"Divorce, Separation and Changing Family Practices"
21-23 September 2001

"Heads or tails, there are no real winners: An Australian perspective of outcomes for contact and residential single fathers "
Lisbeth T. Pike
(Edith Cowan University)

INTRODUCTION

In Australia, there is a gambling game called "Two Up" based on the toss of two coins. The essence of the game is that two coins are tossed in the air and the "punters" gamble on the likelihood or chance of the coins falling with two heads or two tails showing, or one of each. Arguably, there are some interesting parallels between this game and the situation in which many single fathers find themselves in contemporary Australia. Firstly, many of these men would argue that when their relationship with their partner ends, their relationship and future with their children, previously secure, is now often determined by chance. To many of them, it seems that chance has already operated to determine the way in which the couple's relationship has ended in the first place; a whim or a fancy decided upon on the spur of the moment or a decision that is the end product of much thought and soul searching. This in turn can determine whether the ending of the relationship is predictable or unforeseen; amicable or conflicted. Often, as a consequence of the way in which the parental relationship has ended, their ongoing role as a father in encouraged or discouraged, facilitated or contested by their children's mother or even by the children themselves.

Secondly, as with head and tails on a coin, single residential fatherhood and single contact fatherhood are two sides of the same coin - fatherhood. They are very similar but at the same time, also very different. Both categories of fathers have been socialised into the fatherhood role in a prevailing cultural context that has increasingly emphasised and encouraged the involvement of men in childrearing. However, with the transition to single parenthood, they find themselves confused as to how to best continue their involvement with their children when they perceive that some of the social institutions and bureaucracies they have to deal with do not appear to support their continued involvement with their children.

Thirdly, according to many single fathers, engagement with the legal system and in particular the Family Court, represents the greatest gamble of all. They describe how they feel like mere pawns in a game; where they have no certainty as to the outcomes of litigation with regard to custody orders access applications or judicial decisions, particularly when the Court has become involved as a result of these matters being contested by the parties.

Perhaps the strongest parallel between games of chance and the concepts of winners and losers post-divorce, derives from the fathers' comments about the realities of single parenting roles as they experience them. Whether men are designated residential or contact fathers, and whether one is listening to their stories as a researcher, or working with them in a therapeutic role, it becomes clear that they perceive that there are distinct advantages and disadvantages to the situations they find themselves in; positive and negatives about their fathering roles post-divorce.

However, having drawn this parallel between a game of chance and single fatherhood, it is important to note that for many men, their commitment to the role of parent is paramount and not a matter that they want to leave to chance. Although they acknowledge the trials and tribulations of their 'wins' and 'losses', many would not forego their commitment to their role as fathers. The next section of the paper will explore the context against which these different fathering roles are played out.

THE AUSTRALIAN CONTEXT

Permanent parental separation and divorce is increasingly part of the fabric of contemporary Australian life. Over the past thirty years, statistics have revealed that there has been a steady increase in divorce rates, with current rates indicating that two in every five marriages will end in divorce . Funder Harrison and Weston (1993), report that data gathered by the Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS) suggested that 40% of marriages were likely to end in divorce. The ABS report Marriages and Divorces, Australia 1999 , shows a slight increase on this figure, where nearly 46% of marriages have ended in divorce. It should be noted that whilst these statistics only deal with official divorce figures, there is a large but unknown number of permanent separations which occur without engaging the legal process of divorce. In short, the statistics are likely to be conservative in their estimation of the incidence of relationship breakdown (legal or de-facto).

As the incidence of parental relationship breakdown has increased, so has the number of children who are also involved in family restructuring. Of all the divorces granted in Australia in 1996, some 53.6% involved children . Again, ABS data reveals that in 1982, 10.7% of all types of families were single parent families. By 1992, this had risen to nearly 13%, representing an increase of 21.5% in a decade . Recent figures charting the involvement of children in parental divorce indicate that 14.7% of all Australian families are single parent families, the vast majority of which (88%), are headed by women .

Generally speaking, as is the case in most other countries, it is more often the woman in Australia who initiates the separation that follows the relationship breakdown and currently, it is the mother who is more likely to retain residency of the children. Examination of the living arrangements of families nationwide shows that of all families with dependants, 9.1% were headed by a female parent only, a rise of 2.1% over the last decade. By comparison, the number of families headed by a male parent only was 1.3% . Although small percentage-wise, as in the United States of America (USA), father headed households in Australia represent the fastest growing family form .

