Does Fatherhood Matter for Men? Author(s): David J.

Eggebeen and Chris Knoester Source: Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 63, No. 2 (May, 2001), pp. 381-393 Published by: National Council on Family Relations Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3654599 . Accessed: 29/08/2013 23:41
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

National Council on Family Relations is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Marriage and Family.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.83.63.20 on Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:41:15 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

DAVID J. EGGEBEENAND CHRIS KNOESTER*

ThePennsylvania State University

for Men? Matter Does Fatherhood

Ignored in the flurry of new researchon fathers is that fatherhood may have consequencesfor men. This article explorespossible effectson the lives and well-beingof menfor a rangeoffatherhood experiences.Data are drawnfrom the National Survey of Families and Households. The first part of this article examineswhethermen's variedassociationswithchildren(no children,coand stepfatherhood) are resident,non-coresident, associated with men's psychological health and behavior, social connections, intergenerational family relations, and work behavior. We found strongevidencethatfathersdiffer from nonfathers in their social connections, family relationships, and workbehavior.Thereis significantvariation in effectsamongthefather typesas well. Thesecond section of this articlefocuses attentiononly on men who are fathers and examineswhether fathering behavior(e.g., the amountof time and nature of the activities thatfathers are reported to be spendingwith their children)is associated with men's well-being. The effects of father involvementon men was found to be most significantfor thosewho were livingwiththeirown children. Comparedwith motherhood,fatherhoodis not event in as a transforming nearly so appreciated
Department of Human Development & Family Studies, PennsylvaniaState University, University Park,PA 16802. *Departmentof Sociology, Population Research Institute, PennsylvaniaState University, University Park, PA 16802. Key Words:divorcedfathers,fatherhood, men's well-being, nonresidentfatherhood.

the lives of adults. In fact, the consequencesof becominga fatherfor menhas beencomparatively neglectedby scholars.This oversightis somewhat surprisingin light of recent social changes surrounding fatherhood(Bozett & Hanson, 1991; 1988; Griswold,1993; Pleck, 1987; Furstenberg, at least in the United Snarey, 1993). Fatherhood, States,has becomethe subjectof intensescholarly and popularattention.This attentionis drivenin large part by social and culturalchanges in the but also by changesin men's image of fatherhood, differbehavioras fathers-they are "fathering" ently than was the case in the past (Furstenberg). Althoughthe reality may not be as advancedas the rhetoric,there is some evidence that fathers are more emotionallyconnectedto theirchildren, in more involved in their lives, more egalitarian and more likely to theirgenderrole expectations, the principalproviderof care for their children (Griswold;Lamb, 1987; Parke, 1995). Not surof in the consequences prisingly,we areinterested fathers and fatheringfor the well-being of children. There is, however,another,almost contradicin the UnitedStates.At tory changein fatherhood is emergthe same time that a "new fatherhood" for ing and that there is a growing appreciation the role of fathersin the lives of children,fewer Recent demomen are experiencingfatherhood. graphicanalysesshow thatnearly6 out of 10 men were living with childrenin the mid-1960s, but thatthis was the experienceof only a minorityof men (45%) by the late 1990s (Eggebeen,2001). To be sure, women'sexperiencewith parenthood has also declined in the last few decades, but has been moreperfromparenthood men'sretreat & Hogan, 1999). vasive (Goldsheider

and Family63 (May 2001): 381-393 Journalof Marriage

381

This content downloaded from 128.83.63.20 on Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:41:15 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

382 These two trendsformthe backdrop of this article. We addressa simplequestion: In whatways do men who are fathersdiffer from men who are not fathers?We begin be asking why we should betweenfathersandnonfathers, expectdifferences differences. Drawidentifyingsome hypothesized ing on datafrom the NationalSurveyof Families and Households(NSFH), we then explore these issues at two levels. First, we examine associations betweena varietyof fatherstatusesandvarious measuresof well-being,social relations,and family ties. Are fathersbetteroff than men who are not fathers?Do fathers who live with their childrendiffer from nonresident fathers?Second, we move beyond this "social address"model to focus explicitlyon the relationship betweenextent of father involvement and outcomes. In other words, are active, highly involved fathersmore likely to be better off than fatherswho are less involved? BACKGROUND It is a canon among developmentallyoriented scholarsthatthe parent-child is a tworelationship 1979;Erikson,1963). way street(Bronfenbrenner, orientation, however,most Despitethis theoretical of the researchthroughthe years has focused on what parentsdo to children(e.g., socialization). This is especiallytrueof the recentburstof scholarly attention given fathers.This is not to say that the effects of fatherhood on men has been ignored completely. Some attention,ironically,has been on the costs of fatherhood. For example,therehas been researchon the consequences of early-timed fatherhoodamong young adult men. In general, off-timedfatherhood is associatedwith pooreradjustment,higherrisks of droppingout of school, and higher risks of criminalbehaviorfor young fathers(Harper, 1996;Heath,McKenry,& Leigh, 1995). The negative aspects of fatherhoodhave also been discussed,albeitsomewhat in indirectly, the transitionto parenthood literature where the arrivalof a baby is associatedwith declines in maritalsatisfaction,stress, and otherassortedills (Belsky & Pensky,1988;Cowan& Cowan,1992; Glenn, 1990). Studies of normativelytimed fatherhoodthat are not exclusively concernedwith the effects of transition to parenthood are rare,however.There is some evidencethatfatherhood increasesmarital stability(Cowan & Cowan, 1992) and that competentfatherhood may be associatedwith marital satisfaction in midlife (Heath & Heath, 1991;

Journal of Marriage and Family Snarey, 1993). For the most part,however,there or empirical has been little systematictheoretical to why fatherhood shouldmatterto men attention (see Hawkins& Dollahite,1997;Marsiglio,1998, and Snarey,for exceptions).In the next section we review the theoreticalreasons and empirical evidence for consideringthe role of fatherhood. We hypothesizethatfatherhood is associatedwith men's behaviorand functioningin four domains: physicaland psychologicalhealth,men's connections to communitiesand social networks,men's connectionsto their families, and men's involvement in work. Psychologicaland PhysicalHealth Work roles are central to men's psychological to some scholars(Erikson, 1980; health,according Levinson, 1978). The idea is that the workplace is the arenawhere men establishtheir identities and where their self-worthis most firmlyrooted. In contrast to work roles, family relationships have typically been seen to be of marginalimportanceto the psychologicalstatesof men. Nevertheless, a few scholars have challenged this has focusedon the view. Althoughmost attention between marriageand men's mental relationship and physicalhealth(Waite,1995), some have arof the parental role (Fargued for the significance rell & Rosenberg,1981;Pleck, 1985). Happiness, subjective well-being, and life satisfaction,it is posited, are more rooted in the family roles of men thantheirworkroles (Levine & Pitt, 1995). There is supportfor these ideas. Some evidence suggeststhatmen who arefathershave less psychological distress (Barnett, Marshall, & et Pleck, 1992;Gove & Mongione,1983). Barnett al. for example, examined the relationshipbetween men's subjectiveexperiencesin their work and family roles and their level of psychological famihealth for 300 marriedmen in dual-earner lies. They foundevidencethatthe qualityof their family roles and the quality of their work roles equally effect mens' level of psychologicaldistress. They concluded that men's emotional involvement with their childrenacted as a buffer stresses. againstwork-related Men who become fathers are also likely to change how they behave.Just as marriage"civiin such lizes" men by reducingtheirinvolvement risky behaviorsas smoking, drinking,drug use, hobbies (Umberson,1987), so faand dangerous therhoodmay provide the motivationto abstain from these activities. Fatherhoodmay signal a

