Subscribe by Email

Your email:

Sponsor: Contac

Dads don't have time to be sick! When you start to feel cold and flu symptoms, load up on fluids and treat yourself with an OTC medication.

Follow Us

Browse by Tag

The Father Factor: The Official Blog of National Fatherhood Initiative

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

What Was Missing in Sandusky Case? Fathers

  
  
  

SanduskyJerry Sandusky was found guilty of 45 counts of sexual abuse a week ago. Despite the verdict, important questions should continue to be asked. Why didn’t the assistant football coaches do something? Why didn’t the school administration do something? But the biggest, most pointed question is, “How in the world was Sandusky able to prey on so many young boys for so long?”

From our perspective, Sandusky would not have been able to do what he did had he not had access to so many boys growing up in father-absent homes.

Ronnie Polaneczky of the Philadelphia Inquirer brings up this point in her column, Sandusky case underscores importance of fathers. She asks, "What if so many of Sandusky's victims hadn't needed father figures in the first place?" She answers her own question: “This never would've happened.”

Sandusky intentionally surrounded himself with children from homes that didn’t have involved fathers by starting a foundation, The Second Mile, dedicated to helping boys from “disadvantaged” homes.

Polanecksky writes, “I'd bet my own dad's hypertension meds that Sandusky never would've groomed those Second Milers for sex had the children had active fathers whose wrath Sandusky might've feared.”

Of Sandusky's known victims, six had no father in their lives and three admitted to never having known their dads. On the witness stand, many of the boys said they thought of Sandusky as the father they'd never had.

One boy said, he (Sandusky) "treated me like a son in front of other people.” Another victim testified, "I looked at Jerry as kind of a father figure...I didn't want to lose somebody actually paying attention to me."

NFI understands children have an innate need for their fathers’ affirmation and attention. “Children have a hole in their soul the shape of their fathers,” says NFI President Roland Warren. And we know from decades of research that fathers matter. Whether a father is in the home and involved or not changes just about everything – for good or ill.

Sadly, folks like Sandusky know this and prey on children with absent fathers. Like drug dealers or gang leaders, they exploit what they recognize as a weakness or vulnerability in a child craving adult male attention.

To note, this is what DC sniper Lee Malvo said about how John Muhammad caught him up in his web: “Anything he asked me to do I'd do. He knew I didn't have a father. He knew my weaknesses and what was missing.”

We also know through social science research that children from father-absent homes are far more likely to suffer physical and sexual abuse than those growing up in two-parent families.

Economics will not fix this problem. Needy children exist in wealthy homes, too. Only a society willing to educate and train up a generation on the importance of fatherhood can change this problem.

In other words, we need to get to the root by asking the most-pointed question more often: “Why were these kid’s victimized?” More often than not, the answer is going to be because their fathers weren’t there to protect them physically and emotionally.

Photo credit


Comments

Though economics cannot cure the problem it is a key factor that can contribute to complicating fatherhood in low income neighborhoods more intensely.
Posted @ Friday, June 29, 2012 2:45 PM by Art Lee
But what about all the fathers who arewill present.... who will sexually, physically, and emotionally assault their sons today? 
 
Isn't this a symptom of a bigger problem? 
 
How many catholic preists raped boys who came from homes with fathers? 
 
Sandusky himself was a father. What kind of father? One who continually raped his child. 
 
Some fathers don't belong with their children. 
 
You could do more good for honest stable dads if you didn't defend them all. 
 
And if you stood up for the Moms who try to protect their kids. 
 
Think about it.
Posted @ Wednesday, July 04, 2012 9:04 AM by anne
@Anne 
 
 
 
While you raise some valid points, the number of mothers falsely accusing her soon to be ex of wrongdoing, to gain an advanatge in a custody fight, seems to outnumber the mothers with a true need to protect their children. And there are also mothers that don't need to be around their children. Mothers who allow new boyfriends to physically or sexually abuse their children while looking the other way, or mothers who kill their children by drowning them or other methods. Yet we don't judge mothers as a whole on the actions of the few. Fathers want the same treatment. 
 
 
 
Stand up for the rights of fathers trying to be involved in their children's lives.
Posted @ Wednesday, July 04, 2012 10:00 AM by Mike
Couldn't agree more, Mike. 
 
Just like all Dads shouldn't be lumped together, neither should Moms. 
 
But the issue at hand is the protection of children. 
 
How do we help the courts determine the true monster from the protective parent? 
 
Are the fatherhood groups ready to see that any effortof aimed at advocating for fathers is hurt by advocating for ALL fathers? 
 
I think we all agree good Dads need to be included. 
 
How do we take this from mom vs dad to enriching lives? 
 
I thought this article could have a disclaimer.... or a call to action for men to step up and report abuse.... or a chance to educate people about how big a problem child sex abuse really is. 
 
We all win when we stand up for what's right. 
Posted @ Wednesday, July 04, 2012 10:20 AM by anne
Well, Anne, you have to consider the source. This is an article written by an organization that fights for Father's rights. As a divorced dad who has had to fight and spend money on legal fees, just to insure that I am allowed to make a substancial contribution to my child's life and the adult they will become, I agree with and support their fight. I don't believe the organization would support any and all dads parental rights. When you are talking about parents, male or female, you are talking about demonstrably FIT parents. 
 
What courts need to do is treat both parents by default as fit and equally capable of raising their child. Both parents should have equal access and equal say over the raising of their child. A father should not have to prove himself fit to gain access to his child. There are many men who are fit parents but cannot have access to their child because a spiteful ex denies them their right, and fighting for their rights with legal representation can be cost prohibative for many men. LEt it be that it must be demonstrated that a parent is unfit, to have their rights diminished or retracted entirely. This way, if a mother is trying to use the court system to spite her ex unjustly, she now knows there is an upfront cost if her allegations are proven unfounded. Conversely, if her allegations are proven to be true, her legal costs could be ordered repaid by the father, or divided evenly by both parents. 
 
Giving fathers their proper rights does not take anything away from good/fit people looking out for the safety of children. These are 2 different things. 
 
The article's premise is correct. People, especially males, act more responsible when they know a male parent is present in the home of a child, or is substancially involved in the child's life. Even as a teen, I was much more forward with teenage girls of single Moms, than I was of a girl whose Mom and DAD were both present in the home. You know that Dad's are not going to tolerate anyone messing over their children, and that when you're dealing with a father, the repurcussions could be very violent.
Posted @ Thursday, July 05, 2012 11:26 AM by Mike
The exception proves the rule. By this, I mean that both the Sandusky case and Anne's claims about some bad fathers underscores the need for reinforcing good fatherhood. 
 
This site advocates responsible, loving, affirming fatherhood. For Anne to say that defending Fatherhood may cause some defense for people who are bad at fathering only reinforces the relativism that allows predators to divide and conquer. We are held accountable to the higher standard - that is how close we come to being exceptional - not how far above failure we are. If we strive only for achieving a minimum we are failing our children, ourselves, our communities, and God. 
 
We must ALL be diligent in holding each other accountable to the standard by which we all be judged - love your neighbor as you love yourself; or (if your prefer) you should treat people in the same way that you want people to treat you. When we accomplish this individually and collectively, we will have attained the highest standard.
Posted @ Monday, July 09, 2012 8:41 AM by Michael
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics