From Theory to Practice: An Evidence-Based Model Of Father Engagement
Maryam Navaie-Waliser, Dr.P.H., David A. Jones, C.S.W., Aubrey L. Spriggs, M.A.,
Laura Ensler, M.S.Ed., Priscilla Lincoln, R.N, Ph.D.
Nearly two decades ago, pioneering research described fathers as the “forgotten
contributors to child development” (Lamb, 1975 and 1977; Kotelchuck, 1976). Since that time,
informed by a plethora of research and evaluation studies, fathers are increasingly recognized for
their unique and irreplaceable contributions to the health and well-being of children beginning in
infancy (Horn, 1998; Cochran, 1997). Furthermore, through accessibility and support to mothers,
fathers have been shown to help mothers adjust better during pregnancy, have more positive birth
outcomes, and increase joy and affection towards infants (Parke, 1995; Teitler, 2001).
Researchers have identified five key contributors to father engagement in childrearing
including paternal characteristics, (e.g., socioeconomics, psychological and behavioral attributes),
maternal characteristics (e.g., gatekeeper role, psychological well-being), family characteristics
(e.g., roles, structure, cultural beliefs, social support networks, conflict, religiosity), child
characteristics (e.g., sex, temperament, functional ability), and societal/environmental factors (e.g.,
employment quality, strain, and flexibility; relationship with peers; and resource availability)
(Roggman, Boyce, Cook & cook, 2002; Parke, 1996; Lamb, 1997; Robinson & Fitzgerald, 2002;
Beitel & Parke, 1998).
Several theoretical models conceived by developmental and social psychologists have
facilitated the conceptualization of father engagement including: (a) the Theoretical Model of
Father Involvement (Lamb, Pleck, Charnov, & Levine, 1987) which specifies three critical
dimensions that must be present for successful fathering, namely interaction or direct engagement
between father and child, accessibility or availability of father to the child, and the father taking
responsibility for the child; (b) the Theoretical Model of Nonresidential Father Involvement (IbingerTallman, Pasley, & Buehler, 1993; Mincy, 1997) which incorporates the principals of identity theory
to account for the degree of father involvement with children after fathers are no longer involved
with their children’s mother; and (c) the Paternal Investment Theory (Doherty, Kouneski, &
Erickson, 1998) which identifies five key domains of influence on fathering: contextual factors, child
factors, mother factors, the co-parental relationship, and father factors.
Other more distant, but highly relevant theories that relate to father engagement include: (a)
Theories on Early Triadic Processes (Klitzing, Simoni, Amsler & Burgen, 1999) which emphasize
interactional, transgenerational, and representational dimensions of triadic processes between
mothers, fathers, and their children; (b) Social Support and Social Network Theory (Israel, 1985;
Berkman, 1995) that highlight the need for informational, emotional, and instrumental support to
improve caretaking skills; (c) Social Organization Theory (Rook & Schuster, 1996) which
emphasizes the processes by which different relationships within social networks are mobilized to
meet particular needs that enable behavioral and attitudinal changes; (d) Social Cognitive Theory
(Bandura, 1986) which postulates that behavioral capability is essential for behavior change to
occur, therefore increasing knowledge and skills can facilitate positive changes; (e) Social
Influence, Social Comparison, and Convergence Theories (Rogers & Kincaid, 1981) which
proposes that one’s perceptions and behaviors are influenced by members of groups to which one
belongs; (f) Social Ecology Theory (Stokols, 1996 and 2000) which postulates that behavior is
influenced by the social and physical environments in which one lives; and (g) the Theory of
Reasoned Action (Fishbein & Azjen, 1975) which specifies adoption of behavior as a function of
intent, determined by a person’s attitude toward performing the behavior, and of perceived social
norms.
Although the benefits of father involvement on child development have been well
documented and multiple theoretical models for father engagement exist, there are relatively few
evidence-based practice models for guiding public health programs, including Early Head Start
1
(EHS), to successfully engage fathers as active participants in their children’s lives. Thus, the
purpose of this presentation is to describe such a model, one that relies on past theories at its
core, but is based on eight years of cumulative practice-based evidence from the Father’s First
Initiative, an EHS-supported program at the Visiting Nurse Service of New York.
Our evidence-based practice model for father engagement consists of six progressive
action steps. Step 1 emphasizes the importance of creating a culture of inclusion. For this step to
be successfully accomplished, EHS staff must: (a) have clarity about what is meant by father
involvement, including explicit criteria for who can be considered a father (i.e., biologic father, step
father, any male father figure), (b) receive training with regards to techniques that are most
effective in interacting and building relationships with fathers, (c) perform a self-assessment to
uncover personal beliefs, experiences, and value placement regarding father involvement. In
addition, the EHS Program needs to create a physical environment that welcomes fathers (e.g.,
display pictures of fathers with children in open forums and have father-focused print materials).
Step 2 involves various strategies for making initial contact with fathers, including community
outreach (active or passive), home-based outreach, obtaining referrals from mothers, accepting
self-referrals, or receiving referrals from other sources (e.g., maternal grandmother, community
partners, preventive service programs). Step 3 focuses on relationship building based on the
concept of generative fathering, defined as fathering that meets the needs of children by working to
create and maintain ongoing supportive and ethical relationships between a father and a child.