This content downloaded from 128.83.63.20 on Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:41:15 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Fatherhood for Men sense of responsibility to others,or revealto men that they have someone to live for, thus encourEitherof these new peraging positive behaviors. spectivesmay encouragemen to pay attentionto their health and engage in health-promoting behaviors,for example. We anticipate, then, that men who are fathers will indicatethatthey aremoresatisfiedwiththeir lives and reportthemselvesto be in betterhealth. In addition,fathers will be less likely to report andless likely to indicate symptomsof depression drug or alcohol abuse than men who are not fathers. Social Connections Having childrenmay have consequencesbeyond men's psychologicalstates and behavior.Fatherhood may altermen's social relationsin a number of differentways. Havingchildrenmay not merely increasesociabilityas much as changethe natureof one's social life (Seccombe& Ishii-Kuntz, 1994). Being a father may mean less free time spent with friends and associates,but more time in social relationships that directly or indirectly involve the child. For example, childrenmay be a mechanism thatincreasesneighborliness by creating common groundfor adults who live near each otherand have similarlyaged children. Some scholarshave suggestedthatthe opportunityto care for others,especiallychildren,can initiate personal growth by challengingmen to clarifyvalues and set priorities (Parke,1981;Russell, 1982). When men become fathers,they are with opportunities to sort likely to be confronted out what is important to them, how they should live theirlives, and whatthingsthey wish to pass along to the next generation (Snarey,1993). Consistent with this line of reasoning,we shouldexto be associatedwith greater civic pect fatherhood engagement.For example, men who are fathers may be more involved with otheradultsvia their interestand engagementwith institutions and activitiesthatinvolve theirchildrensuch as schools, athleticteams, or community Chilorganizations. dren are the mechanismthat drawsmen who are fathers into such activities as cub scout leader, scout master, coach, leaguebasketball community little league coach, teacher, and so forth.Children may also be behind men's active engagementin school-relatedorganizationssuch as the Parent Teacher Association,local school boards,or other service organizations. Finally,children may affectmen'sparticipation

383 Men may in religiouspracticesandorganizations. of religion when they reevaluatethe importance with the tasksof have childrenand areconfronted teachingchildrenwhatto value.Thereis evidence that assumingthe role of fatherincreasesmen's involvementin religious activities.Churchattendance rates are higher among marriedmen with childrenthanamongmen who are not married or fathers (Chaves, 1991; Ploch & Hastings, 1998; Stolzenberg, Blair-Loy,& Waite, 1995). For these reasons,we expect to see significant in their differencesbetweenfathersandnonfathers social connections.We hypothesize that fathers in service will be more involved than nonfathers whose intent is to betterthe comorganizations munity, school supportgroups,and churches.In contrast,we predictthat fatherswill tend to be whose primary less involvedin organizations purfocused on leisure pursuits, pose is recreational, We also propose that men or self improvement. who are fatherswill be less involvedin informal, such activitiesandsocialrelationships recreational as visitingfriendsor coworkers, going to a bar,or playing on sportsteams. Family Involvement Parenthood may also shift the weightof social retoward family andkin. Thereis plenty lationships of evidence thatparenthood strengthens intergenerationalties of adultchildren(Eggebeen& Hogan, 1990).Regularcontactvia visitingandphone becalls, as well as routineexchangesof support tween adult childrenand aging parents,are most typical when these adultchildrenare parents.Although women tend to be the "kin keepers" of in Americansocirelationships intergenerational ety (Rossi & Rossi, 1991; Spitze & Logan, 1989; Troll,Miller,& Atchley, 1979), thereis some evin providingtanidence that men do participate than women to Men are more likely gible help. provide financialassistanceand are as likely as and a women to providehelp with transportation to their household services of aging parvariety ents (Eggebeen & Hogan). Given that children ties, we mightexpectthat tightenintergenerational to engage fathersare more likely thannonfathers in intergenerational exchanges. WorkInvolvement Thereis also some suggestionin the researchliterature that fatherhood has consequences for men's prioritiesabouttheireconomicroles. Com-

This content downloaded from 128.83.63.20 on Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:41:15 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

384

Journal of Marriage and Family

paredwith men who are not fathers,fathersevidence greater attachmentto the labor force or to theircareersout of a sense greatercommitment of responsibilityto provide for their children (Snarey,1993). Highlyinvolvedfathering may be negativelyrelatedto the intensityof workinvolvement,however(Coltrane,1995; Radin& Russell, 1983). In otherwords,fatherhood may encourage men to seek regular, but responsible employment, moderatetheir desire to "overcommit"to their jobs or careers.Perhapsfatherhood providesmen with an alternative sourceof identityto one's occupation. We hypothesizethatmen who are fatherswill show greater attachment to the labor force. Among men who are employed,however,we anticipate that fatherswill averagefewer hours of work per week thanmen who are not fathers. DefiningFatherhood Until this point, we have assumeda simple distinctionbetween men who are fathersand those who arenot. Giventhe social changesin marriage, divorce, and remarriagethat have complicated families and men's ties to children,this is naive. Today it is common place for fatherhoodto be acrosshouseholds andacrossbloodlines. practiced It is critical,therefore,to distinguishfathersin a varietyof differentcontextsbeyondthe traditional biologicalfatherliving with his own children. these settingsis crucialbecause Distinguishing or barriers to men'spracthey pose opportunities tice of fatherhood. Most obvious,biologicallyfatheringchildrenand then living with them until they become adults presentsmen with considerable opportunities to assumethe identityof father and engagein fathering behaviors. This is certainthe one with the clearly the most typicalpattern, est culturalscriptsto guide behaviorand expectations. It is also the one that has received the most researchattention.Nonetheless,several alternativesettingsare emergingthat cannotbe ignored. High divorceratesand the growingpopularity of nonmarital have contributed to the childbearing growthof childrenliving apartfrom theirfathers. It is well knownthatmen'sinvolvement withnonresident children is comparativelyminimal and declines over time (Furstenberg & Harris,1992; King, 1994;Seltzer,1991). Distance,conflictwith have been shownto be ex-spouse,andremarriage significantbarriersto men's involvementin the lives of their nonresidentchildren (Cooksey &

