Literature Review

Study of Fathers’ Involvement in Permanency Planning and Child Welfare Casework

Appendix A.
Annotated Bibliography

[ Main Page of Report | Contents of Report]

Citation Review/Summary of Findings Measures/Design
General Fatherhood
Allen, W.D., and W.J. Doherty. 1996. “The Responsibilities of Fatherhood as Perceived by African American Teenage Fathers.” Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services 77(3): 142-155. The experience of adolescent fatherhood was explored through asking youth what being a father meant to them. Major themes include the perception of fatherhood, “being there” and responsibility, the importance of fathers, self-image as fathers, and obstacles to fathers’ involvement. In-depth interviews with 10 African American teenage fathers from a mid-western city.
Allen, S.M. and A.J. Hawkins. 1999. "Maternal Gatekeeping: Mothers’ Beliefs and Behaviors that Inhibit Greater Father Involvement in Family Work." Journal of Marriage and the Family 61(1): 199-212. Examines the role of maternal gatekeeping and its sociohistorical context. Dimensions of standards and responsibility, differentiated family role, and family work were reviewed.  
Bernard, S.N. and J. Knitzer. 1999. Map and Track: State Initiatives to Encourage Responsible Fatherhood. New York: National Center for Children in Poverty. Community-based responsible fatherhood programs have spread dramatically in the last few years. Most work both to establish paternity and to foster each father’s lifetime commitment to his children. They offer mentoring by older fathers, employment and training assistance, education, peer support and group counseling, individual counseling, and parenting skills training. States are also developing responsible fatherhood programs, emphasizing promotion of public awareness about importance of fathers in children’s lives, enhancing fathers as economic providers, strengthening them as nurturers, and promoting leadership. Fifty states report some level of fatherhood promotion activity; the level varies considerably among states.  
Brown, B., Michelsen, E., Halle, T., and K. Moore 2001. “Fathers' Activities with Their Kids.” Washington, DC: Child Trends. Research Brief. Data from multiple sources are used to report on the involvement of fathers (all of whom are fathers who live with their children) in children’s lives, specifically in general activities, school activities, limit-setting, and religious activities. Data from multiple sources examined.
Cabrera, N.J., Tamis-LeMonda, C.S., Bradley, R.H., Hofferth, S., and M.E. Lamb. 2000. "Fatherhood in the Twenty-First Century." Child Development 71(1): 127-136. This literature review discusses the impact of four important social trends — women's increased labor force participation, increased absence of nonresidential fathers from their children's lives, increased involvement of fathers in intact families, and cultural diversity in the U.S. Literature review
Cochran, D.L. 1997. "African American Fathers: A Decade Review of the Literature." Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services 78(4): 340-351. Identifies articles on African American fathers and limitations and gaps in the literature. The review suggests that significant contributions have been made in the past decade. A section on research is devoted to theory, methodology and directions for future studies. Literature review
Davis, J.E., and W.E. Perkins. 1996. Fathers' Care: A Review of the Literature. National Center on Fathers and Families. Extensive literature review on fatherhood. Sections include fathers' care activities, father status in families, young unwed fathers, and diversity in father care experiences. Literature review
De Luccie, M. F. 1995. "Mothers as Gatekeepers: A Model of Maternal Mediators of Father Involvement." The Journal of Genetic Psychology 156(1): 115-131. This study examined whether maternal characteristics mediate the frequency of father involvement with children in intact families. Questionnaires were administered to assess several variables and maternal mediators. Results supported the hypothesis indicating that 79% of the variation of mothers’ reports of frequency of father involvement was explained directly by the maternal mediators, marital satisfaction, and age of child. 1.Modified version of Klein’s (1983) Frequency of Participation Scale was used to measure frequency of involvement and importance of and satisfaction with father involvement.
2. Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale (Schumm et al., 1986) was used to measure satisfaction with marriage, social support, and employment status.
3. Crowne-Marlowe Social Desirability Scale (Campbell, Converse, & Rodgers, 1976) used to measure social desirability.
Dubowitz, H., Black, M.M., Cox, C.E., Kerr, M.A., Litrownik, A.J., Radhakrishna, A., English, D.J., Schneider, M.W., and D.K. Runyan. 2001. “Father Involvement and Children’s Functioning at Age 6 Years: A Multisite Study.” Child Maltreatment 6(4): 300-309. Father presence is associated with better cognitive development and greater perceived competence by the children. Also associated with fewer depressive symptoms. Original research.
Halle, T., Moore, K., Greene, A., and S. LeMenestrel. 1998. “What Policymakers Need to Know About Fathers.” Policy and Practice 56(3): 21-35. Reviews research and policy on father involvement. Sections on defining father involvement including accessibility, engagement, and responsibility; whether father involvement matters to children, and whether it matters if children live with their fathers. Provides sections on factors that keep men from being involved fathers—socioeconomic, educational, geographic and transportation, timing of parenting, and mother-father relationship, and when father involvement is not a good idea. Policy implications are discussed. Review of policy and research
Hamer, J., and K. Marchioro. 2002. “Becoming Custodial Dads: Exploring Parenting Among Low-Income and Working-Class African American Fathers.” Journal of Marriage and Family 64(1): 116-129. Examines the transition of working class and low income fathers from part time to full time parents, and the role of support networks in enhancing or inhibiting these men’s parenting. Findings suggest that these men generally become parents by default and are often reluctant to take on a full-time, single parenting role. Some fathers accepted responsibility for the child following child welfare contact due to removal of the child from the mother’s home. Some were sought as an alternative custody arrangement for the child by social service workers. Use of extended kin supports networks and shared living arrangements was found to enhance adaptation to this role. Low wages, a lack of sufficient assistance from public assistance programs, and informal custody arrangements often inhibit their fathering. Interviews with 24 African American men from an impoverished Midwestern urban area. Survey is not included in the article.
Hans, S., Ray, A., Berstein, V., and R. Halpern. 1995. “Caregiving in the Inner City.” A Final Report to the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation. Chicago: University of Chicago, Department of Psychiatry, Unit for Research in Child Psychiatry and Development. A study which addresses the caregiving context experienced by children living in poor urban areas. Attempts to identify caregivers, patterns of roles/relationships among caregivers, and roles/relationships between caregivers and children. Interviews with mothers of families living in Grand Boulevard and surrounding communities on Chicago’s South Side. Original Study
Hawkins, A.J., and D.J. Eggebeen. 1991. “Are Fathers Fungible? Patterns of Coresident Adult Men in Maritally Disrupted Families and Child Well-Being.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 53(4): 958-972. Examines the current debate on the role of fathers in child well-being. No difference found in verbal-intellectual functioning among children in intact versus disrupted families. Few differences found on psychosocial dysfunction. Author concludes that this information may lend support to the argument that fathers are peripheral to young children’s intellectual and psychosocial functioning. NLSY; Verbal intellectual functioning-PPVT-R; Psychosocial dysfunctioning-Behavior Problems Index, child temperament; Tools are not included in this study. Original study
Heath, D.T., and P.C. McKenry. 1993. "Adult Family Life of Men Who Fathered as Adolescents.” Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services 74(1): 36-45. Men who fathered as teens experienced similar levels of marital satisfaction, and reported greater parental satisfaction than the comparison group members. Data from the National Survey of Families and Households were used to investigate the family life of 227 men who fathered children when they were adolescents. The comparison group consisted of 1,032 men who fathered children in their twenties.
Hein, J.F. 1999. “The Father Factor.” American Outlook Magazine. Examines the fatherhood movement in the context of the marriage agenda, social costs, and federal involvement.  
Jeffries, J.M., Menghraj, S., and C.F. Hairston. 2001. “Serving Incarcerated and Ex-Offender Fathers and Their Families.” Prepared for U.S. Department of Justice and the Charles Stuart Mott Foundation. A compilation of resources on incarcerated fathers and their families. Includes information on programs, contacts, and publications related to this topic.  
Johnson, D.J. 1996. Father Presence Matters: A Review of the Literature. National Center on Fathers and Families. Extensive literature review on fathering and child outcomes. Sections include father-absence paradigm-development and child outcomes; single-parent paradigm, poverty and socialization; divorce, an alternative single parent paradigm; father care, beyond family structure; and father presence, toward linking father-specific parenting with child outcomes. Author finds that as a paradigm, father absence is a severely flawed construction of father roles, family functioning, and child outcomes, sorely limited by its emphasis on physical locale and contact patterns of biological fathers. Fiscal support and fulfillment of the provider role by males have the typical effect of lifting children out of or preventing their descent into poverty. The literature suggests that family structure does determine father contribution, and father contact is enormously affected by family structure. Literature review