In Australia, the roles of fathers in terms of their ongoing roles as contact ⁽¹⁾ fathers, have recently gained increasing significance following the amendments to Part VII of the Family Law Act 1975, which were given effect through the Family Law Reform Act 1995. Pursuant to Section 65E of the Family Law Act, in deciding whether to make a particular parenting order in relation to children, a Court must regard the best interests of the children as the paramount consideration. In determining what is in the children's best interest, the Court must consider the matters set out in Section 68F (2) of the Act which includes such issues as the child's wishes, the nature of the parent-child relationship, the capacity of the parents to parent etc. The principles of the Reform Act have attempted to reinforce and encourage both parents to continue the ongoing responsibility as parents in their children's best interests, albeit within a very different family structure. Accordingly, parents' "rights" have been re-framed as parents' "responsibilities", whereby the focus is placed on the wellbeing of their developing children and previously connoted notions of "ownership" of children are totally discouraged.

Against this backdrop, over the past thirty years in the psychological literature, there has been a small number of research publications that have focussed on outcomes of separation and divorce on Australian families and an even smaller number have examined aspects of post-divorce families such as parent residency. Although individual research contributions into separation and divorce in Australia can be traced back to the late sixties, the majority of research findings into the effects of divorce and post-divorce family life have been generated over the past two decades through two major sources, the Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS) and the Federal Family Court of Australia. The AIFS has been by far the major source of Australian research on marriage and divorce and their impact on the Australian family. The AIFS was established in 1980 under the provisions of the 1975 Family Law Act with its functions being the promotion, identification, development and understanding of factors affecting marital and family stability in Australia, through the conduct, coordination and encouragement of research . Since its inception, the AIFS has been involved in collecting data and developing and maintaining databases on different aspects of Australian family life.

In addition to research undertaken in association with the AIFS and the Family Court, a small number of individual researchers have published findings in this area since the late sixties. The majority of this work has examined or commented on the effects of parental separation or divorce on the psychological wellbeing of children and adolescents , but some work has focussed on the psychological wellbeing of the parents or adults involved and has considered discrete aspects such as the impact of divorce on men , the role of the contact parent, and the residential parent . However, it must be said that some of the most influential publications documenting the effects of parental separation and divorce on Australian families and post-divorce family life have their origins in AIFS projects .

In summary, Australian research into the effects of parental separation and divorce and the post-divorce family has typically focussed on the adolescent age group, used cross-sectional rather than longitudinal methodology and employed both retrospective and prospective methods . There has been a lack of research into the effects of different parent residency arrangements on younger children or adults and a tendency to treat all single parent children, adolescents or parents as homogeneous groups. Overall, there has been less reliance on samples drawn from clinical populations by comparison to many of the studies conducted in the USA. However, research to date has produced contradictory findings as to the effects of parental separation or divorce on children, adolescents, adults, and post-divorce family functioning .

CONTEMPORARY PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH AND THE FATHERS ROLE IN POST-DIVORCE FAMILIES

With the growing awareness in western societies that fathers have a significant, complex and multidimensional role to play in the psychological adjustment and development of their children, both pre and post-divorce , there has also been an increased interest in the effects of the changed parental role, on the residential or contact fathers. This interest has been not only on the effects on children's development but also on the fathers' adjustment and wellbeing.

This growing interest by psychologists in the post-divorce adjustment of the residential and contact father in particular is also identifiable in Australian research and can be attributed to several factors. Firstly, as outlined above, while the majority of post-divorce households are still headed by women, single father headed households are increasing in numbers. Men are continuing to seek and gain residency of, and contact with their children in greater numbers than previously occurred.

Secondly, as in other western societies, in Australia, there has been a greater encouragement of men by women to become engaged in childcare and child-rearing and to share the responsibilities of parenting. The fathers who take on these responsibilities, sometimes termed the "new" father, typically are involved with their child(ren)'s development from pregnancy. These men establish close and intimate attachments with their child, participating in non-traditional roles that can include many of the typically more feminine or expressive aspects that characterise nurturing . These fathers are often very reluctant to relinquish this nurturant parental role when their marriage or relationship ends. They have a strong desire to remain connected to their children and play an integral part in their lives, either as a residential or contact father.