Craig,1998;King& Heard,1999;Seltzer,Schaeffer, & Charng,1989). For these reasons,we distinguishfatherswho are not living with theirchildren. There is also a fair amountof evidence that representsdistinct challenges that stepparenting make fathering in this type of family unique & Jodl, 1994). Normativeambigu(Hetherington what role stepfathers shouldplay in the about ity lives of step childrenmeansthatthe natureof father-childrelationships typically must be negotito men funcated (Cherlin,1978). Otherbarriers in the role of father that are likely to exist tioning in stepfamilies includethe taskof establishing and maintaining a strong marital relationship,the child's adaptation to his or her biologicalparents' and that of buildingor new maritalrelationship, or at least nondestructive, maintaining supportive, & Clingemsibling relationships(Hetherington & Jodl). peel, 1992; Hetherington Finally, it often is overlookedthat parentsremain parentseven aftertheirchildrenhave made the transitionto adulthood.Of course, the relationship parentshave with their childrendiffers from when their childrenare under considerably of intergenerational theircare,butpatterns support ties do not witheronce suggest that parent-child children are launched. Contact and routine exchangesof supportappearto be modest,but persistent, with parentstending to give more than they receive from childrenwell into old age (Hogan, Eggebeen,& Clogg, 1993). Both aging parents and adult childrenoverwhelminglyindicate arethe personsthey thattheirparents (or children) would turn to in and emergencyor in times of need (Hogan & Eggebeen, 1995). Furthermore, adult childrenreadily supply help when parents experience a crisis (Eggebeen & Davey, 1998). Although rarely the focus of research,it seems to parto presumethatfatherscontinue reasonable ticipatein this role even when theirchildrenhave grown (Snarey, 1993) and that this role persisfor men's lives. tence has consequences fourtypesof In summary, then, we distinguish settings within which men are fathers:(a) men living with their dependent(under 18) children, fromtheirdependent (b) men who are living apart children because they are not in a relationship with the child's mother,(c) men whose children have grown and are independent adults, and (d) men who have become fathers via remarriage How might these differingtypes of (stepfathers). fatherhoodmoderatethe above hypothesizedreand well-being? betweenfatherhood lationships

This content downloaded from 128.83.63.20 on Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:41:15 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Fatherhood for Men One could arguethat fatherhood will have its most profoundeffect on those men who are currently living with children.The idea is that fatherhoodhas its sustainingeffect only when the role is currently occupied.This "roleoccupancy" is consistentwith the literature showexplanation with theirchildrendeing thatmen'sinvolvement clines when they are not living with them,as well as the literature showing that men's involvement with nonresidentchildren declines even further when men remarry. The implication of this explanationis thatthe impactof fatherhood is likely to be diminishedfor nonresident fathers.We should also expect, then, that men whose childrenhave grownand left the home shouldbe similarto men who are not fatherson these indicators. On the otherhand,some scholarshave argued thatthe experienceof fatherhood has a transforming effect on men (Hawkins& Dollahite, 1997; Marsiglio, 1998; Snarey, 1993). John Snarey,in idea of generativparticular, buildingon Erikson's ity, arguedthatmen who were engagedfathersare more likely at midlife to be generativein areas outsidetheirfamily. Thatis, they are more likely to be active participants in their communities, be mentorsto youngermen, and evidence a greater concernfor others(Snarey).This line of reasoning suggeststhatthe largestdifferencesin well-being shouldbe betweenhavingandnot havingchildren and not between the varioustypes of fathers.In we should expect that fathersof adult particular, childrenshould look very similarto fatherscurrently living with children,especially in the domain of social connections. Settingsdo not tell the whole story, however. Developmentalistsare quick to criticize models that focus on structureratherthan process. Fatherhood as an "address" may meanless to men's well-being than the natureand type of fathering activities.The significanceof fatherhood may reside more in the level of engagement in thatrole than in the mere occupancyof that role. Snarey (1993) observed, for example, that the presence of generativity in the lives of men is conditioned by how nurturing they are of theirchildrenwhen to their children's young and their contributions socioemotionaland intellectualor academicdevelopmentwhen older. It follows that men who live with theirchildrenbut who are only marginally involved with them may show few, if any, We will attempt to positive effects of fatherhood. test these ideas by examiningwhetherone aspect of fatherinvolvement,the amountof time fathers spenddoingcertainactivitieswith theirchild,pre-

385 dicts well-beingwithinthreefathering types:men live with theirchildren,stepfathers, who currently and men whose childrenlive elsewhere.
DATA AND METHOD

The datafor this studyaredrawnfrom the 19871988 wave of the NSFH. This survey includes nationalsample interviews with a representative of 13,017 respondentsaged 19 and older. The NSFHusedpersonalinterviewsandsupplemental, to gather detailed self-administered questionnaires on the respondents' information personal,family, and socioeconomiclife historiesand on theirkinForthis article,we drew ship and social networks. a sampleof 5,226 men aged 19 to 65. thatmakeit The NSFH has severaladvantages ideally suited for our researchaims. First, these and the sample data are nationallyrepresentative, is of sufficientsize to ensureadequaterepresentation of relativelyraregroups.Second, this survey containsdata on a numberof outcomesfor men, rangingfrom psychologicallyorientedmeasures to indicatorsof social and family connections. Finally,these datacontainreportsof men's involvement with their children,allowing us to of the merepresence look beyondthe importance of childrenin the lives of men to whetherrole engagementmatters. MeasuringFatherhood five fatherhood We distinguished settingsfor men. About one third (n = 1,718) of men were not fathers, either in a social or biological sense. Among the remainingtwo thirds of adult men, those who were however,we further distinguished currentlysharinga residencewith a minorchild (n = 2,310) fromthose who only had older,nonresidentchildren(n = 1,198) and those who had at least one minor child living elsewhere (n = 393). Among men living with childrenunderthe between those who age of 18, we differentiated had biologicalchildren,adoptedchildren,or both (n= 1,726) fromthose who had at least one stepchild (n = 191). For the secondpartof the analysiswe focused the exonly on men who were fathers,addressing tent to which they were involved with theirchildren. Our measureof involvementfor coresident fatherswas drawnfrom a series of questionson the amountof time they had spentwith theirchildrenin a varietyof activities.Formen whosechildren were all under5 years of age, the questions

