Some comments by Paul Callister on the section "The still invisible fathers" in Mum's the Word: The Untold Story of Motherhood in New Zealand by Sue Kedgley (click for brief details on the book)

"The still invisible fathers"

This section of the book contains a selective overview of research and comments on fathers. It is within a chapter with the title the "burden of motherhood" which sets the tone. Overall, this section portrays fathers as being mostly absent, and as placing their success in paid work ahead of any family commitments. Playing to her audience, Kedgley portrays men as generally selfish and women generally caring and overworked.

The chapter begins with a sentence suggesting that men seldom report any "role-stress" in combining work and family commitments. While the research literature does focus on the stresses faced by women, there is also literature showing that men also face conflicts. A recent example is:

Williams, K., and Alliger, G. (1994) "Role stressors, mood spillover, and perceptions of work-family conflict in employed parents", Academy of Management Journal, 37 (4): 837-868.

However, the stresses faced by men working long hours to support families in jobs, which they often do not like, has been demonstrated in a range of New Zealand and overseas literature including:

Gray, A. (1983) The Jones Men - 100 New Zealand Men talk about their lives, Wellington: A.H and A.W Reed Ltd.

There is also much research from a range of countries showing that men face problems in workplaces in relation to issues such as taking parental leave, working part-time, and taking time off work when children are sick. For examples see:

Callister, P; Podmore, V. N; with Galtry, J & Sawicka, T. (1995) Striking a balance: Families, work and early childhood education. NZCER: Wellington.

The Kedgley study then moves onto a section discussing how men's time with children has increased very little since the 1940s. This is based on a 1982 collection of studies, so most of the data is from the 1970s. As most writers note the changes in father's time spent with children has occurred mainly since the mid 1980s. Examples include:

Pleck, J. (1992) "Families and work: Small changes with big implications", Qualitative Sociology, 15: 427-432.

Gershuny, J and Robinson, J.P (1988) "Historical Changes in the Household Division of Labour" Demography, 25:537-52.

These writers do not suggest that the increase in the time spent by fathers with children has been anywhere as great as the increase in time spent by women in paid work, but the shifts are much larger than suggested by Kedgley.

The statement by Kedgley that mothers have 90% of responsibility for childcare does not seem to have a source, and is completely at odds with the research literature. For example, Pleck (1992) estimates that, in the mid 1990s, married American fathers spend, on average, one hour for every 1.5 hours their wives spend with their children.

Kedgley then quotes the work of Russell to show that only one to two percent of couples share childcare equally. Again, this is a 1983 publication and so other more recent studies should have been cited. However, Kedgley also presents a very negative, and selective, slant on the research. For example, she notes how some primary caregiver fathers had "given up" when a second child was born. However, Russell makes it clear that in many of these situations it was the women who wanted to stay home and look after the child because they felt they had missed out the first time. And, in an egalitarian relationship, surely there is nothing wrong in taking turns in being the primary caregiver? In this paragraph, Kedgley finishes with a quote for a man saying "I'm glad to have done it, but I am glad it's over." This is probably a comment many women might make as well. Kedgley could have equally reported that the fathers in the study generally felt there was more emotional pressures associated with their new lifestyle but their becoming the primary caregiver had a positive effect on long term family relationships.

Much is then made of the fact that only a few fathers in two parent families are full-time in the role. But this is only one extreme of the parenting models. Equally, at the time quoted (1991 data) only a third of families fitted the traditional two parent model with the mother being full-time at home. Mothers, are still seen as being caring mothers if in paid work, but fathers are judged as being only truly committed if they are full-time at home.

In a further section (pg 325) Kedgley argues that most men do not worry that their commitment to paid work comes at a high cost to their children. This is a gross generalisation, for which Kedgley has only one interview to back up the statement.

In this section, Kedgley reports various women's views that most men are not capable of looking after children. This could have been balanced by the literature which shows that many, if not most, men are fully capable of looking after children. An example is:

Lamb, M. (1987) "Emergent American father - Moving from breadwinner". In M. Lamb (ed.), The father's role - Cross cultural perspectives, New Jersey: Hillsdale.

Where Kedgley does report positive research, the research is often not referenced. For example, she quotes Dr Peter McGeorge saying that research shows that fathers who have more physical and emotional contact with their children produce more stable children (pg328) but includes no reference to this research. Another example is at the bottom of the same page where it is said that some research suggests that fathers who are present at the birth of their child show a stronger attachment to their infants than fathers who are not.

In this section of the book. I am quoted a number of times. Some of the quotes are fine, but some are out of context, while others are an incorrect reportage of my comments. As background, Kedgley rang me on a Saturday morning to ask me about some of my research papers. At no time did she inform me that she was formally interviewing me, and in the reference section I am not listed as someone who was formally interviewed. However, various parts of this "interview" then turn up in the book which I did not expect. An example of a misquote is that I appear to say that I was a full-time father. I made it clear to Kedgley that I had never been a full-time father, but that I had shared in the care of my child.

In this book, Sue Kedgley talks very little about her own parenting arrangements. However, in a previous book, The Sexual Wilderness- Men and Women in New Zealand (1985) Reed Methuen, she argues passionately for a shared parenting model. It is not at all clear that this passion continued when she had her own child. As feminists have long argued the personal is political so an analysis of her and her partner's parenting arrangements may have helped readers better understand her own biases in preparing this section on fathers.

Paul Callister

14 April, 1998