Thirdly, arguably changing parental roles and responsibilities as outlined above are part of a larger social shift in gender roles. Another manifestation of this shift is a greater likelihood on the part of men (fathers) to seek professional help when relationships end. This is accompanied by a greater willingness to disclose to, and discuss with the professional, their perceived personal losses in terms of their role and identity in adjusting to post-divorce fatherhood. From working with fathers and their children, it is clear that the fathers do have unique contributions to make to their children's development and vice versa. Understanding the nature of these contributions holds great interest for many psychologists.

It is against this context and background that the next two sections of the paper will present some recent research into the experiences of fathering from the perspective of both residential and contact fathers.

AUSTRALIAN RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FATHERS

Although the numbers of residential single fathers are increasing in Australia, very little is known about how these families function from either the fathers' perspective or in terms of the outcomes for the children . One reason for this lack of knowledge is that despite the dramatic increase in the number of residential single father-headed households, they still represent a very small portion (approximately 12%), of single parent households overall. An outcome of this is that it is difficult to collect data from samples of residential single father headed households, and even more difficult to collect data that are demographically representative.

One of the few and earliest profiles of Australian residential single fathers was published by Wilson in 1990. In his book, based largely on qualitative data gathered through interviews, Wilson outlined the typical demographic characteristics, challenges and rewards of residential single parenting from the perspective of his sample of 85 single fathers, as well as highlighting aspects from his own experience of single parenthood. By and large however, as a post-divorce family form, very little has been written about Australian residential single fathers households since. The concerns and issues of these men are expressed through 'formal' men's groups like Men's Con-fraternity, Dad's Landing Pad, Lone Fathers Association or through Letters to the Editor in the daily newspapers (see Appendix 1), but rarely in the academic psychological literature.

In the late nineties, as part of a study involving 272 children and their parents, data was gathered on 136 single parent children, including 60 children (30 boys and 30 girls) and their parents living in residential single father households. The major focus of this study was to compare the competence and self-esteem of children from single parent families with two parent peers using a matched pairs design. The study provided measures of child outcomes that were derived from a combination of standardised and non-standardised measures completed by the children's parents and teachers, but more importantly, measures that were completed by the children themselves. The primary finding from the study was that the children growing up in a single parent household, regardless of gender of parent or child(ren), were not disadvantaged when compared to their matched two parent peers. The single parent children were as equally competent on a range of measures and had self-esteem scores that were not significantly different from the two parent children .

In addition, the study also gathered data about the nature and type of support that the parents provided for their children, the parents' own support networks, and parental conflict pre and post-separation or divorce. Fathers in the study had been residential parents for their children for a minimum of one year and they had become the residential parent as a result of a relationship breakdown and not as a result of the death of their partner. Although data was collected for each of the 60 children in the father headed households, there were only data available for 21 of the fathers. This is partly explained by the fact that many of the fathers were parenting more than one child in the sample, but was predominantly due to the fathers failing to return forms. What follows is a brief overview of some of the key findings from this group of residential fathers with a particular focus on the role and functioning of their support networks.

The fathers were predominantly in the 36-40 year old age bracket, were usually parenting two children, and had one of their own parents (69%), usually their mother (85%) living close to them, i.e., in the same metropolitan area. In terms of their education, they had completed secondary school and some were engaged in or had completed tertiary qualifications. Their average annual income was most frequently nominated as in the range of $11,000-$20,000 (²). The majority of families (79%) were either renting, buying or owned their current homes. The balance (21%) were either renting or buying state housing commission homes. The fathers and their children resided predominantly in suburbs classified as low to middle income. There were no indigenous Australians in the sample. (Although this sample was generated nearly a decade after Wilson's 1990 sample, the demographics of the two were similar albeit that his sample of 85 fathers included 16 (18.8%) who were widowed. Wilson's fathers appeared to be more affluent with earnings of between $20,000 and $30,000 gross per annum noted for 47.2% of his sample).

