Dear Brian,

I’m writing an article for Redbook magazine on couples who made the switch from the mother as primary caregiver with husband as breadwinner to the father becoming a Stay At Home Dad (with the wife as the breadwinner). The switch part is crucial: the wife must have been a stay at home mom prior to the husband assuming the SAHD role. Perhaps they made the switch because one partner lost his or her job during the recession, or perhaps it was a voluntary switch. They’ll each tell their story about how the change-up affected their lives: their marriage, their parenting, their schedule and routine, etc. We’ll hear how they both felt throughout the adjustment to their new roles, and what compromises and negotiations were necessary.The couples’ age range can be late 20s to early 40s (ideally they would be in their 30s).

Do you know of someone who fits the criteria? I’d be grateful for any assistance you might provide.

Thank you,

Denise Dowling

203-675-8339/d2dowling@msn.com

Thanks, guys.

In the interest of full disclosure, I get quoted at the end of the piece, but that’s not what gets me excited. Here are the nuggets worth noting:

• Remember  that survey from Pampers that I noted yesterday? Turns out that while 80 percent of the dads said they pulled at least their fair share, moms saw it differently, with fewer than 1 in 3 dads splitting diaper duty 50/50 and a mere 1 in 25 doing a majority of the diapers. Funny, I don’t remember that stat in the press release. (Incidentally, I think even a third of dads doing half of the diapering is probably good, and almost certainly progress. But the gulf between the perception of dads and the perception of moms probably makes it easier for companies to just say “to heck with it” and keep their eyes on mothers alone.)
• Their media event to launch the whole Drew Brees thing included materials that said, literally, “For mom:” and used female pronouns all over the place.
• Greg Allen of daddytypes.com (far and away my favorite blogging father) is quoted delivering a nice stake in the heart to all marketers who think that they can honor fathers one day a year and ignore then the other 364: “In June, everybody talks to dads, and baby marketing is filled with how dads are unsung heroes, but the rest of year it’s just moms. All of the packaging and ad copy is all babies and moms — and their regular day-in, day-out marketing and communications is all targeted at moms.”

Does this mean that the recent love from Pamper is a mirage, a PR ploy intended to fill us all with warm feelings about dad on Father’s Day? Hard to say. As I mentioned yesterday, getting Drew Brees’ time doesn’t come cheap, so I’m hoping this means that they’re serious. But I have to admit that I’m not holding my breath. Father’s Day doesn’t roll around for another 12 months. That’s plenty of time to recede into the background again.

But this weekend, that started to change. Unbeknown to me, back in February, Pampers signed up the one athlete in the United States who a) a household name, b) atop his chosen profession and c) is untainted by any sex scandals: Drew Brees. I have no idea what it costs to get Drew Brees as a spokesman, but I assume, given a), b) and, especially, c), that Pampers is opening up the wallet. This thrills me to no end. Despite having Brees locked up since February, Pamper didn’t unleash him until this weekend, when he did a media blitz and threw out the first pitch at Yankee stadium. (There was apparently an ad during the winter, but I never saw it.)

Brees is a hell of a diaper pitchman: he has one in diapers and one on the way, so he knows what he’s talking about. And if you can believe what he’s telling the press, Brees is the person doing most of the diaper duty in his house. I have no idea if this is true (I tend to assume that people who sign $60 million contracts can hire a person whose sole job is to change diapers), but it doesn’t matter. What matters is that Brees can say that he changes diapers, and he can be taken seriously saying that. I don’t want to undersell that point. Doing most of the diaper duty is now cool and the right thing to do for dads, according to the reigning Super Bowl MVP.

Pampers, in a press release, said that the era of the diaper-changing dad had already emerged:

Pampers recently commissioned a study in which dads said that they do their fair share of parenting dirty work when it comes to diaper changing.  In fact, 80 percent of dads queried said that they either do most of the diaper changing in the house, or an equal share of it.  The survey also revealed that 76 percent of dads said that they partake in parenting responsibilities, including diaper care, more than their own fathers did.  Also, six (6) in 10 dads polled said that they should continue to change diapers on Father’s Day just to show what great fathers they are.

I have no idea what the methodology here is, but this is almost certainly wrong (again, go back and read Katherine Reynolds Lewis’ Slate piece), and probably wrong by a huge margin. 80 percent of guys doing at least half of the diapers sounds highly, highly implausible. But — again — the very fact that Procter & Gamble can push that stat out there and have people take it (semi) seriously is a sign of how far we’ve come. We may not be living in a golden age of diaper dudes, but it seems like a lot of people aspire to get there.

(Aside: last night, I saw a commercial for the very Pampers product that Brees is pitching. It was addressed directly to the viewer — “mom” — so the era of ungendered Pamper marketing is not yet here. I’m not bent out of shape. If P&G wants to go after different market segments, with some stuff aimed at dads and some at moms, God bless ‘em. Just don’t ignore us.)

