One of the world’s most respected campaigners on men’s issues believes “dad deprivation” is directly causing what he’s termed “the boy crisis” – and unless society urgently intervenes, we will be in danger of writing off a generation of men.
Dad-deprived boys are less likely to display empathy, be less assertive, depressed, have nightmares, talk back and be disobedientWarren Farrell
Farrell believes modern society is being tangibly eroded by dad deprivation – through increased relationship breakdown, family courts that favour mothers, and fathers denied access to their children after a separation.
He points out that in in every one of the largest 70 developed nations, boys have fallen behind girls, and what they have in common, Farrell says, is divorce.
“Dad-deprived boys are less likely to display empathy, be less assertive, depressed, have nightmares, talk back and be disobedient,” says Farrell, 72.
“At age nine, girls and boys commit suicide in equal numbers, but boys are twice as likely aged 14, four times more likely aged 15-19, and five times more by age 20-25. This is the time when dads drift out of their lives”.
“We need a major overhaul of education system, especially in inner cities where we know dad deprivation is higher,” he says.
“These boys have no positive male role models. That makes them vulnerable to strong, destructive alpha males like gang leaders or drug dealers.”
“These boys are also most likely to be brought up by mums, then move from a mother-centered home to a woman-centered school.
“Boys need to see males caring at every stage of their lives. So we need more male teachers, period. I’d say equal amounts at least, although, in areas where there are 70 per cent single mothers, why not have 70 per cent male teachers?
“We need to encourage men into the caring sectors, to challenge the cliché that caring work is women’s work”.
Farrell also urges dads not to willingly abandon their children, which he sees as a dereliction of duty.
“Men should not withdraw like cowards,” he says. “To an eight-year-old boy, their dad is God. Backing off or abandoning them leaves the child feeling not important. Dads must fight to be a part of their children’s lives, especially if the mother blocks that”.
Here, Farrell urges separating parents to park their own differences.
Boys need to see males caring at every stage of their lives. So we need more male teachers, period. I’d say equal amounts at least ~ Warren Farrell
“Allowing dads in helps both the boy and the mother, as the child will be easier to manage for her as sole carer,” he says. “Data shows divorced mums are five times more likely to bad mouth dads than dads do mums.
Perhaps you wonder whether the number is still bleak when considering that so many children today live in blended or adoptive families. It’s still bleak. More than 20 million children, slightly more than 1 in 4, grow up without a biological, step or adoptive father.
Nevertheless, there is some good news in the battle against father absence as reflected in the chart below.
Percentage of Children Living in Father-Absent Homes: 1960 – 2014
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the percentage of children in the U.S. living without a dad began to soar in 1960. It rose unabated until 1995 when it suddenly hit the skids—sort of. For every five-year period from 1960 to 1995, the percentage rose. Since then, it has fallen and risen like clockwork. The result is a hold-steady pattern of 27.5 percent.
Parental Alienation deprives children of their right to be loved by and showing love for both of their parents!!
If a father withholds the access of a mother to her children, he can be arrested and charged with Child abduction and Kidnap. When a mother does the same against the father of the children, there are NO laws to stop her from doing this. As a result, many good fathers suffer depression, anxiety and emotional stress that can lead to loss of work, self harming and even suicide. In short, it has a devastating effect on us all.
Children NEED and deserve to have BOTH parents in their lives, the balance needs to be equal. Fathers should not be punished and branded and made to feel inadequate because a relationship with their former partner has deteriorated.
We are hosting the annual TFRM Fatherless Day Rally to spread knowledge to our state officials and the general public about issues in our family court systems. Please come show your support for presumptive 50/50 custody for two, fit loving parents. This is a free, family-friendly event. We encourage everyone to make an appearance or stay with us the entire time. We also encourage you to invite friends, family, loved ones, co-workers, etc. to attend with you. There is strength in numbers. This is our time to let our voices be heard!
We are honest fathers, not drunks, drug users, nor ‘deadbeat’. All we want is to share in the upbringing of our children, be part of their lives, and have it enforced when our children are held against us as if for ransom.
Yesterday I gazed out the window watching fireworks and was really missing my angel but I cannot call her because I am scared of mom’s false allegations and lies, she doesn’t call me and knowing she is only a couple of mile away hurts like hell.
