Feds Hurt Families
by David Usher

We now have the first state-level report to recognize that federal programs may have a negative impact on the family, by the State of New Hampshire in its First Biennial Report Of The New Hampshire Commission On the Status of Men. The Commission’s report is a watershed event in politics because it is the first official recognition that men are part of the family too.

The report looks at structural discrimination against boys in education and men in the family by calling attention to family law, particularly in the areas of domestic violence and child support imposed on the states by federal laws, which in turn lead to problems for children including educational failure, delinquency, poor workplace performance, and men’s health issues.

New Hampshire is the first state legislature to realize the need for a Commission to quantify the problems, triage the causes; and recommend a wide scope of initiatives, reforms, and programs. There is no reason to restate the contents of this report. It speaks eloquently on its own. While the minutiae may vary in different states, the overarching issues and relationships do not. All states would do well to study it carefully, and take the findings and suggestions to heart.

The real value of this report is its political significance. New Hampshire has realized that social policy should no longer live in the 1950’s. Boys have not changed genetically since then, but the way they are raised certainly has. Today, too many boys develop an antisocial attitude that they “have to” do it on their own. They do not build trust in others or a sense of attaining a future role in society. They are raised absent the father socialization that is so necessary for building team-working skills, an ethical competitive spirit, and maturity into functional adulthood. It is not uncommon when speaking with today’s young men to hear them say that marriage is “too dangerous” to risk. Too many of them have no real goal in life – other than hanging out, video games and chat rooms. This is far different from men prior to 1960, whose style of self-reliance was built on healthy competitiveness and a goal and expectation of being a loving father and good husband.

Father-absence seriously affects girls as well. A girl learns how to trust a man and what to expect from one by having an involved father, instead of experimenting on boys down the street.

Today’s marriage movement is comprised of men and women who where brought up with pre-1960’s values, many of whom who ended up paying the price of unrestrained feminist policies. Many of those propositions ended up in federal law and became binding on the states, limiting their flexibility to respond. It is important that our “bridge generation” correct the failures of the last forty years. If we fail, we will leave it to a generation socially unequipped to deal with the problem. Let us all work together to establish a new modern standard that works for the substantive benefit of all men, women, and children.

David R. Usher is President of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children, Missouri Coalition

Email the Editor