This content downloaded from 128.83.63.20 on Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:41:15 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

386 asked how often they spendtime with their childrengoing on an outingawayfromhome,playing Men with togetherat home, and readingtogether. older children(aged 5-18) were questioned about the amountof time they spent with childrenin leisure activitiesaway from home, at home playing or workingon a projecttogether,havingprivate talks,andhelpingwithhomework or reading. The responsescould rangefrom 1 = never to 6 = almost every day for each of these questions. We used the highest score recordedamong the fourquestionsas ourmeasure of involvement with childrenfor coresidentfathers. Two questionswere used to addressinvolvement of men with childrenliving elsewhere.The first questionasked "Duringthe past 12 months, abouthow often did you talk on the telephoneor send your child a letter?".The second question was "Duringthe past 12 months,abouthow often did you see (him or her)?".The rangeof possible responseswas from 1 = not at all to 6 = several timesa week.We used the highestscorerecorded of inamongthese two questionsas our indicator volvementfor nonresident fathers. Ourindicator of fatherinvolvementis, at best, a crudeproxyfor nurturance, emotional closeness, authoritative parenting,or other critical dimensions of the father-child relationship(Amato & Gilbreth,1999). Indeed,there is some indication in the literature thathow muchtime fathersspend with childrenis not as centralto theirwell-being as the extent to which fathersengage in authoritative parentingand encourageemotionalcloseness (Amato,1987;Young,Miller,Norton,& Hill, 1995). DependentVariables Fourdomainsof well-beingwere examined: Psychologicalandphysicalhealth,socialconnections, intergenerational family ties, and work behavior. We drew on four indicatorsof psychologicaland physical health. The first was men's self assessment of their satisfactionwith their life on a 7point scale rangingfrom 1 (very unhappy)to 7 (very happy;M: 5.30, SD: 1.36). A second indicatorwas derivedfrom an abbreviated versionof the Center for EpidemiologicalStudies Depression Scale (CES-D; Radloff, 1977). The scale used in this study was createdfrom responsesto a series of 12 questions about depression-like symptoms.The responses were averagedacross the 12 questions to form a single scale with a range from 0 to 7 (M: 1.14, SD: 1.40). Physical

Journal of Marriage and Family healthis measured by a reporton the partof respondentsto a questionaskingthem to rate their health from 1 (very poor) to 5 (excellent) (M: 4.02, SD: 0.87). A second measureof health is the respondents answersto questionson whether they had a problemwith too much drinkingor with druguse (M: 0.04, SD: 0.19). Five scales were employedto tap men's social connections.The first indicatormeasuredthe extent to which men engage in socializingwith relatives, friends, neighbors, and coworkers.The social participation, focused on second indicator, how often in a week men go to a baror tavernor in grouprecreational activitiessuch as participate bowling, golf, square dancing, and so forth. A thirdindicatoraddressesthe extent to which men in a rangeof organizations otherthan participated Thesegroupscould include service organizations. laborunions,veteran's groups,school fraternities, professional or academic societies, nationality groups,and so forth.We also asked aboutmen's in service groupsor civic organizaparticipation tions such as political groups, school-related groups, churchrelated groups, or service clubs. For each of the abovefour variables, responsesto in each groupor activitycouldrange participation from 0 (never) to 4 (several times a week). Reforming sponses were summedfor each indicator, a scale for socializing that ranged from 0 to 10 (M: 5.42, SD: 3.05), a scale for social participation thatrangedfrom 0 to 8 (M: 2.09, SD: 2.09), in community and a scale for involvement groups thatrangedfrom0 to 10 (M: 2.42, SD: 2.85), and a scale for involvementin service organizations that rangedfrom 0 to 7 (M: 1.29, SD: 1.79). Finally, we tappedthe extent to which men were involvedin religiousactivitiesby drawinga question of how often they attended religiousservices in the past year.Responseswere coded into three categories:0 = never, 1 = 1-11 times,2 = 1224 times,and 3 = 24 or moretimes(M: 1.52, SD: 1.19). of intergenerational Ourthreeindicators family involvementwere drawnfrom a series of questions on contactwith kin, giving of variouskinds of assistanceto available,nonresidential family membersand receptionof variouskinds of assistance from family members.The contact scale was drawnfromthreequestionson how often the by letter or respondentvisited or communicated Resiblings,or adultchildren. phonewithparents, sponses rangedfrom 0 (not at all) to 6 (several valueof the timesa week).We used the maximum summedacrossthe threetypes of communication,

This content downloaded from 128.83.63.20 on Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:41:15 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Fatherhood for Men individuals.This formeda scale with a range of 3 to 18 (M: 10.08, SD: 2.87). Giving assistance was drawnfrom a series of questions asking if one had given help with babysitting,transportation, repairs,work aroundthe house, or advicein the pastmonthto one'sparents, siblings,adultoffspring, or other relatives.These responseswere summedto form a scale with a range from 0 to 20 (M: 1.89, SD: 2.21). Finally,receiving assistance was derivedfrom a parallelset of questions asking about receptionof various kinds of help etc.) in the pastmonth (babysitting, transportation, from the same group of kin. The results were summedto forma scale rangingfrom0 to 20 (M: 1.13, SD: 1.62). Finally, we used two indicatorsof work behavior,whethermen have had a recent bout of unemploymentand how many hours per week they usually work. The first indicatorwas drawn from the job historiesof the men over the past 3 was unyears and was coded 1 if the respondent employedin the past 3 years and 0 if not (conditionalon the respondent havingworkedat least 6 monthsin the past 3 years;M: 0.14, SD: 0.35). The second indicatorwas drawnfrom a question on how manyhoursper week the respondent usually works (conditionedon the respondent being employed).Responsesrange from 0 to 95 hours (M: 33.02, SD: 22.57). AnalyticApproach We estimatedtwo models for each outcome:one model withjust the dummyvariables representing men's fatheringexperienceand a second model that addedfive controlvariables(age, education, race, family income, andmaritalstatus).Ordinary least squareswas used to estimatethese models with the exceptionof the models of drug/alcohol abuse, in which we used logistic regression.For the analysisof fatherinvolvement,we estimated models containingall the above controlsand our measureof fatherinvolvement. Herewe estimated separate models for each subgroupof fathers, however: men living with biological or adopted child youngerthan 19 yearsof age, men with only stepchildrenyounger than 19, and men whose children were younger than 19 but lived elsewhere.
RESULTS

387
1-

-r00?c 00 It NO~0 ~C m ?400 en in \ 00 C rr--4

Ol
-

't

1,0

tr

0
0

.,

o o

Cd ,
01-

4) 0
01 0
cn

00r -

cn

00 r-0
*n

-ooN0

\t

o0

.0

0 r-

n"oc

0 Cl 0 0 0 0 0 01-

N C11*

.,--

X
0 1212

d dd 0 0 z
0

d dd

md
t llI

-d d

o
I I I I IIC

>0

Cn

0 01 0 01 o

r0-

-- 0

r0

M ?c r-q0 Ocm00 CD
*c

r?c C
*

Cd
64
0) o
%

014 o r 01

ry)
01
.,

Sc

Ic c Wddd I\ Ic dddddd
o
*O **, **0

120 l 000)-\ 0 0 ?x-0 Cl)0\ C00 ItC W) r-11000

ddd
** * **

12)1

Ut

01 01
1212

0.
Us

0
0,.

