Why the new crisis in marriage isn't.
Julian Sanchez | June 1, 2006
(Page 3 of 29)
p class="CRlargetext c2">
span class="c1">It was the
eschatological horror of wedding cakes adorned with pairs of little
plastic men in tuxedos that prompted Dobson’s prophecy. But the
fear of gay marriage is only the most headline-friendly
manifestation of a broader concern that the institution of marriage
is in a parlous state. As conservatives look at high rates of
cohabitation and divorce, especially among poor mothers, many
conclude that the institution you can’t disparage requires a
helping hand from the federal government to stay afloat. Indeed,
it’s not just conservatives: Political scientist William Galston, a
former adviser to President Clinton, has argued that marriage is a
key component of poverty alleviation, and that government must
“strengthen [two-parent] families by promoting their formation,
assisting their efforts to cope with contemporary economic and
social stress, and retarding their breakdown whenever possible.”
The most prominent recent effort in this vein is President Bush’s
Healthy Marriage Initiative, run by the Department of Health and
Human Services and funded to the tune of $100 million annually,
most of which goes to fund educational or mentoring programs in
which couples learn “relationship skills,” often by means of grants
filtered through faith-based organizations.
o:p>
/o:p>
/span>
/p>
p class="CRlargetext-dropcap">
span class=
"CRdropcap c1">
o:p>
/o:p>
/span>
/p>
p class="CRlargetext-dropcap">
I
span class="c1">f the link between gay
matrimony and the “crumbling” of marriage remains something of a
puzzle—for all the ink and pixels expended on the issue, no one has
managed a compelling explanation of precisely how allowing more
people to marry will induce fewer people to marry—concerns about
the state of the family aren’t groundless. A spate of studies has
led to a broad consensus among social scientists that children
raised by their biological parents fare significantly better than
children raised by single, cohabiting, or remarried parents on a
wide variety of dimensions: They’re half as likely to drop out of
high school or go to prison, more likely to attend college, and
less likely to have behavioral problems or encounter material
hardship—differences that may be reduced but do not disappear after
controlling for factors such as parental income and education.
These differences are apparent even in countries like Sweden, where
both social norms and public policy are more hospitable toward
single-parent families.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245