Please know that daddy, your brother, your grandparents, your cousins, aunts and uncles; your whole family loves you and misses you very much.
I tried to get to see you but your mom told the Judge, in family court on April 24th, 2013, that “it’s too inconvenient for her to take you to visit with me”.
I love you!
What can be worse than that?
In 2013, Judge Manno-Schurr agreed with mom. In my opinion this is Parental Alienation by Mom facilitated by the Family Court.Judge granted Mom’s Motion to Strike the Amicus Brief filed by Dad that explains to the…
Positive ambassadors for involved fatherhood, at-home dads need to resist the urge to take offense and instead use these thoughtless comments as “teaching moments.” In this way, they can be more effective and positive as they change the out-of-date attitudes of those around them. I came up with a phrase for this very purpose:
“Almost every dad I know is putting in the work to be a loving, hands-on, involved dad”
Here we are starting another year in the same position as last year and the year before that and the year before that. Three years now since I saw my two children and three more to go if the situation remains the same. My son Scott will be sixteen in three years time and he will instantly have the freedom to choose to find me. Which is why I keep my blog running. I have said this over and over again during the last three years, all we want is equality. Not too much to ask in 2014. A fathers right to see his children and a child’s right to see his or her father. Men are often accused of being controlling, but when a mother denies a father access to his children and a child access to his or father then that is the extreme of controlling behavior. But that seems to go unrecognised. Balanced? I don’t think so. Fair? I don’t think so. Equal? I don’t think so. Children are not tools to be used as a punishment against a father.
As in: “I loved that movie from 1983, too (“Mr. Mom”), but that’s not what most dads or at-home dads do today. In fact, almost every dad I know is putting in the work to be a loving, hands-on, involved dad.“
“I know you mean no offense, but I don’t babysit my kids, I’m just being their father. And, you know, almost every dad I know is putting in the work to be a loving, hands-on, involved dad.”
“Almost every dad I know is putting in the work to be a loving, hands-on, involved dad. I just happen to do it full-time, as it made more sense for my family that my wife works. All families should arrange things the best way for them, don’t you think?”
“I’m here with my kids. More and more dads are doing things like this. After all, almost every dad I know is putting in the work to be a loving, hands-on, involved dad. Which are your kids, maybe they can join mine on the monkey bars?”
“I know you mean that (“great dad”) as a compliment, and thank you. But, you know, almost every dad I know is putting in the work to be a loving, hands-on, involved dad. I’m not doing anything more than most dads- or moms- do.”
Progress can come one conversation at a time.
I’m very confident that the awesome guys I met at the convention will more than do their part. Honestly, I’m not sure I could restrain the urge to say something rude if faced with such thoughtless comments. But rising above thoughtlessness is the key to being a positive ambassador.
The dads at this convention seemed to like the phrase and, in fact, a few told me they used some variant of it during their flights back home when fellow passengers saw them wearing their “At-Home Dad Convention” and “Dads Don’t Babysit” t-shirts.
My experience at this convention also led me to think about working dads, and what we can do to be ambassadors of involved fatherhood at our workplaces. Here are a few ideas:
Talk about family while at work and make it easier for others in your sphere of influence to do so. For instance, ask them about what they did with their families on weekends, or have family pictures prominently displayed at your workstation.
Gather a group of fellow working dads and go out to lunch or a happy-hour together every few weeks. Combine this with a mom’s group if you’d like. When you need to, leave early and take work home. Don’t apologize for it. Your continued work performance will win over initial skeptics.
Ask management and HR about what policies they offer. Share with them the news of what leading companies offer.
Take paternity leave when it’s offered. Be visible about it. Share your experiences on social media.
Especially if you are a manager, you play an especially important role. If your employees see you adjust your schedule for family, occasionally work from home, and even take paternity leave, you send a strong signal that it is ok for others to do so. Your actions speak much louder than your words.
Push the need for leave and flexibility policies with HR and top management. Make the business case in terms of attracting and retaining employees, as well as improving engagement.
Beyond paternity leave or workplace flexibility, talk with your employees, coworkers and bosses about the importance of time for life.
After all, almost every dad I know is putting in the work to be a loving, hands-on, involved dad.
Whether we work outside the home or have made parenting our full-time job, we need to be ambassadors for involved fatherhood. That’s how society and workplaces will finally catch on to what most of us do every day.
