Advertisement

Policy Sciences

, Volume 40, Issue 3, pp 241–259 | Cite as

Do government sponsored marriage promotion policies place undue pressure on individual rights?

  • Karen StrueningEmail author
Article

Abstract

The dominance of social science research in the debate over the Bush Administration’s Healthy Marriage Initiative may explain why questions regarding the proper role of government in regulating adult intimacy have received little attention. Social science research focuses on outcomes such as well-being and health. In contrast, rights-based legal theory considers whether state action undermines the rights of individuals. In this article, I intend to shift the debate over marriage promotion policy from questions of child well-being to questions of individual rights. I will ask the following questions: Do individuals have a liberty interest in making their own choices about intimate relationships, such as marriage? Do federally-financed (and frequently state-run) marriage programs compromise this liberty interest? Are there any constitutional grounds for objecting to marriage promotion policy?

Keywords

Marriage promotion policy Healthy marriage initiative Freedom of intimate association Individual rights Constitutional law Privacy and sexual conduct jurisprudence 

References

  1. Acs, G., & Nelson, S. (2002). What do ‘I Do’s’ do? Potential benefits of marriage for cohabiting couples with children. Assessing the new federalism policy brief B–48 Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.Google Scholar
  2. Administration for Children and Families, Healthy Marriage Initiative. 2006. Healthy marriage initiative achievements and accomplishments, 2002–2005. Available at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/healthymarriage/pdf/community2006.pdf. Accessed on: February 25, 2007.
  3. Amato, P. R. (2005). The impact of family formation change on the cognitive, social and emotional well-being of the next generation. The Future of Children, 15, 75–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amato, P. R., & Keith, B. (1991). Parental divorce and the well-being of children: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 26–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Associated Press. 2001. Laws discouraging divorce spreading slowly if at all, Los Angeles Times, February 11, A41.Google Scholar
  6. Cherlin, A. J. (2003). Should the government promote marriage? Contexts, 2, 22–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cherlin, A. J., Chase-Lansdale, P. L., & MacRae, C. (1998). Effects of parental divorce on mental health throughout the life course. American Sociological Review, 63, 239–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coontz, S. (2006). Marriage, a history: From obedience to intimacy or how love conquered marriage. New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar
  9. Coontz, S., & Folbre, N. (2002). Marriage, poverty and public policy. Available at: http://www.contemporaryfamilies.org/briefing.html. Accessed on: May 24, 2004.
  10. Cossman, B. (2005). Contesting conservatisms, family feuds and the privatization of dependency. American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy, and Law, 13, 415.Google Scholar
  11. Duggan, L. (2004). Holy matrimony!, The Nation, March 15. Available at: http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml/!=20040315&s=duggan. Accessed on: June 6, 2004.
  12. Duncan G. J., & Brooks-Gunn J. (Eds.). (1999). Consequences of growing up poor. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  13. Dworkin, R. (1977). What right do we have? In Taking rights seriously. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Dworkin, R. (1981a). What is equality? Part I: Equality of welfare. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 10, 185–246.Google Scholar
  15. Dworkin, R. (1981b). What is equality? Part II: Equality of resources. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 10, 185–246.Google Scholar
  16. Dye, J. L. (2004). Fertility of American women: June 2004, Current Population Reports, P20–555, Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau, 2005.Google Scholar
  17. Edin, K., & Kefalas, M. (2005). Promises I can keep: Why poor women put motherhood before marriage. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  18. Edin, K., & Reed, J. M. (2005). Why don’t they just get married? Barriers to marriage among the disadvantaged. The Future of Children, 15, 117–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fagan, P. F. (2001). Encouraging marriage and discouraging divorce. Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation. Available at: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Family/BG1421.cfm. Accessed on: February 19, 2007.
  20. Fineman, M. A. (1995). The neutered mother, the sexual family and other twentieth century tragedies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Gallagher, M. (2004). Can government strengthen marriage? Evidence from the social sciences, National Fatherhood Initiative, Institute for Marriage and Public Policy and Institute on American Values. Available at: www.americanvalues.org. Accessed on: February 18, 2007.
  22. Galston, W. A. (1991). Liberal purposes: Goods, virtues and diversity in the liberal state. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Horn, W. F. (2001). Wedding bell blues and welfare reform. The Brookings Review, 19, 39–42.Google Scholar
  24. Hsu, S. S. (2005). Marriage fund for poor proposed. The Washington Post, July 22, B05.Google Scholar
