Supporting Healthy Marriage Project

Last updated

The Supporting Healthy Marriage Project (SHM) is part of the Healthy Marriage Initiative funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, that was launched in 2003 as "the first large-scale, multisite, multiyear, rigorous test of marriage education programs for low-income married couples". The project is motivated by research that "indicates that married adults and children raised by both parents in stable, low-conflict households do better on a host of outcomes". The evaluation is led by MDRC, [1] in collaboration with Abt Associates [2] and other partners. [3] USASpending.gov reports payments of more than $30 million from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to MDRC for work on the Supporting Healthy Marriage Project from 2009 to 2012. [4]

Contents

Major study questions of the Supporting Healthy Marriage Project include: [5]

  1. What are the experiences, issues and challenges in designing, implementing and operating healthy marriage education and related services for lower-income couples with children?
  2. What are the net impacts of the programs on: marital stability and relationship quality; attitudes and expectations regarding their marriage; parenting attitudes and behaviors; measures of adult well-being and child well-being and development (e.g., cognitive, social, emotional, health), and economic outcomes for families?

Limited federal funding for a Healthy Marriage Initiative began in 2001 to "help couples who choose to get married gain greater access to marriage education services that will enable them to acquire the skills and knowledge necessary to form and sustain a healthy marriage." [6] In 2005, Wade Horn, Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Children and Families, highlighted plans for a significant expansion of funding in testimony before the Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness, House Committee on Education and the Workforce:

"Although I have focused on the areas of primary interest to your committee, I would be remiss if I did not briefly highlight other key areas of our proposal that play a critical role in the well-being of children, teenagers, and families. Indeed, we establish improving the well-being of children as the overarching purpose of TANF.... In support of that overarching purpose, our proposal seeks to improve child well-being through programs aimed at encouraging responsible fatherhood and healthy marriages. By discontinuing the Out of Wedlock Birth Reduction Bonus and redirecting part of the High Performance Bonus Funding, we provide $200 million for programs aimed at promoting family formation and healthy marriages. We also provide $40 million in funding for the support of responsible fatherhood and healthy marriage programs to reverse the rise in father absence and its subsequent impact on children." [7]

Rationale

When the program was launched, Heritage Foundation explained: "The erosion of marriage during the past four decades has had large-scale negative effects on both children and adults: It lies at the heart of many of the social problems with which the government currently grapples. The beneficial effects of marriage on individuals and society are beyond reasonable dispute, and there is a broad and growing consensus that government policy should promote rather than discourage healthy marriage. In response to these trends, President George W. Bush has proposed--as part of welfare reform reauthorization--the creation of a pilot program to promote healthy and stable marriage. Participation in the program would be strictly voluntary. Funding for the program would be small-scale: $300 million per year. This sum represents one penny to promote healthy marriage for every five dollars government currently spends to subsidize single parenthood. Moreover, this small investment today could result in potentially great savings in the future by reducing dependence on welfare and other social services." [8] [9]

Proponents

The Heritage Foundation and Brookings Institution were early proponents.

"By fostering better life decisions and stronger relationship skills, marriage programs can increase child well-being and adult happiness and reduce child poverty and welfare dependence. Yet opponents make it sound as if the government would be forcing people into unhappy unions. It's nonsense." [10]

"Federal and state legislation enacted over the past decade clearly reflects a growing national interest in reducing the number of children growing up without both parents.... The central policy question is whether it is possible to implement programs that can increase the number of children who are raised by both parents in healthy and stable marriages, especially within disadvantaged populations known to be at higher risk for family instability." [11]

In 2006 testimony to a House Appropriations Subcommittee, Wade Horn further highlighted the program's goals in a request for increased funding: [12]

"As you know, research shows that healthy and stable marriages support children and limit the need for government programs. Whether the problem is abuse, neglect, or poverty, the evidence is clear that the best chance a child has of avoiding these problems is to grow up with their mother and father in a stable, healthy marriage. Research also shows that adults in healthy marriages are happier and healthier. A report from the Institute for American Values suggests that communities with high rates of healthy marriages evidence fewer social problems such as crime and welfare dependency, compared to those with low rates of healthy marriages.... The new funding will support a variety of activities that will provide interested individuals and couples with the skills and knowledge necessary to form and sustain healthy marriages. For example, it will allow us to fund programs to: help high school students learn to develop healthy relationships and gain knowledge about the value and benefits of healthy marriage for themselves and their future children, if they desire to marry and have children; offer pre-marital services to help engaged couples focus on topics critical to the long-term health of their relationship and marriage; offer help to married couples who are struggling, to gain skills to revitalize and strengthen their marriage; work with non-married pregnant women and expectant fathers interested in marriage to gain the skills that are necessary to form and sustain healthy marriages and help them with parenting and financial management skills as well as with finding employment or advancing to higher wage jobs; and reduce the disincentives to marriage in means-tested aid if offered in conjunction with any of the above mentioned activities. In addition, to expand the initiative provided in the Deficit Reduction Act, the Administration’s FY 2007 budget proposes to establish a competitive matching grant program for family formation and marriage. One hundred million dollars in competitive grants would be targeted to innovative approaches to promoting healthy marriage and reducing out-of-wedlock births." [12]

