Men's failure to look after their children is a form of coercive control

[AmnesiacDream]

I was reading a thread today where two parents are trying to both work from home in the school holidays with the kids there, but the dad just refuses to, saying his job is more important. And while that particular situation may well be more properly addressed by getting childcare it occurred to me that in general this is a form of coercive control and possibly one of the most ubiquitous and ingrained that women experience.

I'm not talking about situations where an uneven division of childcare has been happily negotiated.

But where the mother would like to work more or go out more, but the father just refuses to ask for adjusted hours, refuses to add enough to household expenses to allow for paid childcare, refuses to look after the kids in the evening even when he goes out himself, etc. And so the mother takes on a job with worse financial returns short and long term, can't lean in to get a promotion, takes all her vacation over the school holidays to try and cover what she can. Fudges the fact she's working from home with a toddler parked in the other room. Drops hobbies and friendships.

Even when divorced, failing to turn up for contact, refusing to do half the care when it covers work hours, taking the kids at night to lower CMS but won't pay for after school club, etc.

Am I wrong in thinking this is, in effect, a form of coercive control? Does anyone know if Women's Aid or other domestic abuse charities are making this point to the police/courts/government?

I’m not sure whether it actually counts as coercive control or just unfairness, but either way it’s the absolute reason why parenting impacts the salary and career prospects of mothers so much more than of fathers.

Essentially, fathers can pick and choose how they support their children in a way that women cannot.

Is it only that women are more keen to have the children in the first place, or is there something else at stake here ?

Society holds women to account far more than they do men.

Men do this while women don't because men are still seen as decent human beings even if they're bad fathers, but women are seen as bad human beings if they are bad mothers. It defines our worth and all of society would censure a woman who pulled the kind of stunts men pull.

I'm wondering about the feasibility of pursuing it at coercive control either pressuring the police to investigate and prosecute, or possibly suing fathers for the loss of earnings and or cost of childcare. (And to encourage men and women it to see it as the abuse it is).

Trouble is the situation creeps up on you. When I became a SAHM it was absolutely what I wanted. Then when I started work I was still the main carer. With hindsight I realised I made it too easy for DH to be uninvolved. The kids are adults now and I'm still trying to get a career back on track. I can see all my mistakes, but I wouldn't say I was coerced, more taken advantage of.

There was a thread recently where the op had booked a weekend away with her friends, she booked it a year in advance so plenty of notice for DH. Now it's getting closer to the trip her DH has decided he has to visit his parents 8 hours away on the same weekend and is expecting her to sort childcare or not go, this is blatantly coercive control. Everyone was telling the op to tell her DH it's up to him to sort childcare. She never returned to the thread, she also mentioned she never went out, we can only hope the realisation hit her.

Personally I'm curious as to whether companies are more accepting of men who "WFH" whilst supposedly caring for children than women.

The woman who wirh her DH should either get in the home-office first and lock herself in, or get up first and go outside to work.

The woman with the weekend away should have phoned her in laws and say their son would be bringing the kids - then try to leave before him.

Easier said than done

But society thinks the woman's place is looking after the children and is foregoing hobbies time away to bring up the children. If the inlaws raised a son like that then they themselves are likely to think she's should stay home.

If anything happens to the children if the husband doesn't step up it's the woman's fault.

I've even had my husbands boss, female and male say well you have a wife for that why do you need flexible hours.

I think it absolutely does. My ex loved the fact that I was trapped due to our child, so couldn't do stuff. And hated it when I started to get more freedom. He did virtually no childcare but would go out ALL THE TIME to socialise with his friends etc.

When DC got a bit older and I had a bit more freedom he suggested a 2nd baby. Repeating the process I guess.

But unfortunately, his lack of input with childcare meant I wasn't prepared to do it all alone again and wouldn't have a 2nd child.

Even after divorce, he refused to do anything with DC for fear it would give me time to go out and have fun or meet someone else. He tried to put restrictions in place about what I could do with DC. He even gave DC punishments that meant grounding, while DC was with me, trying to prevent DC from going out, meaning I would have to stay at home with them.

He's the same with his 2nd wife (no mutual children though) and follows her when she's out alone.

I definitely think it’s coercive control to not look after the kids. After I had my first DC I signed up to a college course to help me get into a different job when I went back to work. It was an evening course, once a week. He was late home every. Single. Time. Only on that one day a week. Managed to be home on time the other 4 working days. I had to quit the course after a few weeks. He ramped it up when we had the second DC. I wasn’t allowed a double buggy so could only leave the house with either him or his DM when in had a second person to take the other pushchair/pram. I didn’t twog what was going on until much further down the road when other behaviours set in.

Agree with this. You need to mitigate what a lot of young women want with their first baby or babies and that is all the domestic control and to ‘play house’ until the reality of the daily drudge kicks in.

My dd and her friends all joke about being the SAHM type with a glam side hustle and high earning DH, but as an older woman I just keep thinking of the lack of personal pension, and all the stories on MN where husbands leave them high and dry for a younger model.

Until the law recognises that every biological father has an equal responsibilty to that child (including prosecuting feckless fathers for child neglect, which I know is dreamland) nothing will change.

I think that an awful lot of men see their children as their wife's hobby.

That thread was depressing for how much of a fait accompli the situation was presented as and accepted by the poster

My XH absolutely used the children to control me. Wouldn't turn up when he was supposed to so I couldn't leave the house, didn't pay the money he was supposed to, so I was so poor I couldn't afford any help. In the end he saw the children once a year and didn't pay a penny and, I think, enjoyed the fact that I could only work part time and in a school because I couldn't afford care in the holidays. So I couldn't have a career, I couldn't go away for a weekend and I could barely put food on the table. All my own fault, apparently (I ended the marriage, oddly enough because he did absolutely nothing around the house or with the children!)

I use my circumstances as a cautionary tale to all those who tell women to end their marriage "because then at least you'll have EOW to yourself..."

I read this and they just need to sort childcare out like the rest of the population!

Which the DH would not do.

I used to call my XH's refusal to contribute practically my barless prison. It absolutely is cc in my opinion. I felt like a caged lion, completely trapped & it had a profound effect on me.