Overall, the ratings of the fathers of their children's performance on the various measures indicated that they believed their children to be performing at or above the levels expected for their ages, whether this be in terms of the academic (Jastak's Wide Range Achievement Test-Revised) and clinical measures (Achenbach's Child Behaviour Checklist 4-18yrs) or the everyday life skills (Amato's Everyday Household Responsibilities & Life Skills Inventory) and competency scales and social support scales (Harter's Self Percption Profile for Children and Harter's Social Support Scale for Children). Indeed, the accuracy of their ratings were substantiated by the actual levels of the children's performance where the children were found to be performing at or above average levels expected for their ages. However, detailed examination of the results revealed that there were different profiles of fathers' ratings for their sons and daughters across the various measures. In other words, they did identify concerns about aspects of their children's performance and this varied between their sons and daughters.

In response to a series of questions designed to determine the nature and scope of their own support networks, five key research questions were addressed. The first cluster of questions set out to establish Who do single fathers rely on for support? Do they rely on family, friends, organised groups or themselves? Who do they identify that they do not use for support? The fathers identified that they considered their own family and friends to be the most helpful sources of support in raising their children. Institutionalised care, such as schools and childcare services, were valued and professional carers, such as doctors and counsellors, were also seen to be important contributers to their support networks. These single fathers did not seem to find support through organised collectives like church, social or parent groups. Although there were some single fathers who were helped by their ex-spouse and parents-in-law, the majority clearly felt little support from their ex-partner and her friends and relations previously associated with the marriage/relationship.

The second cluster of questions asked How connected do single fathers remain to the family and friends associated with their marriage? Do they still have contact with their in-laws? Answers were obtained by comparing pre and post-divorce data on a number of questions and highlighted how levels of contact with these people changed markedly after divorce. After divorce, these single fathers rarely remained connected to previous in-laws or their ex-partner's friends. A few individuals maintained contact with mothers and fathers-in-law, but the majority had no regular contact beyond traditional family celebrations usually related only to the children (e.g., children's birthdays). This almost total withdrawal from the ex-spouse or partner's family and friends was consistent, whether one examined individual relationships (e.g., mother/father/brother/sister/-in law) or collapsed them into a combined category of "any-in law". Few respondents gave reasons for the changes in contact, but the common theme to emerge from those that did, was continued animosity post-divorce due to the marriage breakdown.

The third cluster of questions explored 'if' or 'how' the fathers' relationships with their own family had changed post-divorce. Surprisingly, answers to these questions revealed that the patterns of contact with their own family members overall changed in a similar way to that of previous family members (i.e., former in-laws). That is, regular contact with extended family members was greatly reduced after divorce with the exception again being for traditional family celebrations. It may be that single fathers are more active in maintaining these ritual contacts or it may be that as the primary carers, they are just more conscious of the importance or significance of these types of contacts for their children. Where a father had been in close contact (daily or weekly) pre-divorce with his own parents, particularly his mother, this type of relationship tended to be maintained post-divorce. The fathers reported no difference in the amount of contact with their own friends post-divorce.

The fourth cluster of questions asked: What types of support do single fathers seek? and Who provides this type of support? Fathers were asked to select from a range of eight possible types of support. The types of support identified as 'most sought' are presented in order of frequency along with the primary provider of the support in Table 1.

From Table 1 it can be seen that the fathers are seeking emotional support (items 1-4) more frequently than practical support. The most common sources of emotional and practical support for these single fathers are their own parents and friends.

The fifth set of questions were designed to establish how important the social context was for these single fathers and asked: How much do single fathers engage with others outside their families? How important are social, sporting or church groups? The questions asked fathers to indicate whether they were involved with religious or other groups. Fathers nominated the type of 'other' groups or individuals with whom they interacted outside their family. They were also asked to indicate how important these involvements were to them and to give reasons for their current level of involvement. The majority of the single fathers (70%) were not involved in religious organisations. Neither were the majority (60%) involved in other types of groups or organisations. Where they were, the types of groups that the fathers were associated with involved male friends, were social oganisations, sporting groups and personal support groups like Lone Fathers or similar men's groups. Other types of interactions were associated with work contacts, neighbours, contacts through their children's sport or school activities and new romantic relationships. There were a range of reasons for involvement with groups and activities (support, time for self, seeking adult contact) and for non-involvement (time constraints, logistics). It seems that like the general population, there are some single fathers who engage in these activities outside the home and some that do not. Those who don't, feel they do not have the time and those who do, report that they enjoy the emotional support and personal affirmation of themselves beyond their role as single parents.