Thanks for visiting our site! Like most individuals you have probably come to our site for one primary reason. You are looking for answers to a specific Fathers rightsfamily law problem. Let me assure you that you’ve come to the right place. We have the answers you need!
The subject of this article is “Why Do Men Lose In Family Court?” I have spent the last 23 years attempting to answer this question. After considerable research, case evaluations and client interviews I believe I now have the answer.
Twenty three years ago I went through a brutal divorce. Actually, at the time of divorce we were very friendly with one another and agreed to settle out of court. My Ex-wife, through a paralegal filed for divorce and like most men I simply agreed to the terms. I walked away with nothing! I surrendered the house, ($40,000.00 in equity) the boat, the car, furniture etc. etc…Everything I had acquired in 13 years of marriage was suddenly gone. We had three children and I wanted them to have the benefit of these items. Although I didn’t realize it at the time I could have and should have made better agreements that would have benefited all members of my family in a much greater way.
Looking back I simply didn’t know what a good agreement was or how to make the deal. I was so concerned about maintaining a good relationship with my ex that I avoided anything that might have resulted in a legal battle. I should have filed my response with the court and requested an equitabledivision of property, custody, visitation and a support order that was based on my Real income. In general I should have been more attentive to the legal issues. This was truly a mistake! Continue reading Changing the outcome of your family court case!
I wish you well and hope you know that your not at all alone.
Life can give us skills whether we want them or not.
In time, every father facing custody and court cases involving family law will develop a ‘thicker skin’ as we all know that nothing is more personal then an attack against your human rights, your rights as a parent and your ability to parent a child.
I would like to express a very important concept today.
This is extremely bold and progressive. I believe their is no ‘movements’ in the world today to change the opinion of culture in the way that will actually build up momentum.
I would like to give you an example*…
“Equality for homosexual relationships in the USA have become popular.
Single Male parents seeking Equality in Custody and Family law is NOT.”
*The example is not aimed to defame or harm homosexual couples in any way, simply a random example.
Who do you believe will be the first to win Public approval in the equality of raising children?
A large portion of Society will back gay rights to have two males or two females raise a child… Will Society recognize the human rights of a Male parent to have ABSOLUTE EQUALITY in custody decisions or family court?
The reason behind this is because Gay rights do not threaten the power of women as much as the concept of ‘ MAN VS WOMAN ‘
Leon is seeking funding for a shared parenting initiative nationwide. It is important to join this cause if we are ever going to secure long overdue reforms for the sake of families and our children. He has been working with the Trump campaign because his Democrat opponent has been the cause for lucrative and needless parental conflict in divorce and family courts. The fundraising gala here was to promote cutting edge medical breakthroughs which save people from addictions and costly health programs. Our initiative is similar regarding the legal profession. However we remain non funded to date. Call our office at (315) 380-3420 or Leon direct at (315) 796-4000.
Well you heard it today on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace, but the question was posed by Leon Koziol publicly the night before at a fundraising gala in Manhattan. After thrilling attendees with politics and his enthusiasm for Donald Trump, keynote speaker Sean Hannity boldly opened himself up to questions. Leon stepped forward and put him on the spot.
“Who should be Trump’s VP and why not you?”
Sean quickly reacted,
“not me, but I can tell you who I think it should be: Newt Gingrich.”
Fathers and Free Speech Case to be Argued June 10 in New York Supreme Court | Leon Koziol.Com
Divorce and family court victims as far away as Florida and California are already committed to attend public hearing on gag order, equal rights and parental alienation.
After ten years of litigating for parental justice as high as the United States Supreme Court, Dr. Leon Koziol may finally get his day in court on behalf of divorce and family court victims everywhere. A New York Supreme Court Justice has just signed an order to hear arguments in a mandamus proceeding on June 10 at 10:30 a.m. at the Oneida County Courthouse in Utica. Mandamus is considered extraordinary, in this case directed at a family court judge named Daniel King in Lowville, New York, and it is open to the public.
In the past, Leon was bombarded with technical dismissals, jurisdictional chaos and judge misconduct designed to suppress his overdue reform efforts in our third branch of government. Unscrupulous lawyers across Americahave turned our children into a lucrative trillion dollar industry eating alive our life’s earnings, retirement savings, health and college funds. And the corruption is escalating for reasons found in Leon’s ordeal described with horrific detail at Leon Koziol.com.