Kandel, D.B. 1990. “Parenting Styles, Drug Use, and Children’s Adjustment in Families of Young Adults.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 52(1): 183-196. Examines parental styles/behaviors in relation to adjustment of children. Increased problems with child adjustment/behaviors appear to result from parental use of punitive discipline, disagreement among spouses on discipline, maternal drug use, etc. Longitudinal study based on Structured Interviews with young adults tracked from ages 15-16 to 28-29. Use of Parenting Scale and child behavior scales; Measures of Parental Drug Behavior (tools were not included). Original study.
Marsiglio, W., Amato, P., Day, R.D., and M.E. Lamb. 2000. “Scholarship on Fatherhood in the 1990s and Beyond.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 62(4): 1173-1191. A complete review of literature on fatherhood — historical perspectives, conceptual and theoretical perspectives, methodological issues, national surveys and fathering measures, measurement issues, demographic and cultural diversity, father involvement and child outcomes (economic support, father-child relationship in both two parent and with non-resident fathers), and future directions. Literature review
McAdoo, J.L. 1993. “The Roles of African American Fathers: An Ecological Perspective.” Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services 74(1): 28-35. Provides a theoretical perspective for understanding the roles African American fathers play in their families. Provider role, decision-making role, child-socializing role, and marital roles are discussed.  
McLanahan, S.S., and M.J. Carlson. 2002. “Welfare Reform, Fertility, and Father Involvement.” The Future of Children 12(1): 147-165. This article focuses on the important role that fathers play in children’s lives and how public policies have affected childbearing and father involvement. Children living in father-absent families often have fewer economic and socioemotional resources and do not fare as well on many outcome measurements. Efforts encouraging father involvement have yielded generally disappointing results, however, new research suggests targeting programs at the time of a child’s birth. Also reviews programmatic information on how to reduce the number of father absent families and increase father involvement.  
National Center for Education Statistics. 1997. “Fathers’ Involvement in Their Children’s Schools: National Household Education Survey.” U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Statistical Analysis Report NCES 98-091. Examines the extent to which resident and nonresident fathers are involved in their children’s schools and how their involvement influences their children’s performance in school. Findings suggest that in two-parent families, fathers are much less likely than mothers (of two-parent families) to be highly involved in their children’s schools. Fathers heading single-parent families more closely resemble mothers heading single-parent families. The study also examines how involvement varies by age of the child, association of parental involvement in schools with other parental behaviors, linkage to school outcomes, etc. This information is collected on both resident and nonresident fathers. Data collected from the National Household Education Survey.
Nock, S.L. 1998. “The Consequences of Premarital Fatherhood.” American Sociological Review 63(2): 250-263. Hazards models and fixed-effects analyses suggest that men who have children before marriage leave school earlier, have lower earnings, work fewer weeks per year, and are more likely to live in poverty compared to men who did not father children outside of marriage. Use of the first 15 years of National Longitudinal Survey of Youth to examine the socioeconomic consequences of premarital fatherhood.
Silverstein, L. B., and C.F. Auerbach. 1999. “Deconstructing the Essential Father.” American Psychologist 54 (6): 397-407. Using a wide range of cross-species, cross-cultural, and social science research, the authors challenge the claim that fathers are essential to positive child development and that responsible fathering is most likely to occur within the context of heterosexual marriage. Analysis of existing research.
Smith, L.A. 1988. “Black Adolescent Fathers: Issues for Service Provision.” National Association of Social Workers, Inc. 33(3): 269-271. Examines black adolescent males as a hard to reach group and an at-risk population. The social history relevant to fatherhood in this population is examined. The author seeks to promote an understanding of the needs of this group and provides implications for practice.  
Sullivan, M. 1998. Uses of Qualitative Research in Identifying and Measuring Outcomes of Responsible Fathering. National Center on Fathers and Families. Commentary on the ways in which qualitative research can inform the assessment of fatherhood programs.  
Yeung, W.J., Sandberg, J.F., Davis-Kean, P.E., and S. Hofferth. 1999. “Children’s Time with Fathers in Intact Families,” University of Michigan. Examines father involvement with children among intact families by measuring time spent together. Findings suggest that father involvement continues to increase from the levels found in the past 3 decades. Ethnic differences relative to involvement were examined. Original study using the 1997 Child Development Supplement to the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (Hofferth, 1998)
Parenting: Non-Resident Fathers
Amato, P.R., and J.G. Gilbreth. 1999. “Nonresident Fathers and Children’s Well-Being: A Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 61(3): 557-573. Meta-analytic methods to pool information from 63 studies dealing with nonresident fathers and children’s well being. Fathers’ payment of child support positively associated with measures of children’s well-being. Frequency of contact was not related to child outcomes in general.  
Carlson, M.J., and S.S. McLanahan. 2001. Father Involvement in Fragile Families. Princeton University, Center for Research on Child Well-Being, Working Paper #01-08-FF. Provides detailed information about the characteristics of fathers, nature of relationships between unmarried mothers and fathers, and the extent of father involvement. Baseline interviews with 1,286 unmarried fathers involved shortly after their child’s birth. Findings affirm importance of provider role in facilitating fathers’ overall involvement and support the centrality of the mother-father relationship for understanding fathers’ contributions to their children. Data from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study, study
Carlson, M.J, and S.S. McLanahan. 2001. Fragile Families, Father Involvement, and Public Policy. Princeton University. Preliminary copy of study presenting data from Fragile Families survey. Reviews literature on the importance of father’s involvement, father roles/contributions, public policy/child support enforcement, etc. Data from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study, study
Danzinger, S., and N. Radin. 1990. “Absent Does Not Equal Uninvolved: Predictors of Fathering in Teen Mother Families.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 52(3): 636-642. Surveyed adolescent teen welfare recipients to investigate the effects of predictors of father-child relations in teen mother families with nonresident fathers. Results indicate that the work behavior of absent fathers had a significant direct effect on participation in childrearing and that minority mothers reported higher rates of paternal involvement. Telephone surveys Describes father involvement measures. Original study.
Fragile Families Research Brief. 2000. Dispelling Myths about Unmarried Fathers. Princeton University, Bendheim-Thoman Center for Research on Child Wellbeing and Columbia University, Social Indicators Survey Center, Report No. 1. Presents data from the first 7 cities (20 in total) in the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study.  
Furstenberg, F.F., Morgan, S.P., and P.D. Allison. 1987. “Paternal Participation and Children’s Well-Being After Marital Dissolution.” American Sociological Review 52(5): 695-701. This article examines the influence of paternal involvement on child’s well-being among children who had experienced their parents’ marital dissolution. Results indicate for academic difficulty, problem behavior, and psychological distress, there is little evidence that paternal involvement has either harmful or beneficial effects. Paternal economic support reduced somewhat the likelihood of problem behavior. No consistent pattern on child well-being in relation to visitation and closeness of relationship. National Survey of Children (NSC)-panel study. Well-being Scales of children are included in appendix. Original study.
Gadsen, V. L. 1995. The Absence of Father: Effects on Children’s Development and Family Functioning. University of Pennsylvania, National Center on Fathers and Families. A review of literature on the effect of father absence on children’s development and family functioning. Review includes sections on cultural contexts, social need, and functioning; nature of social need in young, female-headed households; effects of father absence on family adjustment; economic effects and stress; poverty and single-parent homes; developmental and social issues; and self-esteem, emotional development, and academic achievement. Literature review.
Hairston, C.F. 1998. “The Forgotten Parent: Understanding the Forces that Influence Incarcerated Fathers’ Relationship with Their Children.” Child Welfare 77(5): 671-693. Examination of issues concerning designing policies and providing services that promote the maintenance of parent-child bonds and responsible parenting when fathers are incarcerated.  
Hamer, J.F. 1997. “The Fathers of “Fatherless” Black Children.” Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services 78(6): 564-578. Provides information on how the fathers’ perspective on the roles and responsibilities of fatherhood contrasts sharply with that of the dominant culture. Qualitative data from 38 adult Black noncustodial fathers
Jackson, A. 1999. “The Effects of Nonresident Father Involvement on Single Black Mothers and Their Young Children.” Social Work 44 (2): 156-166. Examined the influence of non-resident fathers on the well-being and development of 188 low-income, employed and unemployed single black mothers and their 3 and 4 year old children. Mothers employment status affects both their depression symptoms and parental stress as well as need for non-resident fathers’ support. Non-resident fathers seemed to be less important in the lives of employed mothers but the mothers with boys predicted greater parental stress. Employed mothers reported fewer child problem behaviors when the father was present in the child’s life. Used data from an ongoing study of current and former welfare recipients.
