The National Fatherhood Initiative held a “media event” today at the National Press Club in Washington and released a survey called “Pop’s Culture: A National Survey on Dads’ Attitudes on Fathering.” A panel discussion followed with representatives from the media:
The topic was, “Does the Media Get it Right on Fatherhood?” The theme is ironic given that NFI’s extreme reluctance to examine the causes of the fatherhood crisis in family court abuses leads some to question whether the National Fatherhood Initiative itself entirely “Gets it Right on Fatherhood.” This is somewhat unfair. NFI deserves enormous credit for calling the nation’s attention to the crisis of fatherless children. Whether NFI can continue to be on the cutting edge of solutions to this crisis remains to be seen.
To its credit, NFI departed from the familiar themes about “good fathering” and “responsible fatherhood” and moved the discussion to the more contentious area of negative depictions of fathers in the media. After an hour, as the discussion was on the verge of becoming repetitious, panelist Stephen Perrine of Best Life, a magazine targeted at men, startlingly shifted the discussion by declaring that primary responsibility for the fatherhood crisis lay not with fathers nor with the media but with “the government.” He specifically criticized divorce courts for arbitrarily separating children from fit and loving fathers and challenged the myth that the crisis is caused by fathers “abandoning” their children.
Since the shift to audience questions was long overdue, I piped in at this point and asked about the “media blackout” on the problem of why loving and committed fathers who have not “abandoned” their children can be arrested for trying to see them, arrested for inability to pay extortionate child support, and arrested for mere allegations of domestic violence when not a shred of evidence is produced. I also asked why we have seen no media investigations of the courts in which this scandal is taking place. Soon after, David Levy of the Children’s Rights Council, pointed out that the District of Columbia in fact already has a shared parenting giving both parents equality in custody arrangements.
A father sitting to my right immediately informed me that everything I had mentioned had just happened to him and handed me a moving account of his efforts to reunite with his daughters. Another told me that the question was long overdue.
What is the moral of this event? Change the subject! We must be bold and not afraid to speak up at every opportunity. We have no right to criticize NFI for not bringing up these topics if we fear to do so. They are helping us by holding such events; it is our duty to take advantage of the opportunity. For too long we have sat in silence as others frame the terms of debate and set the agenda. We must take the initiative. We can be polite, but still firm and forceful. We have nothing to lose and everything to gain.