After 23 unblemished years practicing law in federal and state courts, he was suspended, threatened with contempt, deprived of a livelihood, denied access to (important people in his life) and now they are seizing his home. We can’t disclose who those important people are because this site is still subject to a gag order which Leon seeks to remove on June 10th so that fraud, perjury and judge misconduct can be conveyed to you when government commissions fail us.
The timing before Fathers Day and location of these arguments are also extraordinary. An opportunity like this may not occur for another ten years. Leon has sacrificed too much for this cause and is destined to lose this case because the establishment and gold mine he is seeking to reform are too powerful. But if we can finally rally together at the Oneida County Courthouse in a judicial district which includes the Fort Drum Army Base and former Griffiss Air Force Base, a profound message can be sent to courts all across America.
Leon is highly focused on protecting military, minorities and law enforcement, or those mostly harmed by the antiquated custody system. Instead of promoting shared parenting, our federal government today is obsessed with transgender bathrooms in North Carolina with Attorney General Loretta Lynch accusing us of being racists if we don’t support her. What??? Leon was a highly accomplished civil rights attorney and lawyer for a past president of the National Organization for Women. Racism and religious convictions are not the same. And while everyone else is demanding equal rights, fathers are still discriminated through an abuse of Title IV-D federal funding.
This courthouse in the center of New York state is three hours from New York metropolitan area and Buffalo, two hours from the Canadian and Pennsylvania borders. Already supporters are committed to attend from as far away as Florida and California. Hotel Utica and the Radisson downtown are less than a mile from Thruway Exit 31 (Interstate 90). These were the sites of various civil rights forums sponsored by Leon that were targeted by ethics lawyers engaged in the witch hunt against Leon. They were ultimately fired by a licensing court for falsifying their time sheets. No public charges were ever brought against them.
You may have heard about Arkansas Judge Joe Boeckmann charged this week with sexual predator crimes over a thirty year period through judicial favors. In the mandamus lawsuit and at Leon Koziol.com, you will read about Leon’s custody judge, Brian Hedges, removed from the bench for admitting to sexual misconduct on his five year old handicapped niece, family judges who fabricated college degrees to elevate Leon’s support obligations, and his consequential testimony before the Moreland Commission on Public Corruption which led to more severe retributions. You will read about judges sent to prison in Brooklyn and Albany for soliciting custody and divorce bribes, and of course the “Kids-for-Cash” scandal in Pennsylvania.
It’s out of control people. Stop keyboarding in the comfort of your homes to one another and people who don’t care. “Raising awareness” this way is misguided and creates false hope. It’s time to make a stand against parent waterboarding by a corrupted system. Spread the word every way you can. After the June 10 arguments, Leon will file a petition for writ at the United States Supreme Court in Washington D.C. concerning a similar mandamus action dismissed by a federal appeals court in Manhattan. An opening excerpt is provided below. For more information and desperately needed donations, contact our office, Parenting Rights Institute, at (315) 796-4000 or Leon direct at (315) 796-4000.
U.S. SUPREME COURT WRIT (OPENING):
While our federal government asserts itself around the globe to advance human rights, its military is returning to divorce and family courts which exploit children for profit. Public safety officers, such as our responders on 9-11, are being hauled into the same courts and subjected to discrimination on account of their gender or line of duty. Many are alienated from their children, committed to debtor prisons or oppressed as inferior parents to feed a trillion dollar industry.
It is a highly protected industry orchestrated under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, 42 USC section 651 et. seq. States are rewarded by the number and size of “child support” orders manufactured by their courts. Superior and inferior custody classifications are essential to these money transfers and mandated by federal statute even when parents with near equal incomes and childrearing periods set up contrary agreements, see i.e. Bast v Rossoff, 91 NY2d 723 (1998).
Accordingly support judges have been rendered inherently biased against all those classified under the inferior “non-custodial” label with or without justification. Such classifications are arbitrary, stigmatizing and institutional in countless cases, requiring otherwise cooperative parents to compete over their children. Their infringement of a fundamental right to parent one’s offspring is easily replaced by childrearing plans and orders which retain more family oriented labels such as mother, father and parent, see i.e. Webster v Ryan, 729 NYS2d 315 (Albany Fam. Ct. 2001) at fn. 1(veteran family judge declaring “custody” and “visitation” to be offensive terms in an antiquated system which brings out the worst in parents when children need their best).
However such less intrusive custody substitutes are foreclosed by the blanket classifications and marginalized by overburdened courts committed to the funding scheme. Over time, such injustices have reached constitutional dimension while ever elusive, utopian and overbroad child rearing standards displace parental discretion without compelling state interest contrary to a right declared by the Supreme Court to be the “oldest liberty interest” protected by our Constitution, Troxel v Granville, 530 US 57 (2000)(prolonged custody case can itself violate parental rights), Parham v JR, 442 US 548 (1979)(fit parents presumed to act in their children’s best interests).
A full range of constitutional rights is easily trampled under principles of equity, or the power seized by family judges to “father” our children, see often cited Finlay v Finlay, 240 NY 429 (1925)(“paternal jurisdiction” derived from feudal common law). In plain terms, the Constitution is being ignored because the custody scheme is lucrative for those who depend upon family controversy for their livelihood. It is being facilitated by judges charged with the highest duty of safeguarding such rights, Federalist Paper No. 78; Marbury v Madison, 5 US 137 (1803).
Support inequities triggered by this scheme (child support standards act) are typically countered with custody tactics to result in untold harm to our children, i.e.Pearce v Longo, 766 F.Supp.2d 367 (NDNY 2011)($2 million city liability for police investigator committing murder-suicide with ex-spouse after exiting support court leaving children without parents). In his highly researched study, Is There Really a Fatherhood Crisis, Professor Stephen Baskerville places the blame on government: “What many are led to believe is a social problem may in reality be an exercise of power by the state,” Independence Review, vol VIII, n 4, Spring 2004, at pp 485-486.
Unsuspecting litigants are also exploited by an expanding bureaucracy under Title IV-D to finance welfare costs created by unrelated and irresponsible parents. The ones properly devoted to their children therefore shoulder an unjust burden merely because they reside separately from their partners. These support judges engage in highly abused fictions such as “imputed income” to raise obligations beyond realistic capacities. There is no express provision for shared parenting under the federal entitlement statute, and the regulatory scheme has replaced the child’s needs with “way of life” standards to elevate support even further. It has removed critical discretion from proper decision makers with outcomes that shock the conscience, see fn 3 and 4.
The “band plays on” in our nation’s family courts because civil rights attorneys and parental advocates such as petitioner are subjugated, vilified and punished for their exercise of reform efforts otherwise protected under the American Constitution. Meanwhile, gay, lesbian and trans-gender parents, soon to be victimized by this same lucrative system, have achieved far greater strides in equality with repeat court actions than fathers have over a century of discrimination.
This is a petition for writ of mandamus and prohibition directed to the federal court of the Northern District of New York. It seeks relief which is central to any self-governing society, namely, the right to seek reforms to this over regulated and oppressive system of child control. In that vein, it matters not whether the decision makers here agree with the foregoing legal posture concerning a federal statute. It matters only that the petitioner is accorded his inalienable human right to express public views and raise his offspring free of the severe retributions he sustained for criticizing our third branch of government, see i.e Garrison v Louisiana, 379 US 64 (1964).
 Petitioner’s revenue-bias conclusion was deemed frivolous by the lower court. However it is supported by our nation’s top civil rights experts at the Justice Department. They issued a report on March 4, 2015 after the Ferguson, Missouri race riots concluding that the region’s municipal courts were committing civil rights violations through concocted arrests and excessive fines as part of a revenue generating scheme. There is nothing to distinguish that conclusion from petitioner’s long asserted claims here regarding family courts which incite needless controversy to exact excessive support orders and attorneys fees. Unequal custody classifications are the workhorse behind all this with rampant prejudice against male parents which can no longer be denied or tolerated. The Census Bureau and private entities continue to report that nearly 85% of all support obligors are men. In his court filings, petitioner has described this as “the last bastion of institutionalized discrimination remaining un-checked in America today.”
 As this case verifies, money interests have displaced the “best interests of the child” in family court. Financial disclosures are mandatory for gauging child support but exploited by unscrupulous lawyers to concoct needless and even bizarre issues for fee maximization. When resources are exhausted from both parents, they orchestrate cause for settlement or client abandonment. Ethics violations are so numerous and even accepted as part of a litigious child control process that attorney disciplinary agents cannot logistically police all the abuses. Worse yet, these agents are able to abuse their entrusted positions to suppress accountability. This case features a chief ethics attorney and two lawyer subordinates who engaged in the witch hunt against the petitioner-attorney (and father) for his public disclosure of vast misconduct. They were terminated from their court-appointed positions as standard bearers of lawyer ethics after an Inspector General discovered their falsified time sheets. No public charges, ethical or criminal, were ever instituted, see Robert Gavin, Oversight lawyers quit amid inquiry, (Albany) Times Union, July 10, 2013.
 The injustices have reached epidemic proportions. Only one month after the Ferguson report, a fit and unarmed father named Walter Scott was shot dead in the back while fleeing a child support warrant during a traffic stop in South Carolina. He had been imprisoned a number of times due to a growing support debt based on imputed income capacities. Under prevailing law, an imprisoned parent for any reason continues to face support obligations at pre-commitment levels. Upon release, the debtor is typically overwhelmed and unemployable. He is nevertheless subjected to a rule that one should not profit from the mis-deeds which caused the incarceration even with full rehabilitation. Only because of the “mis-deeds” of this traffic cop, quickly charged with murder, was it publicly revealed that one out of every eight persons imprisoned in South Carolina resulted from support debts. Nearly all are male parents, and a review of warrants lists across New York reveals a similar pattern. South Carolina boasts one of the strictest support enforcement laws with jail terms of up to one year, yet it reports one of the worst collection rates under the federal (performance) statute, partial source: Robles and Dewan, Skip Child Support. Go to Jail. Lose Job. Repeat, New York Times (front page), 4/19/15. Debtor prisons have been invalidated since the mid 19th century but re-introduced through willful support violations. As the case before this court demonstrates, such a contempt avenue is an illusion behind a de facto debtors’ prison due to biased judges having a financial stake in the outcomes of support litigation. Such jurists bring court revenues and personal advancement through support performance measures and payments derived from sources other than the debtor parent, see i.e. Bast, supra. As relevant here, the petitioner-father issued public statements at the Walter Scott funeral before national media, civil rights groups and reporters of the New York Times as part of his ongoing reform efforts. He suffered further retributions in the lower court, state family courts and attorney disciplinary tribunals by actions and decisions beginning only weeks later.
A University of Chicago study found that in just 26 years the number of married couples with children decreased 71%, and the percent of adults who were married decreased from 75% to 56%, which is evidence of an absolutely shocking cultural implosion. At the same time, the number of unmarried households with no children increased 230%, the number of children in single-mother households increased 417%, and the number of children living with neither parent increased 1,440%. Only 51% of American children, or 36.4 million of them, lived with both parents, and 18.2%, or 13 million of them, lived with a single parent, in 1998. This left 31% of the nation’s children, or 22 million of them, living with neither parent.
The US Statistical Abstract, Table 76, confirms the figures from this study by using different terms and arriving at a similar figure for children who are not living with at least one parent. This table shows that 25.7 million children live in “two parent family groups”, and that 11.9 million live in single parent households, leaving 22.5 million children living with neither parent. 10 million of these 11.9 million children live in single-mother households where they are twenty times more likely to be fatally abused than children living with their families.
Why call families “two parent family groups”? Because as many as 13 million of these 25.7 million children now living with “two parents” are actually living with step-parents, most of them step-fathers, where they are seven times more likely than children living with families to be sexually abused.
That is bad enough by itself, but where are these 22 million children if they aren’t with either parent? It’s truly hard to imagine that they could all be with other remote relatives, in foster homes, or in the care of Child Protective Services.
How did we get to this state? How could and why did the country which was once the paragon of social stability suddenly subject 22 million children to a parentless upbringing, and another 11.6 million to the physical, emotional, financial, educational, and psychological abuse of single-mother households, and another 13 million to step-parents, without our knowing about it? 78% of the nation’s jail and prison inmates grew up in a fatherless household, even though only 15% of today’s adult population grew up fatherless. This makes adults who grew up fatherless 20 times more likely to be imprisoned than adults who grew up with a father present. At any one time, more than 5% of those who grew up fatherless in this country are in prison, and now almost half of the nation’s children are growing up without a father who, when they become adults, will be 20 times as likely to be imprisoned and 8 times as likely to commit murder.
Do they commit more crimes? Of the 24,926 murders in 1994, 14,660 were committed by the 30 million Americans who grew up fatherless, and only 10,304 were committed by the 170 million who grew up in father headed families.
Why are they so much more likely to go to prison when the rate at which they commit crimes is only 6-8 times greater than the rate at which children of non-SMHs commit crimes? If they were only 8 times more likely to go to prison rather than 20 times, 936,000 of the 1,560,000 inmates in prison right now who grew up fatherless wouldn’t be there. This would be only 624,000 in prison, still a huge number, but only 40% of the current figure.
The recent decrease in the murder rate was due solely to a temporary decrease in the age group between 15-24 which commits the most crimes. When that age group increases to its regular level, coupled with the increase in the percent of fatherless children becoming adults, the murder rate will begin its long term, rapid acceleration to 12 murders per 100,000 population within the next 20 years. The additional 33.6 million fatherless children added to the already 30 million adults who grew up fatherless, will cause the murder and incarceration rates to reach unprecedented levels. A linear projection of the known data shows that we can expect fatherlessness to cause an extra 2.8 million American citizens to be in prison and an extra 25,000 American citizens to be murdered annually. Instead of our already record high incarceration rate of 730 per 100,000 population, it will be 1,100, and instead of the already record high murder rate of 10.5 murders per 100,000 population in 1991, it will be 12.
Why are these other 936,000 adults who grew up fatherless now in prison if they aren’t committing more crimes than this? Why are these adults 2.5 times more likely to be imprisoned than they are to commit a crime?
The answer is related to the source of the 22 million children now living with neither parent. Fathers and mothers aren’t abandoning their children–government bills like CAPTA, VAWA, and thousands of other hideous programs are subverting the families of these children and placing them in harm’s way. But where did they come from and where did they go?
1,262,000 children were born to unwed mothers in 1997, which means that 20 million children have been born to unwed mothers in the last twenty years. Another 24 million have been subjected to the vagaries the nation’s corruptible divorce courts. This is 44 million children who SHOULD be with either a remarried mother or father, or a single mother or father, but half of them, or 22 million, are NOT.
Fathers who believe the court system is “unfair” haven’t seen one ten millionth of what is unfair. “Unfair” doesn’t even begin to characterize putting HALF of the nation’s children who have been placed under the jurisdiction of the state in a fatherless environment, and putting another 11.6 million in an SMH where they are guaranteed to be at greater risk of abuse. Congress is not implementing a casual prescription for disaster–they are consciously implementing an intentional, well planned blueprint for the systematic destruction of our society.
US Households 1972 to 1998 per University of Chicago study, reported in CNN
Children under 19 in 1972
Children under 19 in 1999
Nonfamily households 1998
Family households 1998
Family households with children 1998
Married couple families 1998
Married couples with children 1970
Married couples with children 1998
Adults married in 1972
Adults married in 1998
Children with “both parents” 1972
Children with “both parents” 1998
Children with both biological parents 1998
Unmarried households no children in 1972
Unmarried households no children in 1998
Children with single parents 1972
grew up with mother
Children with single parents 1998
grew up with mother
grew up with father
Children in “other” households 1972
Children in “other” households 1998
other relatives besides a parent
CPS or foster homes “neither parent”
Children not in families, foster homes, or CPS
Per 1999 US Statistical Abstract
Two parent “family groups”
Single mother households
Single father households
Total “family groups” with children
Children in “family groups” at 1.3/household
Children not in “family groups”
Adults Raised in Fatherless Households vs Adults Raised in Father Headed Families
Population over 18 (millions)
Population over 25
raised in SMHs
raised in SMHs
Current adults raised in SMHs
Current adults raised in “other households”
Percent in prison
In fatherless households today
In father headed families today
Current fatherless adults
Attrition rate over 20 years
Still alive in 20 years
Current children become adults in 20 years
Total adults raised fatherless in 20 years
Expected number in prison
Expected murders committed
Total population in 2020
Population over 18 in 2020
Over 18, grew up in father headed family
Expected murders committed
Total in prison
In prison at father headed family rate
Murders at father headed family rate
Additional in prison due to fatherlessness
Additional murders due to fatherlessness
Survey from the University of Chicago, reported in CNN.