Johnson, W.E. 2001. “Paternal Involvement Among Unwed Fathers.” Child and Youth Services Review 23 (6/7): 513-536. Findings include the overwhelming majority of unwed fathers are highly involved, though in general paternal intentions are higher than paternal behaviors. Non-resident fathers are less involved than resident fathers and mothers reported fewer nonresident fathers provided financial support during pregnancy. Reports findings from a baseline analysis of data from the national FFCW survey of a total of 1780 unmarried mothers.
King, V. 1994. “Variation in the Consequences of Nonresident Father Involvement for Children’s Well-Being.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 56(4): 963-972. Looks at what factors influence the effects of nonresident father involvement on child well-being. Results show few interactive results and no identifiable set of conditions emerged that increased or reduced the importance of father involvement for child well-being. NLSY data. Original study
Knox, V., and C. Redcross. 2000. Parenting and Providing: The Impact of Parents’ Fair Share on Paternal Involvement. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation. Study looks at how the Parents Fair Share Program effects paternal involvement. Results indicate that PFS program participants were more likely to provide formal child support and engage in active parenting than non-participants. It did not seem to impact informal support or level of contact. Custodial Parent Survey, Non Custodial Parent Survey, Child Support Enforcement Payment Records, MDRC’s Baseline information form. These measures are not included in the report. Original Research
Koball, H.L., and D. Principe. 2002. Do Nonresident Fathers Who Pay Child Support Visit Their Children More? Washington DC: The Urban Institute. Poor children are much less likely to live with their fathers and visit nonresident fathers as compared to higher income children. Fathers with support orders and those who pay on these orders are more likely to visit their children. The level of visitation did not rise following increased child support enforcement. Children born out of wedlock were more likely to visit their fathers after PRWORA was enacted. 1999 National Survey of America’s Families Original Research
Lerman, R., and E. Sorenson. 2000. “Father Involvement With Their Non-Marital Children: Patterns, Determinants, and Effects on Their Earnings.” Fatherhood: Research, Interventions and Policies. Binghamton, NY: The Haworth Press. Reviews patterns of father involvement with their non-marital children over time and finds, in initial year after a non-marital birth, 75 percent of fathers were either living with their child or visiting at least once a week. However, eight years after the birth, the proportion had dropped to about 50 percent. Moreover, one in three fathers of non-marital children were disconnected from the child and rarely visited at six years after the birth.  
Lin, I., and S.S. McLanahan. 2001. “Norms about Nonresident Fathers’ Obligations and Rights.” Children and Youth Services Review 23 (6/7): 485-512. Using a survey of parents who just had a new baby, study finds that new parents are generally not opposed to the idea that fathers should have child support obligations and rights to see their child and make decisions about how their child is raised. The study found few disagreements among couples about child support obligations and visitation or decision-making rights. However, this is affected by parents’ relationship status. Couples whose romantic relationships had ended had more disagreements over visitation and decision-making. Study looks at fathers’ attitudes rather than actual behavior. Support obligation question referred to financial support in general, not child support ordered by the court.
Malkin, C. M. and M.E. Lamb. 1994. “Child Maltreatment: A Test of Socio-biological Theory,” Journal of Comparative Family Studies 25(1): 121-130. Study found, among other things, that children growing up in father absent homes are especially likely to experience violence and be victims of child abuse and neglect.  
Manning, W.D., Stewart, S.D., and P.J. Smock. 2001.“The Complexity of Fathers’ Parenting Responsibilities and Involvement with Nonresident Children.” University of Michigan, Population Studies Center at the Institute for Social Research, Report No. 01-478. Describes the complexity of nonresident fathers’ parenting circumstances and assess whether and how parenting configurations are associated with their involvement with nonresident children. Findings include the complex nature of nonresident fathers parenting obligations within and outside their current residences (half of nonresident fathers have parenting responsibilities beyond single set of nonresident children, nearly 75% who are remarried or cohabiting face potential obligations to other children) may result in less economic support and visitation with nonresident children. Data from 1987-88 wave of National Survey of Families and Households
Martinez, J.M., and C. Miller. 2000. “The Effects of Parents Fair Share on the Employment and Earnings of Low-Income, Noncustodial Fathers,” Focus, 21(1), University of Wisconsin-Madison: Institute for Research on Poverty. Descriptive information from Parents’ Fair Share found that poor non-custodial fathers face severe employment barriers, including limited education, limited work experience, criminal records, housing instability, and poor health. PFS demos found that nearly 70 percent of participants had a criminal record and nearly a third had been arrested and charged with a crime during their participation in the program.  
Martinez, J., and C. Miller. 2000. Working and Earning: The Impact of Parents’ Fair Share on Low-Income Fathers’ Employment. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation. Looks at how PFS has effected employment and earnings. Examines low-income noncustodial fathers. Data from Unemployment Insurance (administrative) and survey data. Tools are not included. Original study.
McLanahan, S.S., Garfinkel, I., Brooks-Gunn, J., Zhao, H., Johnson, W., Rich, L., Turner, M., Waller, M., and M. Wilson. 1998. Unwed Fathers and Fragile Families. Center for Research on Child Wellbeing, Princeton University, Working Paper #98-12. Uses mothers’ reports in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY) to examine level and stability of children’s involvement with unwed fathers during first few years after birth. Found high levels of involvement and stability of fathers’ involvement among these children. NLSY data.
McLanahan, S.S., Garfinkel, I., Reichman, N., and J. Teitler. Unwed Parents or Fragile Families? Implications for Welfare and Child Support Policy. Center for Research on Child Wellbeing, Princeton University, Working Paper #00-04. Using baseline data from new parents in seven cities, parent relationships, capabilities of unwed parents, and how to address fathers’ low earnings capacity. Findings include the fact that most unwed parents view themselves as families, over 90% of mothers want the father to be involved in raising the child.  
McLanahan, S., and G. Sandefur. 1994. Growing Up With a Single Parent: What Hurts, What Helps. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Discusses how the reduction in parental/household/community (economic, social, etc.) resources following divorce impacts child well-being. Suggests that school achievement, labor force attachment, and age of childbearing are impacted negatively.  
Miller, C., & Knox, V. 2001. The Challenge of Helping Low-Income Fathers Support Their Children: Final Lessons from Parents’ Fair Share. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation. Generally, fathers were very disadvantaged, however, PFS increased employment and earnings for the least-employable men but not for those more able to find work on their own. PFS encouraged some fathers, primarily those least involved initially to take a more active parenting role. Many had regular visitation but few had legal visitation agreements. Some mothers were found to act as gate-keepers, restricting fathers’ access to children. Men referred to PFS paid more child support than those in the control group. Data from Parents’ Fair Share (PFS) Demonstration Project
Minton, C., and K. Pasley. 1996. “Fathers’ Parenting Role Identity and Father Involvement: A Comparison of Nondivorced and Divorced, Nonresident Fathers.” Journal of Family Issues 17 (1), 26-45. Explored fathers’ parenting role identity in nondivorced and divorced, nonresident fathers and the relationship between role identity and involvement in child-related activities. One of findings suggests that regardless of whether fathers reside with their children they report they are equally invested in being a father. Data collected from 270 fathers (178 nondivorced and 92 divorced) through mail questionnaire
Mott, F.L. 1990. “When Is a Father Really Gone? Paternal-Child Contact in Father-Absent Homes.” Demography 27(4): 499-517. Examines the dynamics of father’s absence during a child’s first few years of life. Documents the extent to which substantial proportions of children born to younger mothers never have had a biological father residing in the home, “net” levels of fathers’ absence at various postbirth points mask significant “gross” flows of fathers in and out of the household, and large proportions of children in homes lacking a biological father have potentially significant contact with absent fathers or new father figures. Using data from the 1979-1986 rounds of the National Longitudinal Survey of Labor Market Experience of Youth (NLSY)
Mumola, C.J. 2000. Incarcerated Parents and Their Children. U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report, NCJ 182335. Presents data from the 1997 Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities. Presents data on the percent of prisoners who were parents, living arrangements of children prior to the parent’s incarceration, and data on contact prisoners have with their children. Uses data from 1997 Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities.
Nelson, T.J., Edin, K. and S. Clampet-Lundquist. 2001. “Fragile Fatherhood: How Low-Income, Non-Custodial

