A recent article in The Chicago Tribune by Dorsey Griffith reports that American girls are entering puberty at earlier ages, putting them at far greater risk for breast cancer later in life and for all sorts of social and emotional problems well before they reach adulthood.

The article points out, using recent studies concerning environmental effects on the onset of puberty and the later development of cancer that no one is really sure why this is so. The researchers, as well as the writer neglect to point out one of the primary culprits in early onset of puberty in girls - for the last 30 years or more there has been an alarming increase in divorce, with the result that many girls grow up without the nurturing presence of their real, biological father.

For example, the article disingenuously states:

For years, parents, doctors and teachers have recognized the trend in early puberty among girls, with little information to explain it….

But rising childhood obesity rates clearly play a role, she said, and so may formula feeding of infants and excessive TV viewing and media use.

However, many studies have linked involved and loving fathers with the delay of puberty among their daughters. Conversely, many studies have demonstrated that the absence of the biological father, especially when the mother remarries into a blended family with step-brothers and the like, girls begin their first periods earlier. Also, the absence of the father is clearly a factor in girls’ promiscuity. For example, an article from 2002 called Without Dad Little girls grow up too fast outlined the results of a massive American study in which it was demonstrated that”`Strange males’ can speed up the path to maturity. The large numbers of children growing up with stepfathers may be contributing to the worldwide trend towards girls reaching early puberty. According to this landmark research divorce and children, life in divorced or remarried families promotes early maturation and increases the likelihood of early pregnancy.”

We we see here is a clear ideological bias by these researchers cited in the Chicago Tribune article, as well as its author, Ms. Griffith, against any suggestion that the biological (real) father could play such a vital role in the psychophysical development of their daughters. This kind of bias in some academic and journalistic circles has been building for some time. It was pointed out by David Blankenhorn in a 2001 USA Today article entitled “Dads, Daughters Forge Key Bonds” Blankenhorn, president of the New York-based Institute for American Values and an editor of The Fatherhood Movement: A Call to Action, correctly points out that most of our grandmothers would laugh at the question of whether biological fathers play a unique and vital role in the development of their children, but these days of ideologically driven academic research gives us such opinions of that of Louise Silverstein and Carl Auerbach who wrote in 2000, in the American Psychologist, that they were “convinced” that the biological father makes no “unique and essential” contribution to his child’s development. Other “responsible, caretaking” adults can do the job just as well.

In the American study mentioned above, involving nearly three decades of research covering 1400 families, which was published in For Better or For Worse, a book on the impact of divorce written by the principle researcher, psychologist Mavis Hetherington, with her co-author, John Kelly, the authors propose two explanations, based on the theories of evolutionary psychologists, to account for the accelerated puberty in divorced and blended families.

First, early puberty may be a response to life in a hostile environment namely the high rate of conflict and stress associated with divorce and remarriage.

The alternate theory focuses on the fact that in many animal species, the presence of a strange male is an environmental cue that induces sexual readiness in young females. Hence early menarche may be triggered by the presence of a “strange male” in the household.

In another study, by Dr Bruce Ellis, revealed  that the presence of the stepfather, or unrelated adult male in the household, can lead to early puberty maturation in girls. “And the earlier and longer the exposure, the stronger the effect.”

All this makes one wonder, why is it so hard in our modern world, to accept the obvious?  Why is it so difficult to admit that father absence is a serious impediment to the well being of our nation’s children?  Why do we continue to pursue social policies that make it easy to separate fathers from their chilren?

Spread the Word