Young Fathers: Influences, Barriers, Possibilities

YOUNG FATHERS: INFLUENCES, BARRIERS, POSSIBILITIES

Messages from the Research

Younger marginalized men who become fathers are not only perhaps the most at risk, but are also the most invisible (Ferguson & Hogan, 2004). Engaging with them, however, is not simply of importance to their development: for the sake of their children, and of the mothers of their children, service providers should seek to assess and support them.

Pregnancy / birth prevention

When a pregnancy is unplanned there is a reluctance to engage with the father, particularly if he is young; and his views are not perceived as relevant. They are relevant.

• Pregnant teenagers’ attitudes towards their pregnancy are strongly linked with their perceptions of the father’s desire for the pregnancy (Hellerstedt et al, 2001).

• In deciding whether to abort or proceed to full term, pregnant teenage girls are substantially influenced by the known views of their baby’s father (Evans, 2001).

Is there any value in trying go engage young men in pregnancy planning?

• Young males are less knowledgeable about sex and relationships than young females, but value the information more highly when it is provided to them (Blenkinsop et al, 2004).

• Howard et al (2004), surveying 2000 mostly African American 8th grade boys found the vast majority willing to use protection: this resulted in the local hospital restructuring its teen family planning clinical services to give the same in-hospital clinical and counselling support to young males as to young females.

• However, while California’s Male Involvement Programme (‘Let’s Hear it for the Boys’) was able to improve boys’ knowledge and understanding, translating this into changed behaviour was not so easy. Insights from this work are informing new responsive strategies (Brindis et al, 2005).

Characteristics of young fathers

A review of the literature on young fathers in America and Britain found their circumstances and backgrounds strikingly similar to teenage mothers’ (Bunting & McAuley, 2004a; see also Berrington et al, 2005).

• Entry into young fatherhood is predicted by low SES, poor academic skills, failure to use condoms, early marriage/cohabitation, and having a mother who was younger at first birth. Anti-social behaviour and its correlates (including academic failure, substance use and early initiation of sexual behaviours) are also implicated (Pears et al, 2005; Bunting, 2005).

• Tan & Quinlivan (2006) found, in multivariate analysis and after controlling for family income and education, men’s history of parental separation/divorce, their exposure to family violence in early childhood and their illicit drug use having significant, independent associations with becoming fathers to the babies of teenage mothers.

• Miller-Johnson et al (2004), in a prospective longitudinal study of 335 African American males found childhood aggression (particularly when stable across 3rd to 5th grades) significantly predicting reported pregnancies during adolescence, with adolescent substance use and deviant peer involvement adding incrementally to the prediction. This suggests that precursors for males’ early pregnancy can be identified as early as age 8.

The degree of disadvantage experienced by young fathers is graphically illustrated by the strong correlation between being a young father and being a young offender. Among 15-17 year old offenders 12% have children of their own (Prisons Inspectorate estimate); and among those aged 22 and under, nearly half are (or are about to become) fathers – as well as having, on average, literacy/numeracy levels below age 11. Over half have been in care; many have experienced violence or sexual abuse at home; and few have had models of good fathering (Young Voice, 2005).

The life trajectories of men who become young fathers are, like those of young mothers, significantly more negative than the average (Higginbottam et al, 2006). As with young motherhood, these negative effects are mainly explained by selection: men who become fathers when young tend to be disadvantaged to start with, and to remain so. Early fatherhood itself may have some additional negative impacts, however: elevated risks of experiencing a series of unstable sexual partnerships and of living in public housing are found among men who have experienced early fatherhood when compared with controls (Sigle-Rushton, 2005).

Young fathers who are not co-resident with their babies’ mothers tend to be of lower SES than co-resident young fathers, and to suffer more unemployment. They are also characterized by a lower threshold for the experience of negative emotions such as fear, anxiety and anger; experience more symptoms of anxiety and substance abuse; and engage in more crime, violence and abusive behaviour towards women (Jaffee et al, 2001).

Young father involvement: opportunities

Quinton et al (2002) found young fathers much keener to be involved than hitherto believed, as did Bunting & McAuley (2004a). Florsheim & Ngu (2003) observed fatherhood to be a ‘wake up call’ for some hugely disadvantaged young men, who gradually pulled their lives together afterwards. Interestingly, a positive attitude during the pregnancy was no predictor of this, and some of the young men spent time in prison after their babies were born. The ‘wake up call’ often kicked in a little later.