66 666( 66
III(
*d *;

0000O

-~?-

~\
I I-

I I
*dd

666r ~ i6~ \)d~~" n~n m -

C )ef0l

- 0

4-0 ., 00

01

01
01

0 .

* **t

* *C

*~

3C

* * *] -

T1*

30

6666 A01
0
*O

\\

0d 0 0* 0*f a0.

dddd
*o *

a~I
*) * *o *

-d--I
*

01 1212 0d *k

O12

*~

* * * *

II

013 .5013 001 010 00 010 01-O

~*-f
01 11
0\

0iuu0b

0Fo

12)1

0 0

C~r

Table 1 contains models of four dimensionsof with chilwell-being.Men's living arrangements

This content downloaded from 128.83.63.20 on Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:41:15 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

388

Journal of Marriage and Family

0

drenwas associatedwith life satisfaction, depression symptoms,self-ratedhealth, and the likelihood of abusing drugs or alcohol. Men with childrenliving elsewherewere especiallylikely to have lower life satisfactionscores and more depressive symptomsthanwere men living with biological or adopted children. They also were slightly more likely to indicatepoorerhealthand to have abusedalcohol or drugs.Once a number of controlswere entered,however,especiallymarital status,these effects of fatherhood largelydisThe two exceptionswere thatmen with appeared. childrenliving elsewhereremainsomewhatmore thanmen who likely to have depressivesymptoms were currently living with theirchildren,andmen with older childrenwere slightly more satisfied. For the most part,however,fatherhood does not associatedwith psyappearto be independently chologicaland physicalhealth. The story is differentfor social connections (Table 2). Consistentwith our hypotheses,note thatmen who hadchildren living elsewhereor had no childrenwere more likely to be engagedin a variety of socializing activities (column one). These effects were reducedbut did not disappear when the controlswere introduced (columntwo). In contrast,men who have adult childrenwere muchless likely to be engagedin social activities, but this appeared to be largelydue to the fact that they were older.When age was controlled,they were no differentthan fathersof dependentchildren. These patternswere replicatedwhen we considered men'sparticipation in informal visiting with friends,going to a bar,or otherleisure pursuits (columns3 and4). Men with coresident children were significantlyless likely to be engaged in these activities.Once controlswere introduced, note thatmen's participation in a varietyof community groups is only slightly affected by their fatherhoodstatus. Men who are not fathersand men whose children are older are slightly less likely than coresidentfathers to be involved in or groups. communityorganizations When we limited our focus to civic or service orientedorganizations (e.g., service clubs, church etc.), we got groups,school-related organizations, a differentpicture,however (columns7 and 8). Even in the contextof controls,note thatmenwho lived with their biological or adopted children were significantlymore likely to be involved in these types of groups or organizations. Finally, note in the last two columnsthatfatherhood was associatedwith churchattendance. With the exceptionof men who are fathersof olderchildren,

0
t: 0

S
d 0

0
0,.

,R -4
* II I

4C C
* I ) I

)It
**

)--IC

- 0

'S
0 0
b0

0 0 0
0

I V)
tN00

l
tcr-0

A
o =r

W)ON

.,0
o0

\%C 0

0
0

U
0 0
0

?, 0;

0.

0 0

00 0'c allt N

rno
rce

0 0 0r 0 0I 0 0 0 z
0:

0
0

O\NI I0

II I

I cfi

Hn
o a,* 0f 0=

z 0
U
0

0 0

C
W) 00

C*
It -

0Co

**

as

~.0
0ib

0
.,.4

C~i
0g 09

0 o r

q"ItIt

\%c

'

0fY

0~
k if -4

'
0

UD

ci

*D*

.,.

Al

This content downloaded from 128.83.63.20 on Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:41:15 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Fatherhood for Men

ANDFATHERHOOD TABLE 3. FAMILY INVOLVEMENT Variables Father Typea Living with stepchild Childrenelsewhere Children aged 19 or older No children Age Years of education Raceb Black Hispanic Total family income Maritalstatusc Divorced Widowed Never married Intercept AdjustedR2 Contact -0.287 0.212 0.648**** -0.439**** -0.512** 0.248 2.380**** -0.833**** -0.070**** -0.085**** 0.0003 -0.438**** 0.017 -0.038 -0.114 0.368*** 13.694**** 0.104 Giving Assistance -0.507*** -0.213* -0.626**** -0.488**** -0.444** 0.052 0.242** -0.426**** -0.027**** 0.054**** -0.418**** -0.362*** 0.013 -0.308*** -0.424** -0.243** 2.625**** 0.057 Receiving Assistance -0.656**** -0.272*** -0.760**** -0.436****

389

-0.685**** -0.159 -0.193** -0.495*** -0.021*** 0.021** -0.111 -0.255*** -0.001 -0.169** 0.243* -0.051 2.091**** 0.058

10.067*** 0.019

2.226**** 0.013

1.493**** 0.032

aReferencecategory: Living with biological or adoptedchildren less than 19 years of age. non-Hispanic. cReferencecategory: Currentlymarried. **.05 ***.01 ****.001. Significance levels: *.10

bReferencecategory:White,

nonresidentfathers, stepfathers,and men who were not fathers attendchurch significantlyless thanmen who were coresidentfathers. Men's involvementwith childrenwas also significantlyrelated to intergenerational family involvement (Table 3). Stepfathersand men who were not fatherswere much less likely thanmen who were living with their biological or adopted children to have regular contactor exchangeswith aging parents,adultchildren,or siblings.In contrast,olderfatherswere muchmorelikely to have regularcontactand to give assistance.Consistent with the literature on life coursepatterns of family supportand exchange, however, they are much less likely thancoresidentfathersto be receiving assistance.Whenit comes to familyties, note that men whose childrenlived elsewherewere no differentthan men who were living with their own children. Overall, then, these models indicate for the ideathatfatherhood strongsupport tightens intergenerational familyties. The one exceptionis who like men with no children,were stepfathers, less involved with kin. One possible significantly for this is that stepfathers explanation may be investing more in their new family at the expense of theirold family. is Finally, observe in Table4 that fatherhood associatedwith workbehavior. As predicted, men with coresident children(eitherbiological/adopted or step) were significantlyless likely to have a bout of unemployment in the previous 3 years. Contradictingour expectations, however, we

