Father’s absence began a rapid increase in 1960 with the number of children growing up without a father (i.e., without a biological, step, or adoptive father) having stabilized since 1995. Father absence is proportionally affecting Black children, and nearly a quarter of American children live in father-absent homes. Trends such as increases in divorce, increases in cohabitation, and marriage decreases have led to more children living with an unmarried parent but not necessarily experiencing father absence. The relationship between the mother and father at birth affects later father involvement. Fathers who have a romantic relationship with the mother are more likely to be involved than fathers who do not have a romantic relationship with the mother.
In 2018, 69.1% of all children under age 18 in the United States lived with both parents, 22.2% lived with mother only, 4.4% lived with father only, and 4.3% lived with neither parent.
- Of all White children, 74.6% lived with both parents, 17.4% lived with mother only, 4.4% lived with father only, and 3.6% lived with neither parent.
- Of all Black children, 39.7% lived with both parents, 48.1% lived with mother only, 5.03% lived with father only, and 7.13% lived with neither parent.
- Of all Hispanic children, 67.0% lived with both parents, 24.9% lived with mother only, 4.0% lived with father only, and 4.2% lived with neither parent.
- Of all Asian children, 86.8% lived with both parents, 8.5% lived with mother only, 2.2% lived with father only, and 2.4% lived with neither parent.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau. (2018). C3. Living arrangements of children under 18 years and marital status of parents by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin and selected characteristics of the child for all children: 2018. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau.
Family structure significantly impacts adolescent substance and alcohol use, particularly for young men. Children from father-absent homes are more likely to engage in substance or alcohol use.
- Findings accounting for mediating factors suggest that adolescents with absent fathers are at a greater risk for using marijuana for they are more likely to live in poverty and poorer quality neighborhoods.
Source: Mandara, J., Rogers, S. Y., & Zinbarg, R. E. (2011). The effects of family structure on african american adolescents’ marijuana use. Journal of Marriage and Family, 73(3), 557-569.
- In lower parental support families, a stronger decrease in paternal control was related to a stronger increase in delinquent activities. On the other hand, in high parental support families, a stronger decrease in adolescent-reported parental control was related to a less strong increase in delinquent activities.
Source: Keijsers, L., Frijns, T., Branje, S. J. T., & Meeus, W. (2009). Developmental links of adolescent disclosure, parental solicitation, and control with delinquency: Moderation by parental support. Developmental Psychology, 45, 1314–1327.
- The lowest achievement and the highest risk of school failure and course failure were experienced by adolescents who did not have a resident father figure and didn’t know the identity of their fathers.
Source: Whitney, S., Prewett, S., Wang, Ze, & Haigin C. (2017). Fathers’ importance in adolescents’ academic achievement.
International Journal of Child, Youth and Family Studies, 8(3–4), 101–126.
The research reported in The One Hundred Billion Dollar Man study outlined the direct and indirect societal costs of father absence associated with federal funding for 13 means-tested programs plus child support enforcement. The research yielded the following findings:
- Higher poverty levels among single-mother households lead to greater use of federal assistance programs.
- The federal government spent about $99.8 billion dollars in assistance to father-absent families in 2006. Means-tested programs that the Federal government spent money on that benefit father-absent families include Earned Income Tax Credit, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), child support enforcement, food and nutrition programs, housing programs, Medicaid, and the State Children’s Health Insurance Plan (SCHIP).
- The programs with the greatest areas of expenses for fatherless families in 2006 include Medicaid ($22.6 billion), TANF ($15.0 billion), and EITC ($14.9 billion).
- Health care costs for fatherless homes were $24.2 billion in 2006. About one-fifth of the federal budget spent on safety net programs was spent on federal means-tested benefits programs for single-mother households. Nearly 4% of the total budget for 2006 was spent directly on assistance to single-mother households.
- Thirty-five (35) percent of SCHIP expenditures benefit single-parent households, 41% of EITC recipients are in father-absent homes, and 87.5% of TANF recipients are single mothers.
- Fifty-six (56.3) percent of children receiving SSI benefits live in single-mother homes, about 30% of SNAP recipients are from female-headed homes, and 69.2% of children receiving free school lunches have single mothers.
- Fifty-five (55.2) percent of WIC recipients are raised by single-mothers, 48.2% of all Head Start recipients are from father-absent homes, and 37% of public assistance and Section 8 housing are female-headed households.
- There are indirect societal costs of father absence. Children of fatherless families use mental health services at higher rates than their peers from two-parent households, they have more behavioral issues at school and are more likely to be involved in the juvenile justice system. Higher usage of substances, alcohol, and tobacco in addition to poorer health outcomes for children from father-absent homes may increase the need for medical services as compared to their peers. Children from father-absent families are more likely to be incarcerated, as well as earn lower wages.
Source: Nock, S., & Einolf, C.. (2008). The one hundred billion dollar man: The annual public costs of father absence. Germantown, MD: National Fatherhood Initiative.