Young Offenders see fatherhood as an important motivator for change. A recent study of 18 to 20-year-old male offenders – 30% of whom were fathers or had a pregnant partner or ex-partner - identified six factors they believed would contribute to successfully resettlement: gaining employment; having stable housing; being in a relationship; having a child; having positive family relations; and managing drug/alcohol use (Farrant, 2006).

A key finding by Quinton et al (2002) was that background disadvantage was a less powerful predictor of ongoing paternal involvement among young fathers than was the quality of the relationship with the child’s mother. Similarly, Erkut et al (2005), studying Puerto Rican adolescent fathers, found their involvement influenced by child characteristics, their own perceptions of their fathering competence, social support - and the quality of relationship with their baby’s mother. Ngu (2005) has unpacked this last finding, discovering that higher relational skills (acceptance, cognitive empathy) in young mothers during pregnancy predicted better parenting outcomes for the young fathers two years later. The young mother’s higher relational capacity was also found to predict development in the young father’s own relational capacity – which, in turn, predicted better paternal functioning.

Young father involvement: obstacles

Young fathers frequently face family rejection, barriers to contact with child and mother, a lack of ways to contribute financially, and an inability to envision future achievements (for review see Guterman & Lee, 2005). Furthermore:

• They tend to believe they are unwelcome and inadequate as parents (Knitzer & Bernard, 1997).

• They generally face lack of preparedness for fatherhood, cognitively and emotionally (for review see Guterman & Lee, 2005) and their knowledge of infant development tends to be deficient and unrealistic (De Lissovoy, 1973).

• Many have difficulty controlling their tempers (Bolton, 1987) and express negative parenting attitudes and behaviours (Miller, 1994).

• Related to this, they may be more likely than older fathers to be violent towards their partners and, possibly, their children (Guterman & Lee, 2005).

• They need to reconcile the contradictory roles of adolescent and father and often to assume the responsibilities of adulthood before they are sufficiently mature (Kahn & Bolton, 1986).

• One US study found 47% of young fathers using alcohol, 40% having problems with the law, and 42% having been in jail (Weinman et al, 2005); other studies have identified higher than average involvement in drug use, although most young fathers are not serious drug users (for review, see Guterman & Lee, 2005).

Young fathers also have very high rates of anxiety and depression (Miller, 1994). These are strongly correlated with younger age of onset of fatherhood, exposure to domestic violence as a child, and no father alive (Quinlivan & Condon, 2005). Common mental health issues that young fathers report are related to relationships, neighbourhood, family, tobacco use, police, and being a parent (Weinman et al, 2005).

Yet the young men’s distress usually goes untreated: their formal contact with psychiatric services is no higher than that of older, less depressed fathers (Quinlivan & Condon, 2005); and they do not seem to recognise their own needs. For example:

• In one study where the young fathers identified feeling states of anger, sadness/depression, nervousness/tension, helplessness and aggression, few requested services to address these issues; rather, their most frequently requested service needs were related to jobs and vocational training (Weinman et al, 2005).

• A majority of young offenders who had very much appreciated a parenting course delivered in prison expressed reluctance about accessing parenting and other formal provision post-release (Meek, in press).

Many of the issues and deficits identified in young fathers are also issues among young mothers. However, while a wide range of services are in place to help these young women in their transition to parenthood, services not only tend to ignore young fathers but are overwhelmingly averse to them. Specifically:

• Quinton et al (2002) found young fathers ‘mostly ignored, marginalized or made uncomfortable by services, despite their desire for information, advice and inclusion.

• Bunting & McAuley (2004b) in a review of US and UK studies found young fathers reporting limited/no contact with midwives, health visitors and social workers.

• Bunting (2005) found health visitors perceiving the needs of both teenage mothers and their partners as high, the young mothers’ parenting capacity as average to good, the young fathers’ parenting capacity as poor, and decreases in couple/paternal contact as being due to negative characteristics in the fathers. All these assumptions were made, despite the fact that the health visitors actually knew very little about the young fahers and were ill-equipped to offer them support, being neither aware of any support they might be receiving, or of services that might be able to help them.