childrenwas not foundthatpresenceof coresident associatedwith fewer hoursworkedper week in thatmen who were the pastyear.In fact,it appears fathersof dependentchildren,regardlessof their averaged more hours per living arrangements, week thanfathersof olderchildrenandmen who were not fathers.The good providerrole appears to be most salientfor coresidentfathers. The results presentedin these four tables indicates that, indeed, men who are fathersdiffer in a varietyof dofrom nonfathers substantially we see evidence indicating mains. Furthermore, is also asthat the particular type of fatherhood sociated with differentoutcomes.We found little evidencefor effects on men'spsychologicalstates and physicalhealth.In contrast,type of fatheris stronglyassociatedwith men'ssocial lives, family connections,and work involvement. Does the level of father'sengagementin fatheringactivitiesmatter?Tables5 and 6 provide some insightinto this question.Amongmen who were living with theirbiological or adoptedchildren, note that their level of involvementwith difference.The their childrenmade a substantial more these men were engaged in activitieswith their children,the more satisfiedthey were with theirlives, the moresocializingthey did, the more themore involvedthey werein theircommunities, connectedthey were to theirfamilies,andthe less involved they were with their work. These patternsstand in contrastto fathersof Involvement childrenand stepfathers. nonresident

This content downloaded from 128.83.63.20 on Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:41:15 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

390

Journal of Marriage and Family

TABLE 4. WORK BEHAVIOR AND FATHERHOOD

Variables Father typea Living with stepchild Childrenelsewhere Childrenaged 19 or older No children Age Years of education Raceb Black Hispanic Total family income Maritalstatusc Divorced Widowed Never married Intercept Adjusted R2 -2 Log Likelihood

Unemployed in Past 3 Years 0.211** 0.366** 0.423**** 0.439**** 0.231 0.370** 0.429*** 0.327** -0.004 0.016 0.209* 0.320** -0.301**** -0.320** -0.414* -0.337** -1.280**** 3425.801

Usual Hours per Week -1.886 - 2.060* -22.309*** -6.552**** -1.494 0.680 -4.037**** -4.857**** -0.634**** 0.392**** -3.749**** -2.373** 0.848**** 1.507 -2.380 -3.584**** 55.944**** 0.289 bReferencecategory:White,

-2.086**** 4075.986

40.449*** 0.143

aReferencecategory: Living with biological or adoptedchildrenless than 19 years of age. non-Hispanic. cReferencecategory: Currentlymarried. **.05 ***.01 *****.001. Significance levels: *.10

with theirstepchildwas positivelyassociated with in community socializingandinvolvement groups but with no other indicators.Men who were involved with theirnonresident child hadhigherlife satisfactionscores and were more likely to be involved in communitygroups and attendchurch but otherwisewere little differentfrom men who were uninvolvedwith theirchildren.
DIscusSION

We beganthis articleby askinga simplequestion: Does fatherhood for men?The analysesdematter scribedabove indicatethat it does. Men who are fathers may differ little from other men on the psychologicalor healthdimensionswe used, but there are clear and compelling differences between fathersand nonfathersin their social and familial connectionsand in their work lives. We could not accountfor these differencesby marital status,socioeconomicfactors,race, or age.

We also foundstrongevidencethatthe context is important. Men who were fatherof fatherhood ing childrenwho live elsewherewere little differin theirsocial connections ent from nonfathers or were similar to fathers who work behavior. They lived with theirbiological or adoptedchildrenin theirintergenerational family ties, however.Stepfromfatherslivingwith fathersalso weredifferent Altheirown childrenon a numberof indicators. were similarto biological fathough stepfathers thers in socializing, participationin informal groups or activities, involvementin community groups,and work behavior,they were less likely to be involved in service type organizations, church attendance,and intergenerational family ties. Finally, fathers of adult children differed from fathersof coresidentbiological or adopted childrenin their social connectionswith one exception:They were similarin their churchattendance. They were more likely than these coresident fathers to be in contact with family and

TABLE 5. PSYCHOLOGICAL AND PHYSICAL HEALTH, SOCIAL CONNECTIONS, AND FATHER INVOLVEMENT

FatherType:

Life Satisfaction

Depression -0.049 -0.030 -0.010

Subjective Health 0.005 0.050 -0.006

Drug/ Alcohol Use 0.003 -0.904** -0.073

Service Social Social- Partici- Community Organi- Church zations Attendance izing pation Groups 0.167** 0.023 0.224**** 0.087** 0.426** 0.168 0.475*** 0.064 0.119 0.292*** 0.065 0.042 0.007 0.066 0.125***

Biological or adopted 0.110**** 0.148 Step only 0.104** Living elsewhere

Note. All models contain the following controls: age, education,race, total family income, and marital status. **.05 ****.001. ***.01 Significance levels: *.10

This content downloaded from 128.83.63.20 on Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:41:15 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Fatherhood for Men

TABLE

391
INTERGENERATIONAL TIES, WORK BEHAVIOR, AND FATHER INVOLVEMENT

6.

Fathertype: Biological or adopted Step only Living elsewhere

Contact -0.068 0.294 0.142

Giving Assistance 0.181*** -0.039 0.101

Receiving Assistance 0.193**** 0.037 0.088

Unemployed in Past 2 Yearsa 0.059 -0.060 0.041

Usual Hours Per Week -1.523**** - 1.120 1.108

Note. All models contain the following controls: age, education, race, total family income, and maritalstatus. aLogisticregression model.

