Abstract
In the past several decades, leaders in academia, politics, religion, and pop culture have pointed to “unwed fatherhood” as a key reason for social problems in families, neighborhoods, and the United States more generally. The general social narrative is that unwed fathers simply do not care about their children. Edin and Nelson take on this controversial topic and talk to black and white unwed fathers living in poor and working-class inner-city neighborhoods. Through ethnographic observation and in-depth interviews in Camden and Philadelphia, Edin and Nelson learn how men make meaning out of their own experiences as fathers.
The authors find that fathers care deeply about their children, but struggle to display this care in the ways that the general culture demands. These fathers are redefining fatherhood and engaging in what Edin and Nelson refer to as “selective fathering”—channeling their limited resources to just some of their children. In presenting these fathers’ narratives, Edin and Nelson emphasize the importance of understanding the neighborhood and social contexts that shape these men’s lives, especially the dramatic decline of economic opportunities in inner cities.
The organization of the book takes us through the story of these men’s relationships with the mothers of their children, focusing on the early dynamics of the relationship, the conception, the reaction to the news of the pregnancy, changes in the relationship once the baby is born, and the ebbs and flows of a father’s relationship with his children over time. Edin and Nelson describe how conception often occurs in new and tenuous relationships in which there is little effort to avoid pregnancy. Surprisingly, many of the men in their study are happy with the news of the pregnancy; for them, it signals a chance to start fresh in a new role. Yet, most of these relationships disintegrate, partly because women’s expectations for their partners change once a child is in the picture. Additionally, many of these men have children with multiple partners and are therefore unable to engage in traditional family formation patterns. The fathers often lack the “biographical” and financial resources to live up to being the kind of father the mothers expect of them and that they expect themselves to be.
Edin and Nelson then describe how, given these challenges, the fathers redefine what fatherhood means and engage in “selective fathering.” Since the men do not have the financial capacity to invest in all of their children, they invest their money, time, and care into just some of their children, often in the context of their current relationship. Edin and Nelson refer to this process as the “family-go-round,” as fathers move in and out of involvement in any one household. This redefined fatherhood helps men feel like they are fulfilling their duties as fathers, but does not match onto the mothers’ expectations of what the men’s involvement should look like, nor does it coincide with broader societal notions of what a “good” father is. Thus, Edin and Nelson argue, there is a mismatch between these fathers’ efforts and society’s expectations of them.
Edin and Nelson’s ability to present a thorough, personal, and intimate narrative of these fathers’ lives is extremely compelling. Throughout the book, the authors pose the very questions that readers are asking themselves as they read these fathers’ stories. They do not glamorize these men’s lives or paint a simple picture. Instead, they show the tensions, struggles, and joys of fatherhood in a challenging context. The authors provide a powerful illustration of the depth to which these men care about their children, but show how they are simultaneously largely unable to meet expectations about what being a good father entails.
Edin and Nelson conclude by stating the obvious need for improved economic opportunities for unskilled workers in urban areas. They also present a more countercultural argument, however, that institutions in the United States need to value men’s efforts to spend time with their children rather than primarily going after men for child support alone. Perhaps if these fathers were not just viewed a paycheck, a sentiment many of the men expressed, they would experience more fulfillment from being fathers and would be more invested in all of their children’s lives. Edin and Nelson present this suggestion, but stop short of detailing ideas for how this change might happen. This leaves the reader and those leaders who have historically problematized “fatherlessness” with the charge to learn from these fathers’ stories and decide if reconceptualizing fatherhood would improve the lives of families and children, and how to collectively pursue that goal.