Family Matters No.72 Summer 2005 Australian Institute of Family Studies 58

This small qualitative study

explores the ways in which

definitions of fatherhood and paternal identities are located

within men’s personal experiences of fatherhood, as well as

within a variety of social contexts and processes.

S T E V E N TA L B OT

This article draws on in-depth interviews with 40 fathers to examine some of the issues that inform men’s decisionsto become fathers and influence the subsequent timing offatherhood. The fathers’ comments reveal a great dealabout their own aspirations for fatherhood, as well as theirrelationships with their parents, partners, and children.

Modern families for modern times

In pre-modern times, home and work were intimately con-nected. The family was the main unit of production,carrying out economic, political and religious functions,and thus was more likely to be bound together by mutualdependence rather than love and affection. Labour wasorganised along gender-specific terms to maintain house-hold economies. Within these families, individual needswere subordinated to the higher needs of the collective,allowing little room for the free personal expression ofdesires to become realised (Beck and Beck-Gernsheim1998; Coltrane 1996; Gilding 1997).

Consequently, marriages were “contracted” not on thebasis of love and sexual attraction, but according to eco-nomic concerns. These contracts were frequently initiatedand controlled by parents to facilitate the successful trans-mission of wealth within families (Giddens 1991; 1992).Thus, as Beck and Beck-Gernsheim propose, marriage wasa binding mode of living implemented from “above,” pre-scribing roles within these relationships (1998: 33), andinstitutionalising sexual inequality (Griswold 1993).

odern fatherhood in Western societies is aparadox of complex and competing imagesemphasising the importance of paternalinvolvement. On the one hand, televisiontalk shows reveal the problematic aspects of

dysfunctional fatherhood, venting rage at “deadbeat dads”who fail to provide monetary support for their childrenpost-divorce or post-separation. On the other hand, therehas also been a proliferation of stories in magazines andnewspapers heralding the arrival of the “new” and“involved” father. As ideas of “good” fatherhood havediversified, so too have attitudes and expectations towardpaternal behaviour. Today’s fathers are expected to bepresent at births, be involved in providing care for theirchildren, and provide financially for their families.

However, while the expansion of the definition of father-hood and paternal roles has led to new possibilities formen, the sheer magnitude and diversity of representationsand expectations for paternal involvement have blurredthe cultural meaning of fatherhood.

Devoid of a unified cultural model of parenthood, this arti-cle proposes that, more than ever, men and women arefrequently required to come up with their own model ofparenthood. Part of this process involves the negotiation of working and family life and personal relationships. Italso appears to entail a considerable degree of planning onthe behalf of “would-be” parents, particularly in relation tothe timing of families.

MM

Family biographies in the making

From here to paternityFrom here to paternity

59Australian Institute of Family Studies Family Matters No.72 Summer 2005

The growth of industrial capitalism and market economieshas often been attributed to the decline of the householdeconomy and the development of “separate spheres”wherein the family (home) became disengaged from theworkplace. As a result, “modern” marriage and family lifebecame delineated by a separation of “public” and “pri-vate” realms. This separation gave rise to new set ofparental roles – the domesticated “housewife” and theundomesticated “breadwinner” (Blakenhorn 1995;Coltrane 1996; Gerson 1993; Giddens 1991; Grisworld1993; La Rossa 1997). More recently, workplace changessuch as greater levels of female (and maternal) participa-tion in full-time employment (ABS 1998; ABS 1999), theshrinking of heavy industrial and manufacturing sectors,as well as policy-related changes – like the introduction ofmaternity and paternity leave – have further transformedthe ways in which men and women see themselves asfathers and mothers (Russell et al. 1999; Knijn 1995).

Beck and Beck-Gernsheim (1995; 1998) argue that the rise ofindividualisation (wherein individual goals and desires takeprecedence over common ones) is a feature of the greater eco-nomic, structural and societal transformations associatedwith modernisation. These authors contend that individuali-sation is also a “historical process that increasingly questionsand tends to break up people’s traditional rhythm of life”, ortheir “normal biography”, freeing them to construct biogra-phies of their own making (Beck-Gernsheim 1998; Beck andBeck-Gernsheim 1995). According to this theoretical view-point, people’s biographies are determined by their decisions,

choices and actions, rather than being imposed from above.In this respect, modern marriages and families are electiveand voluntary relationships that are “made” by the “joining ofindividuals” and, as a consequence, are more contingent upondecision making and planning (Beck 1992).