Fathers in Philadelphia Talk about their Families.” In The Handbook of Father Involvement: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by C. Tamis-LeMonda and N. Cabrera. Northwestern University, Institute for Policy Research.

Authors discuss how study population construct the fathering role and examine three aspects of father involvement— how relationships (primarily with child’s mother) shape father involvement, how involvement is constrained by illegal activities, labor market inequalities, and the child support system, and how fathers “do the best they can” within these constraints. Data from open-ended interviews with 70 low-income, noncustodial fathers
Nord, C., and N. Zill. 1996. Non-Custodial Parents’ Participation in Their Children’s Lives: Evidence from the Survey of Income and Program Participation. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Provides information on custody arrangements, non-custodial parent participation, and family structure. Reviews the role of the father and child development. Large section devoted to the ways in which family structure may affect children’s lives. Includes an annotated bibliography and traditional bibliography on issues of child support, fathers, families, etc. None.
Perloff, J.N., and J.C. Buckner. 1996. “Fathers of Children on Welfare: Their Impact on Child Well-Being,” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 66(4): 557-571. Study presents evidence suggesting there is considerable father-child contact. Multivariate modeling indicates that contact with fathers had a modest beneficial effect on children’s behavior. Negative traits of fathers—substance abuse, physical violence— appear to be associated with increased child behavior problems. A case-control study in Worcester, Massachusetts.
Rasheed, J.M. 1999. “Obstacles to the Role of Inner-City, Low-Income, Noncustodial African American Fathers.” Journal of African American Men 4(1): 9-23. Policies and gendered-obstacles that affect the paternal role function of inner-city, low-income noncustodial African American fathers are examined. Policy review
Ray, A., and S. Hans. 2001. “Low-Income African-American Fathers’ Involvement in Caring for Toddlers.” (Draft). University of Chicago, Erikson Institute for Graduate Study in Child Development. A study of paternal care yielded results indicating that low-income noncustodial fathers frequently play a role in various aspects of caregiving and are involved with their children. 64% of fathers saw the toddler at least one day of the week and 47% of fathers provided solo care to the toddler. Parental Caregiving Roles Scale (Ray, 1998) Other interview questions also utilized. Instrument is not included however measured items are listed in the appendix. Original Study
Schaeffer, N.C., Seltzer, J.A., and J. Dykema. 1998. Methodological and Theoretical Issues in Studying Nonresident Fathers: A Selective Review. National Center on Fathers and Families. Examination of issues raised by using survey data to study contemporary families in a way that includes fathers and mothers. Principal household studies discussed include Current Population Survey, Survey of Income and Program Participation, National Survey of Families and Households, National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, and Panel Study of Income Dynamics.  
Seltzer, J.A. 1991. “Relationships Between Fathers and Children Who Live Apart: The Father’s Role After Separation.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 53(1): 79-101. Describes three components of nonresident fathers involvement with children— social contact, economic involvement, and participation in childrearing decisions. Fathers who visit are more likely to pay child support and influence childrearing decisions. Data from 1987-88 National Survey of Families and Households.
Seltzer, J.A. 1998. “Father by Law: Effects of Joint Legal Custody on Nonresident Fathers’ Involvement with Children.” Demography 35(2): 135-146. Examines relationship between joint legal custody and nonresident fathers’ contributions, frequency of visits and child support payments. Findings support view that joint legal custody may encourage some aspects of paternal involvement after divorce. Data from the National Survey of Families and Households (1987-88 and 1992-94)
Simons, R.L., Whitbeck, L.B., Beaman, J., and R.D. Conger. 1994. “The Impact of Mothers’ Parenting, Involvement by Nonresidential Fathers, and Parental Conflict on the Adjustment of Adolescent Children.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 56(2): 356-374. Studies looks at the relationship between quality of parenting by nonresidential fathers/mothers and child externalizing/internalizing problems. Results are provided separately by gender of child. Also examines relationship between these problems and father involvement. Panel data-207 divorces women and their children; 10-item self report measure on externalizing problems; SCL-90-R for Internalizing problems; measures on custodial mother’s parenting; Nonresidential fathers parenting (this measure is included in study); contact with father (question included); parental conflict (included); family income; child support payments (question included). Original study
Sorenson, E. 1997. “Nonresident Fathers: What We Know and What’s Left to Learn.” The Urban Institute, Prepared for the NICHD Workshop. Washington, DC, January 16-17. Provides review of how nonresident fathers are identified in national surveys; what we know about the fathers identified in these surveys; why nonresident fathers are underrepresented in national surveys; and future research efforts. Review of results of national survey data.
Sorenson, E. 1999. Obligating Dads: Helping Low-Income Noncustodial Fathers Do More For Their Children. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. Provides a demographic profile of noncustodial fathers. Examines how the current child support system interacts with low-income noncustodial fathers. Provides recommendations on ways in which to optimize current legislation and practices to promote financial responsibility among noncustodial fathers.  
Sorensen, E., Mincy, R., and A. Halpern. 2000. “Redirecting Welfare Policy Toward Building Strong Families.” Strengthening Families. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. Summarizes recent literature on fragile families and reports that fathers are not necessarily absent from children born outside of marriage. Finds that 44 percent of fathers were living with non-marital children at the time of birth and another 38 percent were involved romantically with their child’s mother. Of all poor children under the age of two who were born outside of marriage, 35 percent lived with their mothers and saw their fathers at least weekly.  
Stewart, S.D. 1999. “Disneyland Dads, Disneyland Moms? How Nonresident Parents Spend Time with Absent Children.” Journal of Family Issues 20(4): 539-556. Examines gender differences in how nonresident parents spend time with their absent children. Results suggest that nonresident mothers and fathers exhibit a similar pattern of participation in activities with absent children. Most parents either engage in only leisure activities with their children or have no contact. Only one-third mention school among activities they participate in with children. Data from 1987-88 National Survey of Families and Households
Stewart, S.D. 1999. “Nonresident Mothers’ and Fathers’ Social Contact with Children.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 61(4): 894-907. Assessment of social contact using nonresident parents’ own reports. Investigation of sex differences in nonresident parents’ level of contact with biological children with whom they do not live. Data from the 1987-88 National Survey of Families and Households
Teitler, J.O. 2001. “Father Involvement, Child Health and Maternal Health Behavior.” Children and Youth Services Review 23(4/5): 403-425. Examines the level and effects of father-involvement on child’s birth weight and mother’s health behavior during pregnancy. Findings indicate that most fathers, including those that are unwed, are involved with children at birth and intend to remain involved. Effects of father involvement vary based on which construct is measured and are inconclusive regarding the effect of father involvement on birth outcomes . Baseline data from Fragile Families and Child Well-Being Study
Travis, J., Solomon, A.L., and M. Waul. 2001. From Prison to Home: The Dimensions and Consequences of Prisoner Reentry. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. Summarizes results of the first “Reentry Roundtable” in October 2000. Chapter on implications of prisoner reentry for families and communities. Presents data on percent of prisoners who are parents and where their children are living.  
Waller, M.R. 2001. “Unmarried Parents, Fragile Families: New Evidence from Oakland.” Public Policy Institute of California. Report investigates factors that support and discourage efforts on the part of unmarried parents to form stable relationships, including marriage. Focuses on 250 families in Oakland who participated in the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing (FFCW) survey.
Marriage Agenda
Furstenberg, F.F. 1995. “Dealing with dads: The Changing Roles of Fathers” In “Escape from Poverty: What makes a Difference for Children?”, edited by P.L Chase-Lansdale and J. Brooks-Gunn. New York: Cambridge University Press. Examines fathers in the context of marriage and child-bearing. Also looks at the role of child support in family structure, well-being etc.  
Lipscomb, A. 2001. The Legislative Marriage Agenda and its Potential Meaning for Programs Serving Low-Income Families. Center on Fathers, Families, and Public Policy. Examines fatherhood in the context of recent legislation. Discusses the impact of the “marriage agenda” on fatherhood programs and funding.  
Sawhill, I. 2001. Welfare Reform and the Marriage Movement. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution. Commentary on recent conservative pro-marriage movement and a review of strategies for reducing the growth of single parent families.  
Paternity Establishment
Aizpuru, R. 1999. “Protecting the Unwed Fathers’ Opportunity to Parent: A Survey of Paternity Registry Statutes.” The Review of Litigation 18(3): 703-32. Reviews the history of case law regarding unwed fathers. Additionally, discusses the operation of paternal registries, how they work, implications, etc. Provides information on some individual states and their paternal registries. An outline of options for setting up a paternal registry.  
Alton, K. 2000. “Foster Care and Adoption: Casenote: In re Adoption of Kelsey S.” Journal of Contemporary Legal Issues 11: 547-53. Review of case law. Examines how recent case rulings have reflected previous rulings.  
Burns, J.E. 2000. “Should Marriage Matter?: Evaluating the Rights of Legal Absentee Fathers.” Fordham Law Review 68(6): 2299-2349. A review of case law (rights of unwed fathers) in relation to child protection, foster care, ASFA, etc.  
Crippen, G. 1990. “Stumbling Beyond Best Interests of the Child: Reexamining Child Custody Standard-Setting in the Wake of Minnesota’s Four Year Experiment with the Primary Caretaker Preference.” Minnesota Law Review 75: 427-503. Provides an overview of case law and judicial opinions in reference to Minnesota’s policy on utilizing “primary caretaker preference” in making custody decisions. Primary caretaker preference means that that court considers the child’s primary caretaker to be a firm preference when making decisions on placement of the child.  
Dapolito, A.R. 1993. “The Failure to Notify Putative Fathers of Adoption Proceedings: Balancing the Adoption Equation.” Catholic University Law Review 42: 979-1026. Discusses the notification of putative fathers in regards to adoption proceedings. Father registries are discussed as a means of avoiding judicial dilemmas. The implementation of these registries is discussed.  
Eveleigh, L.J. 1989. “Certainly not Child’s Play: A Serious Game of Hide and Seek with the Rights of Unwed Fathers.” Syracuse Law Review 40: 1055-1088. Reviews court rulings related to unwed fathers and child custody. Discusses how the rights of fathers have been furthered by these rulings, but also examines limitations that currently exist related to unwed fathers and custody rights.  
Gustafson, J.B. 1993. “The Natural Father, I Presume: The Natural Father’s Rights versus the Best Interests of the Child.” San Diego Justice Journal 1: 489-501. Examines the rights of unwed fathers in the context of adoption. Historically, the “alleged” fathers rights could be terminated on the basis of the best interests of the child. Current legislation states that any father that is a capable parent and comes forward promptly with a desire to raise his child who was relinquished for adoption, becomes a presumed father by the act of coming forward and offering a home. The court now considers only the father’s conduct in making decisions regarding custody. Preference is given to parents over non-parents.  
Kastner, C.R., and L.R. Young. 1981. “In the Best Interest of the Child: A Guide to State Child Support and Paternity Laws.” Washington, D.C.: National Conference of State Legislatures. This document is outdated but may contain helpful information on laws related to paternity establishment in the United States. State by State review. Synthesis
Martin, R.W. 1983. “A Legal Assistance Symposium—Legal Rights of the Unwed Father.” Military Law Review 102: 3-190. Discusses the constitutional recognition of the role of unwed fathers. Examines the way in which this affects specific rights, including adoption, custody, visitation, etc.  
Melli, M.S. 1992. A Brief History of the Legal Structure for Paternity Establishment in the United States. University of Wisconsin-Madison. Provides an overview of the historical origins of paternity establishment in the US. Historical synthesis
Meyer, D.R. 1992. “Paternity and Public Policy.” Focus, 14 (2), University of Wisconsin-Madison, Institute for Research on Poverty. Provides data on the increasing numbers of out-of-wedlock births. Overviews the historical trends of paternity establishment. Discusses the weakness of national data on paternity establishment as well as the correlates of success and failure in paternity establishment.  
National Conference of State Legislatures, Paternity Establishment Tables and Information. Provides state by state data on paternity establishment practices, 11/99  
National Fatherhood Initiative. 2000. “Federal Legislation Promoting Responsible Fatherhood.” http://www.in.gov/fssa/fathers/docs/Federal%20Fatherhood%20Legislation.doc Reviews recent fatherhood legislation and guidelines for legislation.  
National Women’s Law Center/Center on Fathers, Families, and Public Policy. 2000. “Family Ties: Improving Paternity Establishment Practices and Procedures for Low-Income Mothers, Fathers and Children.” Same as author. Examines paternity establishment before and after PRWORA. Reviews paternity establishment from the perspective of the families involved.  
Nichols-Casebolt, A. 1988. “Paternity Adjudication: In the Best Interests of the Out-of-Wedlock Child.” Child Welfare 67(3): 245-254. Discusses the benefits of a legal parent-child relationship in the context of increasing out-of-wedlock births. Provides an overview of ways to improve father-based practice in child welfare agencies.  
Nichols-Casebolt, A. and I. Garfinkel. 1991. “Trends in Paternity Adjudications and Child Support Awards.” Social Science Quarterly 72 (1): 83-97. Examines the role of public policy in effecting change regarding the number of paternity adjudications/child support orders per year. Ratios of paternity adjudications to nonmarital births are provided for all states 1979-1986. While increases in the number of paternity adjudications and child support awards were found, the author notes that there are still large numbers of children without adjudicated fathers.  
Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) Best Practices www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cse/rpt/bppat.htm Reviews state by state practices in regards to legislation/paternity establishment.  
Office of the Inspector General, Department of Health and Human Services. (8 Reports on Paternity Establishment, 1997-2000). Reviews the variations in state practices regarding paternity establishment including:

