90 of 120 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
The facts don't lie, August 24, 2005
This review is from: Raising Boys Without Men: How Maverick Moms Are Creating the Next Generation of Exceptional Men (Hardcover)
Drexler claims point blank that boys do not need fathers. This is a significant claim to make, and, if true, would have enormous consequences for the way we think about family. Therefore, it is imperative to investigate what her research actually says, and more importantly, what it does not and cannot say. Accordingly, there are two things wrong with Drexler's book - the methodology and the argument itself.
First, the methodology. These are the three most glaring errors in her methodology:
1) The control group for her study is made up of one person - herself (page 28). She sets herself up as a "one woman control group" to make comparisons to her group of 90 fatherless families. Anyone with even a cursory understanding of research methodology knows that this is completely unacceptable, and that the control group has to be as similar in size and attributes as possible to the group that is being investigated.
2) She uses a small, unrepresentative sample - 30 lesbian moms, 30 single moms by choice, and 30 single moms by circumstance - (page 27) to make inferences about the population as a whole. Again, a cursory understanding of statistical and research methods shows that unless you have a sufficiently large, random sample, you simply cannot make inferences about the whole population. But Drexler uses her research to claim that ALL boys do not need fathers. For more of her bias and elitist sample, see pages 24 and 25.
3) She does not measure outcomes using a well-tested instrument with which to determine how the children are doing across measures of child development and well-being. Instead, she relies on interviews with young children (primarily from the lesbian moms) to make the broad determination that these boys are "better off" without a father. The self-reporting of children is notoriously unreliable for the purposes of academic research.
Second, the argument itself. Three principle flaws in her argument:
1) Over the past 25 years, an enormous amount of social science research has shown that across measures of economic, educational, health, emotional, psychological, and behavioral well-being, children with involved fathers fare better, on average, than children without involved fathers. These two and a half decades of research cannot be overturned by one flawed, small-scale study that does not even measure outcomes over a long period of time.
2) If Drexler's research was reliable, the implication would be that when men get women pregnant, their children are actually better off if the father leaves. But Drexler also claims that male involvement is important for boys, and that boys will seek out this male involvement on their own. This means that fathers should not take responsibility for their own children, but should make sure that they make themselves available for someone else's children, who were presumably left behind by their father. This is illogical.
3) Based on her biased sample, Drexler's research tells us nothing about the vast majority of fatherless homes. The vast majority of fatherless homes are produced by divorce and out-of-wedlock childbirth, where, by circumstances beyond the single mother's control, she is left to raise her child on her own. They are often living in poverty. But, again, the majority of Drexler's small sample was of well-off women raising children fatherless, by choice, which would produce an entirely different environment for the children than the vast majority of single mother households.
In conclusion, it is borderline fraudulent for Drexler to claim that her research is a reliable tool to infer that boys do not need fathers. Her research method and her argument are deeply flawed and need to be addressed in front of a national audience that has been exposed to her faulty publication. We need to send the message to boys that they need to be involved, responsible, and committed fathers and that girls need to value and uphold the importance of the future fathers of their children for the sake of their children's well being.
I would encourage all to read Father Facts by the National Fatherhood Initiative, Fatherless America by David Blankenhorn, and Fatherneed by Kyle Pruett for the TRUTH!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
11 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
could we have a balanced review?, February 15, 2007
I'm more stunned by the reviews than by the book. I think the book has interesting information and a valid perspective that isn't heard often.
But to understand that, one needs to actually read the book and also to understand sociological methods of study - studying human experience is not like studying cause and effect in a lab. One also needs to hear and grasp the difference between studies on boys with fathers who have abandoned them - the studies most often cited and associated with stats about the negative effects of not having a father - and this study which is on boys who do not have a father in the picture and never have. In this way, this is new research.
The book doesn't, to me, say that men are not necessary to boys - in fact the author spends a great deal of the book talking about how boys who do not have fathers get access to (and are encouraged by their "maverick moms" to get access to) men and male role models. She finds this to be of benefit for the boys.
She does also say that, based on this research, she sees boys being raised in this specific circumstance (boys without fathers who have abandoned them and who are being raised by a mom or moms) doing very well and developing in a very balanced and healthy manner.
My issue with the book is two-fold. I'd like to see more research and a follow-up with the subjects of her research - I think that would lend itself to a stronger work.
I also just found the writing to be generally unorganized and a bit repetitive. This was very distracting to me as I read.
So interesting information - would like more research and more data - writing itself only so-so.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No