Planned parenthood

Life planning plays a key role in organising and holdingtogether family biographies. Indeed, this planning is an indis-pensable feature of parenthood as a salient component ofparenting involves preparing the way for future generations(Hawkins, Christiansen, Sargent and Hill 1995; Holland1998; Marsiglio 1995). In relation to parenthood/fatherhood,couples often need to determine when is a “good” time tomarry, if at all. They may also ask themselves when is theright time to start a family? How many children should theyhave? Which caregiving arrangements should they adopt?Hence, it would appear that the “freedom” to decide and cre-ate our own biographies is “precarious” in that decisions likethese carry with them a “tyranny of possibilities,” choices,and outcomes (Beck and Beck-Gernsheim 1998: 26).

In many respects, parenthood can be seen as being both aresponse and contributor to the demographic changesoccurring with contemporary society. These changes notonly signify a shift in the (traditional) roles of men as fathers,and women as mothers, but also have profound implicationsfor parenthood and configurations of relationships into thefuture. For example, the erosion of the “family wage” andthe increased labour force participation of women (many ofwhom are mothers) have called into question the “fairness”of traditional family structures and parenting arrangementswhich tended to view men as “breadwinners” and women as“caregivers”. Likewise, other concerns such as declining fer-tility and marriage, and increasing divorce, haveconsiderable implications for the compositions of families(Edgar and Glezer 1992; Lupton and Barclay 1997).

Recent figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics showthat these trends are continuing. Australian couples are hav-ing fewer children (between 1.73 – 1.76 for each woman)(ABS 2005) and having children later in life. The median ageof parenthood (for all births) in the last 15 years has risenfrom 27.5 to 30.0 years for women and 30.2 to 32.3 for men.Couples are also marrying less, or delaying marriage (theaverage age of first-time brides and grooms are now 26.9 and28.7 respectively) (ABS 2003), and are experiencing higherrates of divorce (although these rates have plateaued).

While socio-demographic characteristics like these are animportant analytical tool for describing how trends in par-enthood (and subsequent family compositions) have alteredover time, they tell us little about the politics of the planningprocess itself – that is, those decision-making factors whichinform the timing of parenthood. For example, with regardto starting a family, how and when are such decisions made?What role, if any, do fathers play in this decision makingprocess? How do these issues relate to “do it yourself” biog-raphies and life trajectories (Giddens 1991)?

Consequently, part of the discussion with fathers in thestudy entailed asking them questions about the “timing oflives” (Burton and Snyder 1998), or more specifically,when and how they decided to become fathers. Is father-hood something that merely “happens to” men, or is it anevent for which they actively and voluntarily plan? More-over, what are the social and structural forces that factorinto fathers’ overall decision-making processes?

Family Matters No.72 Summer 2005 Australian Institute of Family Studies 60

hinging upon the reliability of contraception. In this respect,conceptions of fatherhood were situated in opposition tothe pursuit of one’s own interests and lifestyle. For thesemen, the transition to fatherhood was perceived as entailinga loss of personal freedom, and previous sense of self. Theperceived enormity of the responsibility of caring for a childwas another deterrent – a responsibility they felt they weretoo “immature” to appreciate:

“I don’t think I was mature enough – let’s say at 25 or even at 30 – to . . .well, I realised, I knew it would be a big job, and something you wouldhave to devote all your time to.I was still playing footy . . .and our sociallives.”(Rob:Storeman, 36, 1 child)

“It was always in the back of my mind that I would have kids one day ...Itwas just ...I didn’t feel right.Looking back,I was very immature throughmy late teens and those early twenties. I went from one lifestyle toanother.”(Brian:Production Engineer, 35, 1 child)

Immaturity in this context is associated with a lack ofworldly and personal experience, self- interest (puttingone’s needs before another), and instability, or going from“one lifestyle to another”. Implied within this commentaryis the notion that fatherhood is a feature of the ongoingprocess of self-development and maturation, requiring inessence a degree of selflessness.

