Rather surprising that a bourgeois liberal like Penelope Leach would say something so absolutely on the mark:
Why is it socially reprehensible for a man to leave a baby fatherless,but courageous, even admirable, for a woman to have a baby whom she knows will be so?
![[del.icio.us]](http://www.catholicdadsonline.org/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Digg]](http://www.catholicdadsonline.org/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Facebook]](http://www.catholicdadsonline.org/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[Google]](http://www.catholicdadsonline.org/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/google.png)
![[LinkedIn]](http://www.catholicdadsonline.org/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/linkedin.png)
![[Reddit]](http://www.catholicdadsonline.org/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/reddit.png)
![[StumbleUpon]](http://www.catholicdadsonline.org/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/stumbleupon.png)
![[Technorati]](http://www.catholicdadsonline.org/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/technorati.png)
![[Twitter]](http://www.catholicdadsonline.org/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/twitter.png)
![[Yahoo!]](http://www.catholicdadsonline.org/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/yahoo.png)
![[Email]](http://www.catholicdadsonline.org/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
I think the idea that fathers are essential is spot on.
But the underlying implications of the quote are not good. This "advice" gets dished out to promote contraception and abortion. The life of a child is always valuable whether one of the parents is a dolt or not.
To prove the point, here is a quote from a site that used the same quote you did: "This isn't 1522. If a woman really doesn't want a kid, she can take advantage of modern advances in birth control like Depo-Provera or the IUD, combine them with backup methods (as recommended by her doctor)…." Ref
Of course you're right, Rob, and that's kind of what I meant by calling Leach a "Bourgeois Liberal." I found the quote in a nice little article in The Wanderer about the importance of fathers which went on to cite the usual statistics about how children from fatherless homes have higher rates of virtually all social ills.
I think it's important to realize that contraception and feminism go together and an attack on one ultimately undermines the other. Both stem from a desire for "autonomous personhood" (with all its liberty and free choices) instead of seeking a vocation in life (with all of its duties and responsibilities). When a soft-core feminist like Leach attacks an important aspect of "autonomous personhood" she puts hard-core feminists on the defensive and (maybe) causes some people on the fence to reconsider their positions.
The explanation helps. I am not used to the language, I guess. That happens as one crosses areas, as I repeatedly discover.
I still don't get why you say this is absolutely on the mark. It is nonsense. The reality is that it has sadly become socially acceptable for men to leave their children fatherless. Out of wedlock births are much too high to suggest that society considers it socially reprehensible for a man to leave a baby fatherless.
Also, like Mr. Kaiser, I gather that Leach's intention was to promote contraception and abortion.
David beat me to it. This was exactly my first thought. If it really was socially reprehensible for fathers to leave, there would not be so many fatherless kids.