June 16, 2006, - 4:35 pm

Wake Up, America: Disturbing Census Figures on U.S. Fathers

**** UPDATE: Thanks to all the readers who found the Census press release and noted that these figures refer to Mr. Moms, and not all married dads with kids, as the WSJ’s Harwood made it sound. . ****
As we approach Father’s Day, a trend that’s at even more disturbing depths than we thought.
According to John Harwood’s “Washington Wire” column in today’s Wall Street Journal, the Census says only 147,000 of America’s 66.3 million fathers are married and home with kids under 15.
That’s disturbing because, besides those many fathers whose kids are over 15, the rest are either NOT living at home with their kids, are not married to their kids’ mother, or BOTH.
Tens of millions of America’s fathers not with their children. Are we becoming “Fatherless Nation”? Maybe “Single Mother Nation” is an equally appropriate appellation.
No wonder American culture and family are both declining. Kids need fathers in their lives.

Tags: , , , ,

10 Responses

Debbie, I’m no expert, but that 147,000 figure just does not seem right. In the entire USA? Are you sure it doesn’t refer to just stay-at-home dads?

KathyP on June 16, 2006 at 5:45 pm

Debbie – your site is great as always – but this number cannot be correct – it’s not even the right order of magnitude. Things aren’t that bad, yet.

Ground State on June 16, 2006 at 6:42 pm

The numbers appear to be off if you look at this press release about Father’s Day from the U.S. Census:
It states there’s 25.8 million fathers in married-couple familes with their own children under 18.
John Harwood may have been looking at the figure for stay-at-home dads. The press release says there are 105,000 married fathers not in the work force with children under 15.

kyreader on June 16, 2006 at 9:32 pm

Actually, here’s the same press release updated for this year:
And I think Harwood is definately referring to stay-at-home dads.
The number of fathers in married-couple families with kids under 18 has actually risen to 26.4 million. The number of stay-at-home dads has also increased.

kyreader on June 16, 2006 at 9:44 pm

At least these kids got to be born. I’m a bit concerned by demographics, and I’m not talking about race. Debbie maybe the government should pay for our dates.

shleppy on June 17, 2006 at 8:58 am

It is almost like Harwood forgot a zero. I’ll bet there more than 147,000 in NYC alone.

The Plumber on June 17, 2006 at 1:26 pm

I am not surprised, the feminist agenda is marching forward. They hate men in general and thank the government for all of this starting with the great society of LBJ.
It was his administration that started the practice of rewarding single moms by financing their illegitimate babies with section 8 housing, food stamps,free health care, and a check from the Government.
Woman now can throw their husbands out and have no fear about how to support their children. In fact the Government is encouraging this behavior.
When I was in High School they had two options, give up the kid for adoption or pay for it themselves. Now the Government pays for irresponsible behavior by rewarding them with a full package of benefits.
I call it the spread you legs and get a check program.

ScottyDog on June 17, 2006 at 3:55 pm

“Throw their husbands out”? I don’t know about you, but most of my friends growing up, and myself included, lived in single-parent homes not because the dads were “thrown out.” In most cases it was because the dads walked out on their responsibilities — regardless of their marital status to the mother. The goverment pays for these programs because in many cases the father doesn’t step up and pay child support. My mom raised two kids on a nurses’ income after my dad skipped out, and even with that we were technically below the poverty line. It is sad when a mother intentionally keeps a father out of the kids’ lives. But in many, many instances, the father chooses not to have anything to do with their kids. When you point the finger of irresponsibility, don’t forget about the deadbeat dads too. It takes two to have a kid, so two people should be paying for and raising it.

kyreader on June 17, 2006 at 5:35 pm

I see the Government re-education schools have been successful with your thinking.
What right does the Government have to steal from taxpayers at gun point to pay for the children of a failed marriage or for having children out of wedlock.
Dead Beat Dad is an invention of Government nanny state. Strange that before the Great Society divorce rates were far different than today.In fact, 180 degrees different.
Because it is now easy to throw the father out and go on the Government dole is the primary reason.3 out of 4 divorces are instituted by the mother.
Before the Government rewarded bad behavior, couples had an incentive to work out their differences and stay married.I am not saying that all fathers are blameless but the family courts today are so one sided in favoring the mother, the father has no say in their children’s upbringing.

ScottyDog on June 18, 2006 at 11:03 am

I did not say I agreed with the fact the government covers for parents who don’t support their kids (whether it’s the mom or dad). I’m just saying that’s how all the programs started.
And the government “created” deadbeat dads? Yeah right. I thought conservatives were all for “personal responsibility.” To blame the government for a parent not paying child support or involving himself in his kid’s life — that’s the ultimate cop out. Jeez …
It’s pretty easy to state statistics with no source, isn’t it?
And I also agree the courts need to work with both parents more instead of just assuming the mother will automatically be the best caretaker. Kids need both parents, like Debbie said.
And as a sidenote, this is why I hate extremists on both sides of the political spectrum — they’re so quick to throw out insults before at least listening to what people really believe.

kyreader on June 18, 2006 at 3:36 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field