanced understanding of their experiences. Similarly, same-sex fathers, stepfathers, and adoptive fathers are often underrepresented in research, leading to findings that predominantly reflect heterosexual biological fatherhood models.

The sensitive nature of fatherhood research also affects participant recruitment and retention. Many fathers, particularly non-residential or with strained relationships with their children, may be hesitant to participate due to fears of judgement or legal repercussions. Longitudinal studies on father involvement often struggle with high dropout rates, as fathers may disengage due to personal circumstances or concerns about how their participation could be perceived. This selective participation can create sample bias, where only highly engaged fathers are studied, leading to an incomplete picture of paternal roles.

To address these challenges, researchers must adopt ethically responsible methods that minimise harm and reduce bias. This includes using inclusive research designs that account for diverse family structures, ensuring that findings are not misrepresented in ways that reinforce stereotypes, and being transparent about the limitations of correlational research when discussing causality. Additionally, engaging in community-based research—where fathers from different backgrounds actively shape research questions and interpret findings—can help mitigate misrepresentation risks and increase studies' relevance to real-world fathering experiences.

Ultimately, while fatherhood research is essential for understanding the role of fathers in child development, its social sensitivity demands careful handling. Without thoughtful consideration of ethical, cultural, and methodological challenges, research in this area risks reinforcing existing inequalities rather than contributing to a more accurate and inclusive understanding of paternal involvement.

ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF RESEARCH INTO THE FATHER’S ROLE IN ATTACHMENT

Research into the father's role in attachment has significant economic implications, particularly regarding workforce participation, government policy, and the financial strain on state resources. As attachment studies increasingly emphasise the importance of paternal involvement, societal expectations around fatherhood are shifting. However, these changes have both positive and negative economic consequences.

One key implication is the impact on employment patterns. Research suggesting that fathers play a crucial emotional role in child development has contributed to policy changes, such as shared parental leave. This allows fathers to take time off work to bond with their children, but it also places strain on government-funded parental leave schemes and employers, who must accommodate extended absences. While this policy shift promotes greater gender equality in the workplace, enabling more mothers to return to work and potentially reducing the gender pay gap, it also means that some fathers contribute less to the economy during the early years of parenting. However, increasing maternal workforce participation can boost economic productivity, mainly if childcare provision is well-supported.

Another major economic issue is the financial burden on the state when fathers/mothers fail to contribute financially to their children’s upbringing. When one parent does not pay child maintenance, single parents—regardless of sex—often rely more on state benefits, increasing the strain on welfare systems. Children raised in financially unstable households are more likely to experience poor nutrition, inadequate healthcare, and lower educational opportunities, which can have long-term economic consequences. Research consistently links childhood poverty to higher rates of mental health issues, lower academic achievement, and an increased likelihood of involvement in crime, all of which impose further costs on healthcare services, the criminal justice system, and social support programmes. Thus, the economic effects of one parent’s absence (most often the father's) extend beyond immediate welfare costs, influencing long-term social mobility and economic productivity.

At the same time, the need for alternative childcare arrangements when both parents work has created economic opportunities, particularly in the nursery and early childhood education sectors. Expanding nurseries and childcare services provides jobs, particularly for women, and contributes to economic growth. However, childcare costs can be prohibitively high, forcing some single parents (or even couples) to leave the workforce, which reduces tax contributions and increases reliance on state benefits.

Bowlby’s traditional view—that fathers should provide an economic rather than an emotional function—has influenced historical workplace structures, reinforcing gendered divisions in income and caregiving responsibilities. However, modern research challenging this perspective suggests that greater paternal involvement benefits children’s social and emotional development, potentially reducing long-term reliance on mental health services and welfare programmes. Therefore, encouraging policies supporting parents in balancing work and childcare could have wider economic benefits, improving productivity, reducing crime, and lowering public spending on social issues.

In summary, research into the father’s role in attachment has far-reaching economic consequences, from influencing workforce participation and government policy to shaping long-term social and economic stability. While increased paternal involvement may reduce short-term economic output from individual fathers, it can foster greater workforce equality, improve child outcomes, and reduce long-term financial burdens on state resources. However, where financial instability and lack of parental support exist, the economic consequences can be severe, contributing to generational cycles of poverty and increased reliance on public services. Effective policies must, therefore, balance support for working parents, childcare provision, and financial responsibility, regardless of the biological sex of the primary caregiver.