The final question tried to ascertain how likely it was that the single fathers had moved into new relationships, albeit that they were parenting alone. Here the men were split 50:50. Of those who had become romantically involved post-divorce, most had experienced a couple of short term relationships (56%). Only 10% of the total sample had been involved in another longterm relationship.

So what does this brief sketch of these residential fathers suggest? It suggests that they are busy getting on with their lives and their parenting post-divorce. That they are usually working, while sometimes others are studying. That they make realistic assessments about how their children are developing. Certainly from examination of the measures of the children's actual adjustment, their assessments are supported. They have typically become disconnected from their ex-partners friends and family and appear to have retained close relationships with their own parents if they are still alive. This connectedness to their parents provides a large portion of their emotional and practical support network. In terms of their own lives and social involvement, they tend to have adapted in two different ways. One way is to engage with a range of organisations and activities that are predominantly focussed on masculine activities. This way also seems to include establishing new short term relationships with the opposite sex. The other way is to 'opt out' of any participation in clubs, organisations and relationships and to focus on parenting their children. As one father described it, "to put one's own life on hold" until the children have grown up.

CONTACT FATHERS

In Australia it is very difficult to get clear and accurate information about the number of contact fathers. Nevertheless, it is possible to get an estimate of this number by looking at the number of children who live in a family where a natural or biological parent is living elsewhere. From the 1997 census data, it appears that nationally, there were a total of 4.6 million children (aged 0-17 years) who were living in families, of which some 978,000 had a natural parent living elsewhere. This was more likely to be their father (88%) than their mother (ABS, 1997). A further 102,800 children were identified as "living with one natural parent only, but no other parent was reported as living elsewhere. This may be due to death of, or loss of contact with, the other parent" (ABS, 1997, p. 7).

What has been previously reported in Australian research is that 27% of separated (contact) fathers had weekly contact with their children, 35% had monthly contact and 38% had less than monthly contact with their children . Although this study was based on a limited sample size in comparison to some American studies, these figures are consistent with the existing American research on father contact after separation .

There appears to be limited research into the effects of marital separation and divorce on contact fathers universally . This dearth of research is again reflected in Australian research literature, with the major exception being the longitudinal work of Jordan . However, from the limited amount of published data that is available in Australia and elsewhere, it is clear that contact fathers are faced with financial problems , dealing with ex-wives/partners, attending to their own emotional state and being inadequately equipped to deal with child care . Further, they often struggle to maintain relationships with their children whilst feeling ostracised, anxious, without roots and suffering from low self-esteem, depression, poor work performance and disturbed sleep .

As well as having to adjust to a range of changed practical, physical and financial situations, the contact father has often to learn to negotiate with a range of government and legal systems with which he has never before come in contact, as well as trying to cope emotionally with his changed circumstances. While generalisation about the experiences of contact fathers may be problematic, as every separation process and post-separation or divorce arrangement is different and will result in a range of individual experiences for those fathers, there are consistent and recurring issues that characterise their post-separation adjustment experiences.

In practice, these issues have been found to be associated predominantly with those contact fathers who have: a) not initiated separation; b) have left the matrimonial/partnership home either voluntarily or have been ordered out by the Family Court; and c) have left their children in the matrimonial home with the mother as an interim measure. This is the situation that many contact fathers would typically find themselves in as part of the immediate post-separation arrangement. Whilst this physical arrangement may be viewed as beneficial for the children's adjustment inasmuch as it facilitates continuity of their lifestyle in a variety of domains, many of the contact fathers' adjustment issues and psychological disturbances appear to emanate from difficulties not only adjusting to these changed physical circumstances, but also to the realignment of their identity as a father with a "different" relationship to their children. For many fathers, these changed circumstances also precipitate a complete re-evaluation of their total identity as an adult male and their role in contemporary society.

What follows is a brief overview of the "typical" experience of contact fathers as it has consistently been revealed through working with them in a professional capacity as a clinical psychologist .

A TEMPORAL FRAMEWORK FOR CONTEXTUALISING CONTACT FATHERS' ADJUSTMENT POST DIVORCE

Experience in practice suggest that the contact fathers' separation and adjustment issues can generally be categorised into three stages which roughly correspond with periods of time following the physical separation from the family and the matrimonial/family home. These are:

Stage 1: Early days, immediately and up to 6 months following separation; Stage 2: Middle range, 6 months to 2 year post-separation and Stage 3: Long-term or ongoing adjustment, 2 years and upwards following separation.

