From the July 2003 Idaho Observer:

The future: Set adrift on a sea of fatherless children

Ask anyone who has had the loving intentions toward parenting their children destroyed by the state and they will tell you: “State child protective services and the courts go out of their way to make sure that, in child custody cases before them, the worst possible outcome for the child, the outcome desired by child protective services, becomes a court order. It has been our experience that destroyed families and children are preferred by bureaucrats who have no incentive to solve the problems they are paid to administrate. We have only ourselves to blame. Americans have become so incapable of solving their own interpersonal problems honorably the state gets called in to mediate them for us. We give the state authority over our lives and the lives of our children because we are too incompetent to manage our own affairs in a dignified manner. The state does not love us; does not love our children and, therefore, is only capable of making decisions that benefit the state. The state is not destroying our families -- we are. By demanding that the state meddle in our most personal affairs, we have allowed it to set the future adrift on a sea of fatherless children. As you will see from the figures below, our current culture of institutionalized interpersonal idiocy will pay a high price over the next few decades because we are producing generations of emotional basketcases.

Children from fatherless homes account for:

63% of youth suicides. (Source: US Dept. of Health & Human Services, Bureau of the Census).

71% of pregnant teenagers. (Source: US Dept. of Health & Human Services)

90% of all homeless and runaway children.

70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Special Report, Sept 1988)

85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders. (Source: Center for Disease Control).

80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger. (Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol. 14, p. 403-26, 1978).

71% of all high school dropouts. (Source: National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools).

75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers. (Source: Rainbows for all God's Children).

85% of all youths sitting in prisons. (Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of Corrections 1992).

The State of Fatherhood

37.9% of fathers have no access/visitation rights. (Source: p.6, col.II, para. 6, lines 4 & 5, Census Bureau P-60, #173, Sept 1991.)

“40% of mothers reported that they had interfered with the non-custodial father's visitation on at least one occasion, to punish the ex-spouse.” (Source: p. 449, col. II, lines 3-6, (citing Fulton) Frequency of visitation by Divorced Fathers; Differences in Reports by Fathers and Mothers. Sanford Braver et al, Am. J. of Orthopsychiatry, 1991.)

“Overall, approximately 50% of mothers “see no value in the father`s continued contact with his children....” (Source: Surviving the Breakup, Joan Kelly & Judith Wallerstein, p. 125)

Only 11% of mothers value their husband's input when it comes to handling problems with their kids. Teachers & doctors rated 45%, and close friends & relatives rated 16%.(Source: EDK Associates survey of 500 women for Redbook Magazine. Redbook, November, 1994, p. 36)

“The former spouse (mother) was the greatest obstacle to having more frequent contact with the children.” (Source: Increasing our understanding of fathers who have infrequent contact with their children, James Dudley, Family Relations, Vol. 4, p. 281, July 1991.)

“A clear majority (70%) of fathers felt that they had too little time with their children.” (Source: Visitation and the Noncustodial Father, Mary Ann Kock & Carol Lowery, Journal of Divorce, Vol. 8, No. 2, p. 54, Winter 1984.)

“Very few of the children were satisfied with the amount of contact with their fathers, after divorce.” (Source: Visitation and the Noncustodial Father, Koch & Lowery, Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, Vol. 8, No. 2, p. 50, Winter 1984.)

“Feelings of anger towards their former spouses hindered effective involvement on the part of fathers; angry mothers would sometimes sabotage father's efforts to visit their children.” (Source: Ahrons and Miller, Am. Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Vol. 63. p. 442, July '93.)

“Mothers may prevent visits to retaliate against fathers for problems in their marital or post-marital relationship.” (Source: Seltzer, Shaeffer & Charing, Journal of Marriage & the Family, Vol. 51, p. 1015, November 1989.)

In a study: “Visitational Interference - A National Study” by Ms. J Annette Vanini, M.S.W. and Edward Nichols, M.S.W., it was found that 77% of non-custodial fathers are NOT able to “visit” their children, as ordered by the court, as a result of “visitation interference” perpetuated by the custodial parent. In other words, non-compliance with court ordered visitation is three times the problem of non-compliance with court ordered child support and impacts the children of divorce even more. Originally published Sept. 1992

Child Support

Information from multiple sources show that only 10% of all noncustodial fathers fit the “deadbeat dad” category: 90% of the fathers with joint custody paid the support due. Fathers with visitation rights pay 79.1%; and 44.5% of those with NO visitation rights still financially support their children. (Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173).

The following is sourced from: Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Income Security Policy, Oct. 1991, Authors: Meyer and Garansky.

Custodial mothers who receive a support award: 79.6%

Custodial fathers who receive a support award: 29.9%

Non-custodial mothers who totally default on support: 46.9%

Non-custodial fathers who totally default on support: 26.9%