Building relationships between EHS staff and fathers involves collaboration (providing relevant and
timely information and consistency of contact), patience (building trust and allowing the process to
be driven by fathers), and reflection (staff must remain non-judgmental and have varying levels of
acceptance of fathers’ lifestyles and behaviors). Step 4 involves making assessments to support
fathers’ underlying reasons for wanting to become engaged in their children’s lives by helping them
express their motivations (emotional, tangible and/or social) and needs (intrinsic and extrinsic).
Step 5 requires that EHS staff assist fathers with prioritizing incremental action steps to increase
participation in their children’s lives. Step 6 outlines diverse home-based, center-based, or
community-based activities for engaging fathers with their children, the child’s mother, the EHS
Program and its staff, and the community.
In conclusion, our cumulative experiences in developing and implementing programs to
help facilitate father involvement over the past eight years have resulted in generating a successful
evidence-based model of father engagement which has the potential to be beneficial to other EHS
programs through replication in full, or adaptation in part.
References
Bandura A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Beitel A, Parke R. (1998). Paternal involvement in infancy: the role of maternal and paternal
attitudes. Journal of Family Psychology 12:268-88.
Berkman LF. (1995). The role of social relations in health promotion. Psychosomatic Medicine
1995; 57:245-254.
Cochran D. (1998). African American fathers: A decade review of the literature. Family in Society
1997:340-350.
Doherty WJ, Kouneski EF, Erickson MF. Responsible fathering: An overview and conceptual
framework. Journal of Marriage and the Family 60(2):227-292.
2
Easterbrooks MA, Goldberg WA. (1984). Toddler development in the family: Impact of father
involvement and parenting characteristics. Child Development 55:740-752.
Fishbein M, Azjen I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and
research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing.
Horn WF. (1998). Father facts third edition. Gaithersburg, MD: The National Fatherhood Initiative.
Horn, WF. (2000). Fathering infants. In Osofsky JD, Fitzgerald HE, eds. Handbook of Infant
Mental Health. New York: Wiley and Sons, Inc. 272-297.
Ibinger-Tallman M, Pasley K, Buehler C. (1993). Developing a middle-range theory of father
involvement postdivorce. Journal of Family Issues, 14:550-571.
Israel BA. (1995). Social networks and social support: implications for natural helper and
community level interventions. Health Education Quarterly 12:65-80.
Klitzing KV, Simoni H, Amsler F, Burgen D. (1999). The role of the father in early family
interactions. Infant Mental Health Journal 20(3):222-237.
Kotelchuck M. (1976). The infant’s relationship to the father: Experimental evidence. In Lamb ME
(Ed.), The role of the father in child development. New York: Wiley, 161-192.
Lamb ME, Pleck JH, Charnov EL, Levine JA. (1987). A biosocial perspective on paternal behavior
and involvement. In Lancaster J, Altmann J, Rossi A, Sherrod L (Eds.), Parenting across lifespan:
Biosocial dimensions. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter; 111-142.
Lamb ME. (1977). Father-infant and mother-infant interaction in the first year of life. Child
Development, 48:167-181.
Lamb ME. (1975). Fathers: Forgotten contributors to child development. Human Development
18:245-266.
Lamb ME. (1997). The development of father infant relationships. In Lamb ME (Ed.) The role of
the father in child development (3rd Ed.) New York: Wiley; 104-120.
Mincy RB. (1997). Delivering dada: Paternalism and fragile families. In Mead L (Ed.), The New
Paternalism: Supervisory approaches to poverty reduction. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings
Institute.
Parke RD. (1996). Fatherhood. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Robinson JL, Fitzgerald HE. (2002). Early Head Start: Investigations, insights, and promise.
Infant Mental Health Journal 23(1-2):250-257.
Rogers, E. & Kincaid, D.L. (1981). Communication networks: A paradigm for new research. New
York: Free Press.
Roggman LA, Boyce LK, Cook GA, Cook J. (2002). Getting dads involved: Predictors of father
involvement in Early Head Start and with their children. Infant Mental Health Journal 23(1-2):19621978.
3
Rook KS, Schuster TL. (1996). Compensatory processes in the social networks of older adults. in:
Pierce GR, Sarason BR, Sarason IG, eds. Handbook of Social Support and the Family. New York,
NY: Plenum Press; 219-248.
Stokols D. (1996). Translating social ecological theory into guidelines for community health
promotion. American Journal of Health Promotion. Mar-Apr 10(4):282-298.
Stokols, D. (2000). Theory development in environmental psychology: A prospective view. Wapner
S, Demick J, et al. (Eds.), Theoretical perspectives in environment-behavior research: Underlying
assumptions, research problems, and methodologies. New York, NY, US: Kluwer Academic/
Plenum Publishers; 269-276.
Teitler J. (2001). Father involvement, child health and maternal health behavior. Children & Youth
Services Review 23:403-25.
4