1. Use of voluntary paternity acknowledgements (OEI-06-98-0053)

2. Administrative and Judicial Methods (OEI-06-98-0050)

3. The role of vital records agencies (OEI-06-98-0055)

4. Payment to vital records agencies (OEI-06-98-0056)

5. State use of genetic testing (OEI-06-98-0054)

6. Use of alternative sites for voluntary paternity acknowledgement (OEI-06-98-0052)

7. Notification of rights/responsibilities for voluntary paternity acknowledgement (OEI-06-98-0051)

8. In-hospital voluntary paternity acknowledgement programs (OEI-06-95-00160)

 
Pearson, J., and N. Thoennes. 1995. “The Child Support Improvement Project: Paternity Establishment.” Center for Policy Research. In hospital paternity interventions can produce dramatic increases in the voluntary paternity acknowledgement rate. Discusses simplifications in the voluntary paternity acknowledgement process. Provides information on the correlates of paternity establishment, paternal participation factors, and financial implications of paternity acknowledgement. Colorado Dept. of Health Data 1991-examination of patterns in 4 Denver facilities. Survey of Mothers related to paternity establishment is included in the document. Original research
Pons-Bunney, J. 1998. “Non-custodial Fathers’ Rights: State’s Lack of Incentives for the Father to Remain in the Child’s Life.” Journal of Juvenile Law 19: 212-235. Provides information on custody determinations, establishment of paternity, child support, financial incentives etc. Statistics provided on the number of paternity establishments.  
Smith, P.L. 2000. “The Primary Caretaker Presumption: Have We Been Presuming Too Much?” Indiana Law Journal 75(2): 731-746. Critically examines the impact of primary caretaker preference on custody decision-making in West Virginia/Minnesota. Synthesis.
Sonenstein, F.L., Holcomb, P.A., and K.S. Seefeldt. 1993. Promising Approaches to Improving Paternity Establishment Rates at the Local Level. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute. Reviews paternity establishment procedures and provides information based on data analysis of the National Survey of Paternity Establishment Procedures. Rates of paternity establishment and promising practices are identified. Data analysis of the National Survey of Paternity Establishment Procedures. Original study.
Thompson, R.A. 1986. “Fathers and the Child’s “Best Interests”: Judicial Decision Making in Custody Disputes” In The Father’s Role: Applied Perspectives, edited by M.E. Lamb. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Describes the “best interests” standard in judicial decision-making within custody disputes.  
Wattenberg, E. 1987. “Establishing Paternity for Nonmarital Children” Public Welfare 45(3): 8-13. Examines the role of policy and practice in paternity adjudication in light of the increasing number of out-of-wedlock births. Provides an overview of the benefits of establishing paternity. Reviews the findings from a study on the Project on Paternity Adjudication and Child Support Obligations of Teenage Parents.  
Williams, W.C. 1997. “The Paradox of Paternity Establishment: As Rights Go Up, Rates Go Down.” University of Florida Journal of Law and Public Policy 8: 261-281. Provides a thorough review of recent legislation that is targeted at nonresident fathers. Also discusses paternity establishment policies in other countries and suggests a model for the United States.  
Child Support
Bloom, D., and K. Sherwood. 1994. Matching Opportunities to Obligations: Lessons for Child Support Reform from the Parents’ Fair Share Pilot Phase. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation. Reports on early findings from Parents’ Fair Share demonstration projects that offered intensive services (job search assistance, case management, parenting education, access and visitation, etc.) to low-income, non-custodial fathers. The aim of the demonstrations was to help these fathers attain well-paying jobs, establish paternity and child support orders, pay child support on behalf of their children, and improve their parenting capabilities and practices.  
Crowell, N. and E. Leeper. 1994. America’s Fathers and Public Policy: Report of a Workshop. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Provides an overview of child support enforcement policy, paternity establishment, custody issues/fathers’ rights, as well as programs aimed at increasing father involvement. Policy and program review
Doolittle, F., and S. Lynn. 1998. Working with Low-Income cases: Lessons for the Child Support Enforcement System from Parents’ Fair Share. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation. Provides an overview of the child support enforcement and PFS Intake Process. In depth look at noncustodial parents and enforcement. Policy and practice review.
Garfinkel, I., Gaylin, D.S., Huang, C., and S.S. McLanahan. The Roles of Child Support Enforcement and Welfare in Nonmarital Childbearing. Center for Research on Child Wellbeing, Princeton University, Working Paper #00-06. Analysis of states’ child support policies over 16 year period and relationship to non-marital births. Study found that strict child support enforcement deters and generous welfare promotes non-marital births. Compared to welfare, the estimated effects of child support enforcement are more robust. Analysis of observational data of states’ child support enforcement policies for 1980-1996. Uses primarily fixed effects regression models.
Garfinkel, I. and S. McLanahan. 1995. “The Effects of Child Support Reform on Child Well-Being” In Escape from poverty: What makes a difference for children?, edited by P.L. Chase-Lansdale and J. Brooks-Gunn. Examines history of child support in the US and the potential effect of child support reform on child well-being. Provides statistics on the increase of paternity establishments from 1975-1985. Provides a model and proposed evaluation of the effect of child support on child well-being.  
Garfinkel, I., McLanahan, S., Meyer, D., and J. Seltzer (Eds.). 1988. Fathers Under Fire: The Revolution of Child Support Enforcement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Examines policy in relation to nonresident fathers. How child support enforcement effects fathers and how to assist fathers in access to children and ability to meet obligations. Some of the studies in the text are original work.
Garfinkel, I., McLanahan, S., and P. Robins (Eds.). 1994. Child Support and Child Well-Being. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press. Looks at the interaction between child support and child well-being, policies and payment, assured child support benefits, child outcomes in relation to payment, etc. Ch 2: Promising Approaches to improving paternity establishment rates at the local level. Some of the studies in the text are original work.
Griswold, E.A., Pearson, J., and N. Thoennes. 2000. “New Directions for Child Support Agencies, When Domestic Violence is an Issue.” Policy and Practice 58(1): 29-36. Discusses the conflicting nature of child support enforcement regulations on identifying fathers and the needs of women that have been subjected to domestic violence by the noncustodial parent. Provides an overview of 3 state efforts and findings (Colorado, Massachusetts, and Minnesota) in screening public assistance applicants for domestic violence.  
Institute for Research on Poverty. 2000. “Child Support Enforcement Policy and Low-income Families.” Focus 21(1), University of Wisconsin-Madison. Examines the success of child support enforcement policies and low income families. Provides a useful overview of major changes in federal legislation relevant to child support enforcement from 1975-1998.  
Knox, V. 1996. “The Effects of Child Support Payments on Developmental Outcomes for Elementary School-Age Children.” The Journal of Human Resources 31(4): 816-840. Evaluates the effect of child support payments from absent fathers on children’s achievement test scores and home environments. Results indicate that increased child support payments may improve the academic achievement of elementary school-age children more than income from other sources. NLSY, PIAT (Peabody Individual Achievement Test), HOME (Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment)—Some information on tools is provided in appendix. Original research study
Lerman, R., and E. Sorenson. 2001. Child Support: Interactions Between Private and Public Transfers. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, Working Paper N. 8199. Reviews the history of federal and state government efforts to ensure that non-custodial parents improve the provision of financial support to their children, and the interactions between child support enforcement and the cash welfare program for mothers.  
May, R. 2001. Child Support Policy Concepts and Proposals that will Impact Poor Families. Center on Fathers, Families, and Public Policy. Discusses bills that would make significant changes to child support policy which were considered but not passed by Congress during the Fall 2000 session. Provides online links to websites which monitor child support policy.  
Mincy, R.B. and A.T. Dupree. 2001. “Welfare, Child Support and Family Formation.” Children and Youth Services Review 23 (6/7): 577-601. Data from the first seven cities of the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study are examined to test the hypothesis that anti-poverty policies designed for women and children entering poverty after marital dissolution may have adverse effects on young, low-income unwed parents who are beginning, rather than ending, a process of family formation. Fragile Families study.
Norland, C. 2001. Unwed Fathers, the Underground Economy, and Child Support Policy. Fragile Families Research Brief, No. 3. Baseline data from first seven Fragile Families study cities provide preliminary findings that confirm previous studies’ conclusions that unmarried fathers are able to pay more than they currently pay in child support, and the findings confirm the importance of underground earnings for about 30 percent of the fathers. However, the fact that a substantial portion of income is underground suggests a precarious economic situation for these fathers. Fragile Families study.
Pirog-Good, M., and D.H. Good. 1995. “Child Support Enforcement for Teenage Fathers: Problems and Prospects.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 14(1): 25-42. Looks at various aspects of the teen father and child support. Provides income profiles for several subgroups of teen fathers. NLSY (National Longitudinal Survey of Labor Market Experiences-Youth Cohort). Original Study.
Rich, L.M. “Regular and Irregular Earnings of Unwed Fathers: Implications for Child Support Practices.” Children and Youth Services Review 23(4/5): 353-376. Estimates the regular and irregular earnings of unmarried fathers to be $17,000, comparable to previous studies. Indicates that approximately 3 in 10 fathers participate in irregular work activity, and that most of these combine the irregular and regular work sectors. Irregular work earnings are found to increase total income by 20% among fathers reporting informal activity, and by 6% among all unmarried fathers. Data from the first seven cities of the Fragile Families and Child Well-Being Study.
Sigle-Rushton, W. and I. Garfinkel. 2001. “Welfare, Child Support, and Labor Markets: Are They Related to Father Involvement?” Princeton University, Working Paper. Reviews economic literature on the effects of welfare, child support enforcement, and labor markets on father non-involvement with children due to divorce, separation, and nonmarital births. Literature Review
Sorensen, E. and A. Halpern. 2000. “Child Support Reforms: Who has Benefitted?” Focus, 21(1), University of Wisconsin-Madison, Institute for Research on Poverty. The article provides information on recent innovations in child support enforcement policies and how these have affected child support receipt among various groups within the population. Data suggests that recent innovations have had a positive effect on child support receipt among all groups of single mothers.  
Sorensen, E., and M. Turner. 1996. Barriers in Child Support Policy: A Literature Review. National Center on Fathers and Families, LR-SB-96-04. A literature review of the ways in which institutions and agencies, as well as policy, act as barriers to paternal involvement, particularly for nonresident/minority fathers. Several sections on the establishment of paternity. Synthesis
