The findings of a new study on the impact of family structure in Virginia aren’t exactly new. For decades, scholars taking a close look at how the presence and active engagement of a mother and father affect outcomes for children have found remarkably consistent results. That is, children raised in these engaged, two-parent homes — which were dominant in U.S. society before anyone even thought to question whether they were a model — perform better on nearly every metric of social well-being and individual achievement. Moreover, as adults, these children are more likely to form stable and productive households in the next generation — in fact, no other factor is more predictive of such success.

The new study was released this month on the eve of Father’s Day. Spearheaded by the prolific Professor Brad Wilcox at the University of Virginia, “Good Fathers, Flourishing Kids: The Importance of Fatherhood in Virginia” represents the combined insight of scholars at six national or Virginia-based organizations, including the National Center for Black Family Life at Hampton University, the American Enterprise Institute, the Brookings Institute, the American Institute for Boys and Men, and Wilcox’s Institute for Family Studies. The 60-page report relies on data drawn from the 2022 and 2023 National Surveys on Children’s Health (NSCH) for more than 1,300 children and includes “intact, stepfamily, and single-father families with biological, adoptive, and step fathers.” Wilcox and Maria Baer of the Colson Center for Christian Worldview conclude, “[H]aving an engaged dad at home has a profound positive impact on a child’s life — for his or her entire life.”

The study examines this finding in a wide variety of contexts: poverty, school achievement, emotional health and depression, avoidance of behavioral problems, and future family formation. It breaks down these findings by race/ethnicity. It looks at father absence in the context of imprisonment, as is the case for some 100,000 children in Virginia. The study also offers new insights into the different impact of father engagement on boys and girls, a fresh contribution from the study authors. First, of course, it is important to note how the report defines paternal engagement, which has objective as well as subjective components. The report uses the NSCH standard which codes a father “as highly involved if he reports handling the demands of raising children ‘very well,’ and the family eats meals together at least 4 days per week.”

The findings are statistically significant across nearly every category examined:

• Among students receiving good grades (A’s and B’s, age 5-17): for whites, 85% of children in intact families receive good grades versus 63% for father-absent families; for blacks, 90% of children in intact families receive good grades, versus 41% for father-absent families; for Hispanics, the corresponding figures are 87% and 54%;
• For school contacts with parents resulting from bad student behavior or academic performance: for boys, 22% of engaged parents had contacts, while 35% of unengaged parents had contacts; for girls, 14% of engaged parents had contacts, while 21% of unengaged parents had contacts;
• For diagnosed childhood depression: for boys, 4% of engaged parents’ children had diagnoses, while 7% of unengaged parents’ children had diagnoses; for girls, 1% of engaged parents’ children had diagnoses, while 10% of unengaged parents had diagnoses.

Wilcox and Baer acknowledge that dads’ involvement in their children’s lives makes a difference even in settings where the parents are not in the same household or married. But they underscore that outcomes where parents live in the same household, usually meaning they are married, are “dramatically better” than any other arrangement. “Dads who live at home spend 10 times as much time with their kids as dads who live elsewhere. And in Virginia, we find that married residential dads are about three times more likely to be highly involved with their kids, compared to cohabiting dads. Our report is consistent with the idea that children in intact, married families typically get the most attention and affection from their fathers.”

The study is particularly engrossing for what it says about the impact of involved fathers on the lives of sons. While it is not true that children from intact homes never act out, misbehave at school, or suffer depression, fathers bring certain parenting habits that seem to matter more for boys. The study identifies three of those habits as “play,” “risk-taking,” and “discipline.” Regarding play, the report states that fathers’ distinctive approach tends to rely on physical activity that involves unpredictability and excitement, and helps children learn to control their bodies and emotions in ways that build confidence. Risk-taking can involve planned adventures outdoors and similar activities, while discipline appeals to the same set of rules mothers generally apply, but is delivered in a manner, the report subtly states, “more likely to command the attention and compliance of their children.”

