Criticizing fathers?! Really?!

It seems that New York radio hosts Boomer Esiason, Craig Carton and Mike Francesa took to the airwaves this week to criticize New York Mets second baseman Daniel Murphy for missing the first two games of the season in order to be there for the birth of his first child.  There were several issues here that I take umbrage with.  First, they felt he should have not taken the time off.  Second, they felt he should have insisted on having a C-Section before opening day.  Third, they felt he is a rich baseball player and could just hire a nanny.  Finally, they felt he was letting his team down.  I am a father of two and so am very opinionated about this issue, so keep that in mind if you believe something differently.  However, it seems that many agree with me...CNN here and ESPNW here.

Should he have not taken time off?  To suggest this is inexcusable to me.  Men have a responsibility to their families that takes precedence over everything else.  A man should be there for his wife, children, etc. whenever possible.  To make special efforts for the big moments is particularly important, especially if you are a man who must travel a lot for his job, as Major League baseball players are.    Society today pushes images of manliness that are not accurate and allow people the misconception that somehow men shouldn't take paternity leave.  This fallacy leads to this kind of criticism.  In addition, MLB and the player's union have negotiated that players can have three days for paternity leave.  If it is in the contract, then the Mets and MLB certainly aren't going to complain.  It is shocking to me that any man who is also a father and takes that responsibility seriously would say that there is something wrong with being present at the birth of your child.  Any child, not just your first, but your first might be even more important.

The second statement made was that Murphy should have gotten his wife to have a C-section before opening day.  This was in conjunction with the idea that certainly he could have made it back before the second game since there was a day off in between.  First of all, clearly these men are ignorant about C-sections.  They are more invasive, more risky, and require a longer period of recovery.  In my opinion, they should only be performed when necessary and never simply for convenience sake.  At any rate, insisting on a C-section just so he can make it to work on opening day would have been the irresponsible choice.  Boomer Esiason said he would have done something like that.  That makes him an idiot and irresponsible, not Murphy.  Boomer also isn't looking at it with an apples to apples comparison.  Even if I were to accept the idea that he shouldn't be at the birth of his child because he has work responsibilities, which I don't, then Boomer was a football player who played 16 games.  Murphy is a baseball player who plays 162.  The importance factor of the individual games played is dramatically different.  In fact, most baseball players average something around 150 games a year.  Very few these days, relatively speaking, actually play all 162 games.

The third complaint was that he should be able to hire someone to help out since he's so rich.  Well, maybe he is rich and can afford it, but when did being rich mean you stopped being human, or stopped being a father?  It doesn't.  This argument is so ludicrous it almost isn't worth addressing.  However, they clearly believed it when they said it, so I'll address it.  The responsibilities of a father do not end when you hire a nanny, a maid, a cook, or any service to assist you with domestic duties.  One of the more important aspects of fatherhood is being there.  Three days to be there for the birth of your child is reasonable even for a rich man.  Would these guys be asking Warren Buffett not to take time to be present at the birth of his children?  I think not.

Fourth, the believed his behavior was letting his team down.  Well, I have two points on this.  One, the primary team in a man's life is the one that exists at home, not any team that exists on a ball field, in an office, etc.  Two, if his team felt he was letting them down by attending the birth of his child, then they should be ashamed of themselves.  I've already shown above the relative importance of any game in baseball, but an additional consideration is that no one person on a baseball team in indispensable or irreplaceable.  Sure, you may lose some defensive or offensive production based on an individual player, but over a 162 game season, you expect to lose almost every player on the team for at least 2-5 games due to various reasons, including nothing more nefarious than the coach deciding someone needs a day off.

Finally, these guys need to get a life.  They are New York radio show hosts who have a New York audience and they are talking about a New York team and player.  There's a reason the rest of the baseball world doesn't care for the New York teams and perhaps the lack of simple honor and class on display by these three radio hosts is one of the reasons.  In essence, they are saying that every baseball game is so important that no player should miss one for any reason.  In the end, they aren't really complaining about him going to be there for the birth of his child.  They are complaining that they lost the first two games and using this guy as a scapegoat to explain why.  It really is that simple.  When did sportscasters become as bad as shock media to pick on someone's personal life and drag their family into the equation simply because they're upset they lost a couple of games.  Here's a hint.  The Mets are awful and will remain awful whether Murphy is out there or not.  Focus on that rather than picking on a man for making the correct and responsible decision to be with his wife for the birth of their child and sticking around to be with her for several days after.  I don't know when she was released from the hospital with the child, but I believe he should have stayed with her until she was, regardless of what these idiots might think.  We have enough trouble with men being responsible and taking on the role of father as it is, we don't need stupidity from the media continuing to foster an irresponsible image of manhood and fatherhood.