MOTHERS OR FATHERS?

All that I am, or hope to be, I owe to my mother" Abraham Lincoln,

• A study published in Social Sciences found that infants preferred their mothers for comfort and attachment behaviours, even when fathers were highly involved.

• Despite this preference, attachment security was not affected, meaning infants can form strong bonds with both parents.

• A survey by The Independent found that 40% preferred their mother, while 14% preferred their father.

• 35% switched their preference to their father around 13, but overall, 41% of adults still favoured their mother in the long run.

• A Forbes article revealed that Americans spend $168 on Mother’s Day but only $120 on Father’s Day, a 40% difference.

• Research shows that adult children are more likely to care for their mothers in old age than their fathers.

• Suitor & Pillemer (2006) found that mothers receive more financial and emotional support from their children than fathers.

COMPLETE REFERENCE LIST

THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS

• Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York: Basic Books.

• Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man (pp. 136–179). Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing.

• Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1989). Attachments beyond infancy. American Psychologist, 44(4), 709–716.

• Paquette, D. (2004). Theorizing the father-child relationship: Mechanisms and developmental outcomes. Human Development, 47(4), 193-219.

• Pleck, J. H. (2010). Paternal involvement: Levels, sources, and consequences. Handbook of Father Involvement: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 2(1), 58-81.

FATHER-INFANT ATTACHMENT & SENSITIVITY

• Field, T. (1978). Interaction patterns of primary versus secondary caregiver fathers. Developmental Psychology, 14(3), 313-323.

• Lucassen, N., Tharner, A., Van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (2011). The association between paternal sensitivity and attachment security: A meta-analysis. Journal of Family Psychology, 25(5), 767-776.

• Lamb, M. E. (1997). The role of the father in child development. John Wiley & Sons.

• Lamb, M. E. (2010). How do fathers influence children's development? Social Policy Report, 24(1), 1-26.

• Brown, G. L., Mangelsdorf, S. C., Neff, C., & Schoppe-Sullivan, S. J. (2012). Father involvement and co-parenting in families with infants. Family Relations, 61(3), 404-417.

• Grossmann, K., Grossmann, K. E., & Kindler, H. (2002). A wider view of attachment and exploration: The influence of fathers and mothers on infants’ development. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 26(5), 423-439.

PATERNAL CAREGIVING AND CULTURAL VARIABILITY

• Van Holland De Graaf, J., Hoogenboom, M., De Roos, S., & Bucx, F. (2018). Socio-demographic correlates of fathers' and mothers’ parenting behaviors. Journal of Family Psychology, 32(3), 403-414.

• Belsky, J., & Rovine, M. (1988). Nonmaternal care in the first year of life and the security of infant-parent attachment. Child Development, 59(1), 157-167.

• Braungart-Rieker, J., Garwood, M. M., & Stifter, C. A. (2014). Infant temperament and maternal sensitivity. Infant Behavior and Development, 37(4), 637-646.

• Belsky, J., Hsieh, K.-H., & Crnic, K. (1998). Infant temperament and parental involvement. Developmental Psychology, 34(1), 40-51.

FATHER’S ROLE IN DISCIPLINE, SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT, AND RISK-TAKING

• Geiger, T. C. (1996). Father-child play and the promotion of exploration and independence. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 37(5), 579-589.

• Varissimo, A. (2015). Fathers and child social development: The role of play and risk-taking. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 32(6), 789-806.

• Fäthr, L., et al. (2021). The impact of father-child play on emotional and social competence: A systematic review. Developmental Psychology, 57(3), 510-526.

• Gottfried, A. W., & Gottfried, A. E. (1988). Maternal and paternal involvement in children's cognitive development. Journal of School Psychology, 26(1), 63-75.

• Yogman, M. W. (1994). Play and social development in fathers and infants. Pediatrics, 93(4), 673-677.