Sorensen, E., and C. Zibman. 2000. “To What Extent Do Children Benefit From Child Support?” Focus, 21(1), University of Wisconsin-Madison, Institute for Research on Poverty Documents the incidence of our nation’s children with a parent living outside of the household (one-third) and their living arrangements and conditions.  
Turner, M. Child Support Enforcement and In-hospital Paternity Establishment in Seven Cities. Center for Research on Child Wellbeing, Working Paper #00-21-FF. Study assesses the strength of child support enforcement in the seven cities included in the Fragile Families study with a special emphasis on in-hospital paternity establishment. Texas was shown to have a weak CSE compared to a relatively strong in-hospital paternity program in California. Used qualitative data from Fragile Families Study.
United States General Accounting Office. 1993. Child Support Assurance, Effect of Applying State Guidelines to Determine Fathers’ Payments. GAO/HRD-93-26. Provides details of proposed federal child support assurance program and study objectives include examining the income of young noncustodial fathers and the burden on them of paying the entire minimum assured benefit and illustrating how many of these fathers would be required to pay the minimum assured benefit under typical state child support guidelines. Used 1988 data from the National Longitudinal Study of the Labor Market Experience of Youth.
Waller, M., and R. Plotnick. 2001. “Effective Child Support Policy for Low-Income Families: Evidence from Street Level Research.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 20(1): 89-110. Discusses the child support system and its failure among many low-income families. Looks at how informal arrangements of support may sometimes be preferable and the reasons for noncompliance with formal support systems. Synthesis of qualitative research studies.
Social Work, Child Welfare, and Fathers
Bolton, F.G. 1986. “Today’s Father and the Social Services Delivery System: A False Promise.” In The Father’s Role: Applied Perspectives, edited by M.E. Lamb. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Discusses the perpetuation of stereotypical roles of fathers in the social services and examines how these stereotypes are currently interfering in service delivery to families.  
Dailey, D.M. 1980. “Are Social Workers Sexists? A Replication.” Social Work 25: 46-50. Results indicate that the social worker’s clinical judgements towards males and females are not as significantly different as determined by the original study. In fact, this study provides evidence which supports that social workers are more likely to make anti-female, pro-male judgements.  
Featherstone, B. 2001. “Putting Fathers on the Child Welfare Agenda, Research Review.” Child and Family Social Work 6(2): 179-186. Discusses the need for attention on fathers by providing information on the importance of fathers in healthy child development.  
Fischer, J., Dulaney, D., Fazio, R.T., Hudak, M.T., and E. Zivotofsky. 1976. “Are Social Workers Sexists?” Social Work 21(6): 428-433. Examines the role of sexism and stereotypical sex-role behavior in the social work and mental health fields. Results indicate a strong pro-female, anti-male bias in social work practice. A case study depicting identical male and female clients were distributed to case workers. Using a modified inventory developed by Fischer and Miller, clinical judgements from the social workers were obtained.
Franck, E.J. 2001. “Outreach to Birthfathers of Children in Out-of-Home Care.” Child Welfare 80(3): 381-399. Investigated the hypothesis that caseworker activities would demonstrate a preference for birthmothers over birthfathers as targets for outreach and planning efforts. Using a sample of children in out-of-home care, several instruments were used to assess casework outreach to these populations. Results supported the hypothesis. Instruments included: Casework Activity Scale, Birthparent Response Scale, and Family ties scale.
Greif, G.L., and C. Bailey. 1990. “Where are the Fathers in Social Work Literature?” Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services 71(2): 88-92. Provides a review of social work journals indicating a search of articles revealed only 21 feature articles on fathers between 1961 and 1987. Three common themes identified within the literature written include: fathers as perpetrators, fathers as missing and needed, and fathers as embattled. Literature review
Greif, G.L., and S.J. Zuravin. 1989. “Fathers: A Placement Resource for Abused and Neglected Children?” Child Welfare 68(5): 479-490. Provides information on how fathers get custody, how situations where fathers get custody differ from those where they do not, and how satisfactory father placements are. Content analysis of case records for 35 fathers
Jaffe, E.D., Lamb, M.E., and A. Sagi (Eds). 1983. Fatherhood and Family Policy. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Discusses the disparity between child welfare teachings and actual practice in terms of involvement of the entire family unit, specifically the father. Examines devaluation of the father’s role, female-based service delivery, and caretaking.  
Kahkonen, P. 1997. “From the Child Welfare Trap to the Foster Care Trap.” Child Welfare 76(3): 429-445. Analyzed the visibility of mothers, fathers/partners, and children during the placement process. A review of case records revealed that mothers received the most attention, with fathers and children receiving little focus. Contacts with biological families after placement were also minimal.  
Lagnese, A., and S. Green. 1976. “Discharge Planning in Foster Care Cases Where the Father is the Significant Parent.” Child Welfare 55(9): 612-617. Provides an overview of father involvement in discharge planning through a review of a case study and an agency survey of father-based cases. Case study and agency survey of father-based cases.
Lamb, M.E. 2001. “Male Roles in Families “at Risk”: The Ecology of Child Maltreatment.” Child Maltreatment, 6(4): 310-313. Provides an overview of the articles in the special issue on fathers drawing conclusions about the benefits of two-parent families and the risks of father surrogates. Synthesis
Lazar, A., Sagi, A., and M.W. Fraser. 1991. “Involving Fathers in Social Services.” Children and Youth Services Review 13(4): 287-300. Findings suggest that social service professionals, regardless of gender, are maternally oriented. Gender was found to be a factor in the involvement of fathers in service delivery. Female workers were found to involve fathers less than male workers. A negative correlation between job tenure and time spent with fathers was also found. Involvement of the entire family was influenced by workers exposure to family-related courses, perceived contribution of both sexes to the healthy development of sex roles in children, employment in an agency committed to family involvement, and the ability to work flexible hours. Only two-parent families in study
Leashore, B. R. 1997. “African American Men, Child Welfare, and Permanency Planning,” In The Challenge of Permanency Planning in a Multicultural Society, edited by G.R. Anderson, A.S. Ryan, and B.R. Leashore. New York: The Haworth Press. Presents the claim that permanency planning process continues to be negligent in its efforts to reach out to African American men. Describes child welfare services as having a perception of African American men that is fearful and stereotyped, often classifying them as insignificant, unavailable, and uninterested in the well-being of their children. Identifies need for culturally competent services in relationship to African American family roles, traditions and historical experiences. Involvement of non-resident fathers as resources in finding placements and reunification is stressed, as well as need for flexibility in scheduling visits between workers and African American fathers.  
Marshall, D., English, D., and A. Stewart. 2001. “The Effect of Fathers or Father Figures on Child Behavioral Problems in Families Referred to Child Protective Services.” Child Maltreatment 6(4): 290-299. The association between fathers or father figures and child well-being are weak and relatively unclear. Original study
Nisivoccia, D. 1993. “Caseworkers’ Values and Attitudes in Relation to their Activity with Biological Parents.” The Jewish Social Work Forum 29: 28-43. Study finds that workers with positive values/attitudes towards biological parents have higher activity rates in terms of attempting to foster reunification. Values and Attitudes Questionnaire (VAQ)-not included in study. Activity Report Form-w880- not included. Original study
O’Donnell, J.M. 1999. “Involvement of African American Fathers in Kinship Foster Care Services.” Social Work 44(5): 428-441. This article examines the various forms of involvement among African American fathers (in-kind support, emotional support etc.). Results from interviews with caseworkers suggest that low levels of communication with fathers, as well as minimal involvement in service planning and service delivery are present. Instrument not included in the article.
O’Hagan, K. 1997. “The Problem of Engaging Men in Child Protection Work.” The British Journal of Social Work 27(1): 25-42. Discusses on a theoretical level avoidance strategies engaged in by caseworkers in the child welfare system causing men to be neglected from involvement in case work practice. Provides suggestions on ways to promote caseworker involvement of fathers, training techniques, etc.  
Radhakrishna, A., Bou-Saada, I., Hunter, W., Catellier, D., and J. Kotch. 2001. “Are Father Surrogates a Risk Factor for Child Maltreatment”, Child Maltreatment 6(4): 281-289. Using data from North Carolina’s Central Registry for Child Abuse and Neglect, it was found that the presence of a nonbiological father figure in the home increases the risk of a maltreatment report more than two times above that for families with both biological parents in the home. The risk of maltreatment given the presence of a father surrogate in the home is twice that of female-headed families with no male partner in the home. Discusses the fact that male involvement may not always have positive effects on the children they are living with. Original Study
Web Resources
http://cpmcnet.columbia.edu/dept/nccp/MT99refs.html National Center for Children in Poverty: Bibliography for 1999 Map and Track  
http://fatherfamilylink.gse.upenn.edu/fatherlit FatherLit database  
www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cse/extinf.htm List of child support enforcement web sites.  
www.cffpp.org Center on Fathers, Families and Public Policy  
www.familysupportamerica.org Family Support America  
www.fathers.com National Center for Fathering  
www.ncsl.org/statefed/welfare/webresources.htm National Conference of State Legislatures: List of fatherhood internet resources.  
www.npcl.org National Center for Strategic Nonprofit Planning and Community Leadership  
www.npnff.org National Practitioners Network for Fathers and Families, Inc.: Bibliography, Policy/Legislative review of fatherhood, and contacts for fatherhood programs.  
www.responsiblefatherhood.org The Institute for Responsible Fatherhood and Family Revitalization  
www.welfareinfo.org/fatherho.htm Welfare Information Network: List of fatherhood references and programs throughout the United States.  
Measurement Tools
National Center on Fathers and Families. “The Fathering Indicators Framework: A Tool for Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis.” University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education. Provides 6 categories of Fathering indicators: Father Presence, Caregiving, Children’s Social Competence/Academic Achievement, Cooperative Parenting, Fathers’ Healthy Living, and Material/Financial Contributions. For each category, indicators are outlined and potential sources of information to measure each of these indicators are provided.  
Stone, G.S., and Crowe, Chizek and Company, LLP. “Indiana Fathers and Families: Sample Evaluation Tools for Fathers and Families Projects.” http://www.in.gov/fssa/fathers/Sample_Evaluation_Tools.doc This document contains various measurement tools—some are evaluation measures for a specific programs and others can be used generally to measure father involvement. Tools on paternity establishment, service accessibility, and child support do exist, but most are intended as specific evaluation tools for this project.  
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, School of Social Work, Children and Family Research Center. Included full interviewing tools on the following:
  1. Child Interview on Kinship Foster Care
  2. Caregiver Interview on Kinship Foster Care
  3. Caseworker Questionnaire on Kinship Foster Care
 
