The Case for (Promoting) Marriage
Ted L. Huston and Heidi Melz
Journal of Marriage and Family 66 (Nov. 2004)
1.
One of the most contentious debates in the United States today centers on
the concern that some social critics have that, as a society, we are turning away from
the institution of marriage. Though American families have been in transition for as
long as there have been American families, the normative context for family
formation has shifted over the last several decades in four important ways: (a)
nonmarital cohabitation is being practiced more visibly and more widely across our
social spectrum; (b) the proportion of births that occur outside marriage has
increased dramatically; (c) people marry later in life; and (d) divorce has settled in at
a high rate.
2.
These phenomena have broad implications for adult lifestyles, childbearing,
and childrearing. Social scientists, legal scholars, family advocates, and pundits have
examined the causes and consequences of the changing shape of American
families. A growing consensus exists that being raised in a well-functioning twoparent family is generally good for children, and the declining proportion of twoparent married families is seen by some as a crisis in need of intervention. Some
scholars have argued that the benefits of marriage over other lifestyles are manifold,
and policymakers have recently considered federal legislation to promote and protect
the institution.
3.
This article sets forth our thoughts about these issues. We begin by posing a
series of questions. We present evidence that should encourage people to move
beyond their own experiences and, instead, to be mindful of the diverse
circumstances under which people delay marriage, dissolve marriage, or choose not
to marry at all.
IS MARRIAGE RIGHT FOR US ALL AND ALWAYS?
4.
Let us consider some questions to which many of us offer differing answers.
a. What constitutes a ‘‘good marriage’’ or a ‘‘good enough marriage’’?
b. Can the future of a marriage be foretold from the character of its
courtship?
c. What constitute ‘‘legitimate’’ personal reasons for terminating a marriage?
d. Can the attractiveness of marriage be increased by decreasing poverty
and its common manifestations, such as
crime, out-of-wedlock
childbearing, low educational attainment, drug abuse, and alcoholism?
e. Should we attempt to relieve single mothers’ burdens by encouraging
them to marry?
f.
Should the government be involved in encouraging marriage and
discouraging divorce, and, if so, what kinds of government efforts are
likely to benefit society the most?
5.
Social scientists should not feel comfortable promoting marriage over other
lifestyles unless we can document that the good effects of marriage are general –
that is, if it could be demonstrated that nearly everyone who marries and stays
married would be happier, healthier, and better off financially than they would be if
they did not marry.
6.
The idea that marriage is beneficial requires, at a minimum, that we compare
married, single, and divorced individuals on a variety of indicators of well-being, and
find that those who are married are consistently better off. We will start with a brief
review of the demographic trends that underlie the concerns that people have about
marriage.
THE STATE OF MATRIMONY IN THE UNITED STATES
7.
American couples today form relationships with each other in a very different
social context than did couples of the 1950s because of two broad trends in marriage
over the second half of the 20th century: the postponement of marriage (today’s
brides first marry at about age 25) and the increase in divorce. Adults now expect to
spend a smaller proportion of their lives in the state of matrimony than would adults
in the 1950s. Between 1970 and 1996, the proportion of 25- to 29-year-olds who had
never married more than tripled for women (from 11% to 38%), and more than
doubled for men (from 19% to 52%). This trend is largely accounted for by a revival
of our nation’s historical trend of delaying marriage.
8.
Of course, this delayed age at marriage does not necessarily mean that
today’s unmarried people are single people. Americans today are far more likely than
in the 1950s to reverse the traditional order of family-building transitions by living
together and bearing children before marrying. Cohabitation has been practiced by
an increasing proportion of the U.S. population in the last 40 years, and by the mid1990s, half of women in their 30s had cohabited. In addition to sharing a home
before marriage, American couples are now more likely to be parents before they
marry. Today, more than one million unmarried American women give birth in a year,
representing a third of all births, and substantial and increasing proportions of
children start out in cohabiting families.
9.
If they do marry, today’s couples are far more likely to divorce than were
couples in the 1950s. The number of divorced people has increased more than fourfold over the last three decades, and today the currently divorced represent 1 in 10
adults ages 18 and over.
10.
This national portrait obscures substantive differences in family-building
behavior for different racial and income groups in the United States. One of the many
comparisons that can be made is between Whites and African Americans, two
groups that have taken divergent family-building paths since the mid-20th century.
Prior to 1950, African American women married at younger ages than did White
women, but around 1950, this trend reversed. By the late 1990s, only about 15% of
Black women ages 20-24 had yet married, compared with one third of White women
this age. And although the vast majority of White women can expect to have married
by age 35-39, only about 65% of Black women this age have done so, a finding that
suggests that nearly one in three African American women may, in fact, never marry.
African Americans who do marry are more likely to divorce than are Whites, and after
divorce, their rates of remarriage are only one quarter those of Whites.
11.
Black and White couples also differ in their experience of nonmarital fertility.
Whereas 27% of births to White women occur outside marriage, a much higher
proportion of African American births, nearly 69% occur outside marriage.
Consequently, a little over a third of Black children lived with two parents in 1998,
and just under three quarters of White children did so.
12.
Family-building paths have also diverged for people of higher and lower
socioeconomic status in the United States. For example, for college-educated White
women, the chance of marriage increased from 91% for those born between 1945
and 1949 to 97% for those born between 1960 and 1964. For those without a college
degree, however, the chance of marriage decreased from 96% to 92% over the same
age group.
13.
These data signal a decline in marriage, particularly among African
Americans and those of lower socioeconomic status. Among these groups, it would
appear that marriage has lost much of its appeal. Why is this the case? Does this
transformation in the centrality of marriage in the lives of adults reflect a turning away
from marriage, a devaluation of the institution? The answer, as we will see, appears
to be No.
AMERICANS STILL VALUE MARRIAGE
14.
Axinn and Thornton (2000) reviewed two decades of data from several
national surveys and found that people still want to marry and believe that marriage
affords the best opportunity to live the good life. They report that Americans remain
convinced that married people are happier than those who go through life without
getting married, and that most people believe that once married, it is very likely that
they will stay married. Americans also still value marital fidelity highly, as evidenced
by their consistent and strong expressions of disapproval of extra-marital affairs. At
the same time, the American populace has become more open to choices that lead
them to postpone marriage, to live together out of wedlock, or to divorce. People are
more accepting of premarital sex and cohabitation and less disapproving of couples
having children before marriage.
15.
When we look more closely at the evidence, the picture that emerges
suggests that those who are least likely to marry –African Americans and those of
low socioeconomic status – are strong believers in the value of marriage. Karney,
Garvan, and Thomas (2003) examined attitudes toward marriage among Florida
residents and found near universal agreement (92%) across race and household
income categories with the idea that ‘‘a happy, healthy marriage is one of the most
important things in life.’’ Unmarried African Americans and Hispanics showed more
interest in getting married than did unmarried Whites, and people with low incomes
were more interested than people with more economic resources. African Americans
were also less open to alternatives to marriage than other ethnic groups. They were
less accepting of cohabitation and less willing to accept divorce as a solution to an
unhappy union.
16.
Given that Americans still value marriage, why are they now more likely to
delay marriage and less likely to stay married? In contemporary society, marriage
has lost its place as the exclusive setting for society, family and reproduction. If this
transformation continues to evolve, we should expect that the currently normative
order of marriage before childbearing will bear decreasing relevance to couples’
lives. People may increasingly view their family-building goals, as a group of
objectives to be achieved in whatever order possible. And for many people, a happy,
healthy marriage is a desired goal that is perhaps more elusive than childbearing.
PROBLEMS IN FINDING A VIABLE MATE
17.
Given the value that Americans place on marriage, it would seem that
teenagers and single adults would both fantasize about marriage and begin to look
for a mate. But we want to focus here on the particular problem of mate selection in
communities, such as low-income neighborhoods, that have substantially lower rates
of marriage and higher divorce rates than is true nationally. Those living in such
neighborhoods appear to possess a strong desire to marry, yet many find themselves
on the outside of marriage looking in. Why is this so?
18.
Goffman points out the difficult situation of those who, for whatever reasons,
are left to prospect for mates in a social environment in which only a small proportion
of the people they encounter possess the qualities that promise a happy, durable
marital union. They are faced with a cheerless dilemma: They can marry someone
who has few virtues to offer and many liabilities, or not marry at all. This conundrum
is demonstrated by sociologist Kathryn Edin (2000), who conducted in-depth
interviews with nearly 300 low-income single Black mothers. Although most of these
women hoped to marry one day, they described several costs and risks that, in their
estimation, cautioned against marriage in the near term.
19.
First, most of these women faced near-constant shortfalls in their monthly
budgets and hoped to marry men who would be able to help provide economic
support to their households. The women said they could not afford to risk marriage to
men who lacked marketable skills or who had shaky employment histories – common
traits among the men in their communities – because they knew that such unions
would likely prove to be more of an economic burden than a benefit. Even when they
sympathized with their partners’ difficulties finding work, the women often felt forced
to break off relationships with men whom they might end up having to support.
20.
Second, the single women Edin interviewed also refrained from marrying men
who lacked qualities they deemed important in a
mate because, they believed,
marriage announces one’s ‘‘current and prospective class standing’’. Family and
neighbors would interpret a poorly contracted marriage as evidence that ‘‘he was the
best she could do’’. The women held marriage in high regard and, recognizing the
major stresses that couples inevitably must contend with, they preferred not to wed
rather than marry someone they did not feel they could count on.
21.
Third, the women felt that remaining single or cohabiting gave them more
control over decision making than they would have if married. They perceived a
divide between themselves and their mates on the issues of gendered family roles
and childrearing, and they were concerned that these unresolved differences would
be exacerbated if they took on the role of wife. Additionally, the women worried about
losing control over financial management decisions if they married.
22.
Finally, these women voiced concerns about the trustworthiness of the men
they encountered. They not only worried about whether their men would be sexually
faithful but many were also concerned about domestic violence, having witnessed its
consequences in their own lives or in their communities.
23.
The multiple concerns these women raise are very real and must be
especially difficult to put aside when raising children in a financially precarious
situation. The women in Edin’s study seemed to appreciate that the benefits of
having a father or a ‘‘father figure’’ in their home depend not only on how well the
man performs as a parent but also on how he functions as a member of society.
Their views are well reasoned because research has shown, for example, that the
more contact a child has with a socially alienated father, the more likely the child is to
exhibit such antisocial behaviors as defiance, aggression, and delinquency. Despite
this, Edin (2000) offers the following summary of the women in the study:
They say they are willing, and even eager, to marry if the marriage
represents an increase in their class standing and if their prospective
husband’s behavior indicates he won’t beat them, abuse their
children, refuse to share in household tasks, insist on making all the
decisions, be sexually unfaithful, or abuse alcohol or drugs. However,
many women also believe they can mitigate against these risks if they
forgo marriage until the tasks of early child rearing are completed and
they can concentrate more fully on labor market activities. These
women believe that by forgoing marriage until they can make regular
and substantial contributions to the household economy, they can
purchase the right to share more equally in economic and household
decision making within marriage. Additionally, an income of their own
insures them against destitution if the marriage should fail.
24.
Data from the Fragile Families and Child Well-being Study, which follows
nearly 5,000 children of married and unmarried parents, provide additional insights
about why some parents do not marry, even when they are involved with someone.
Such romantically involved new parents would seem to be primed for marriage, and
indeed, most of the unwed parents in this study envisioned bright futures for their
relationships. Among those who were co-habiting, 86% of the mothers and 91% of
the fathers said that they planned to marry each other.
25.
Despite their optimism, most of the couples in this study did not have a
specific date or time frame in mind for marriage. One year later, only 1 in 10 of the
couples had actually married, and nearly a third of the couples were no longer
together. Qualitative research revealed that the vast majority of the couples said that
they had not married yet because they were not in an economic position to do so.
They felt a need to improve their financial situation, to purchase material assets, or to
accumulate savings sufficient to hold a traditional wedding celebration. Many also
had reservations about their commitment to each other and their own emotional
readiness for marriage.
26.
These studies suggest that the hesitation about marrying that some Black and
low-income couples feel does not signal their devaluing marriage. On the contrary,
many such couples postpone marriage out of a deep respect for the institution.
Determined to avoid divorce, many couples desire first to achieve personal and
economic readiness for marriage’s responsibilities.
27.
White women’s experience can be very similar. In a study on white women’s
attitudes to marriage, the following story was revealed. All but one of the women in
the room had grown up without a father in the home. At least two had been sexually
abused in the first ten years of their lives. Those who had children had been left by
the children’s fathers. Three had been beaten by men they had loved, and two had
been involved with violent criminals. In short, it required an imaginative leap to
believe that a committed relationship with a man would rescue a woman from
poverty. In some places, relationships with men were often what stopped an
ambitious woman from escaping poverty.
28.
The problem for some in communities in which marriage rates are low is that
the pool of mates includes far too few prospects who would promise them a
relationship that would bolster their health, happiness, and financial well-being. Two
incomes are better than one, but one income for two (a mother and child) is better
than one for three (add a husband, who cannot find or hold a job).
29.
So where does this leave us? Our reading of the available research suggests
that social policies that promulgate the value of marriage are misguided. Marriage
advocacy presumes that the benefits of marriage are considerable and general
enough to legitimately speak on its behalf, yet insufficiently appreciated by the
populace to make its promotion necessary. But Americans already value marriage
and, sadly, those whose prospects for a successful union are bleak seem to value
the institution the most.
30.
What approach to policy does our analysis suggest will be effective? We
believe that it is one that accomplishes two goals. First, we must create a favorable
context for the health and stability of marriage by giving serious attention to the
neighborhood ecologies within which marriages and other human relationships are
problematic. We must take an ecological approach that includes economic
development and investments in human capital through education, job training, drug
rehabilitation, and access to the full range of reproductive health services. Second,
because marriages partly reflect the strengths and vulnerabilities that partners bring
to their unions, policy initiatives should help people make healthy choices about
whether, when, and with whom to partner. Of course, such initiatives may lead to
lower marriage rates in the short run. But when the investments advocated above
yield gains in human capital, marriages are more likely to thrive and survive.
(3,042 words)
I. Pre - Reading Activities
A. In groups, discuss the answers to the following questions.
1. What is a good marriage?
2. If people were happy together before marriage, does that mean they will be
happy together when married?
3. Why do people get married? Think of several reasons.
4. Are poor people more likely to marry than people with high incomes? Why or
why not?
5. Should single mothers be encouraged to remarry?
B. According to some research studies, there has been a decline in the marriage
rate and an increase in the divorce rate and out of wedlock births. How can
you explain these trends? List the possible reasons.
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
__________________
________________________________________________________________
___
Global Questions
1. What is the purpose of this article?
a. To illustrate and promote the numerous benefits of marriage over other
lifestyles
b. To explain the implications of the changes in the norms for family formation
c. To raise awareness of the various circumstances for making marital decisions
d. To present the dangers involved in turning away from the institution of
marriage
2. a. Which types of people do the writers contrast to show differences in
matrimonial trends today in the U.S.?
i.
_____________________________
and
________________________________
ii.
_____________________________
and
________________________________
b. Which of these groups marry less often?
i. _____________________________________________
ii. _____________________________________________
c. According to the writers, do the groups who marry less often value marriage?
YES / NO
Support your answer by quoting from the text.
Par. # ___________
Quote:
________________________________________________________________
3. What are some of the concerns of low-income single Black mothers about the
prospect of marriage in the near future?
Fill in the blanks to answer this question.
Apart from worrying about how meritorious and reliable their potential spouses
may be, these women also believed that in their situation, marriage may mean
the
decrease
in
_____________________________
and
________________________.
4. In what respect is the experience of White women similar to that of Black
women?
Complete the following sentence:
Both wish _____________________________________________________ in
order to __________________________________________.
5. a. According to the conclusion of the article, which types of policies do the writers
think will NOT help promote marriage?
________________________________________________________________
b. Which types of policies do the writers think will help promote marriage?
Policies that give information about ____________________________________
________________________________________________________________,
and that give people help with _______________________________________
________________________________________________________________
6. According to the writers, their suggestions will lead to a positive and negative
outcome. List the outcomes:
Positive Outcome:
________________________________________________________________
Negative Outcome:
________________________________________________________________
Close Reading Questions
Read paragraph 7-16 closely and answer the following questions.
7. Why do adults today expect to spend a smaller percentage of their lives in
matrimony than adults in the 1950s?
a. ____________________________________________
b. ____________________________________________
8. In paragraphs 8 and 9 the writer describes an increase in three different
aspects relating to marriage. What are they?
a. _____________________
b. _____________________
c. _____________________
9. Mark (√) the statements that are true regarding the new paths for building a
family since the late 1990s:
___ a. African-American women are as likely as white women to be married at
age 20-24.
___ b. 33% of all white women are already married by the time they are 24.
___ c. The vast majority of both African-American and white women is expected
to be married by age 35-39.
___ d. Divorce rates are higher among African-Americans than among whites.
___ e. Nonmarital fertility is less likely to among whites than among AfricanAmericans.
10. Which statement best reflects the attitude of the general American society?
a. They devalue the institution of marriage and thus, postpone marriage.
b. They are more open about marital infidelity and extramarital affairs.
c. They approve less of premarital sex. and extramarital fertility
d. They strongly believe that marriage offers positive opportunities.
11. Fill in the gaps in the following sentences with the words More / Less
according to paragraph 15:
a. People with high incomes were ___________ interested in marriage
than people with low incomes.
b. African Americans were _____________ open to sharing a home
before marriage than Hispanics.
c. Whites were ______________ open to divorce than African Americans.
12. Which transformation will decrease the relevance of the normative order of
marriage before childbearing?
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________