(The whole line of thinking came from a tip from NYC Dad honcho Matt, who pointed me to this clip. It’s worth watching just to hear Brees talk about changing nappies. He doesn’t say “nappies,” of course. He’s an American. An American Dad. A Proud, Diaper-Changing, Touchdown-Throwing American Dad.)

The argument that’s put forth by author Pamela Paul is pretty simple: the data on how great fathers are is massively compromised by the fact that studies that show the advantage of fathers tend to have comparisons that are not quite right: comparing a traditional two-parent family to one with a single mom doesn’t mean that you can attribute any differences to dads, specifically. Paul goes on to say that apples-to-apples comparisons of traditional families with, say, lesbian couples (or single moms with single dads) demonstrate that dads actually don’t fare all that well.

I have a couple of issues with the general argument, as well as one caveat that is important to get in here as quickly as possible: I don’t believe that the only possible stable family unit has one mom and one dad. There are dozens and dozens of parental styles that can be filled by all kinds of people, from biological parents to step-parents to grandparents to foster parents to mentors or siblings or uncles or whatever. So I don’t think it’s fair to argue that fathers (or mothers) are a “necessary” component in all cases.

But … the literature on the importance of father involvement is so large and so consistent that I am willing to cede certain methodological flaws (I’m also willing to bet that those flaws are not as universal or as fatal as Paul makes them out to be). I’d love to get the take of an Aaron Rochlen or Kyle Pruett here, but I’m pretty sure that we’ve seen apples-to-apples comparisons of involved dads versus uninvolved dads. And — no surprise — kids with involved dads do better.

The traditional-families-versus-lesbian families (even the single-mom vs. single dad thing) is a red herring in all of this. I can’t imagine that Paul is calling for an end to heterosexual childrearing or suggesting that custody should never go to fathers. No, the practical, social question for most of us is “how do we craft a family that will maximize the change of loving and happy kids?”, and the answer is, in the majority of cases, “get dad involved.” I’m not aware of a scrap of research that contradicts this in anything but abusive households.

(I don’t want to dismiss or diminish the research on same-sex couples. Indeed, I hope data on the parenting styles of same-sex parents makes it easier for same-sex couples to marry and adopt.)

In addition, there is no question that, historically, dads are “better” now than they used to be when it comes to engagement with their children, so the literature of a decade or two ago is less and less relevant. So while Paul may have great fun musing on the idea that dads aren’t “necessary,” but she gets to gloss over the fact that dads are certainly important in a huge number of families (and getting more important). But that’s not nearly as much fun to write about, I guess.

UPDATE: It’s been a long week, so this post isn’t as passionate as it probably should be. Cameron Phillips had no such problem, and you should absolutely go read his take on this.

Hello BRIAN,

Remember when you taught the baby how to high five? Or the time the two of you jumped into puddles together? Or how about when the finger paint ended up everywhere but the paper? We know you and your little one enjoy all kinds of adventures together. And adventures mean stories. So share your funniest, wackiest, or most loving story of you and your baby in honor of Father’s Day. …

Yes, Pampers has sent me a gender-correct mass mailing. And so they will be spared my ire. Unless they start calling me a mom again.

The BC findings — based on self-reported information (this is important) — said that dads spent about 3.3 hours a day with the little ones, a finding that author Katherine Reynolds Lewis points out is far, far more rosy than would be suggested if you looked at more rigorous measures of how much time dads spend with their kids.

In all fairness, no one doubts that dads are more involved than they used to be — this is reflected in every study using every methodology. Katherine’s point is that dads are now inflating their child-care hours when researchers ask: proof that fathers think being daddy is important. So important, they’ll even fudge the extent of their involvement. It wasn’t all that way. Per Katherine:

When [Ellen] Galinsky was studying New Jersey factory workers in the 1980s, she knew from her research that they were heading home so their wives could make the night shift at the hospital, for instance, but they would lie to their co-workers and say they were going out drinking. “It wasn’t OK in their macho world to say, ‘I’m going to tuck in my children,’ ” she recalled.

So this Father’s Day, lets lift a glass to celebrate the strange but happy trend of dads wanting to be seen as spending lots and lots of time with their kids.

(Standard whine: Katherine takes the current Census stats at face value, which I think is unwise. But I’ll let that one pass.)

(Standard disclaimer on Katherine: for the better part of three years, she sat across from me in the Bloomberg DC newsroom. I consider her a friend. But I also think she’s a great reporter and a thoughtful commentator on modern parenthood, and I like to think that’s a perfectly objective assessment.)

Registration for the conference — which will be held October 2 — just opened. Fifty bucks gets you in until Aug. 15, when the price goes up $15. Specific details on the program, hotel and such are coming.

