Fathers Rights Groups and the Marriage Movement
A number of the father’s rights groups I recommend on my blog espouse the principle that the first thing a father should do, come what may, is to remain married to the child’s mother. I’m not an advocate of the right or the left on this issue, but I am a pragmatist. Groups that support the “if more couples stay married at all costs, we’ll go back to the way things were when Ward and June lived here,” philosophy are, respectfully, doing a disservice to fathers.
First, they are ignoring social reality. We live in a society that does not have the first clue what makes marriage work. We do not reward couples for entering into the civil aspects (contractual as they are) of marriage. Our advertising and social conditioning mindlessly promote the concept that marriage is about romance and entitlement, not about friendship and respectful partnership. We have women who want to be taken care of and men who can’t cope with an adult relationship if the woman is not dependent. They’re both wrong, and they’re both living from a set of perspectives that is completely false. Nevertheless, we do nothing to require couples to enter marriage with a sense of hard-headed pragmatism, and the skills training to make it work. And when city councils, legislatures and other law-making bodies propose legislation to do so, the same folks that want people to stay married for life (among other more sensitive social topics around the family) are the first ones up and screaming about the inroads into the sacred private ordering of the family.
Second, they are ignoring human nature in American culture today. Both men and women in our culture are chronically, endemically affected with narcissism and entitlement. I notice it more often in women, because of the nature of my work, but I’ve seen plenty of it in men too.
Very often, the affected spouse does not demonstrate noticeable traits of this until well into the marriage (particularly if there has been no premarital education or counseling). The more severely affected of these personalities are not merely narcissistic, they are dangerous, running the gamut from verbally to physically abusive and destructive.
Let me say this clearly. It is not an intact family that children need. It is an intact, reasonably healthy family. Parents who stay together because, “it’s the right thing to do,” without more, and whose families contain destructive conflict, whether verbal or physical, are affirmatively destroying their children. Children are always better off with at least one parent who demonstrates the ability to change and grow beyond conflict, and with one home where there is relative peace, than with a single, battle-ridden intact family (even if nobody but the family and the four walls sees the conflict).
Let’s start by insisting people be hard-headed and intelligent about the marriages they make.
Let’s continue by educating parents about the destructiveness of conflict on children before children are born.
Let’s not insist on the alleged virtue of living with a mistake no matter how destructive to the individuals involved, from some ridiculous notion that intact equals better.

