NASW Practice Snapshot:
What Social Workers Need to Know about the Administration’s Marriage Initiative

Office of Social Work Specialty Practice

Social workers have always played a crucial role in supporting families, either by providing therapy to newlyweds who are trying to sort through conflict related to managing a newly created household, or by helping couples who are trying to make the decision whether or not to pursue marriage. Social workers also counsel same-sex partners or heterosexual cohabiting partners who grapple with many of the same issues as married couples do.

Recent developments in public policy have shined a bright light on the institution of marriage and pose opportunities and challenges for social workers practicing with couples.  The Bush Administration is proposing to spend $1.5 billion during the next five years on marriage programs, and legislators are scrutinizing tax and transfer policies for "marriage penalties." These initiatives are spurred by changes in marriage and childbearing trends during the latter part of the 20th century as policymakers and social scientists debate whether children are always better off in married-couple families. Some experts contend that stable marriages improve children's emotional, intellectual, and economic well-being, and that some well-designed marriage-promotion initiatives may benefit children and families.

Background

In 2002, the Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families (ACF) launched the “Healthy Marriage Initiative” to support the President’s goal of increasing healthy marriages by focusing attention and action on strengthening marriages and preparing couples for a healthy marriage. ACF oversees multiple programs that serve children and their families, particularly low-income children. These programs include child welfare, child support enforcement, and services to refugees and Native Americans.

In its welfare reform law of 1996, Congress stipulated that three of the four purposes of the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) block grant to states must be related to promoting healthy marriages. In his budget request for 2006, the President has proposed $100 million in matching funds for states and tribes to develop innovative healthy marriage programs, and another $100 million to fund technical assistance and research as well as demonstrations related to family formation and healthy marriages.

What is a “Healthy Marriage?”

According to the Administration for Children and Families (2005), there are at least two characteristics that all healthy marriages have in common: “First, they are mutually enriching, and second, both spouses have a deep respect for each other. It is a mutually satisfying relationship that is beneficial to the husband, wife, and children (if present). It is a relationship that is committed to ongoing growth, the use of effective communication skills and the use of successful conflict management skills.”

According to ACF, the stated goals of the marriage initiative are to:

• Increase the percentage of children who are raised by two parents in a healthy marriage;
• Increase the percentage of married couples who are in healthy marriages;
• Increase the percentage of premarital couples who are equipped with the skills and knowledge necessary to form and sustain a healthy marriage;
• Increase the percentage of youth and young adults who have the skills and knowledge to make informed decisions about healthy relationships including skills that can help them eventually form and sustain a healthy marriage;
• Increase public awareness about the value of healthy marriages and the skills and knowledge that can help couples form and sustain healthy marriages;
• Encourage and support research on healthy marriages and healthy marriage education; and
• Increase the percentage of women, men, and children in homes that are free of domestic violence.

The Controversy

Opponents of the Administration’s marriage proposals fear this initiative would coerce or “bribe” women to enter hasty and ill-considered marriages or force them to remain in abusive marriages. Others are concerned that “privileging” marriage would mean discriminating against single parents. Other advocates have asserted that the initiative allocates too much money for marriage programs and that these funds would be better spent on other supportive services. What is certain is that this initiative represents a radical departure from the role government has taken in the past which was limited to giving licenses and issuing divorce decrees.  Clearly, the promotion of a “healthy marriage” is at the top of the national agenda.

What is Fueling Public Interest in Healthy Marriages?

Rising rates of out-of-wedlock childbearing and divorce resulted in a three-fold increase since 1960 of children growing up in single-parent households. Studies published in the late 1980s identified the negative effects of divorce on many children and the greater likelihood that children raised by single parents experience disadvantages. This research helps to fuel the concern about child well-being and the need to reduce the incidence of single parenting. This apprehension has resulted in statutes that increase the difficulty of obtaining a divorce and policies and programs that would better prepare people for marriage (Center for Law And Social Policy [CLASP], 2004).

Yet, some question whether or not the Administration’s marriage initiative is merely a cloaked “anti-poverty” vehicle intended to minimize the government’s role and responsibility to help low-income families get out of poverty. On the legislative front, the Administration continues to push for increased personal responsibility and self- sufficiency for low-income families that receive government assistance. The Administration’s plan to reauthorize the TANF program would increase state obligations to require more cash assistance recipients to enroll in work activities for more hours than is required under current law. If that happens, analysts predict that states will have to increase their spending on work activities and child care.

