The Effects of Father Absence Due to Divorce: A Systems Interpretation.

In American society, the incidence of divorce continues to rise. In 1974, the estimate was that 40% of all new marriages would end in divorce. When children are involved, the mother usually regains custody. Although the number of children of divorce living with their fathers is increasing, it is still a small percent. In addition, the rate of remarriages is lower when children are involved (Hetherington.et al.,1977). Consequently, a large number of children are being raised in father-absent homes, and indications are that the numbers are increasing. A recent Denver Post article predicted that 50% of all children now being born will spend some of their childhood in a single-parent home. In terms of frequency, the father-absent family is becoming quite common, even "normal," yet it often continues to be considered a "broken" home and, when compared to the two-parent family, an inadequate structure in which to raise healthy children. Since father-absent families are so common these days, this opinion is in need of review.This paper will present a review of the father absence research in three areas: sex role development, cognitive development and personality development. The role of moderator variables will be discussed. And, finally,an open systems model will be proposed as a vehicle to better understand the effects of father absence and as a guide for future research.

Governance and Uncertainty

Government actors create law against a backdrop of uncertainty. Limited information, unpredictable events, and lack of understanding interfere with accurately predicting a legal regime’s costs, benefits, and effects on other legal and social programs and institutions. Does the availability of no-fault divorce increase the number of terminated marriages? Will bulk-collection of telecommunications information about American citizens reveal terrorist plots? Can a sensitive species breed in the presence of oil and gas wells? The answers to these questions are far from clear, but lawmakers must act nonetheless. The problems posed by uncertainty cut across legal fields. Scholars and regulators in a variety of contexts recognize the importance of uncertainty, but no systematic, generally-applicable framework exists for determining how law should account for gaps in information. This Article suggests such a framework and develops a novel typology of strategies for accounting for uncertainty in governance. This typology includes “static law,” as well as three varieties of “dynamic law.” “Static law” is a legal rule initially intended to last in perpetuity. “Dynamic law” is intended to change, and includes: (1) durational regulation, or fixed legal rules with periodic opportunities for amendment or repeal; (2) adaptive regulation, or malleable legal rules with procedural mechanisms allowing rules to change; and (3) contingent regulation, or malleable legal rules with triggering mechanisms to substantively change to the rules. Each of these strategies, alone or in combination, may best address the uncertainty inherent in a particular lawmaking effort. This Article provides a diagnostic framework that lawmakers can use to identify optimal strategies. Ultimately, this approach to uncertainty yields immediate practical benefits by enabling lawmakers to better structure governance.