Government’s New Report on Status of Fatherhood in Washington Shows They See Problems. What Comes Next?

The Washington Fatherhood Council recently released their ground-breaking State of Fatherhood in Washington Study Report. Their study found room for improvement when it comes to support for fathers and fatherhood, acknowledging that fathers experience stigmas and inequities, and government policies and approaches to fatherhood inclusion remain inconsistent.

The Fatherhood Council’s report is the result of a year of work undertaken with support from a consultant and researchers at the University of Washington. The report incorporates input from stakeholders including state and local agencies, members of the Fatherhood Council, and dads around the state with valuable perspectives to offer based on their personal experiences.

The report is excellent. We strongly recommend you at least read the four-page summary.

Readers will be impressed by the report’s thorough acknowledgement that the current state of the ‘fatherhood ecosystem’ has problems. We know that some people feel quite discouraged by how service providers and state and local governmental authorities regard fathers here in Washington. We particularly urge those individuals to read the report. In it they may find cause for hope.

Considering the contents of this report, it cannot be denied that there are people within state government who are aware that dads are experiencing prejudice and inequities that are harming their ability to be the dads they want to be and the dads their children deserve. In other words, ignorance is not a plausible explanation for the status quo.

Now what? How do we bring about change?

The Washington Fatherhood Council has existed since 2018, but it is not statutorily endowed, meaning legislators never got together and collectively created it and allocated a budget for it. The Council’s status and future are somewhat fragile.

The two State of Washington employees who coordinate the Council — Anne Stone and Dieter Jacobs — carry out their work at the pleasure of the director of the Department of Social and Health Services, who serves at the pleasure of the governor. Washington will soon get a new gubernatorial administration led by Bob Ferguson, the current attorney general. If interest in fatherhood work wanes in the new administration, the Council’s work could diminish or cease.

“Washington needs to make a commitment to sustain this work as part of its equity efforts and benchmark goals.” – State of Fatherhood in Washington Study Report, Washington Fatherhood Council

Also, being essentially an entity of the state government, the Fatherhood Council is not ideally positioned to lead the advocacy for statutory and systemic changes. Even if someone were to propose a change to state law that would improve the status of fatherhood in Washington — for example a bill establishing a default rebuttal presumption of 50/50 shared parenting when parents split up — Council staff cannot lobby legislators to pass such a bill.

Who will take the findings of the State of Fatherhood in Washington Study Report and utilize them to bring about change? Who will do the difficult, long-term work of coalition-building, advocating, and lobbying?

Washington Initiative for Boys and Men is trying to be a difference-maker in this arena, as are others with whom we are cooperating or want to be cooperating. We ask you, reader, to get involved too.

Help us bring about a Washington state where more children have regular, healthy involvement of their dads in their lives.

For further information on the State of Fatherhood Study contact Anne Stone, the Washington Fatherhood Council director, at anne.stone@dshs.wa.gov.

The study’s six key findings

The following six findings are copy-pasted directly from the from the State of Fatherhood in Washington Study Report Summary.

1. Fathers and fatherhood figures experience stigmas and inequities.

While many systems in our state acknowledge racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, gender-based, sexual orientation, gender-identification, disparities and discrimination, gender equity rarely focuses on marginalized fathers in our equity work. Few systems or policies acknowledge the disparities, barriers, challenges and biases against fathers. Further, evidence from fathers indicates that they have limited access to family and resources that are tailored to meet their unique needs. Cultural biases, stigmas, negative stereotypes and harmful narratives also limit access and often completely exclude fathers from systems and structures that are meant to support the whole family.

2. Data and monitoring systems that track fathers’ access to services are not fully developed, making it hard to address inequities.

The Study revealed significant gaps in data across a wide array of disciplines. To fully understand the real and perceived inequities that fathers experience, there must be more data and an effective monitoring process to specifically track and measure how fathers receive services and how systems respond. Current data-gathering systems and protocols often categorize unmarried fathers as single adult males or single parents, but miss their co-parenting role. Collecting and analyzing disaggregated data can tell us if and how fathers are eligible, aware, enrolled, accepted, received and if they complete services. At intake, programs and practices should routinely ask all presenting adults if they are parents and if there is a co-parent involved in the child’s life. This will help identify opportunities to provide services to all parents, even when one is not in the home, and to begin gathering information about fatherhood involvement and access to services.

3. Policies and approaches to fatherhood inclusion remain inconsistent.

While many agencies and systems in Washington are focused on two-generation or whole-family approaches, they often primarily focus on single mother-child dyads or two-parent households and often miss non-cohabiting parents. Systems are not set up to detect or serve the needs of non-cohabiting parents or single dads with primary custody. This often creates barriers for father-child dyads and misses the complexities of non-cohabiting co-parenting families’ unique needs for resources.

4. Representation of fathers is limited.

Provider workforces and parent and community advisory groups across the spectrum of supports rarely have male-presenting members. This limited representation has led to barriers and challenges for fathers’ specific needs to be met. It also leads to children missing out on having a positive male role model in services and classrooms. Funding and resources are often directed at scaling existing evidence-based programs, which is needed, but few evidence-based fatherhood programs are considered through that lens. Fathers need to be equitably represented when groups and organizations work to set priorities and policies.

5. Increased cross-agency funding, planning and coordination are needed.

The intersectionality among the unmet needs of fathers must be addressed. This includes needs when reentering the community after a period of incarceration, shelter and housing, financial supports, behavioral health, access to parenting supports, early childhood and K-12 education acceptance, navigating family court and child support. Marginalized parents who are BIPOC, low-income, justice-involved, single and young experience additional disparities and have complex unmet needs. Systems, partners and programs need to be more coordinated and inclusive of fathers and create targeted pathways to provide wraparound and holistic supports. Having an integrated father-inclusive system requires awareness, action and collaboration among all public and private agencies that support individual fathers and peaceful co-parenting.

6. The Washington Fatherhood Council plays a unique and critical role in shaping solutions to these challenges.

Nationally, in states that have made substantial investments in both capacity and system transformation through legislative action, councils and commissions are beginning to see results. The first step in building an integrated system is to start with acknowledging the inequities experienced by fathers or father figures, and to understand how supporting all parents is mission-centric for child and family outcomes. In the six short years since the Council’s inception, momentum is growing toward mindsets shifting and agency partners engaging with fathers and inviting this perspective into their work. Incorporating the voices and perspectives of fathers with lived experiences can help identify stigmas, biases and perceptions of their roles and shape policy and practice. The Council’s inclusive membership approach has played a unique and impactful role in bringing diverse players into the dialogue to shape collective action across the state. Washington needs to make a commitment to sustain this work as part of its equity efforts and benchmark goals.

See related: More dads needed on judicial advisory committees focused on children, families, and gender bias