Programs
Committee on Human Resources, Employment and Social Services Policy Studies Division. 1998. “Promoting Responsible Fatherhood: An Update.” Reviews initiatives to promote responsible fatherhood in states throughout the nation.  
Delaware Health and Social Services, Child Support Enforcement. 1992. “Delaware Paternity Establishment Pilot Project.” Pilot project to increase number of paternity establishments. Integration of paternity establishment process and prenatal care educational program.  
Department of Health and Human Services. 1995. “The Child Support Improvement Project: Paternity Establishment.” www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cse/rpt/csipat.htm Information provided on paternity establishment.  
Department of Health and Human Services, Fathers’ Work Group. 1997. “Fathering: The Man and the Family.” http://fatherhood.hhs.gov/year2.htm Reviews activities including research, trainings, conferences etc. which address fatherhood.  
The F.A.C.T. Program, Lexington, Kentucky. A Collaborative Effort between Prevent Child Abuse Kentucky and the Blackburn Correctional Complex. This program teaches fathers who are incarcerated how to be responsible while in prison, communicate with their children, and recognize the importance of their role as a father. Graduates of the 12-week course are entitled to special visits from their children in a less restrictive environment.  
Families and Work Institute. The Fatherhood Project Home Page. www.fatherhoodproject.org A national initiative for research and education-primarily provides access to publications.  
Georgia Fatherhood program www.welfareinfo.org/geiorgiafatherhood.htm Review of the Georgia Fatherhood program  
Henrich, C. “The Importance of Fatherhood: Promising Efforts to Promote Positive Father Involvement.” State of Connecticut, Commission on Children. www.cga.state.ct.us/coc/fatherho.htm Reviews programs in Connecticut while also providing information on legislation and practices in other states.  
Illinois Department of Public Aid. “Child Support Enforcement Non-Custodial Parents.” http://www.state.il.us/dpa/html/wcs_8246.htm Reviews Illinois program services - NCPSU (Non-custodial parent services units)  
The Lewin Group, Inc. 1997. “An Evaluability Assessment of Responsible Fatherhood Programs.” Department of Health and Human Services. http://fatherhood.hhs.gov/evaluaby/intro.htm Provides information on the evaluation of fatherhood programs. Also provides information on these programs.  
Long Distance Dads. Incarcerated Fathers Program developed at State Correctional Institution at Albion, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections. http://www.thefathersworkshop.org/lddads_1.html This curriculum-based 12-week program assists incarcerated men in developing the skills to become more involved and supportive fathers.  
Martinson, K., Trutko, J., and D. Strong. 2000. Serving Non-Custodial Parents: A Descriptive Study of Welfare to Work Programs. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute. Services, programs and participation of non-custodial parents.  
National Center for Children in Poverty. 2000. “Map and Track 2000.” http://cpmcnet.columbia.edu/dept/nccp/mt00text.html Reviews state by state initiatives and indicators related to fatherhood.  
National Center on Fathers and Families. 1999-2000. “State Policy Series Briefs on Family Support and Father Involvement.” Reviews activities and policy issues related to fathers in:
1. Southern States
2. Mid-Atlantic/New England States
3. Western States
 
