Psychology Today blogs

Evolutionary Psychology Blogs  

Why are mothers better parents than fathers? Part I

Blair Witch Project“Mommy’s Baby, Daddy’s Maybe”

In a climactic scene in the 1999 horror movie The Blair Witch Project, Heather Donahue’s character, sensing her and her friends’ impending deaths in the woods, turns the camera on herself and says “I just want to apologize to Josh’s mom, and Mike’s mom, and my mom.” Given that her film project eventually led to Mike’s and Josh’s (as well as her own) deaths (sorry for the spoiler), an apology might make sense. But why did she apologize to their mothers, and not to their fathers?

The answer, from an evolutionary psychological perspective, is that Heather instinctively knew, as do most of us, that children are more important to their mothers than to their fathers, and, as a result, their loss would be more devastating to their mothers than to their fathers. It is not difficult to find abundant evidence for the fact that mothers are more dedicated to their children than fathers. For example, when married couples with children get divorced, chances are that the children stay with the mother, not the father, especially if they are young. According to the 1992 March/April Current Population Survey in the United States, conducted by the US Census Bureau on a nationally representative sample, 86% of custodial parents are mothers. Further, many of the noncustodial fathers who have agreed to pay child support, either voluntarily or via court order, default on their commitment and become “deadbeat dads." The first national survey of the receipt of child support, conducted in 1978, reveals that less than half (49%) of women awarded child support actually received the full amount due to them, and more than a quarter (28%) of them received nothing. The percentages have remained more or less constant since. In 1991, 52% of custodial parents awarded child support received the full amount; 25% of them received nothing. So the question remains: Why are women so much more dedicated parents than men? Why are there so many deadbeat dads but so few deadbeat moms?

On the surface, this massive sex difference in the dedication to children may appear puzzling, since both the mother and the father are equally related to their children genetically; each parent transmits half of their genes to their child. However, there are two biological factors that combine to make fathers far less committed as parents than mothers.

The first is paternity uncertainty. Because gestation for all mammals (including humans) takes place internally within the female’s body, the male can never be certain of his paternity, whereas maternity is always certain. And paternity uncertainty is not a remote theoretical possibility. As I mention in a previous post, the estimated incidence of cuckoldry (men unwittingly raising and investing in another man’s genetic offspring) in contemporary Western societies is substantial (between 10% and 30%). Thus, this is a very realistic possibility for any father in contemporary Western society and probably elsewhere throughout human history as well. Naturally, men are not motivated to invest in children who have a distinct possibility of not being genetically theirs.

The twin concept of paternity uncertainty and maternity certainty is captured in the common saying “Mommy’s Baby, Daddy’s Maybe.” Every single mother, not only among humans but among all mammalian species, has been certain that the child that she has just given birth to is hers; no woman has ever wondered, as a child is coming out of her body, “Hmmm.... I wonder if this child is really mine....” In contrast, every single father wonders, either explicitly or implicitly. Some wonder more than others, but no father has ever been completely certain of his paternity. The best he can ever say is “Maybe.”

So paternity uncertainty is the first reason why fathers are less dedicated to their children than mothers. I’ll discuss the second reason in the next post.

Comments

This is one of the most

This is one of the most biased article that I have read in many years. I am amazed that anyone has the courage of presenting this explanation as "scientific". But I understand now: you are a proud fundamentalist


Paternal uncertainty is an

Paternal uncertainty is an important contributor to the differences in emotional attachment from an ultimate perspective. However, from a proximate point of view (mom carries baby to term, adapts to carrying girth, breast-feeding, etc), mothers might also experience more exposure and literal connection and attachment to the offspring. These tangible experiences might contribute to maternal emotional attachment.


This one I have to comment on...

I've been reading this blog for a while now, usually with great amusement and frustration. However, I just have to comment on this post.

The statistics quoted here to 'prove' the parental dedication (or lack there of) are at best outdated, and at worst irrelevant. The 1992 census has custody going to women 86% of the time. I am not sure of the current statistics, but from what I have seen and heard in society, those numbers have been changing, men are being granted custody on a more and more frequent basis. Does this mean men are becoming more dedicated? How this even proves parental dedication, I don't know. Last I checked, custody was court-mandated and until recently it was believed by society that mothers were the only appropriate care-takers of children. The court didn't take into consideration a mother's dedication to the child, or the father's for that matter.

I also fail to see how the 1978 census on 'deadbeat' dads defaulting on their child support proves or disproves parental dedication. To me it seems to prove more of a person's inability to financially support one family in addition to himself and maybe even a new family from a re-marriage.

Also, while I am no man, and certainly not a father, I find it hard to imagine that *every* man questions his paternity, even implicitly.

Kanazawa here is an old hat at making sweeping generalizations from only a handful of statistics, but in this case he has jumped from completely irrelevant, outdated facts to proving an evolutionary paranoia in men and obsession in women. So, yes Dr. Kanazawa, these glaring sex differences in parental dedication are quite puzzling and I look forward to hearing the second part to your reasoning, but your argument has only led me to the conclusion that these differences are societal in nature, not evolutionary.


While I'm tempted to lean in

While I'm tempted to lean in favor of the opinion of those who have already commented on this blog, I believe there is some juice to be squeezed out of this and further investigations. I am also interested to see what the second part of your reasoning is.

To apply my reasoning to evolutionary thought, a reader must accept that I withold the understanding that societal norms are both sustained and changed by the mechanisms of evolution, those known (genetics) and unknown. On a psychoanalytic level, it makes sense that from infancy a child shows greater attachement to the mother - just from breastfeeding alone. Meanwhile, being that these families live in a society, the father is out being the breadwinner and is lucky to spend a few hours each night with 'his' child.

Or at least, that is how society used to be. There has been an ever increasing amount of woman pursuing careers and starting families, with perhaps only a few months out of the office for maternity leave. With this trend swinging women into the career realm there would be a logical swing of more men into the home realm, to become the primary caretaker of children.

I'm waiting for the science to allow men, if not produce eggs, to be able to carry out a physical pregnancy. Our protoevolution will have reached such heights as to only now be seen in questionable movies by California's Governator!


I have to agree on most

As women are more nurturing and well balanced, I have to agree that (the majority of them) do make better parents. It's not just the primary bonding. It took me months to bond with my child. However, as a woman I have a greater deal of patience, understanding, maturity, support, and with not having a Y chromosome, don't feel the need to tell my male child that he's a 'sissy' for showing emotions. I actually paid child support with joint custody for 5 years because I made more money and never once defaulted on the payments. My ex husband complains constantly about having to pay now that things have changed. While I don't believe the study results from 1991 are accurate now, and I really believe children are better off with 2 loving parents that can both be good role models, I am just not convinced that fathers are half as important as mothers.


Add comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
zero plus one equals
Solve this math question and enter the solution with digits. E.g. for "two plus four = ?" enter "6".

Blogger  

Satoshi Kanazawa's Recent Posts  

Find a Therapist
Choose the best match from
thousands of profiles.