The marriage debate is not just about marriage or partnerships; it is also about the economic well-being of individuals and families. Some reports on income and marriage indicate that people who graduate from high school, work full-time, and marry before having children are far less likely to be poor than those who do not accomplish one or more of these tasks. According to the Brookings Institution, “education, work, and marriage are all powerful antidotes to poverty” (Haskins and Sawhill, 2003). Recent Census data show that the poverty rates have risen for the fourth consecutive year from 11.3 percent in 2000 to 12.7 percent in 2004. There were 37 million people living in poverty in 2004, up 1.1 million from 2003 (MSNBC.Com 2005). Many of those living in poverty are children and individuals.

Why Some Women Choose Not to Marry and Some Men Decide Not to Stay

“Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put Motherhood Before Marriage” (2005), is a report about a study of 162 white, African American, and Puerto Rican low-income single mothers living in Philadelphia. It found that these women have a high regard for marriage and they “want to do it right” but they want to have quality relationships and economic stability. The idea of having a home and nursery “properly” prepared for their new arrival is important. Women in this study were afraid of becoming financially dependent on a man. Many of their relationships ended because of infidelity, substance abuse, and domestic violence.

Conversely, advocates for fatherhood say that many young fathers lack appropriate male role models, so they learn how to treat women from their peers. Some feel passed over by women because of their financial situations, which in turn causes them to feel inadequate in their male roles, and reject their roles as parent and spouse/partner. This trend is a concern particularly in the African American family where African American women are more likely to enter college than black men and black males are disproportionately represented in the correctional systems, leaving many black females at a loss if they desire an African American mate with similar educational and career aspirations.

Policymakers and social scientists are also alarmed by the absence of fathers in the family unit, a concern which has spawned a “pro fatherhood” movement, headed in large part by the National Fatherhood Initiative. Their fact sheet points out that compared to children raised in intact, two-parent homes, children who grow up without their fathers have significantly worse outcomes, on average, on almost every measure of child well-being (Horn, 2005). Children who grow up in father-absent homes are more likely to suffer from child abuse, poverty, low academic achievement, drug use, emotional and behavioral problems, and suicide. “Simply put, father absence is the most consequential social problem we confront” (Horn, 2005). More supportive services are needed to help men become more emotionally and financially prepared to assume the fatherhood role.

Examples of Healthy Marriage Grant Programs

ACF program offices have awarded grants to support the development and implementation of an array of marriage and relationship skills classes and related marriage strengthening services including pre-marital and marriage-enrichment classes, marital inventories, marriage mentoring, and similar services. From 2002-2004, more than 100 grants were awarded, totaling more than $25 million. Further, during this period, ACF committed more than $17.5 million for contracts to conduct research and evaluation on healthy marriage services and related topics.

Two special initiatives were established to promote culturally competent strategies to work with leaders and practitioners in the African American and Hispanic/Latino communities. In 2004, ACF established a Marriage Resource Center to serve as a central library of information for the general public, practitioners, policymakers, and researchers.

Healthy Marriage Initiative of Nebraska

The Healthy Marriage Initiative of Nebraska project works with couples who are engaged or considering marriage by providing marriage-preparation classes and linking couples with mentor couples. Curricula used include the “Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Program” (PREP), “Engaged Encounter” and “When Families Marry” as well as marriage inventories such as “Facilitating Open Couple Communication, Understanding and Study” (FOCCUS).

PREP was developed over 20 years ago by researchers at the University of Denver, and has been widely used across the United States and other countries. Evaluations of PREP have found small, but promising, results including improved couple communication and reduced divorce rates (CLASP, 2004). For a description of the curriculum and articles on the evaluations, see www.prepinc.com

The Nebraska project includes a public awareness campaign that focuses on the benefits of a healthy marriage through billboards, TV spots, brochures, and pamphlets. In addition, they offer:

• Marriage enhancement and marriage skills training programs for married couples;
• Divorce reduction programs that teach healthy relationship skills;
• Marriage mentoring programs that use married couples as role models and mentors in at-risk communities;
• Programs to reduce the disincentives to marriage in means-tested aid programs, if offered in conjunction with any activity described above;
• Research on the benefits of healthy marriages and healthy marriage education; and
• Technical assistance to grantees who are implementing any of the above activities.