For many men, the sense of security, stability and com-mitment derived from being in a long-term relationship, ormarriage, provided the impetus for entertaining the idea offatherhood. Some men indicated that they had not thoughtabout fatherhood prior to being in a relationship, andemphasised the importance of finding the “right person,”or being in the “right time” in their relationship as playinga role in the ideation of parenthood:

“I guess it just came about when I knew I had found [wife] and we werethinking about getting married – probably then you start thinking . . .the next progression is children, you have to, you know, have a family.”(Tom:Parole Officer, 31, 1 child)

“It seemed like the natural thing to do. The timing was right, and Ithought that this is the right woman to have a child with ...another stepin the process of engagement, getting married, getting a house, thenchildren.”(Phil:Private Investigator, 43, 2 children)

Phrases like “next progression,” or “natural progression”were frequently used by fathers to explain the timing offatherhood, suggesting that the commencement of familieswas a consequence of “natural” rather than social arrange-ments, organisation, and choice, or at least was theinevitable outcome of a chain of sequential events thatsomehow acquired a life of their own. However, as the fol-lowing discussion reveals, the timing and planning ofparenthood was very much an interactive social processundertaken by couples in an attempt to manage familialbiographies and negotiate self-identities.

The feeling is mutual

In order to explore their roles in the decision makingprocess, fathers were also asked whether they believedthat the starting of families was a mutual decision under-taken by themselves with their partners. Althoughpartners were more likely to instigate or broach the subject(only three fathers stated that they instigated the discus-sion of starting a family with their partner), the majority offathers (n=25) indicated that the decision to start a familywas a mutual one:

The study

Data reported here come from a larger study exploring themeanings fathers give to their experiences of fatherhood,and its relationship to paternal involvement and identityformation (Talbot, 2004). Through the use of semi-struc-tured in-depth interviews, 40 fathers were asked about theirroles in the timing of families and related decision-makingprocesses. Interviews lasted between one and three hoursand covered issues concerning pathways and transitions tofatherhood, feelings and expectations about fatherhood, aswell as questions relating to work and family balance.

Participants for this study were generated through the dis-tribution of flyers requesting volunteers for a researchproject examining men’s experiences of fatherhood, andthrough similar requests outlined in a community newspa-per. The chosen respondents comprised “new” orfirst-time fathers, married, single, sole and non-custodialfathers from varying socio-economic backgrounds. Fathersranged in age from 22 to 63 years, with an average age of 38years. The average age that men became fathers was 29years. The overwhelming majority of fathers (n=33) weremarried, with divorced or separated fathers accounting for15 per cent (n=6) of the sample. Most of the respondentsindicated that they were employed. These men wereemployed in a variety of occupations ranging from cleaner tobiotechnician. Seven fathers were unemployed at the timeof the interview, with the majority of these unemployedfathers describing themselves as being “stay-at-home dads”.

All of the in-depth interviews were tape-recorded andinterview transcripts were reviewed for the emergence ofthemes and concepts relating to paternal involvement andidentity formation. Preliminary analysis entailed a famil-iarisation with the data, making sense of what was goingon, or finding a chronology of events. More detailed analy-sis involved discovering linkages or relationships betweenpatterns of events and identified themes.

Given that the selection of the sample was driven by theo-retical and conceptual concerns of the research, and thuswas an illustrative rather than statistically representativeone, the results presented here will not be generalised.

A matter of timing

During the interviews, men were asked to reflect uponthose times when they started entertaining the idea offatherhood, or when they envisaged that they wouldbecome fathers. For many of these men, prior to becomingfathers, fatherhood was an “abstract idea,” a “vague” or“distant thought”. Others revealed that fatherhood was“not a priority” or “focus in their lives” in their youth, andwas something to be avoided when embarking upon rela-tionships with girlfriends:

“I think men spend a great deal of their life trying not to have children(laughs) . . . and it never really occurred to me. I never really thoughtabout it. It never seemed inevitable.” (Tim: Database Administrator, 35,2 children)

“Before I got married, I suppose I was like a lot of people.I would go outand sow my wild oats and then I would go to church on Sunday and prayfor crop failure.”(Geoff:Retired Police Officer, 55, 2 children)

In relation to the organisation and stages of one’s “lifecourse” (Giddens 1991), fatherhood was seen as beingsomething “you did later on,” with the timing of parenthood

61Australian Institute of Family Studies Family Matters No.72 Summer 2005

“It definitely was a mutual thing that we both thought about, and justwent into it with open eyes, I guess. It wasn’t accidental.” (Adam, Pri-mary Caregiver, 25, 1 child)

“Having kids was a joint decision and I thought that it was really impor-tant that I too have a part in it.”(Dave:Clerical Officer, 45, 2 children)