  25. Hughes, C. (2007). On heels of success, marriage supporters lobby for more welfare dollars, The Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy. Available at: http://www.religionandsocialpolicy.org/news/article.cfm?id=5924. Accessed on: February 20, 2007.
  26. Jackson, B. (2006). Compassion capital fund offers over $50 million to faith-based and community groups, The Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy. Available at: http://www.religionandsocialpolicy.org/news/article.cfm?id=4307. Accessed on: February 12, 2007.
  27. Jones-DeWeever, A. (2002). Marriage promotion and low-income communities: An examination of real needs and real solutions, briefing paper. Washington: Institute For Women’s Policy Research.Google Scholar
  28. Kaplan, M. B. (1997). Sexual justice. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Karst, K. L. (1980). The freedom of intimate association. Yale Law Journal, 89, 624–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Leiwant, S. (2003). Testimony of NOW legal defense and education fund on “welfare reform reauthorization”, Submitted to the United States Senate Finance Committee, Hearing on ‘Welfare Reform Reauthorization”, held on March 12, 2003. Available at: www.legalmomentum.org/issues/wel/marriagepromotion.shtml.
  31. McClain, L. C. (2006). The place of families. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  32. McLanahan, S., & Sandefur, G. (1994). Growing up with a single parent: What helps, what hurts. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Milbank, D. (1996). Blame game: No-fault divorce law is assailed in Michigan and debate heats up. Wall Street Journal, January 5.Google Scholar
  34. Mink, G. (1998). Welfare’s end, Ithaca. New York: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Nedelsky, J. (1989). Reconceiving autonomy: Sources, thought and possibilities. Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, 1, 34.Google Scholar
  36. Office of Family Assistance, Department of Health and Human Services. 2007. Healthy marriage and promoting responsible fatherhood initiatives. Available at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/hmabstracts/summary.htm . Accessed on February 20, 2007.
  37. Okin, S. M. (1989). Justice, gender and the family. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  38. Ooms, T. (2002a). Marriage and the government: Strange bedfellows? Couples and marriage policy brief no. 1. Washington: Center for Law and Social Policy.Google Scholar
  39. Ooms, T. (2002b). Marriage plus. The American Prospect, 13, 24–29.Google Scholar
  40. Ooms, T., Bouchet, S., & Parke, M. (2004). Beyond marriage licenses: Efforts in states to strengthen marriage and two-parent families. Washington: Center for Law and Social Policy.Google Scholar
  41. Parke, M. (2003). Are married parents really better for children? Couples and Marriage Policy Brief No. 3. Washington, DC: Center for Law and Policy.Google Scholar
  42. Pear, R., & Kirkpatrick, D. D. (2004). Bush plans $1.5 billion drive for promotion of marriage. New York Times, January 14.Google Scholar
  43. Polikoff, N. (2004). Making marriage matter less: The ALI domestic partner principles are one step in the right direction. University of Chicago Legal Forum 353.Google Scholar
  44. Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Roberts, P. (2006). Update on the marriage and fatherhood provisions of the 2006 federal budget and the 2007 budget proposal. Washington: Center for Law and Social Policy.Google Scholar
  46. Sack, K. (1997). Louisiana approves measure to tighten marriage bonds. New York Times, June 24, A1.Google Scholar
  47. Schott, L. (2002). TANF reauthorization: The congressional divide over TANF authorization. Seattle Journal of Social Justice, 1, 427–434.Google Scholar
  48. Shanley, M. L. (2001). Making babies, making families. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  49. Shanley, M. L. (2004). Just marriage. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Struening, K. (2002). New family values: Liberty, equality, diversity. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  51. Wilcox, B. W. 2002. Sacred vows, public purposes: Religion, the marriage movement and marriage policy, the pew forum on religion and politics. Available at: http://pewforum.org/publications/reports/marriagepolicy.pdf. Accessed on November 3, 2006.
  52. Zelinsky, E. A. (2006). Deregulating marriage: The pro-marriage case for abolishing civil marriage. Cardoza Law Review, 27, 1161.Google Scholar

Legal References

  1. Bowers v. Hardwick. 1986. 478 U.S. 186.Google Scholar
  2. Eisenstadt v. Baird. 1972. 405 U.S. 438.Google Scholar
  3. Griswold v. Connecticut. 1965. 381 U.S. 479.Google Scholar
  4. Goodridge v. Department of Public Health. 2003. 798 N.E.2d 941.Google Scholar
  5. Lawrence v. Texas. 2003. 539 U. S. 558.Google Scholar
  6. Loving v. Virginia. 1967. 388 U.S. 1.Google Scholar
  7. Roe v. Wade. 1973. 410 U.S. 113.Google Scholar
  8. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern PA v. Casey. 1992. 505 v. 833.Google Scholar
  9. Zablocki v. Redhail. 1978. 434 US 374.Google Scholar

Statutes

  1. District of Columbia Appropriations Act. (2005). Division B of Pub. L. No. 109–115, 119 Stat. 2396.Google Scholar
  2. Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity and Reconciliation Act. 1996. P.L. 104–193, H.R. 3734, Title 1, Section 101.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceCity College-CUNYNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations