In the Mirror of Elián
by
Warren Farrell, Ph. D.
Excerpted from the forthcoming
book, Father
and Child Reunion by Warren Farrel, Ph.D.
The twenty-first century will begin with a father and child reunion:
the father of Elián González’ reunion with his child, Elián.
Just as the last quarter of the twentieth century was marked by
women’s struggle for equal opportunity in the workplace, more than the
first quarter of the twenty-first century will be marked by men’s
struggle for equal opportunity in the homeplace. By millions of dads
trying to be reunited with their Eliáns.
Our response to the Elián González case tells us a little about how
far we have to go. The moment the news broke of the mother drowning and
the U.S. relatives taking over, the first responses reflected suspicion
of the dad: “Maybe Elián should be with the relatives, maybe the mom
was bringing him to a better country, and helping him escape a dad who
was perhaps abusive, incompetent and did not love the child.” That is,
we placed the father under suspicion until proven innocent.
So the INS (Immigration & Naturalization Service) did investigate
the dad, although he had already been investigated and awarded legal
custody in Cuba (only to have it undermined by a lack of enforcement).1
When all indicators pointed to a loving dad, the prevailing view was
still one of the case being a struggle between a mother who wanted a
better life for her child in America and sacrificed her life to make
that happen, and a dad who wants his child back. When the mother died,
the American relatives fought to keep Elián as a way of fulfilling the
mother’s wishes, even honoring her sacrifice.
But if we substitute dad for mom, let’s look at whether our view
would be different. In real life, it was the mom and her boyfriend who
took Elián. Had it been dad and his girlfriend, would we be focusing on
the dad sacrificing his life to create a better one for the child, or,
suddenly, would our binoculars be focusing on the fact that it was a man
and his girlfriend who unilaterally took the child from a mother who had
won legal custody? Would the media not be portraying this man and his
girlfriend as “running off“ together?
Had the roles been reversed, and a man and his girlfriend had run off
together, snatching a child away from a mother who had custody,
wouldn’t we call this kidnapping? Would the U.S. cousins and uncles
who had never before seen Elián be seen as potential substitute
parents, or as co-conspirators in the kidnapping? If the U.S. didn’t
enforce the INS ’s ruling to return the child, would the U.S. itself
be seen as a co-conspirator? Would not a father’s co-conspiracy with
relatives be seen as indications of his manipulativeness, and his
ability to persuade his girlfriend to join in at the risk of her life
reinforce the image of his manipulativeness, even his Svengali-like
nature?
Had the dad run off with --or kidnapped-- the child, would our focus
have been on the dad risking his life, or the dad risking the child’s
life? Would the issue be the dad’s sacrifice or child endangerment?
In real life, the dad was in the headlines for four and a half
months, begging for the return of his son. If a mom were in the
headlines for four and a half months, begging for the return of her son,
would we know the mom’s name? I think so. Well, did you, the reader,
learn the dad’s name in the four and a half months prior to his trip
to Washington to pick up his son in April of 2000? No? Nor did most
Americans.
Had it been the mom who was left in Cuba crying for her son, the
image of her crying would be in our homes; her voice would create
compassion in our hearts, and thus her name would be on our tongues.
When the name of someone whose pleas surround us nevertheless remains
invisible, it’s a sign of a deep bias, a bias that prevents the dad
from being heard as a person even when he does speak.2 It symbolizes an
instinct that creates suspicion of the dad where there would have been
empathy for the mom. And in fact, our first response was suspicion of
the dad.
I suspect that had it been the dad and girlfriend who had kidnapped
Elián, our response to someone who said Elián might have a better life
with his American relatives would be, “That’s beside the point: the
law cannot give permission for one parent to kidnap a child, overrule
the law, ignore the parent with custody, and flee to another country.
That should be grounds only for losing the right to the child. In any
case, one parent cannot be allowed to unilaterally determine what is
right for the child--especially when it involves depriving a six year
old of the other parent.“
Had the mom and her boyfriend been seen as kidnappers, and the
relatives as co-conspirators, Elián would have been returned to his dad
immediately, not five months later -- after an argument could be made
that the child should not be disturbed from his stable Miami
environment. Had it been a mom waiting, feminists, Americans and Cubans
would have been of one mind.
If a son was being deprived of his mom, pictures of never-before-seen
relatives parading the son around Disneyland would have been seen as
child abuse, not child amusement. The primary suspicion would not have
been of the father, but the relatives. Thus it would not have taken over
two months to discover that four of Elián’s caretakers had recent
histories of drunk driving, grand theft, and/or forgery: Lazaro and
brother Delfin each had two convictions of driving under the influence,
and both had their license revoked or suspended in 1997 and previously,
each for two or three years; Jose Cid, another relative, stopped
visiting when he started his 13 year jail sentence for grand theft,
forgery and violating probation. And his twin brother, Luis, visits Elián
even as he is on trial for robbery.3 All of these relatives have one
thing in common: they support Elián being kept from his dad. Lazaro’s
brother, who wants Elián’s reunion with his dad, is barred from
seeing Elián.
In brief, if a child were being deprived of mom, our empathetic minds
would have opened the path to an immediate “mother and child
reunion”; instead, when a child was being deprived of dad, suspicious
minds investigated the dad with custody before the relatives with prison
sentences, inviting roadblocks to a father and child reunion. In the
mirror of Elián, we see ourselves.
© 2000 Warren Farrell, Ph.D.
Dr. Warren Farrell
is the author of many books, including two award-winning
international best-sellers, Why Men Are The Way They Are plus
The Myth of Male Power. His most recent books are Women
Can’t Hear What Men Don’t Say, which was a selection of the
Book-of-the-Month Club, and Father and Child Reunion about
how fathers can be successful at both work and home. His latest
book, just published this year, Why Men Earn More: The Startling
Truth Behind the Pay Gap and What Women Can Do About It, helps
both employers and employees understand what makes a company want to
increase an employee’s pay. His books are published in over 50
countries, and in 10 languages.
Dr. Warren Farrell is available for expert
testimony to help fathers stay equally involved in their children's
lives after divorce.
CLICK HERE to contact Dr. Warren Farrell for information.
www.WarrenFarrell.net (Why Men Earn More)
www.WarrenFarrell.biz (Father and Child Reunion)
www.WarrenFarrell.org (The Myth of Male Power)
www.WarrenFarrell.info (Women Can’t Hear What Men Don’t Say)
www.WarrenFarrell.us (Why Men Are The Way They Are)
www.WarrenFarrell.ws (The Liberated Man)
Copyright 2002 Warren Farrell, Ph.D., all rights
reserved