The findings on the elimination of racial differences in school behavior and success echo a long string of studies that have examined this question. In an era where there remain worrisome racial differences in such areas as out-of-wedlock births and family structure, and where too many voices continue to make racial appeals as per se explanations for such differences, it’s invaluable to recall how family policy ought to be our largest concern.

The “Success Sequence” holds true and matters more than any social or fiscal policy aimed at remediating family problems: if a child gets at least a high school degree, works full-time, and marries before having any children, their chance as an adult of living in poverty are extremely small. Add to that the importance of staying married to the mother of one’s children, and these benefits can become the prime inheritance of millions more people.

“Good Fathers, Flourishing Kids” takes the next step and offers a set of recommendations, a few of them provocative and all of them innovative, to apply the lessons of the research. Naturally, all the organizations that contributed to the report do not agree on every recommendation. The ideas put forth are Virginia-specific and focused on improving outcomes for boys, who are falling behind in measures of academic accomplishment and social health, but they can be adapted and applied across the 50 states as more leaders recognize the failings of value-free approaches and explore reforms in school financing, standards of learning, and curricula. Among the report’s suggestions:

• Increase support for Virginia state financing of career and technical education (CTE) as a pathway for higher earnings and marriage for young men. Virginia, a state that was home to Cyrus McCormick, is home to military bases from all branches, excels in peanut and pig farming, ship-building, and many other trades, should rank higher than 27th in CTE spending;
• Hire more male teachers — the proportion of teachers in Virginia public schools who are male is just 17%. The study proposes a 30-by-30 plan that would aim for 30% of new teachers in the state to be male in five years;
• Consider creating the first single-sex charter schools in Virginia, where none of the existing seven schools is male- or female-only;
• More recess (definitely popular);
• Reforms to curriculum aimed at producing more “books and learning focused on war, sports, and science — all subjects that tend to have more appeal to boys”;
• State sponsorship of a public service announcement (PSA) campaign designed to reach teenage boys and young men with strong messages about being a “future family man.” The PSAs might feature young women talking about what they are looking for in a “future husband” — “virtues like being hard working, emotionally engaged, protective, responsible, and committed, all traits known to be linked to the formation and sustenance of strong and stable families.”

Four other policy and communications initiatives will likewise unsettle some libertarian and progressive thinking, but they are long overdue. They include, “Limiting Access to Pornography,” “Reviving Civic Efforts to Promote ProSocial Masculinity,” “Spotlighting Good Dads and Helping All Fathers Become the Family Men They Could Be,” and “Helping Formerly Incarcerated Stand Tall.” The last of these categories has special resonance given the depth of the effect on children of both sexes in having a parent, usually a father, behind bars. The tone of much of our public discourse in 2025 tends to give up on people who have run afoul of the law. The Virginia Department of Corrections (DOC) currently has 23,000 prisoners in 26 state facilities, most of them men and many of them fathers. The report recommends that state, local, and federal prisons seek to implement programs designed to impart parenting skills to these prisoners before they are released.

The DOC has such a project underway. Governor Glen Youngkin’s (R) Stand Tall-Stay Strong-Succeed Together Initiative uses a multi-agency approach as prisoners approach release, offering help with gaining employment, developing fathering skills, and other reentry challenges. A randomized controlled trial of the Parenting Inside Out program in Oregon showed positive outcomes, leading to better parenting relationships as well as reduced drug use and fewer rearrests.

All in all, while new public investments are helpful, the nation as a whole needs renewal of its cultural understanding of the nature of fatherhood and the family. The race to fix social problems often resembles a crew scrambling after the iceberg has been hit. We know now without doubt that America’s social problems can’t be fixed with after-the-fact remedies that ignore the moral and spiritual realities of faith and family. “Good Fathers, Flourishing Kids” is one more compelling account of the path forward to a better and happier future for us all.