HORMONAL AND BIOLOGICAL ADAPTATIONS IN FATHERHOOD

• Gettler, L. T., McDade, T. W., Feranil, A. B., & Kuzawa, C. W. (2011). Longitudinal evidence that fatherhood decreases testosterone in human males. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(39), 16194-16199.

• Hardy, J. B. (1999). Biological limitations on paternal caregiving: Hormonal influences on father-infant bonding. Human Nature, 10(2), 91-113.

• Feldman, R., Gordon, I., Schneiderman, I., Weisman, O., & Zagoory-Sharon, O. (2011). Natural variations in maternal and paternal care are associated with systematic changes in oxytocin following parent–infant contact. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 36(5), 613-621.

MATE SELECTION, OVULATION, AND FACIAL ATTRACTIVENESS

• Bobst, C., & Lobmaier, J. S. (2012). Men’s preference for the ovulating female is triggered by subtle face shape differences. Hormones and Behavior, 62(4), 531-535.

• Puts, D. A., Welling, L. L., Burriss, R. P., & Dawood, K. (2013). Men’s attractiveness ratings of women’s faces track their mate preferences. Hormones and Behavior, 64(4), 759-765.

• Jones, B. C., et al. (2018). No compelling evidence that men can detect women’s ovulatory status by facial cues. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 89, 59-68.

SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS OF FATHERLESSNESS & CUSTODY ISSUES

• Amato, P. R., Meyers, C. E., & Emery, R. E. (2009). Changes in nonresident father-child contact from 1976 to 2002. Family Relations, 58(1), 41-53.

• McLanahan, S., Tach, L., & Schneider, D. (2013). The causal effects of father absence. Annual Review of Sociology, 39, 399-427.

• Centre for Research on Families and Relationships (2019). Child custody outcomes following allegations of domestic abuse. CRFR Report. Edinburgh.

• Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2023). Poverty and single-parent families in the UK. JRF Report. London.

• UK Time Use Survey (2015). Changes in parental childcare involvement in the UK. Office for National Statistics.

• Pew Research Center (2016). Fathers’ role in child-rearing: A cross-cultural analysis.

• Statista (2023). Number of single-father households in the U.S.

• Office for National Statistics (ONS) (2022). Lone-parent families in the UK.

• Gingerbread (2023). Child maintenance payments and financial strain on single parents.

ASSESSMENT

1. Explain what is meant by the term ‘multiple attachments’ (2 marks)

2. Explain the economic implications of research into the father's role in attachment (Total 4 marks).

   Marks for this question AO1 = 2

   MARK SCHEME: 2 marks for a clear and coherent explanation of an implication of the research findings into the father's role. 1 mark for a muddled/limited explanation. Possible content: • increasingly, fathers remain at home and therefore contribute less to the economy; consequently, more mothers may return to work and contribute more to the economy • changing laws on paternity leave/shared parental leave – government-funded so affects the economy; impact upon employers • gender pay gap may be reduced if parental roles are regarded as more equal • early attachment research, e.g. Bowlby suggests fathers should provide an economic rather than an emotional function.

   EXAMINER’S COMMENTS: This question comes as a surprise to a number of students, although a few moments’ thought would have led them to some relevant material, such as research showing the importance of the paternal role and hence to an increase in the availability of paternal leave. This, in turn, can free up mothers to return to work. Many answers referred to the implications of these changes − the cost of paternity leave versus the economic gain of mothers returning to work. A few students discussed how having the father at home might reduce later adolescent problems and criminality and consequently reduce economic costs to society. Where such speculations were psychologically informed, credit was given. Some less successful answers focused on older research that devalued the father’s role, implying that paternal leave was wasted and fathers should stay at work.

3. Brian and Mikhail are discussing how they manage their child care. Brian: “I take the children to the park most evenings to run around or play football. Their mum, Julie, makes their evening meal and baths them before putting them to bed.”Mikhail: “It must be nice to have time to go to the park. As a single parent, I am the one who makes the evening meal and does the bedtime routine.”

   Concerning the conversation above, briefly discuss what research has shown about the father's role in attachment (4 marks).

4. Outline the role of the father in the development of attachment (6 marks)

5. Outline findings from research into the role of the father in attachment. (4 marks).

6. Outline and evaluate the role of the father in attachment. (12 marks AS, 16 marks A-level).