National Center on Fathers and Families. 2001. “The Bay Area Fathering Integrated Data System (BAyFIDS) Project. www.ncoff.gse.upenn.edu/bayfids/bayfids-intro.htm Reviews fatherhood initiatives in the Bay Area  
National Conference of State Legislatures. 2000. “Building Services to help fathers.” In Connecting Low-Income Families and Fathers: A Guide to Practical Policies. Policy brief discussing the importance of fathers and the policies which affect them.  
National Fatherhood Initiative. www.fatherhood.org/statelocal.asp Reviews programs in Texas, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.  
Office of Child Support Enforcement. 2001. Best Practices and Good Ideas in Child Support Enforcement 2001. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health and Human Services. http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cse/pubs/2001/best/ State by state review of child support enforcement practices, including paternity establishment.  
Operation Fatherhood: Promising Practices. www.welfareinfo.org/operationfatherhood.htm Reviews promising practices program in New Jersey. Provides contact information.  
Papas and Their Children (PATCH) Program, San Antonio, Texas. http://www.oag.state.tx.us/criminal/cluzine/cluincar.htm This program allows incarcerated fathers to spend an hour with their children in several area jails. The purpose is to help selected offenders to develop and maintain bonds with their children.  
Paternity Establishment Project, Virginia. Project whose aim is to reduce costs of establishing paternity for clients who apply for child support benefits through promotion of voluntary/legal acknowledgement of paternity at birth or shortly thereafter. Data provided on number of paternity declarations.  
Pearson, J., Thoennes, N., Price, D., and J. Venohr. 2000. OCSE Responsible Fatherhood Programs: Early Implementation Lessons. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health and Human Services. Discusses several important steps for program implementation. Also provides information on fatherhood programs in various states across the country.  
Roy, K. 2000. "Fathers on the Margins of Work and Family: the Paternal Involvement Project." Poverty Research News, 4(2). Northwestern University, University of Chicago, Joint Center for Poverty Research. http://www.jcpr.org/newsletters/vol4_no2/articles.htm Provides information on the Paternal Involvement Project in Illinois. Additional information provided on various other issues regarding fatherhood.  
South Carolina Fatherhood Programs www.palmettofamily.org/Father2.htm Lists programs and contacts related to fatherhood in South Carolina.  
State Capitals Newsletter (Family Relations). 2001. “Online access to birth records part of electronic trend for West Virginia child support agency.” 55(36): 1. Discusses West Virginia’s trend towards electronic birth records for child support enforcement.  
U. S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Education, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, U.S. Department of Justice, and U.S. Department of Labor. 2001. “Meeting the Challenge: What the Federal Government can do to Support Responsible Fatherhood Efforts: Chapter 5, Getting help: Resources for Program Development and Improvement.” A Report to the President. http://fatherhood.hhs.gov/guidance01/ch5.htm Lists various fatherhood programs and contacts throughout the country. Also lists research publications and organizations that have conducted work on fathers.  
Welfare Information Network. 1999. “Resources for Welfare Decisions.” Vol. 3, No. 8. www.welfareinfo.org/heidiresourceoct.htm Overview of programs/contacts. Programs in Arizona, Connecticut, Illinois, and Wisconsin are reviewed.  
Welfare Information Network. 2000. “Support Services for Incarcerated and Released Non-custodial Parents.” Vol. 4, No. 6. www.welfareinfo.org/heidijune2.htm Reviews transitional services state by state for fathers and families exiting jail.  
Zvetina, D. 2000. “Father Care: Redefining Fatherhood in Low-income communities.” Erikson Institute, The Herr Research Center, No. 2. Contains information on the Paternal Involvement Project in Chicago.  


Where to?

Top of Page

Main Page of Report | Contents of Report

Home Pages:
Human Services Policy (HSP)
Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)