levels:*.10 Significance

**.05

***.01

****.001.

giving help but less likely to be receiving help. These patternsare consistentwith the life course patterns of assistance flows described in other work (Eggebeen, 1992; Eggebeen & Hogan, 1990). As expected,given theirgreaterlikelihood of being retired,we foundthatolderfatherswere more likely to be unemployedand work fewer hoursper week. Finally, we found evidence that the level of in this studyas the amount measured involvement, of time fathersspendwith theirchild, could have consequencesfor their lives. The most pervasive effects, however,were for fathersliving with biological or adoptedchildren.For them, involvement is associatedwith the natureof kinds of social connections,theirfamily ties, and theirwork lives. Involvement to be less important for appears the othertypes of fathers. What do these findingstell us aboutthe possible explanations for fathereffects?The evidence is most consistentwith the "role occupancy"explanationof fathereffects. That is, the strongest correlatesof fatherhood are among men who are The most currently living with theirown children. telling evidence for this is in Tables 5 and 6, whereit is clearthatinvolvement has its strongest imprint amongthe men living with theirown children. Once men step away from coresidence,the If fatransforming powerof fatherhood dissipates. therhoodwere a transforming event as is argued by Snarey(1993), we wouldhave foundthatolder fathers would be quite similar to coresidentfathers.This was the case for some indicators (e.g., the psychological andhealthindicators andchurch attendance)but not for their social and family connections. Our confidencein these conclusionsis muted somewhat by several considerations.First, we have somewhatsimplifiedthe fatherhood experiences of men. We did not distinguishmen living in cohabiting unionsthatcontainchildren. The nature of fatherhood in these families remainsvirtually unexploredby scholars. Yet, recent evi-

dence shows that about 3% of children are adults, and the currentlyliving with nonmarried indicationsare that this experiencewill continue to become more common (Manning& Lichter, 1996). Neither have we drawna distinctionbefathersbecauseof divorceand tween nonresident fathersfrom nonmarital nonresident childbearing. faThereis evidence,however,thatnonresidential thers have less contact with childrenwho were born out of wedlock (Cooksey & Craig, 1998; King, 1994). of ourdataalso posnature The cross-sectional es some constraints. First,it preventsus from addressingpossible life coursedifferencesin father effects. It is conceivablethat fathereffects may by the age of the child or chilvary substantially dren given that the natureof parentingchanges has childrengrow. Having teenage childrenmay have negative psychological consequences for natureof these men! Second, the cross-sectional data precludea careful examinationof possible marmechanisms. Oursimplecontrolsfor current ital statusfail to do justice to what we know are between parentingand complex interconnections marital systems (see Gable, Belsky, & Crnic, 1992). Finally,these datamakeit difficultto rule for these out selection as a possible explanation effects. The idea here is that men who are the most healthy,happy, socially connectedto their communitiesand families, and the most stably employed may be the ones most likely to be coBeforewe can residentfathersor involvedfathers. is causallyassociated be confident thatfatherhood with the outcomeswe observed,we mustaddress with longitudinal data. this possibility,probably What does it mean to be a father?The tradiis to tional way this questionhas been addressed rangingfromprosuggesta set of responsibilities viding economic support, disciplining children, and serving as a role model (Mintz, 1998). Of andculcourse,a numberof social, demographic, tural changes have broughtmost or all of these ideals undercriticalscrutiny,most typicallywith

This content downloaded from 128.83.63.20 on Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:41:15 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

392

Journal of Marriage and Family work?The role of anticipated help in times of need. Eggebeen,D. J., & Hogan,D. P (1990). Givingbetween the generations in American families.Human Nature, 1, 211-232. Eggebeen, D. J., Snyder,A. D., & Manning,W. D. (1996). Childrenin single fatherfamilies in demo441-465. Eggebeen, D. J., & Uhlenberg,P. (1985). Changesin the organization of men's lives: 1960-1980. Family Norton.
graphic perspective. Journal of Family Issues, 17, Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 939-950.

an eye to their implicationsfor children'swell1995; Griswold,1993). Lost being (Blankenhorn, in the debate, however,is a sense of the other component of this answer-what it means for Ourexplorations of this men's lives to be a father. a firstapproximation of an anquestionrepresent swer.The evidencepresented hereis unequivocal: Fatherhoodcan profoundly shape the lives of men. NOTE
This researchwas partiallysupported by core funding (GrantNo. P30-HD28263)from the NationalInstitute of Child Healthand HumanDevelopmentto the PopulationResearch Institute. It was presented at the annual Associationof America,Los meetingof the Population in March2000. Angeles, California, REFERENCES
Amato, P R. (1987). Children in Australian families: The growth of competence. Sydney: Prentice Hall. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56, 55-573. Review, 12, 133-156.

Relations, 34, 251-257. Erikson, E. (1963). Childhood and society. Toronto: Erikson, E. (1980). Identity and the life cycle. New

York:Norton. Farrell,M. P.,& Rosenberg,S. D. (1981). Men at midlife. Boston:AuburnHouse. Furstenberg, E E, Jr.(1988). Gooddads-bad dads:The In A. J. Cherlin(Ed.), The two faces of fatherhood. DC: UrbanInstitute Press. 193-218). Washington, Furstenberg, E E, Jr.,& Harris,K. M. (1992). The disAmerican father?Divorce and the waning appearing In S. J. South significanceof biologicalparenthood. 197-223). Boulder,CO:WestviewPress. Gable,S., Belsky,J., & Crnic,K. (1992). Marriage, parenting, and child development:Progressand prosresearchon marital Glenn, N. D. (1990). Quantitative quality in the 1980s: A criticalreview. Journal of E, & Hogan,D. P (1999, August).A cenGoldsheider, Changes in living with tury (plus) of parenthood: children:1880-1990. Paperpresentedat the annual meeting of the AmericanSociological Association, Chicago,IL. Gove, W. R., & Mongione,T. W. (1983). Social roles, distress: sex roles andpsychological AdditiveandinJournalof Health teractive modelsof sex differences.
and Social Behavior, 24, 300-312. Griswold, R. L. (1993). Fatherhood in America: A hisMarriage and the Family, 52, 818-831. pects. Journal of Family Psychology, 5, 276-294. & S. E. Tolnay (Eds.), The changing American family: Sociological and demographic perspectives (pp. changing American family and public policy (pp.

J. G. (1999). Nonresidential Amato,P R., & Gilbreth, fathers and children'swell-being:A meta-analysis. Belsky, J., & Pensky,E. (1988). Maritalchangeacross the transitionto parenthood. Marriage and Family N. L., & Pleck, J. H. (1992). Barnett,R. C., Marshall, Men's multipleroles and theirrelationship to men's

psychological distress. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 358-367. Blankenhorn, D. (1995). Fatherless America. New

and families in cultural context. New York: Springer. Bronfenbrenner, E. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by design and nature. Cam-

York:Basic Books. Bozett, E W., & Hanson,S. M. H. (1991). Fatherhood

bridge,MA: Harvard UniversityPress. Chaves, M. (1991). Family structureand protestant churchattendance: The sociological basis of cohort as an incompleteinstiCherlin,A. (1978). Remarriage Coltrane,S. (1995). The futureof fatherhood: Social, andeconomicinfluences on men'sfamdemographic, In W.Marsiglio(Ed.),Fatherhood: ily involvements. Oaks,CA: Sage. (pp. 255-274). Thousand from Cooksey,E. C., & Craig,P H. (1998). Parenting a distance:The effects of paternal characteristics on contactbetweennonresidential fathersandtheirchilCowan, C. P, & Cowan, P A. (1992). Whenpartners and intergenEggebeen,D. J. (1992). Familystructure Eggebeen,D. J. (in press). The changingcourse of fatherhood: Men's experienceswith childrenin demoEggebeen,D. J., & Davey, A. (1998). Do safety nets
graphic perspective. Journal of Family Issues. erational relations. Research on Aging, 14, 427-447. become parents. New York: Basic. dren. Demography, 35, 187-200. Contemporary theory, research, and social policy tution. American Journal of Sociology, 84, 634-649. and age-effects. Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion, 30, 501-514.

tory.New York:Basic Books. C. (1996, August).YouthcrimeandfamilyforHarper, mation:Does fatherhood pull young men out of the high risk set for jail? Paperpresentedat the 1996 annualmeeting of the AmericanSociologicalAssociation,New York. Hawkins,A. J., & Eggebeen,D. J. (1991). Are fathers of co-residentadultmen in marifungible?Patterns familiesandyoung children's well-betally disrupted 972. Heath,D. H., & Heath,H. E. (1991). Fulfillinglives:
Paths to maturity and success. San Francisco, CA: ing. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 958-

Jossey-Bass.
Heath, D. T., McKenry, P C., & Leigh, G. K. (1995). The consequences of adolescent parenthood on men's depression, parental satisfaction, and fertility in adulthood. Journal of Social Service Research, 20, 127148. Hetherington, E. M., & Clingempeel, W. G. (1992). Coping with marital transitions: A family systems

This content downloaded from 128.83.63.20 on Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:41:15 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Fatherhood for Men

perspective. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 57, (2-3, Serial No. 227). Dunn (Eds.), Stepfamilies: Who benefits? Who does

393
Pleck, J. H. (1985). Working wives, working husbands.

E. M., & Jodl K. M. (1994). Stepfamilies Hetherington, as settingsfor child development. In A. Booth & J. not? (pp. 55-80). Hillsdale,NJ: Erlbaum. Hogan, D. P, & Eggebeen, D. J. (1995). Sources of in old age. Soemergency help androutineassistance
cial Forces, 73, 917-936.

Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. in historical Pleck, J. H. (1987). American fathering permen:New spective.In M. S. Kimmel(Ed.),Changing 87-97). NewburyPark,CA: Sage. Ploch, D. R., & Hastings,D. W. (1998). Effects of pacurrentfamily status,and rental churchattendance, Review of religious salience on church attendance.
Religious Research, 39, 309-320. directions in research on men and masculinity (pp.

Hogan,D. P, Eggebeen,D. J., & Clogg, C. C. (1993). The structure of intergenerationalexchanges in 98, 1428-1458. King, V. (1994). Nonresidentfather involvementand child well-being:Can dadsmake a difference? JourKing, V., & Heard,H. E. (1999). Nonresidentfather satisfaction: visitation,parental conflict,andmother's What's best for child well-being?Journal of MarThe emergent AmerLamb,M. E. (1987). Introduction: ican father.In M. E. Lamb (Ed.), Thefather's role: Erlbaum.
Cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 3-25). Hillsdale, NJ: Levine, J. A., & Pitt, E. W. (1995). New expectations: Community strategies for responsible fatherhood. riage and the Family, 61, 385-396. nal of Family Issues, 15, 78-96. American families. American Journal of Sociology,

Radin,N. R., & Russell, G. (1983). Increased paternal The fathers'perspective. In M. E. Lamb participation: 191-218). Hillsdale,NJ: Erlbaum. Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depressionscale for researchin the generalpopula401. Rossi, A. S., & P. H. Rossi. (1990). Of human bonding:
Parent-child relations across the life course. New Russell, G. (1982). The changing role of fathers. St. tion. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385& A. Sagi (Eds.), Fatherhood and family policy (pp.

York:Aldine de Gruyter.

Press. Lucia,Australia: Universityof Queensland M. (1994). Genderand Seccombe, K., & Ishii-Kuntz, Sex social relationshipsamong the never-married. betweenfathersand Seltzer,J. A. (1991). Relationships childrenwho live apart:The father'srole aftersepa101. N. C., & Charng, H.-W.(1989). Seltzer,J. A., Schaeffer, between Family ties after divorce:The relationship visiting and paying child support.Journal of Marration. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 79Roles, 30, 585-603.

New York:Familiesand WorkInstitute.

Levinson, D. (1978). Seasons of a man's life. New

York:Knopf. coManning,W. D., & Lichter,D. T. (1996). Parental habitation and the economicstatusof children. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 998-1010. Marsiglio, W. (1995). Fatherhood: Contemporary theory, research, and social policy. Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage. W. (1998). Procreative man.New York: New Marsiglio, YorkUniversityPress. to androgynyand Mintz, S. (1998). From patriarchy othermyths:Placingmen's family roles in historical In A. Booth& A. C. Courter perspective. (Eds.),Men baum. Munch, A., McPherson,J. M., & Smith-Lovin,L. children,and social contact:The ef(1997). Gender, fects of childrearing for men and women.American Parke, R. (1981). Fathers. Cambridge,MA: Harvard UniversityPress. Parke,R. (1995). Fathersand families.In M. Bornstein NJ: Erlbaum.
(Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Volume 3, Status and social conditions of parenting (pp. 27-64). Mahwah, Sociological Review, 62, 509-520. in families: When do they get involved? What difference does it make? (pp. 3-30). Mahwah, NJ: Erl-

riage and the Family, 51, 1013-1032. Snarey, J. (1993). How fathers care for the next generation: A four decade study. Cambridge, MA: Har-

vardUniversityPress. Spitze, G., & Logan, J. R. (1989). Genderdifferences Is there a payoff? Gerontologist, in family support: 29, 108-113. Stolzenberg,R. M., Blair-Loy, M., & Waite, L. J. in young adulthood: (1995). Religious participation Age and family life cycle effects on churchmemberTroll,L. E., Miller,S. J., & Atchley,R. J. (1979). Families in life. Belmont,CA: Wadsworth. Umberson,D. (1987). Family statusand healthbehaviors: Social controlas a dimensionof social integra319. matter? Waite,L. (1995). Does marriage Demography, 32, 483-508. Young,M. H., Miller,B. C., Norton,M. C., & Hill, E. behaviors J. (1995). The effect of parental supportive on life satisfactionof adolescentoffspring.Journal
of Marriage and the Family, 57, 813-822. tion. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 28, 306ship. American Sociological Review, 60, 84-103.

This content downloaded from 128.83.63.20 on Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:41:15 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions