Deadbeat Dads

Like a double-edged sword, the parenting standard applied to men and women, especially in minority communities across the country, has proven to be biased. The concept of a “deadbeat dad” in our society is one that labels a father who is not in his child’s life as a second-rate citizen. But what are the circumstances behind this estranged relationship? Is his absence deliberate? Is it intentional? Or are there circumstances behind the absence that society rarely takes the time to examine?

How did we get here?

For many fathers with whom I’ve had the opportunity to speak throughout the years, they’ve expressed that the label inappropriately describes them. Some feel that such a label only seeks to tarnish the image of good men by hiding behind the premise of a deserter. From these men’s perspective, a deadbeat dad is someone who fathers a child and actively chooses to distance himself from the child. There is an important difference between a father who abandons his child and one who wants to participate but, for one reason or another, is struggling to gain or maintain access to that child.

Contrary to many fallacies presented as fact, most men want to be active in their children’s lives. In many cases, the woman and man separate sometime after the woman becomes pregnant or sometime after the birth of the child. Men often report to me that the reason they are not in their child’s life is because the mother chooses not to allow it. The mother strips away visitation and scares the man away with threats of going to court for child support.

The woman, in many cases, wants desperately to be with the man, but because he refuses her terms, she uses the child as a token or bargaining chip. Using the child as leverage is quite common; however, many do it without understanding what the implications may be, while others know the consequences but do not care enough to avoid those outcomes. There are no winners in such situations. The mother does not win. The father does not win. Most importantly, the child does not win.

The damage can extend well beyond the immediate disagreement between the parents. A child should never have to feel as though loving one parent means betraying the other. Children should not be placed in the middle of adult arguments, used to deliver messages, questioned about the other parent’s personal life, or made to feel guilty for enjoying time with the other parent. When adults allow resentment to enter the parent-child relationship, children can end up carrying emotional burdens that were never theirs to carry.

Men in minority communities often do not understand the legal system, they do not understand their rights as fathers, or they are simply petrified of legal proceedings. One man told me once that he did not know that the court could appoint him a lawyer in certain support or custody proceedings. Another man assumed that the mother had total authority over the child and anything regarding the child. He did not understand that being the father could give him enforceable parenting rights and that he could ask the court to recognize those rights. Therefore, he simply gave up.

That surrender can easily be interpreted from the outside as abandonment. What people may not see are the fear, confusion, lack of resources, or lack of knowledge that came before it. This does not excuse a parent from responsibility, but understanding why something happens is different from excusing it.

Another concept that people tend to ignore is the woman in the child’s life who makes the child suffer because of a broken relationship with the father. If her actions are motivated by selfish reasons and she intentionally interferes with a healthy relationship between the child and the father, should that woman not also be labeled a deadbeat mom?

What about the so-called “independent” mom who claims that she does not need a man to help her take care of her child? Is she a deadbeat if that independence becomes a reason for depriving the child of an involved father? Any parent who intentionally deprives a child of a healthy relationship with the other parent, absent a legitimate concern for the child’s safety or well-being, is failing that child. If a parent is taking care of a child, then that parent is parenting. Arguably, if a parent refuses to take care of a child when capable of doing so, then that parent should be referred to as a deadbeat, regardless of whether that parent is the mother or the father.

What do I mean?

Sometimes men are reluctant to give women money for the child because they believe the women will spend it on themselves and not the child. While this belief is not accurate in many cases, there are also situations in which children are neglected, beaten, or abused because of extreme hatred for the father, irresponsible behavior, or financial illiteracy. These circumstances should not be ignored simply because acknowledging them makes the conversation uncomfortable.

However, not giving money to support your child because you are skeptical of how the other parent will spend it is not an excuse not to give. If you helped create the child, it is your duty to help maintain that child until that child reaches an age and level of independence where he or she is able to maintain themselves. A disagreement between adults does not eliminate a parent’s responsibility to the child.

Conversely, a child should not be used as a pawn and withheld from the other parent because that parent is not contributing financially or because that parent is not interested in pursuing a romantic relationship with the other parent. Financial support, romantic relationships, and parent-child relationships are separate issues. Adults too often combine them, and the child pays the price.

This distinction is important because money and parenting, while both necessary, are not interchangeable. A parent can write a check every month and still be emotionally absent. Another parent may struggle financially while consistently showing up for school meetings, doctor’s appointments, practices, birthdays, homework, and difficult conversations. Ideally, a parent should contribute financially and remain actively involved. But when judging the quality of a parent, society should recognize the entire contribution rather than using money as the only measurement.

The traditional order of things has long held that men take care of the home financially and otherwise, while women take care of the children. It is a philosophy that has existed for hundreds of years. In modern society, however, with the family dynamic changing dramatically, it is difficult and perhaps unrealistic to simply revert to such a philosophy. Men and women now frequently share financial, household, and parenting responsibilities, and our expectations of each parent should evolve with that reality.

At times, it seems that some women are more content with being single mothers than they are with being adults about difficult situations when it comes to parenting. Likewise, some men avoid responsibility by blaming the mother for her lack of cooperation. Neither behavior serves the child.

Accountability cannot exist only on one side.

If the pair would realize that the child is not a dollar amount and that the child needs the mom just as much as the dad, when both parents are capable of providing a safe and healthy relationship, many issues with parenting or co-parenting would not exist today. Children need stability, consistency, love, guidance, discipline, and reassurance. Those things cannot always be measured by a child-support payment.

The unfair practice of labeling a dad a deadbeat simply because he does not have the financial means to support his child at a particular level must end. If the dad is able to provide support in other ways, such as taking the child while the mother works, doing the child’s laundry, helping with homework, preparing meals, taking the child to practice, attending school events, providing transportation, or simply being consistently present, those contributions have value. There are many ways a father can be supportive and play an active role in his child’s life.

Financial responsibility matters, but parenting cannot be reduced to a receipt.

Mothers can also be supportive by realizing when the father does not want to pursue a romantic relationship with them. It is often difficult to get over a relationship, especially if you have committed time, money, energy, and tears. However, for the sake and developmental well-being of the child, those issues must be put aside. Although it is difficult, one cannot blame the child for relationship missteps and must not use the child to get back at the other parent.

The same expectation must apply to fathers. A man who is angry with the mother cannot withdraw from his child simply because dealing with the mother is difficult. He cannot refuse support merely to punish her, nor should he make the child feel responsible for the relationship ending. Parenthood continues even when the romantic relationship does not.

Perhaps that is where the conversation about “deadbeat” parents needs to change.

Being a good parent should not be determined solely by whether the parent is male or female, whether the parents remained together, or even solely by how much money changes hands. It should be determined by effort, responsibility, consistency, sacrifice, and the willingness to place the child’s well-being ahead of personal resentment.

Society also has a responsibility to stop celebrating mothers for actions that are simply considered obligations when fathers perform them, while simultaneously praising fathers for basic parenting that mothers are expected to perform without recognition. If we truly want equality in parenting, then equality must include expectations, criticism, responsibility, and recognition. Neither parent deserves a free pass because of gender, and neither parent should automatically be condemned because of it.

A father should not automatically be called a deadbeat because he is absent without first asking why he is absent. A mother should not automatically be considered a good parent simply because the child lives with her. Likewise, a father cannot use conflict, fear of court, financial hardship, or disagreement with the mother as a permanent excuse to abandon his responsibilities. The standard must work both ways.

If we are going to use the word “deadbeat,” then perhaps it should have nothing to do with gender.

A deadbeat parent should be a parent who has the ability and opportunity to contribute to the life of his or her child but deliberately chooses not to do so. That contribution can be financial, physical, emotional, educational, or simply the consistent presence that tells a child, “You matter to me.”

I hope this essay provides talking points that can be used in a healthy debate to further assist the parenting and upbringing of children raised in single-parent homes. The term “deadbeat” is hurtful, harmful, and degrading, and children see and hear more than adults sometimes realize. When one parent constantly attacks the other, the child may eventually internalize those attacks because that child understands that he or she came from both parents.

Children in harmful situations, such as the ones previously described herein, can become victims of both parents’ inability to nurture the child above their own disagreements. At some point, both parents must decide that whatever happened between them is less important than what happens next for their child. They do not have to love each other. They do not have to like each other. They may never agree about why their relationship failed. But they should be able to agree that their child deserves the opportunity to grow without carrying the weight of their resentment.

The objective should never be for the mother to win or for the father to win.

The objective should be for the child to win.