Early concerns

"Although promoting marriage is undeniably a laudable aim, whether government programs can effectively promote marriage is far from certain. Government has virtually no track record on this issue. Moreover, before Congress commits to making significant investments in an unproven arena, policy makers must address an even more fundamental question: Can marriage really be a panacea that helps poor women and their children lead better lives or are supporters of marriage promotion overpromising the benefits of their agenda? Answering this question isn’t easy. Although the empirical evidence in support of marriage is incontrovertible, there is still a great deal we need to know before state [TANF] programs move too rapidly into uncharted territory. Studies on the 'retreat from marriage' in the United States abound, but we have surprisingly little information about the marital behavior of those women about whom policy makers are most concerned: low-income and welfare-dependent unwed mothers." [13]

"Marriage promotion represents a cornerstone of social conservatives' domestic policy agenda, and proposals designed to promote and strengthen marriage are gaining currency at all levels of government. Since taking office, President Bush has promised to invest in marriage promotion on an unprecedented scale through his proposal to reauthorize the nation's welfare reform law, and legislation pending before Congress would allocate substantial funding toward that end. Yet even as the president waits for Congress to act, his administration is finding ways to devote significant funding to marriage promotion activities through existing programs and funding streams. [14]

"A variety of new federal and state initiatives are attempting to promote family formation and healthy marriage among interested couples, including poor and minority couples who have had babies outside marriage. Careful evaluations of these programs should identify which are most effective. [15]

"A marriage movement is underway, as efforts to promote marriage, strengthen two-parent families and reduce divorce gain momentum around the country. And yet, no one can say with certainty how the government should effectively put marriage education and promotion programs into place, or if those programs will achieve their desired goals." [16]

"Some states are poised to develop and provide programs to support healthy marriages, as called for by the Bush administration.... If political support for these programs is to grow, evidence that they work for the right populations will be critical." [17]

Opposition

"With congressional Republicans beating the drum about profligate and wasteful government spending, they may want to take a hard look at a federal program pushed by a host of top GOPers during the Bush-era and reauthorized in late 2010, as the Republican deficit craze took hold. Originally championed by Republican lawmakers including Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, and current Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback, a federal initiative to promote marriage as a cure for poverty dumped hundreds of millions of dollars into programs that either had no impact or a negative effect on the relationships of the couples who took part." [18]

"The Alternatives to Marriage Project opposes marriage promotion because it stigmatizes unmarried people and institutionalizes discrimination against singles and diverse family forms. We believe that policies designed to help children should focus on supporting all the types of families in which children really live. We believe that people who care for one another should be supported in their efforts to build healthy, happy relationships ... There is no evidence that it is an effective way to help people escape poverty. It diverts funds from poverty-fighting programs that have been proven to work." [19]

Initial findings

Program impact

In an early impact study on the effectiveness of "skills-based relationship education programs designed to help low-income married couples strengthen their relationships and, in turn, to support more stable and more nurturing home environments and more positive outcomes for parents and their children," MDRC reported: [20]

The initial impact report is based on 12-month follow-up with 4,989 program participants and control groups at sites in Florida (Orlando), Kansas (Wichita), Pennsylvania (Reading and Bethlehem), Texas (El Paso and San Antonio), New York (Bronx), Oklahoma (Oklahoma City), and Washington (Shoreline and Seattle). [20]

Program implementation


Publications

Related Research Articles

Sterilization is any of a number of medical methods of birth control that intentionally leaves a person unable to reproduce. Sterilization methods include both surgical and non-surgical, and exist for both males and females. Sterilization procedures are intended to be permanent; reversal is generally difficult or impossible.

Head Start (program) U.S. federal aid program for low-income childcare

Head Start is a program of the United States Department of Health and Human Services that provides comprehensive early childhood education, health, nutrition, and parent involvement services to low-income children and families. The program's services and resources are designed to foster stable family relationships, enhance children's physical and emotional well-being, and establish an environment to develop strong cognitive skills. The transition from preschool to elementary school imposes diverse developmental challenges that include requiring the children to engage successfully with their peers outside the family network, adjust to the space of a classroom, and meet the expectations the school setting provides.

Elementary and Secondary Education Act United States law, part of Johnsons War on Poverty

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was passed by the 89th United States Congress and signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on April 11, 1965. Part of Johnson's "War on Poverty", the act has been one of the most far-reaching pieces of federal legislation affecting education ever passed by the United States Congress, and was further emphasized and reinvented by its modern, revised No Child Left Behind Act.

The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) is a division of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). It is headed by the Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services for Children and Families. It has a $49 billion budget for 60 programs that target children, youth and families. These programs include assistance with welfare, child support enforcement, adoption assistance, foster care, child care, and child abuse. The agency employs approximately 1,700 staff, including 1,200 federal employees and 500 contractors, where 60% are based in Washington, DC, with the remaining in regional offices located in Boston, New York City, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Kansas City, Denver, San Francisco, Missouri and Seattle.

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families U.S. federal aid program

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families is a federal assistance program of the United States. It began on July 1, 1997, and succeeded the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program, providing cash assistance to indigent American families through the United States Department of Health and Human Services. TANF is often simply referred to as welfare.

Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act United States welfare reform law

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) is a United States federal law passed by the 104th United States Congress and signed into law by President Bill Clinton. The bill implemented major changes to U.S. social welfare policy, replacing the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program with the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program.

John Gottman American psychologist

John Mordecai Gottman is an American psychologist, professor emeritus of psychology at the University of Washington, whose work focuses on divorce prediction and marital stability through relationship analyses. The lessons derived from this work represent a partial basis for the relationship counseling movement that aims to improve relationship functioning and the avoidance of those behaviors shown by Gottman and other researchers to harm human relationships. His work has also had a major impact on the development of important concepts on social sequence analysis. He and his wife, psychologist Julie Schwartz Gottman, co-founded and lead a relationship company and therapist training entity called The Gottman Institute. They have also co-founded Affective Software Inc., a program designed to make marriage and relationship counseling methods and resources available to a larger audience.

The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) is an American federal assistance program of the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) for healthcare and nutrition of low-income pregnant women, breastfeeding women, and children under the age of five. Their mission is to be a partner with other services that are key to childhood and family well-being. The basic eligibility requirement is a family income below 185% of the federal poverty level. Most states allow automatic income eligibility, where a person or family participating in certain benefits programs, such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Medicaid, or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, may automatically meet the income eligibility requirements. Currently, WIC serves 53 percent of all infants born in the United States.

Relationship education and premarital counseling promote practices and principles of premarital education, relationship resources, relationship restoration, relationship maintenance, and evidence-based marriage education.

Comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) is a sex education instruction method based on-curriculum that aims to give students the knowledge, attitudes, skills, and values to make appropriate and healthy choices in their sexual lives. The intention is that this understanding will prevent students from contracting sexually transmitted infections, such as HIV and HPV. CSE is also designed with the intention of reducing unplanned and unwanted pregnancies, as well as lowering rates of domestic and sexual violence, thus contributing to a healthier society, both physically and mentally.

The Maternal and Child Health Bureau (MCHB), is one of six Bureaus within the Health Resources and Services Administration, an agency of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services located in Rockville, Maryland.

Futures Without Violence is a non-profit organization with offices in San Francisco, Washington, D.C., and Boston, United States, with the goal of ending domestic and sexual violence. Futures Without Violence is involved in community-based programs, developing educational materials, and in public policy work.

Social programs in the United States Overview of social programs in the United States of America

Social programs in the United States are programs designed to ensure that the basic needs of the American population are met. Federal and state social programs include cash assistance, health insurance, food assistance, housing subsidies, energy and utilities subsidies, and education and childcare assistance. Similar benefits are sometimes provided by the private sector either through policy mandates or on a voluntary basis. Employer-sponsored health insurance is an example of this.

The Victorian Health Promotion Foundation is a statutory authority in the Australian state of Victoria, originally funded by hypothecated taxation raised by the Victorian Tobacco Act 1987. It was the first health promotion body in the world to be funded by a tax on tobacco.

The Building Strong Families Program (BSF) is part of the Healthy Marriage Initiative funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, "to learn whether well-designed interventions can help couples fulfill their aspirations for a healthy relationship, marriage, and a strong family."

Michal Grinstein-Weiss American economist

Michal Grinstein-Weiss, PhD, MSW, MA, is the Shanti K. Khinduka Distinguished Professor at the George Warren Brown School of Social Work at Washington University in St. Louis where she is also serves as the Associate Dean for Policy Initiatives, the director of the university-wide Social Policy Institute, and the founding director of the Centene Center for Health Transformation. She serves as a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. She previously held positions as a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill where she established the Asset-Building Research Group.

The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) is the principal advisory group to the United States Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on policy development and provides coordination and support for HHS's strategic and policy planning, planning and development of legislation, program evaluation, data gathering, policy-related research, and regulatory program. ASPE refers both to the position, the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, and the office directed by that position. Since its authorization in 1965, ASPE has played an instrumental role as an internal strategy group, think tank, and incubator supporting the priorities and needs of the Secretary, and consequently, the Department as a whole.

Armenia and the United Nations Armenia at the United Nations

Armenia was admitted into the United Nations on 2 March 1992, following its independence from the Soviet Union. In December 1992, the UN opened its first office in Yerevan. Since then, Armenia has signed and ratified several international treaties. There are 20 specialized agencies, programs, and funds operating in the country under the supervision of the UN Resident Coordinator. Armenia strengthened its relations with the UN by cooperating with various UN agencies and bodies such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the World Food Programme, and with the financial institutions of the UN. Armenia is a candidate to preside as a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council in 2031.

The Hispanic Federation (HF) is a U.S based non-governmental organization focused on supporting Hispanic communities through local, state, and national advocacy. The Federation was founded in New York City in 1990 by a small group of Latino leaders, establishing initiatives to advocate for the interests of the Hispanic community and has expanded to establish programs, and policies in 16 states. The organization's objective is to empower and advance the Hispanic community primarily through service pillars, membership services, advocacy, and community programs. The Federation has formed relationships with a network of 100 Latino grassroots nonprofits, as well as collaborating with organizations, government officials, and private sector partners to enact systemic change related to a variety of socioeconomic issues for Hispanic communities. The Federation has gained national recognition for its work in areas of education, health, immigration, economic empowerment, civic engagement, environment, and organizational development to strengthening Latino institutions to ultimately increase the quality of life within Hispanic communities.

The education policy of the United States is the set of objectives and acts of the federal government to support education in the United States. The federal government has limited authority to act on education, and education policy serves to support the education systems of state and local governments through funding and regulation of elementary, secondary, and post-secondary education. The Department of Education serves as the primary government organization responsible for enacting federal education policy in the United States.

References

  1. ↑ MDRC website
  2. ↑ Abt Associates website
  3. ↑ Manpower Development Research Corporation (MDRC), New York, NY
  4. ↑ USAspending.gov
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, D.C.
  6. ↑ Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, D.C.
  7. ↑ Testimony of Wade F. Horn on Welfare Reform Reauthorization, March 15, 2005.
  8. ↑ Rector, Robert and Pardue, Melissa. The Heritage Foundation, "Understanding the President's Healthy Marriage Initiative," May 26, 2004.
  9. ↑ Office of Community Services, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, D.C.
  10. ↑ The Heritage Foundation, "Senators, Experts to Speak Out for "Healthy Marriage Initiative," March 26, 2004.
  11. ↑ Dion, M. Robin. "The Future of Children," Princeton-Brookings, Marriage and Child Wellbeing, Volume 15, Number 2, Fall 2005.
  12. 1 2 Horn, Wade. "The Marriage Calculator," Testimony Before Subcommittee on Appropriations, April 2006. "Testimony on Marriage Calucator | Office of Legislative Affairs and Budget | Administration for Children and Families". Archived from the original on 2012-12-31. Retrieved 2012-11-14.
  13. ↑ Lichter, Daniel. "Marriage as Public Policy," Progressive Policy Institute, Cornell University, September 2001.
  14. ↑ Dailard, Cynthia. The Guttmacher Report on Public Policy February 2005, Volume 8, Number 1.
  15. ↑ Haskins, Ron; Donahue, Elisabeth; McLanahan, Sara. "The Decline in Marriage: What To Do," Brookings Institution, September 2005.
  16. ↑ Hughes, Claire. "Marriage Promotion: Will It Work?" Rockefeller Institute of Government, The Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy, June 2004. "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-05-22. Retrieved 2012-11-14.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  17. ↑ The Urban Institute, "Making Marriage Work," 2012 Archived 2012-09-26 at the Wayback Machine
  18. ↑ Mencimer, Stephanie. "The GOP's Dead-End Marriage Program," Mother Jones, June 25, 2012.
  19. ↑ "Government Mandated Marriage Promotion," Alternatives to Marriage Project, Seattle, Washington. "Government Mandated Marriage Promotion". Archived from the original on 2011-07-02. Retrieved 2011-05-12.
  20. 1 2 Knox, Virginia, et al. "Early Impacts from the Supporting Healthy Marriage Evaluation," MDRC, New York, NY, March 2012.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.