Joint decision making of this kind sometimes reflectedwishes to pursue equal or active levels of involvement asfathers. For the most part, however, reciprocity of decision

Therefore, for some men, becoming a father was a conse-quence of partners’ desires to become mothers. In thesecircumstances, maternal desires were constituted as beinga gender specific attribute and something which distin-guished men from women. These comments also expounda belief that a woman has the ultimate (sexual) control, orfinal say in deciding the timing of families. Thus, whilethese men were included in parenting plans, they were notthe architects of these plans.

making was frequently framed within a discourse of plannedparenthood, with “evidence” of mutuality and planning per-ceptible in the avoidance of unplanned or “accidental”pregnancies. In this sense, identities as fathers were activelychosen by men through negotiation with their partners.

Men who did not regard fatherhood as being a product ofmutual or shared decision making, frequently conveyed asense that fatherhood was an event that “happened tothem,” or was something that they felt they had little say orcontrol over. In some cases, fatherhood was solely a productof sexual relations rather than careful planning or choice:

“It was very unplanned really. It just happened . . . literally. So I didn’treally think about it much to be honest. It just happened.” (Paul, SelfEmployed Tradesman, 36, 3 children)

“I think fatherhood was a by-product of sex, to tell the truth. I know mywife wanted it ...wanted to have some kids.And I knew that I was goingto stay with my wife ...she’s happy – he’s happy.I’ll help her out.”(Chris,Employment Consultant, 41, 4 children)

“Helping out,” or as alternatively expressed, not “denying”their partners the opportunity to experience motherhood,were terms used by men who did not hold strong desires tobecome fathers but were keen to remain in otherwise ful-filling relationships:

“I think that my wife was very keen on having children. I wasn’t thatfussed .. .but I wasn’t against it . . .and given that she was so passionatetowards it,then I was happy to have a child.But if I was married to some-one who didn’t want to have children, I wouldn’t have been upset.”(Brian, Physiotherapist, 34, 1 child)

Although these men indicated that they did not con-sciously choose to become fathers, they were certainlycomplicit in enabling their partners to become mothers:

“I think that’s most men isn’t it? Well, most of the ones I know seem tobe that way . . . the wife decides that she wants the baby and you just go ‘yeah, okay I suppose’. What are you going to do? Say no we’re notgoing to have sex anymore. I don’t want a kid?” (Ethan, Primary Caregiver, 22, 1 child)

Some men also indicated that their decisions to becomefathers entailed considerations of economic and careerissues, as well as their own and their partner’s ages.

Counting the cost of parenthood

Parenthood today is often the result of active choice anddecision making. However, perceived freedom to decide orchoose is often constrained by unevenly distributed struc-tural and institutional rewards. Consequently, choices tobecome parents involved weighing up careers, leave enti-tlements, and of course, financial concerns. Indeed,fathers pointed out that the management of householdeconomies was one of the primary considerations in plan-ning pregnancies. As one father explained:

“Monetary considerations do come into it . . . people will say ‘oh no itdoesn’t. It does . . . If you’ve got monetary problems, you’ve got socialproblems – lots of problems. If you can’t buy the car, if you can’t pay forthe petrol, if you can’t fix the car when it breaks down, if you can’t paythe power bills . . .you can’t buy your smokes .. .you can’t go out and getyour hair permed.So monetary consideration is to the forefront. It’s gotto be the forefront.”(Geoff, Retired Policeman, 55, 2 children)

Overall, fathers employed in a variety of “blue collar” occu-pations (for the most part requiring unskilled or semi-skilledmanual labour) were almost twice as likely as thoseemployed in “white collar” or professional occupations(requiring credentialised skills or qualifications) to indicatethat financial pressures were a contributing factor in theirdecision to delay parenthood. Significantly, those fathersemployed in “white collar” occupations who cited financialissues as influencing family planning were employed inoccupations that offered lower remuneration than theirpeers, or were in formative stages of building capital withintheir careers and relationships. These financial concernsfrequently overrode desires to become a parent:

“We lived in a modest home . . .so then what we did was acquire all ourpossessions,and then we bought a bigger house to what we were livingin ...it was a plan for us.We thought we didn’t want to be struggling likeall hell when we do have our first child.”(Bill, Storeman, 44, 1 child)

Parenthood today is often the

result of active choice and

decision making. However,

perceived freedom to decide or

choose is often constrained by

unevenly distributed structural

and institutional rewards.

Family Matters No.72 Summer 2005 Australian Institute of Family Studies 62

advance of becoming pregnant in order to avoid a severereduction in family income. Similarly, fathers revealed thatthey also prearranged leave entitlements with employers tocoincide with the expected due dates of babies. These leavearrangements however, were more temporary in applica-tion, often involving the use of annual leave, highlighting apreference for paid leave. In general, women’s labour forceparticipation became interrupted with the arrival of chil-dren, with many mothers reducing the hours they worked,or returning to work on a part-time basis. Once again, eco-nomic necessity and men’s greater earning potentialinformed these traditional family arrangements.

However, discussions with primary caregiver fathers (n=7)provided a more interesting twist to the standard parentingbiographies highlighted above. For partnered primary care-giver fathers, the greater earning potential of their spousesinfluenced the organisation of caregiving arrangements:

“We decided that when we had kids ...one of us was going to stay home.. .and it just made sense that I stayed home until the second one camealong,because my wife can earn more money than I can.For me to earnthe same amount of money, I’ve got to work seven days a week andtwelve hours a day . . . I wouldn’t see the kids, so it’s no point. It justseemed logical for my wife to work.”(Joel,Primary Caregiver,37,1 child)

The women who returned to work on a full-time basisworked in professional occupations, and were successful intheir chosen fields, receiving salary increases and promo-tional opportunities. Conversely, all of the partneredprimary caregiver fathers previously worked in workingclass occupations involving manual labour. These menexperienced little job satisfaction, stating that they “didn’tmiss” or “didn’t like” their former occupations – occupa-tions which presented little remuneration and opportunityfor upward mobility. Clearly, the economic contributionsof their partners allowed these men to leave their unfulfill-ing jobs to become more involved as fathers.

Age – biology versus biography

Another interesting facet that emerged in the discussionwith fathers involved the relationship between age and thetiming of parenthood for both men and women. Men spokeof their partners having “biological clocks” with various“cut off points” or “deadlines” for having children, rangingfrom 35 to 45 years of age. Deadlines like these gave cou-ples a timeframe within which to set goals and establishrelationships and careers. Related to this notion of the bio-logical imperative to reproduce, was the belief that certainages were more advantageous than others for producingfavourable outcomes. Thus, a woman’s increased age wasunderstood in terms of the possible “risk” it posed to suc-cessful pregnancies and foetal development:

“Because my wife is a little older than I am,we didn’t want to leave it toolate when ...bringing up children.So it was better to start it earlier thanit was to leave it.So that was another reason .. .the incidences of thingslike Down’s Syndrome increases when you get to 40 . . .which we didn’treally want.”(Tim, Database Administrator, 35, 2 children)

In comparison, men’s concern with age related to theirprojected abilities to play physically active roles as fathersin their children’s lives, and the belief that you needed tobe young(er) to do so:

“It was just the timing of it ...because I am five years older than my wife ...I guess I was thinking about it earlier than she was ...I don’t want to betoo old to kick the footy around, or chase the kids . . . I’ve done all right sofar.Pull up a bit stiff a times”(laughs).(Peter,Primary Caregiver,35,1 child)

“Didn’t want to bring a child into a world where .. .we wanted to have ahouse . . . and all that, rather than try to do it on one income and theneveryone struggles.What’s the point? We waited a couple of years andwe had a house . . .money in the bank.So everything was set up.”(Greg,Foundry Worker, 33, 2 children)

Thus, work, as well as income, “strongly conditions lifechances” (Giddens 1991: 81). The same can be said for lifechoices. For working class and lower income middle classfamilies, choices regarding the commencement of familieswere clearly mediated by economic necessity. Rising costs,spiralling mortgages, and the sheer expense of providingfor another family member meant that “parenting proj-ects” (Beck-Gernsheim, 2000) were delayed until couplescould become more “established”. Indeed, given that manyof these families would become single income householdsfor a period before and after the arrival of their newest fam-ily members, delaying parenthood was seen as a necessarypart of this strategic planning process.

