Of course, quantity AND quality of nonresidential father involvement matter … as part of every individualized best interests of the child determination: Commentary on Adamsons 2018 article

Abstract Adamsons uses two prominent meta-analyses to argue that “time (of father involvement) is a necessary but not sufficient factor” in predicting child adjustment after parental separation. Quantity of contact between nonresidential parents and their children does not, by itself, predict child adjustment or well-being. Adamsons points out the ingredients for positive child adjustment include father involvement in activities, forming quality father–child relationships, and authoritative parenting. She also notes there are instances when contact can be negative and adversely impact the child’s adjustment. Scholars and practitioners should not be surprised by these findings, which illustrate the complexity of the task of deciding what is best for children and the need for individualized determinations. Adamsons provides a cogent argument against making decisions based on “averages” and notes the need to consider moderating variables when predicting child adjustment. She easily defeats one strawman presumption argument (e.g., time does not matter), then seems to miss how that the logic of her arguments also undermines the argument for an equal time presumption. The individualized best interests of the child standard is never mentioned in her article, but it remains the approach that best fits the task and the data.