"It's Not What You Say, It's How You Make Them Feel": Providers Speak up about the Absence of Father-Focused Engagement

Introduction: While it is well established that healthy father engagement contributes to positive health and educational outcomes among children, the key systems that provide services to families and youth typically do not engage in father-centered practices and policies. Manifestations of structural barriers, such as racism, mother-centric practices, and the cyclical effects of disproportionate incarceration among Black and Brown BILPOC fathers prevail. Little is known, however, about how providers describe barriers they encounter toward engaging fathers in case planning or services to equip fathers with the capacity to co-parent effectively. To that end, the current study interviewed providers representing systems that serve children and families to address the following questions: 1) what barriers do they experience toward engaging fathers in services within their respective system; 2) how do these barriers impact their ability to engage fathers in services and refer them to father-focused specialized services; and 3) what resources or supports are needed to mitigate barriers?

Methods: In 2021 the current leader of the Commonwealth Center for Fathers and Families (CCFF) in Lexington, KY notified service providers via email about the study. Providers contacted research staff to learn more about the study, and if interested, scheduled a time to participate in a semi-structured interview. Each interview was coded by at least two members of the team who were trained to follow procedures outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006), including: 1) open coding (labeling phenomena during a quick read of the text); 2) axial coding (categorizing initial codes into groups based on similar patterns); and 3) categorizing groups into themes. The team engaged in constant comparison, reached consensus on codes and quotes to support them, and noted any deviant cases or outliers.

Results: A racially diverse sample of service providers (N=24) representing different systems (child welfare, criminal justice, addiction/recovery, and housing/employment) revealed two major themes: 1) barriers to father engagement and 2) strategies to mitigate them. For barriers, three salient types were discussed: micro (lack of reflexivity about biases, colorblindness), societal (devaluation of fathers’ role and capacity to parent), and systemic (racism, mother-centrism, lack of funding to support father-centric services, policies that restrict benefits if fathers reside in the home). These barriers explained why providers do not make referrals for fathers to engage in father-centric programming at CCFF. Data also illuminated strategies to address each of three major barriers. These included implementing strength-based practices, (e.g., conveying to fathers they are valued and understanding their intrinsic motivations), creating spaces within systems to engage in reflexivity, and investing in father-centric programming.

Conclusions: This study captured the experiences of change agents and healers who are working with fathers and families. Their experiences illuminate obstacles they must contend with at the micro, societal, and systemic levels of practice. To support providers, data indicate that additional research is needed to: 1) unpack what conditions are necessary to implement their recommendations, 2) evaluate the effects of delivering culturally relevant father-centric training across systems, and 3) if/how the training increases father engagement and healthy father-child relationships.