Choices to delay parenthood, particularly for middle classfathers, reflected desires to organise and maintain currentstandards of living:

“It was the little things like will we have enough money? Were we financially secure enough? How’s it going to change our lives? Are westill going to be able to do things we wanted to do?” (Angus, SocialWorker, 39, 4 children)

Indeed, fathers revealed that not only the timing, but alsothe size of families, were based on affordability and antici-pated effects on lifestyle for both parents and child:

“We basically ...enjoyed ourselves,and put our children aside so that wecould get ourselves in the position where we could actually support thechildren ...we wanted two or three that we could support and maintain,that they would get the things in life we didn’t . . . getting the first oneinto private primary . . . we’ve been planning all that.You virtually haveto plan two years in advance.”(Zack,Technical Officer, 40, 3 children)

Subsequently, planning of this nature also included prepar-ing the way for yet-to-be-born family members. Decliningbirth rates can thus be seen in terms of parents’ endeav-ours to maximise the life chances of their children byproviding as many opportunities as possible. Fathers oftenreported that they wanted their children to get “the thingsin life” that they did not, or “have a better life,” than theydid. If good and responsible parenting obligates parents to“do everything to give the child ‘the best start in life’”(Beck-Gernsheim 2000: 143), the planning of familial andindividual biographies is necessary for this to occur.

“His” and “her” careers

Another important and closely related dimension of thesuccessful planned parenting project, involves the carefulorganisation of work or career biographies. This oftenoccurred in dual income households where negotiationcentred on which parent would fulfil “caregiver” or “bread-winner” roles. This process usually entailed weighing upeconomic, institutional, and personal considerations, andaccentuated the relationship between perceptions ofchoice and agency and their structural underpinnings.

Within these families, it was usually women and wives whoorganised their careers around impending motherhood,whereas men’s/husband’s labour force participationremained relatively stable. Part of this planning process forwomen involved the accumulation of paid (and the organi-sation of unpaid) leave entitlements, sometimes years in

63Australian Institute of Family Studies Family Matters No.72 Summer 2005

For many, the desire to be younger fathers originated fromthe evaluation of the relationships they shared with theirown parents, or of other fathers they had come into con-tact with:

“My parents were old when I was born . . . they were closer to 40 when Iwas born.That was something I didn’t like ...I didn’t want to be an olderfather because I had older parents.”(Paul,Self Employed Tradesman,36,3 children)

“I always wanted to be a young dad ...and have the vibrancy.I had somefriends who had older fathers . . . they didn’t really interact with theirkids. It was in the back of my mind that I would like to be a dad while Iwas still young enough to enjoy my kids, and be able to run round thehouse.”(Luke, Musician, 30, 2 children)

Men’s conceptualisations of the appropriate timing offatherhood were also constructed around attempts to avoidpossible “generation gaps” from occurring. These fatherssaw delaying fatherhood too long as having a detrimentaleffect upon the quality of relationships with future off-spring, reducing active levels of involvement, andincreasing the likelihood of possible remoteness withinthese relationships. More significantly, these accountsreveal the importance of the more enjoyable and physicalaspects of fatherhood in the construction of paternal identities.

Conclusion

The findings presented here reveal the conundrum facedby parents as they attempt to create their personal, work,and familial biographies. In turn, the planning of paternalbiographies is situated within the context of differingsocial, historical and economic locations of individuals andfamilies. Despite anecdotal claims of otherwise, some ofthe comments highlighted above reveal that there is a“right time” for parenthood.

However, for those men who did not view fatherhood to be something that “happened to them”, it would appearthat part of the problem in planning for parenthoodinvolves the ever-shrinking window of opportunity tobecome parents (especially for mothers) as a result of juggling a complex array of pressing institutional and per-sonal needs. Thus, while delaying parenthood is seen asbeing a necessary component of the planned parentingproject, and advantageous for maintaining careers,lifestyles, and maximising the potential opportunities for offspring, the “over-delaying” of parenthood is seen ashaving a detrimental effect on the quality of relationshipswith children (reducing active levels of involvement byfathers).

Given the economic constraints faced by couples as theyattempt to plan parenthood, the extended provision of paidmaternity and paternity leave would alleviate some of thefinancial pressures felt by families during one of the mostrewarding and challenging periods of their lives. Moreover,the national extension of paid maternity and paternityleave would allow individuals to exercise greater choice inrelation to the timing of parenthood and subsequent care-giving arrangements. Similarly, greater access to moreaffordable child care would also prove beneficial to thistask. Structural and social support of this kind mayencourage parents to bring forward decisions to have chil-dren, and help dispel the notion that there is never a righttime to become a parent.

References

ABS (2005), “Population: Recent fertility trends”, Australian SocialTrends 2005, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra.

