The absent father shows up all too frequently in my one-on-one sessions with clients, often as the source of debilitating behavior, depression, self sabotage, unhealthy relationships, and other destructive patterns. In organizations we find the effects of his absence in bullying behavior of bosses, impoverished personal resources of those charged with leadership and power struggles from top to bottom. Furthermore, many of today’s social challenges – increasing crime rates, substance abuse, physical abuse, and racial and economic disparity – are also rooted in the absent father.

When the father is experienced as absent but represented as present, either by himself, the child or someone else, the child is placed in a double bind; trust yourself and lose the other or trust the other and lose yourself.

Men who father can make a choice to be present. As fathers, if we are willing to hold presence, our children will find a way to receive what they need from us.  Our presence and the consciousness we bring to our relationships with our children, becomes the context that defines our ability to father.

The Present Father ™ is an active and compassionate posture available to the father in all moments of parenting. Through Gifting Presence, the direct application of consciousness, the father can choose to bring about connection and relational development while nurturing a context for growth and change for himself and for his children.

Additionally, anyone who lives with a man who fathers, is integral to the father’s presence. There is an inter-relational mandate that tells us that we can no longer imagine that we live separately from one another. We are already fundamentally connected and denial of this lived reality fuels our confusion and discord.

In any given moment, the journey a man takes in order to be present and show up for his child is no small matter. It is not just based on accumulated experience; it is a risky and unpredictable odyssey which calls into being the very soul of a man.

Another “tool” I would suggest I call; Joining. As fathers, when we hold presence for our children, we are both the container and the contained. We join our children in such a way that we are fully part of their play, their question, their experience of eating dinner; while at the same time we hold and contain their process. When we play with them we ensure their freedom and safety. When they ask us a question we respond in such a way as to keep the question alive while joining their wonderment and curiosity. When we have a family meal, we have set the context for them to receive nourishment and nurturance while we become part of what they consume.

“There is an ancient Chinese story of an old master potter who attempted to develop a new glaze for his porcelain vases. It became the central focus of his life. Every day he tended the flames of his kilns to a white heat, controlling the temperature to an exact degree. Every day he experimented with the chemistry of the glazes he applied, but still he could not achieve the beauty he desired and imagined was possible in the glaze. Finally, having tried everything, he decided his meaningful life was over and walked into the molten heat of a fully fired kiln. When his assistants opened up the kiln and took out the vases, they found the glaze on the vases the most exquisite they had ever encountered. The master himself had disappeared into his creations.” –David Whyte

Joining means we lose ourselves fully to the relational moment with our children. In order to do this, like the kiln, we must also hold that moment so that the beauty of who we are as fathers becomes part of the formation of our children in a safe and facilitated context. We hold our presence as we disappear into our relationship with our children to re-emerge as an integrated component of their creation.

One of several “tools” I would suggest I call, Gifting Consciousness. When I am with my son, I attempt to place him at the center of my awareness and communicate to the best of my ability the life and vitality that is within me. I am aware of my ability to place this awareness into my relationship with him, while I am sorting through the distractions which diminish my attention.

The other day, while my son and I were visiting a friend and colleague, something occurred having to do with a project we were working on which made me realize how much more was required before we could deliver a proposal we had been developing. On the way home, distracted, my son asked me what I was thinking about. Sorting through my pre-occupation, I briefly shared my concerns. Then, with some effort, returned to our discussion of how we were going to continue to spend our day together. His prompting me to clarifying for him my distraction, allowed us to reconnect and continue to breathe life … together. If I am distracted, I communicate distraction. If I am dull, I communicate my dullness. If I am present, I communicate my presence and the life of our relationship finds us.

“One day a father of a very wealthy family took his son on a trip to the country with the firm purpose of showing his son how poor people can be.

They spent a couple of days and nights on the farm of what would be considered a very poor family. On their return from their trip, the father asked his son, “How was the trip?”

 ”It was great, Dad.”

 ”Did you see how poor people can be?” the father asked.

 ”Oh Yeah” said the son.

 ”So what did you learn from the trip?” asked the father proudly.

 The son answered, I saw that we have one dog and they had four.

 We have a pool that reaches to the middle of our garden and they have a creek that has no end.

 We have imported lanterns in our garden and they have the stars at night.

 Our patio reaches to the front yard and they have the whole horizon.

 We have a small piece of land to live on and they have fields that go beyond our sight.

 We have servants who serve us, but they serve others.

 We buy our food, but they grow theirs.

 We have walls around our property to protect us, they have friends to protect them.”

 With this the boy’s father was speechless. Then his son added, “Thanks, Dad, for showing me how poor we are.”

( June 4, 2010, http://www.khamneithang.blogspot.com/ )

Commentary
In the above vignette there appears to be no agenda, no method, and no intention on the father’s part but to be with his boy. Perhaps nothing was gained, yet certainly nothing was lost in this gentle interaction.

