Press Release

Q: If an orphan child asks for love, which of you would give them a school meal?

A: Ruth Kelly, Secretary of State for Education and Skills

There is a gaping hole at the centre of the Government's family policy.

'The manifesto on families put out by the Labour party is right about one thing;’ says FNF Chair John Baker. 'It is the headline - but there is no follow up.'

The headline puts parenting as the priority for family policy.

Above all else, children need the love and care of their parents. With this all else follows. Without it, improving the standard of school meals and so on is trivial.

Four million children live apart from one of their natural parents. Most want to see more of their 'other parent' than they are allowed.

Some 2 – 2.5 million parents live apart from one or more of their natural children. Most of them want to see more of them than they are allowed.

There is an enormous fund of loving, caring parenting waiting to be tapped.

If this were tapped, the following problems would be reduced:

The distress of children. Losing a parent following divorce or separation causes more damage to the lives of children than losing one through death. There are more children 'socially orphaned' by separation or divorce today than were physically orphaned by death in Victorian times.
The distress of parents. When a child is abducted, even if the child is known to be physically safe, the distress of the parents is recognised. Parents can feel the same about children they are prevented from seeing following parental separation.
Less physical and mental illness, deviance, teenage pregnancy and law breaking. This is associated with insufficient parenting, often following separation or divorce.
Less child abuse and ill-treatment. This is associated with parents who have more than they can cope with, often following the exclusion of one of the child's parents.
Less child poverty. Parents involved with their children share their money with them and with their ex's. Both parents are able to earn money without the children losing out on time with a parent as a result.
Less need for institutional childcare, as both parents can look after the children.
Less of a burden on the taxpayer. Savings in the cost of childcare, social security, the child support agency, the costs of social problems....

The priority for family policy must be to enable children to have all the love and care from their parents that is available. This involves changing the law and attitudes so that children are allowed to have this, even if the parents do not live together. The government has no effective proposals on this score.

They have rejected the proposal from MPs that, when considering the ‘welfare checklist’ as required by the Children Act 1989, courts should take into account a child’s underlying need for the full involvement of both parents as far as practical.

John Baker
FNF Chair

Please see Families Need Fathers ‘programme for change’ Father’s Day Manifesto

For comment or information please contact us.

Join Now