I’ll be there again this year (I’m registering today), and I’ll make a deal with readers who have never made the trip before: if you pony up and registered before Father’s Day, you can have the swag item of your choice from the rebeldad.com store. Just send along your PayPal receipt (or tell me your name, and I’ll confirm with the convention guys) and the item you’d like, and I’ll hand-deliver it at the convention.

Can’t wait to see you all there.

There is at least one notable exception, and that USA Today’s take on dads and hormones. It goes over the growing body of research that shows that a father’s hormones go nutty after (and just prior) to the birth of a kid, in much the same way we’ve long known that women respond to motherhood. The piece is largely based off of a book I haven’t read (yet) called The Male Brain by Louann Brizendine. I can’t speak to the overall conclusions of the book, but what USA Today plucks out matches well with my understanding of the subject. (Much of what I learned about the topic comes from Yale’s Kyle Pruett, who talked at length about the topic at an At-Home Dad Convention a few years back. I’m amazed that I still have the audio.)

Here are some of the nuggets:

Levels of a stress hormone called cortisol — the same ancient chemical that instructs men to fight or take flight — tend to spike about four to six weeks after men learn they’re going to be fathers, subsiding as the mother’s pregnancy progresses, Brizendine says.

…

About three weeks before the baby arrives, levels of testosterone — sometimes called the “male hormone,” associated with competitiveness, aggression and sex drive — fall by roughly a third, Brizendine says.

…

Tests show that men actually get better at hearing a baby’s cry — zeroing in on the sound and responding to it — as the due date of their own child approaches.

…

At the same time that testosterone is falling, a man’s supply of prolactin — a hormone that helps mothers make milk — rises more than 20%, Brizendine says.

…

Male hormones begin to readjust when the baby is 6 weeks old, returning to pre-fatherhood levels by about the time the baby is walking, Brizendine says.

It’s fair to note that there are a lot of caveats, and no one has a really good idea of what all those chemical changes mean, so going overboard with interpretations isn’t wise. But it is another reminder that our very biology is somehow intimately related to the act of being a father. It’s yet another piece of evidence supporting my general worldview: that there is no reason to think parenthood isn’t as central to fathers as it is to mothers.

In addition to being a good piece about the science, reporter Liz Szabo talks to some of my favorite at-home dads, including Nebraska’s Phil Andrews, who has been a driving force behind the convention, and Lance Somerfield from NYC.

Not today. I received an e-mail about a new web series from a site owned by MTv Networks called “Stay At-Home Dad.” It is (intentionally) offensive, profane and rude. The title character is a clueless jerk, a Michael Scott with a stroller, a drinking problem and a potty mouth. Check it out:

I want to be offended and curse MTv for ruining the good name of SAHDs. But here’s the thing: I’m happy that we’ve gotten to the point where at-home dads don’t have to be revered as miracle hero parents or painted as bumbling layabouts (or playground Lotharios). We can be portrayed as a-holes. It’s not good, but it’s not a standard-issue stereotype. So that’s progress, right?

Apparently, the Babble people have a friendly bet with the Pamper people to see who can drive me the most nuts. Up to this point, the Pamper people have had an edge, but Babble stuck back in a big way this week, with this piece called “Playdates with Other People’s Husbands.”

The title is a tip-off. The piece is about playdates with dads. But it doesn’t say “dad.” It says “other people’s husbands.” On the surface, this has a steamy OPP vibe to it. I mean, if this were a piece about the strange dynamics between, say, male and female surgeons, I can’t imagine someone referring to a respected female cardiologist as “another person’s wife,” as if that were the most salient fact. But, hoo boy, throw a dad and a kid into a coffeeshop at midday, and you apparently teleport into some kind of repressed-sexuality-driven soap opera.

It goes downhill from there, describing author Jamie Rich’s experience meeting an at-home dad for the first time. She writes about it as if she’s Jane Goodall and has just found some strange and alluring tribe of parents. I’m not saying that it’s inconceivable that a mom could go 3 years without seeing a caregiving dad, but I find it amazing that Rich finds it amazing to actually be talking to an AHD.

Apparently, Rich isn’t the only one who lives in her bubble. She does a very scientific poll of her 300-odd Facebook friends and found that only one (1) has regular contact with a father. The odds of this are pretty staggering (especially when you consider that she used to live near my old stomping grounds. I mean, I was a 6′ 3″ redheaded stroller-pusher. I was pretty hard to miss). But it says a lot about where she’s coming from: a world where dads and moms don’t ever meet. I don’t live in the world. And neither do more and more people. Which is good.

At the risk of repeating myself: any tension, sexual or otherwise, between moms and dads at the playground is purely an illusion. If you’re a mom who feels uncomfortable because the guy next to you at Music Together is smiling and laughing a lot, it’s in your head. If you’re a dad who feels like you’re getting frozen out by the moms at the park, it’s in your head. In pretty much every workplace in this country, men and women work together without hand-wringing about the consequences. And it should be no different when your office is the playground or the ice cream shop or the YMCA.