This interchange was influenced by the context and the state of the father’s psyche. In that moment the father appears free of conflicting demands which could have predetermined his psychological, emotional, and behavioral posturing. What took place in the father’s psyche, both conscious and unconscious, is of interest. How he entered the room could have been conditioned by numerous potential influences. He could have been carrying a judgement of how long he feels his boy should sleep and of how he should wake up. When told to “go,” there was fertile ground for intrapsychic intrusion on the part of the father. He could have allowed dozens of alternative responses (i.e., his feelings could have been hurt). Yet, quite simply, he got up and walked out of the room. How did he do that? In addition, what message did he leave with his son as communicated by his body posture, breathing pattern, words, and gestures? These actions are also grounds for choice or subject to defensive responses. Could these responses have been determined by the degree of awareness brought to the situation?” – Dukes, Timothy P. (1995). Father Mindfulness: The psychodynamics of loving attention. Ph.D. dissertation.

Above Image: www.sydney-australien.de/…/DSC01937_xl.jpg

Dinner is ready, places set, our first family  meal at our first new piece of furniture. We are happy and excited; we bless our food. I hand our boy his metal spoon and without hesitation he expresses his delight by banging it on top of the table. I notice immediately the small crescent shaped dents multiplying with every “bang,” and I urgently reach out to stop him. Holding his hand for a moment, as though suspended in a dream, I realize that this will be the nature of our life together – As perfect as I will try to make it, life will accumulate dents. Small dents that will, over time, replace the well conceive plans – life that is real – made - evoked by the impact that we have on one another.

I let go.

(© Timothy Dukes, Fathering Journal, 2010)

lifting the boy

laughing

in acrobatic assaults

onto his shoulders

just before bedtime,

“just one more time,”

time after time;

moments of

father and son

treasured forever.

(Author unknown)

image: imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/NGSPOD0…

But what needs to happen first and how do we listen? 

Our relationship with the earth is contaminating our planet to the point that we may not be able to live here. We may survive but will we be well? What can we do today that will make a difference? Care for the earth through our care for our families. Recognize that we do this along with – mother, peer group, school and various affiliations that make up the context of our children’s world. As our awareness and efforts fall into accord and we listen – we may very well find our way into sustainable relationship. As we inform our presence into our child’s world and gently remove the obstacles that separate us, we open to the vitality and life force that awaits us, and receive our understanding of how to father.

“From his earliest childhood he had been cut adrift in a world where a person needed to emerge the winner to keep from being annihilated.  No wonder his sense of manhood was so deeply tied to his sense of male dominance and mastery.  (p. 11)”

In addressing his son, Nerburn explains a potential for younger generations which suggests a less aggressive and a more interdependent and hence inter-relational positioning in the world.

“You were born into a different world that will present you with different gifts and challenges.  A new vision of manhood will be called for that does not tie so closely into the more aggressive and competitive residues of our male character.  You will need to search out new ways of expressing strength, showing mastery, and exhibiting courage–ways that do not depend upon confronting the world before you as an adversary.  (pp. 12, 13)”

Nerburn leaves it to his son, however, to “search out” these non-adversarial ways of being in the world.  It is interesting to note that many fathers, today, are not satisfied to leave their sons alone to discover and define what it means to be a man.  Awareness of the problem suggests responsibility for the problem.  Once we become aware, fathers must take on this responsibility so as much as is humanly possible, we are able to pass on solutions and not simply the problems.

When a father is faced with the challenge of how to relate to his son, does he find a way to include his child in his world of work, relationships, and activity, or does he attempt to enter the child’s world of play, fantasy, education, relationships, and psychological, emotional, and physical concerns?  Who comes to whose world, and when and how does he get there?  Is it the father’s responsibility to go to the world of the child or to include the child in his world?  When, how, and how often do they join to create a world together?  What are the mechanics or what methodology is employed and by whom, to constellate these interactions?  Whether the father is to participate in the son’s world or facilitate the son’s emergence into the father’s world, he must figure out how to connect.  Once connected, is he, the father, there to shape personality, stimulate growth and to work toward the self-realization of the child?  Or is he participating in these interpersonal interactions with his son for his own growth, development, and self-realization?

Nerburn, K.  (1993).  Letters to my son:  Reflections on becoming a man.  San Rafael, CA:  New World Library

In the above vignette there appears to be no agenda, no method, and no intention on the father’s part but to be with his boy.  Perhaps nothing was gained, yet certainly nothing was lost in this gentle interaction.  This interchange was influenced by the context and the state of the father’s psyche.  In that moment the father appears free of conflicting demands which could have predetermined his psychological, emotional, and behavioral posturing.  What took place in the father’s psyche, both conscious and unconscious, is of interest.  How he entered the room could have been conditioned by numerous potential influences.  He could have been carrying a judgement of how long he feels his boy should sleep and of how he should wake up.  When told to “go,” there was fertile ground for intrapsychic intrusion on the part of the father.  He could have allowed dozens of alternative responses (i.e., his feelings could have been hurt).  Yet, quite simply, he got up and walked out of the room.  How did he do that?  In addition, what message did he leave with his son as communicated by his body posture, breathing pattern, words, and gestures?  These actions are also grounds for choice or subject to defensive responses.  Could these responses have been determined by the degree of awareness brought to the situation?