Mr. Raeburn writes that “as recently as a generation ago, in the 1970s, most psychologists” believed that “with regard to infants, especially, fathers were thought to have little or no role to play.” When it came to toddlers and older children, too, the great parenting theories of the 20th century placed fathers in the background. Freud famously exalted, or damned, the mother for her influence. John Bowlby’s attachment theory, which he developed beginning in the 1940s, focused on the mother or “mother-figure.”
When the pioneering researcher Michael E. Lamb became interested in the role of fathers, in the mid-1970s, “there wasn’t much evidence for the irrelevancy of fathers” — it was just assumed, Mr. Raeburn writes. And “there wasn’t a lot of data to suggest they were relevant, either.”
…
Aside from a few remarks about his own second marriage, and second go-round at being a dad, Mr. Raeburn is less chatty. “Do Fathers Matter?” is paragraph after paragraph of scholarly articles summarized, a Psycinfo and Jstor database clip job. It’s not for grad students, but it’s also not for the beach.
So, after condemning earlier psychological research, the book expects us to believe newer psychological research? Should we trust common sense, or should we take our guidance from the latest theories?