Stage 1, Early days is generally the most stressful and emotionally vulnerable time for contact fathers. The reality of their situation with its sudden, multiple and often forced components of change - physical, psychological and practical, can serve to shock, confuse and overwhelm the individual albeit to varying degrees.

For many contact fathers, the psychological and emotional effects immediately following separation are often intertwined and coincide with a variety of practical issues that need their immediate attention and may occupy a great deal of their time and emotional energy. These issues may include attention to financial aspects such as the payment of child support (as current practice in Australia is that 'maintenance' is assessed and begins accruing from the date of separation), the location and re-establishment of new accommodation for himself so that his children may visit or stay with him during contact times. In many instances, efforts to maintain, regain or increase contact time with his children may necessitate an initial encounter with the legal system. This may also impose immediate and significant financial strain which can add to the emotional stress already being experienced. Working towards a resolution of these practical issues (especially in terms of re-positioning his financial affairs), is likely to affect his ongoing psychological adjustment and may, in turn, indirectly influence self-esteem, motivation, ability to work or his general sense of wellbeing.

The most pervasive emotions in sessions during these 'early days' is the deepest sense of loss and sadness over earlier family life, the hopelessness and futility of moving forwards and the fear of what the future holds. Perceived losses often include the loss of attachments to friends and relations created through the former relationship (eg., in-laws), the loss of earlier defined statuses and roles (such as husband, father, friend, provider etc.), and the loss of identity that accompanies the changes. When such losses are also combined with the loss of a former way of life, of the family home etc., arguably the contact father initially faces a greater vulnerability than the residential parent who remains in the home with the children, a situation that may act as a buffer against immediate psychological distress.

Some contact fathers have described their experience as a "roller-coaster ride" of emotional states over the space of one week, one day and even one hour. Some remain angry and continue to blame their ex-spouse for years after the separation. Residual bitterness or anger may be manifested (by either or both parties) and continually played out in difficult exchanges with the ex-spouses or partners for any number of reasons. The contact father may become "stuck" in the anger phase derived from his own thought processes, or conversely may become the target of behaviour that emanates from ongoing anger issues that remain with the ex-spouse or partner. In some cases, the anger can become potentially dangerous if directed towards the ex-spouse and or the children. In the more severe cases, the impact of separation can lead to thoughts of homicide and suicide and it is not uncommon to work with clients who possess such pervasive thoughts. This experience in clinical practice, is also supported by research which has established an association between separated males and suicide .

Stage 2, the Middle range around the six month mark, the initial impact or shock of the separation has usually dissipated somewhat although ongoing conflict between both parties may continue to hamper adjustment and acceptance of the new lifestyle. Issues in this middle stage usually center around role restructuring, identity redevelopment or redefinition and post-separation relationship difficulties. These issues generally emanate from the effects of the changing relationship between himself and his ex-partner and between himself and his children. Some of the more contentious issues tend to revolve around matters of conflicting parenting values and styles, (particularly in terms of discipline and varying expectations for children's behaviours), children's schooling, financial matters and ineffective communication styles. If, at this stage, a consistent and regular contact regime has not yet been established with the children, such matters are exaggerated and generally serve to hinder adjustment for all family members.

During this second stage, these issues may be current, ongoing, unresolved or be in the process of re-negotiation as the post-separation family forms emerge and try to achieve some equilibruim. That is, most commonly the contact father and his children may be attempting to establish their own domestic family situation whilst the mother and children make the transition towards a restructured family unit. However, it is still predominantly the loss of the father role and status as defined within the marriage/relationship and subsequent restructuring of this role which is often the most traumatic and sometimes the most problematic concern for many contact fathers in this second stage.

The third stage Long-term or ongoing adjustment often sees the father dealing with relationships with their own biological child(ren), and in addition, new step/blended relationships may be in existence for these fathers, both as a result of their ex-partners establishing new relationships or the fathers themselves progressing to new relationships. The new and unique issues faced by fathers in these circumstances can also be a source of stress from time to time, and especially compounded if there is ongoing conflict and role confusion from the previous marriage involving children and these issues are left unresolved.

The reorganising of a new role as a contact father with his children, together with an individual identity as a father is a task, which is often the longest and hardest struggle. It is precisely due to this strong desire to remain in his children's lives that creates the need for reorganising, restructuring and sometimes, relearning about the parent-child relationship. This "redefinition of father identity" becomes a key component to facilitating contact fathers' adjustment post-separation.

This brief sketch of the contact father's perspective provides some further insights into fathering in the post-divorce family and suggests some important considerations. Firstly, the adjustments required by the contact father following separation are significant and the impact of the event will be determined by the way in which such changes are/are not acknowledged and resolved. The post-separation period raises issues such as dealing with loss not only of his children but of his multiple roles and identities. It also involves role restructuring as a contact father. For many, this requires confronting emotional barriers which can facilitate growth and change, learning new coping skills, becoming informed about laws and policies and even confronting and changing past self-defeating behaviours. What is clear is that regardless of the individual father's personal issues, the transition to single parenthood will require some degree of psychological adjustment. However, despite the challenges and difficulties, most of these fathers are keen to maintain contact with their children. They continue to see themselves as fathers who have an important contribution to make to the development of their children albeit in a different way.

CONCLUSIONS

From the preceding snapshot of different aspects of Australian residential and contact fathers lives, it becomes clear that one of the most important considerations for professionals working with single fathers, is that in the divorce process and the post-divorce family, families and relationships do not end, they change and the outcome for all members of the family will be determined by how such changes are negotiated. For many contact fathers, their perception is that the legal system, and in particular the Family Court, does not facilitate speedy or constructive negotiation of these changes; that delays, usually as a result of their decision to become involved with the legal system to resolve disputes about residency or contact, often only serve to exacerbate problems.

Residential fathers have demonstrated that they are quite capable of parenting alone and that they have requisite skills to nurture and care for their children. For some, this total commitment to parenting dominates their life-style. For others, there appears to be a more balanced approach where parenting is incorporated into other adult roles and activities. Most of the residential fathers seek and gain support through their familial networks with few of them drawing on community based resources. Overall, the impression gained is that these men seem to be fairly self-contained and quietly getting on with the job of parenting their children. They are a largely non-vocal, post-divorce family type that are not acknowledged by or very visible in the Australian community.

Equally it is clear that many contact fathers have a genuine interest and desire to remain connected to their children. However, with the transition to single parenthood, they find themselves confused as to how to best continue their involvement with their children when they perceive that some of the social institutions and bureaucracies they have to deal with do not appear to support their involvement and engagement with their children. Many examples and instances of this discouragement and lack of support are cited by the fathers, but the most often nominated is the Child Support Agency, the government agency responsible for the collection of maintenance monies from the non-residential parent. Many fathers describe their interactions with agencies and bureaucracies as random, illogical and incredibly unfair. They characterise them as 'stacking the odds' against them in their quest to stay involved with their children post-divorce. These negative interactions often result in contact fathers seeking publicity for their situations which they perceive to be unjust and in many cases intolerable. As a consequence, notwithstanding the relative imbalance in numbers between the two types of fathers post-divorce, as a society, Australians are more aware of the post-divorce experiences of contact fathers than residential fathers.

As professionals, it is important to be sensitive to the fact that both groups of fathers are dealing with different but equally important sets of issues around parenting post-divorce. That in seeking to achieve outcomes that are in the 'best interest of the child,' they should not make assumptions about parenting skills based solely on gender. Neither should they assume that financial considerations drive all contact fathers' calls for a review of their treatment by current legislation. The fathers' psychological needs and adjustment issues are an integral part of these calls too. Perhaps the greatest challenge for professionals is to find ways to recognise and support the reality of the diversity of contemporary post-divorce families for both children and their fathers. While professionals can never ensure that everyone is a winner, if they can facilitate fathers and their children to negotiate these post-divorce transitions, they can improve the odds of creating satisfying post-divorce families.

FOOTNOTES

(1) The new legal term "contact" replaces the old legal term of "non-custodial" and the old term "curstodial" has been replaced with "residential" as a consequence of amendments to Part VII of the Family Law Act 1975, given effect through the Family Law Reform Act 1995. Back

(2) There may have been some reluctance to accurately divulge income due to the implications for their Child Support Agency obligations. Back

REFERENCES

Table 1. Sources of Support showing order of importance, types and people most likely to provide this support

BACK