Given the increasing evidence of the benefits of father involvement, this study examined the process of fathering and the contributions to supporting father involvement and father identity. Emerging research in fathering suggests a complex set of contextual factors as influences on father identity and behavior. Social location, identities, and life events provide an opportunity to study variation and change in fathering. Guided by an integrated framework of symbolic interactionism and intersectionality theories, this study examined fathers' needs and desires in parenting programs. To address these needs in the literature, grounded theory methods were employed to analyze data from semi-structured interviews of 50 fathers of infants residing in the Appalachian region of Virginia. Results revealed a process model of fathering consisting of interactions within and between themes of intrapersonal, interpersonal, and institutional and sociocultural domains. The factors of these three domains relate to father identity, meaning making in fatherhood, and enactment of fathering. Within a model of vulnerabilities and resiliencies, two typologies of fathers emerged: the thriving father and the evolving father. Implications for family strengthening programs and future research are explored. / Ph. D. / Father involvement and father identity are areas of interest in family development due to the evidence of increasing benefits of father involvement. This study examined the process of fathering and the contributions to supporting father involvement and father identity. This study examined fathering within the fathers’ social contexts, identities, and life events. Through interviews with fathers of infants living in rural Appalachia Virginia, this study examined variation and change in fathering. Additionally, this study examined fathers’ needs and desires in parenting programs. Qualitative grounded theory methods were employed to analyze data from semi-structured interviews of 50 fathers of infants residing in the Appalachian region of Virginia. Results revealed a process model of fathering that emphasizes interactions within and between themes of intrapersonal, interpersonal, and institutional and sociocultural domains. The factors of these three domains relate to father identity, meaning making in fatherhood, and fathering behaviors. Utilizing a model that addresses vulnerabilities and resiliencies, two typologies of fathers emerged: the thriving father and the evolving father. Implications for family strengthening programs and future research are explored.

Given roles and expectations of father involvement in South Korea are in transition from traditional breadwinner to an involved caregiver to children, it is plausible that Korean fathers show diverse involvement behaviors in the contexts of work, family, and parenting. Using a person-centered approach, we explored if there were groupings of Korean fathers who could be identified from their involvement with their children. We also examined if those subgroup memberships were related to various factors in work, family, and parenting domains. With a sample of 212 married working fathers and the 12 items of involvement behaviors, we found four heterogeneous subgroups of people: low-involved, accessibility-focused, involved-but-less-accessible, and highly involved fathers. Significant differences among the four profiles were also found regarding various factors such as job stress, work and family conflict, work schedule, maternal employment, parenting satisfaction, and perceived level of involvement. Suggestions for future research, practitioners, and policymakers were discussed.

Given roles and expectations of father involvement in South Korea are in transition from traditional breadwinner to an involved caregiver to children, it is plausible that Korean fathers show diverse involvement behaviors in the contexts of work, family, and parenting. Using a person-centered approach, we explored if there were groupings of Korean fathers who could be identified from their involvement with their children. We also examined if those subgroup memberships were related to various factors in work, family, and parenting domains. With a sample of 212 married working fathers and the 12 items of involvement behaviors, we found four heterogeneous subgroups of people: low-involved, accessibility-focused, involved-but-less-accessible, and highly involved fathers. Significant differences among the four profiles were also found regarding various factors such as job stress, work and family conflict, work schedule, maternal employment, parenting satisfaction, and perceived level of involvement. Suggestions for future research, practitioners, and policymakers were discussed.