Strengthening Marriages in Oklahoma

Some grantees received funds through the Safe and Stable Families Grants to support healthy marriages, family formation, and safety for children and families in or at risk of being in the child welfare system. The “Strengthening Marriages in Oklahoma” program focuses on the needs of adoptive couples and improving and expanding marriage education programs. Offered statewide, services include marriage education retreats for adoptive parents, enriched adoption support services, and marriage education curricula geared toward the specific issues that adoptive couples face.

Child Welfare Training Grants

The Children’s Bureau awarded grants to Syracuse University, NY, University of Denver, CO, University of Louisville, KY, State University of New York at Albany, and the Forest Institute to develop and field test curricula that assist child welfare staff in promoting healthy marriages and family formation. Some activities include equipping child welfare staff with curricula that support healthy marriage formation, training graduate students, delivering continuing education workshops, and disseminating training materials.

Compassion Capital Funds

Created in 2002, the Compassion Capital Funds (CCF) were touted as a key component of the President’s Faith-Based Initiative to increase the capacity of faith and community-based organizations to serve those in need. The CCF administers two grant programs: the CCF Demonstration Program and the CCF Targeted Capacity Building Program. CCF funds intermediary organizations to work directly with faith-based and community organizations to provide training and technical assistance to subawardees in the development of healthy marriages. The Institute for the Youth Development Fund develops programs to educate teens, parents, and educators about the importance of avoiding alcohol, drugs, sex, tobacco, and violence. As an intermediary, they convey their expertise in these areas to smaller faith-based and community organizations. An example of a subawardee is First Things First in Chattanooga, TN, where multiple programs work with low-income couples and at-risk youth to reduce divorce and out-of-wedlock childbearing, increase marital satisfaction, and encourage unwed fathers to participate more fully in the lives of their children.

Conclusion

The marriage initiative, just like marriage itself, is complex and must be given serious consideration. Regardless of which side of the marriage debate you fall on, social workers have a key role to play in supporting the lifestyle choices that men and women make in a culturally competent, professional manner. For those social workers who decide to participate in the marriage initiative, there are numerous grant opportunities available. For clinicians working with couples, we hope you will find the resources offered in this document useful in your practice.

As s social worker, you can also engage in the marriage initiative at a macro policy level. As Congress gears up for this legislative session, we hope that you will urge legislators to continue their efforts to reduce poverty through the preservation of entitlement programs such as TANF and Medicaid, and ensure public policies that support women’s economic and social rights. Advocacy efforts should consider job readiness and economic and social services for men and women, especially those of color, if we are to truly foster “healthy” marriages in this country. Please check our website, www.socialworkers.org for updates on TANF and other important legislative issues.

References

Administration for Children and Families. (2005). Healthy marriage initiative: Activities and accomplishments 2002-2004 [Online]. Retrieved from
http://cbexpress.acf.hhs.gov/articles.cfm?issue_id=2005-07&article_id=1004
on August 29, 2005.

Administration for Children and Families. (2005). Mission of the healthy marriage initiative [Online]. Retrieved from
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/healthymarriage/about/mission.html on August 29, 2005.

 

Center for Law and Social Policy. (2004). Beyond marriage licenses: Efforts to strengthen marriage and two-parent families. Washington, DC: Author.

 

Edin, K. & Kefalas, M. (2005). Promises I can keep: Why poor women put motherhood before marriage. An account of how low-income women make their choices about marriage and motherhood. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Haskins, R.& Sawhill, I. (2003). Work and marriage: The way to end poverty and welfare. Welfare Reform and Beyond Policy Brief  (No. 28). Washington, DC: Author.

 

Horn, W. (2005). Father facts [Online]. Washington, DC: National Fatherhood Institute. Retrieved from
http://www.fatherhood.org/fatherfacts_int.asp on August 12, 2005.

MSNBC.Com. (2005, August 30). Poverty rate at 12.7 percent, 4th straight rise:  
Situation better than in the '80s and early '90s [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9130342/ on September 10, 2005.

NASW, October 2005