• Pollock et al (2006) found systemic exclusion of (mainly black) young fathers in a London hospital maternity service, though more inclusion by the local teenage pregnancy team.

• Higginbottom et al (2006), reporting the views of ethnic minority young parents in England, found the young fathers, the young mothers and the service providers all agreeing that services were aimed at mothers.

Effects of ignoring young fathers

Quinton et al (2002) found that, by ignoring young fathers, services were ignoring mothers’ wishes: while in 50% of cases health visitors did not even know the fathers’ names, the young mothers themselves often placed a high value on the involvement of their babies’ fathers.

Another effect of ignoring the young fathers is to compromise their children’s wellbeing:

• Among expectant teenage mothers, lack of perceived support by the father of their baby is a key correlate of high scores on the Child Abuse Potential Inventory (Zelenko et al, 2001).

• A decreasing pattern of involvement by the young father is significantly associated with young mothers’ increased parenting stress (Kalil et al, 2005).
• Teenage mothers with positive partner support are less rejecting and punitive towards their children (Unger & Wandersman, 1988).

Professionals who do not asses ,young fathers pre-natally, may miss important indicators of future child abuse:

• Young expectant fathers who report poor relations with their own parents during the prenatal interview have higher child abuse potential scores at follow up (Florsheim & Ngu, 2003).

• Young men with a history of psychopathology revealed pre-natally report higher rates of physically punitive behavior toward their child later (Florsheim & Ngu, 2003).

• A history of psychopathology in both young parents (identified pre-natally) predicts inter-couple violence postpartum – another serious risk factor not only for the young adults, but for their infants (Moore & Floresheim, 2001).

Finding and working with young fathers

Identifying the fathers of the babies of teenage mothers should not prove difficult if community and health services work together. Fitzpatrick et al (1997) surveying pregnant teenagers at an Adolescent Antenatal Booking Clinic in Dublin found that at an average of 16.4 weeks into their pregnancies 87.5% said they were involved in a continuing relationship with the father of their baby. Although a significant proportion of the birth certificates of babies born to teenage mothers do not identify the father (Ferguson & Hogan, 2004), Phipps et al (2005) found that in such cases in the USA, the father’s name was usually in the hospital records.

Can interventions with young fathers bear fruit?

• In Ireland, Ferguson & Hogan (2004) report that a key challenge in working with some young fathers is to move them beyond ‘protest masculinity’ so they can adjust to domestic routines. These researchers believe intensive day or residential family support is the model most likely to lead to successful outcomes.

• One small US study of just six fathers (Parra-Cardona et al, 2006) found the young men’s involvement with their children and their commitment as fathers substantially increased after participation in a therapeutic/ psycho-educational fatherhood programme.

• Saleh et al (2005) found programme participation by 38 young fathers correlated with one third moving from ‘positive emotionality’ to substantial ‘engagement’ with their child. In this last study, ‘accessibility’ (i.e. the amount of time the child was available to the father) showed the smallest shift. This is not surprising, as it is the area least likely to be controlled by the young father himself.

The significance of the wider family cannot be overestimated in devising support for young fathers (Kiselika, 1995).

• Kalil et al (2005) found sustained low father involvement highly correlated with strong support given to the young mother by her own mother, particularly when the two lived together. By contrast, where the young mother experienced positive relationships with both the young father and his family (particularly his mother), this was predictive of higher initiated and sustained father-involvement.

• Anderson (1993) found the paternal grandmother’s acceptance of her son’s paternity and her feelings towards the child’s mother significant in pushing the young father towards accepting his paternal role.

• Krishnakumar & Black (2003) found that a young mother’s satisfaction over time with the young father’s involvement was predicted by a positive relationship between her own mother and the young man.

Another finding from the Kalil study was the substantial stability of very low involvement over time: only one young father increased his involvement over time from a very low level. By contrast, however, another similar study found 18% of the young fathers moving from low involvement at the birth to high involvement 2-3 years later (Coley & Chase-Lansdale, 1999). Such findings point to the early years as a potential ‘decision process’ for young families, in terms of developing paternal roles – and to the importance of intervening early in the parenting cycle.