ABS (2003), “Changing families”, Australian Social Trends 2003,Catalogue No. 4102.0, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra, pp. 35-39.

ABS (1999), Household and family projections 1996-2012, CatalogueNo. 3236.0, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra.

ABS (1998), Australian Social Trends 1998 Work – Paid Work: Trends inWomen’s Employment, Catalogue No. 4102.0, Australian Bureau ofStatistics, Canberra.

Beck, U. (1992), Risk society: Toward a new modernity, SagePublications, London.

Beck, U. & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (1998), “Individualisation and precariousfreedoms: Perspectives and controversies of a subject-orientated soci-ology” in Heelas, P., Lash, S. & Morris, P. (eds), Detraditionalisation:Critical reflections on authority and identity, Blackwell Publishers,Cambridge Massachusetts.

Beck, U. and Beck-Gernsheim, E. (1995), The normal chaos of love,Polity Press, Cambridge.

Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2000), “Life as a planning project” in Lash, S.,Szerszynski, B. & Wynne, B. (eds), Risk, environment and modernity:Towards a new ecology, Sage, London.

Beck-Gernsheim, E. (1998), “On the way to a post-familial family: From acommunity of need to elective affinities”, Theory, Culture and Society,vol. 15, no. 3-4, pp. 53-70.

Blakenhorn, D. (1995), Fatherless America: Confronting our mosturgent social problem, Basic Books, New York.

Burton, L.M & Snyder, A.R. (1998), “The invisible man revisited:Comments on the life course, history and men’s roles in American fam-ilies” in Booth, A. & Crouter, A.C. (eds), Men in families: When do theyget involved? What difference does it make? Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates, Mahwah.

Coltrane, S. (1996), Family man: Fatherhood, housework, and genderequity, Oxford University Press, New York.

Edgar, D. & Glezer, H. (1992), “A man’s place . . . ? Reconstructing familyrealities”, Family Matters, no. 31, April, pp. 36-39.

Gerson, K. (1993), No-mans land: Men’s changing commitments to fam-ily and work, Basic Books, New York.

Giddens, A. (1992), The transformation of intimacy, Stanford UniversityPress, Stanford California.

Giddens, A. (1991), Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in thelate modern age, Stanford University, Stanford California.

Gilding, M. (1997), Australian families: A comparative perspective,Longman, Melbourne.

Griswold, R.L. (1993), Fatherhood in America: A history, Basic Books,New York.

Hawkins, A.J., Christiansen, S.L., Sargent, K.P. and Hill, E.J. (1995),“Rethinking father’s involvement in child care: A developmental per-spective” in Marsiglio, W. (ed.), Fatherhood: Contemporary theory,research, and social policy, Sage Publications, London.

Holland, A. (1998), “Reconceptualising fatherhood: Issues revisited andvirtues reclaimed”, Paper presented at the 3rd National Conference onParenting in the 90s and Beyond: Dealing with the Difficult Issues,Melbourne.

Knijn, T. (1995), “Towards post-paternalism? Social and theoreticalchanges in fatherhood” in van Dongen, M., Frinking, G. & Jacobs, M.(eds), Changing fatherhood: A multidisciplinary perspective, ThesisPublishers, Amsterdam.

LaRossa, R. (1997), The modernization of fatherhood: A social and polit-ical history, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Lupton, D. & Barclay, L. (1997), Constructing fatherhood: Discoursesand experiences, Sage Publications, London.

Marsiglio, W. (1995), “Fathers’ diverse life course patterns and roles:Theory and social interventions” in Marsiglio, W. (ed.), Fatherhood:Contemporary theory, research, and social policy, Sage, London.

Russell, G., Barclay, L., Edgecombe, G., Donovan, J., Habib, G.,Callaghan, H. & Pawson, Q. (1999), Fitting fathers into families: Menand the fatherhood role in contemporary Australia, CommonwealthDepartment of Family and Community Services, Canberra.

Talbot, S. (2004), “Old” or “new” fatherhood? Reflexive fathering in latemodernity, unpublished PhD thesis, Flinders University South Australia.

Steven Talbot is a sociologist who works for the Defence Scienceand Technology Organisation (DSTO) in Edinburgh, South Aus-tralia. His research examines the institutional significance of genderrelations and, in particular, the ties between cultural configurationsof masculinity, fatherhood and identity formation.