Monday, November 30, 2009
Homework
Dont forget to bring your 3 questions from each chapter we've covered to class tonight. Also write down if you want to take the final in class on dec 14th or take it home on dec 7th and have a week to bring it back.
Nick Peterson: Article: Navigating...
Navigating Conflict when Opposites Attract
Desseret News, Nov 23 2009
Also on BYU Front Page Website
http://byunews.byu.edu/archive09-Nov-conflictstyles.aspx
Here is the link if you want the whole article. I cut a bunch out because of space.
When it comes to conflict, some people follow the phrase you should "never go to bed angry” while others would rather get their beauty sleep.
Couples with mismatched conflict styles don’t necessarily suffer a hit in relationship quality according to a new study. Professors Dean Busby and Thomas Holman of Brigham Young University's School of Family Life gathered and analyzed data from nearly 2,000 couples and report their findings in the Nov. 25 issue of the academic journal Family Process.
“The concern with mismatched couples is that they will have problems that are just never quite resolvable,” Holman said. “But it’s really about getting to a point where a problem becomes less important to them than the relationship itself.”
The study participants completed a comprehensive relationship inventory called RELATE. The survey covers more than 300 areas known to be predictive of marital quality. Upon completion of the relationship inventory, the couple gets an 11 page report with charts and graphs illustrating the strengths and weaknesses of their relationship.
Just as many couples had mismatched conflict styles as had matching approaches (not counting couples considered to have an openly “hostile” dynamic). Depending on the type of mismatch, the data show that certain pairings present bigger red flags for relationship quality than others.
“There are several couples that work through it,” Busby said. “But we know that how couples manage conflict is one of those crucial factors that can lead to divorce.”
So what are the conflict styles and which one fits your personality? And how can you work through a mismatched pairing?
The “Avoidant” The “Validating” The “Volatile” The “Hostile”
Worst (Functional) Conflict Pairing
The worst functional mismatched conflict style is the avoidant-volatile pair. The good news is that it was the least common pairing in the study, representing a little more than 1 in 10 couples.
Many couples in this situation fall into the trap of attributing their partner’s motives incorrectly. Sincere attempts to resolve a conflict and restore harmony can be construed as nagging.
Something that can help in this situation is to wait until the emotional flood subsides before trying to resolve the issue.
“One couple I taught this to were marathon runners and they would watch their wrist watches and saw that as soon as they started arguing their pulse rates jumped way up,” Holman said. “Once they had their pulse rates back down they would start the conversation again. They said it helped them to monitor their actual physiological reaction in a conflict.”
Best Conflict Pair
Several combinations promote relationship health, and the key is that at least one of the partners is the validating type. The researchers note that it’s a skill that can be learned.
“Validating types make sure that their partner feels understood and that both perspectives are attended to,” Busby said. “They are more likely to create a positive connection around that conflict.”
The researcher who pioneered these conflict styles, John Gottman, found that in a healthy conflict style there are five positive exchanges for every one negative exchange. In dysfunctional styles the negative exchanges outnumber the positive.
“The idea that we should never argue, is clearly not what we are talking about in this article,” Busby said. “It’s that you have to find a way to work together so that you can resolve problems with a style that fits for both of you.”
Posted by Nick Peterson
I liked this for two reasons, first, we talked about going to bed angry a few weeks ago. Second, we talked about communication and different types of ways people can control. This article mentions many of the same things our book does.
Desseret News, Nov 23 2009
Also on BYU Front Page Website
http://byunews.byu.edu/archive09-Nov-conflictstyles.aspx
Here is the link if you want the whole article. I cut a bunch out because of space.
When it comes to conflict, some people follow the phrase you should "never go to bed angry” while others would rather get their beauty sleep.
Couples with mismatched conflict styles don’t necessarily suffer a hit in relationship quality according to a new study. Professors Dean Busby and Thomas Holman of Brigham Young University's School of Family Life gathered and analyzed data from nearly 2,000 couples and report their findings in the Nov. 25 issue of the academic journal Family Process.
“The concern with mismatched couples is that they will have problems that are just never quite resolvable,” Holman said. “But it’s really about getting to a point where a problem becomes less important to them than the relationship itself.”
The study participants completed a comprehensive relationship inventory called RELATE. The survey covers more than 300 areas known to be predictive of marital quality. Upon completion of the relationship inventory, the couple gets an 11 page report with charts and graphs illustrating the strengths and weaknesses of their relationship.
Just as many couples had mismatched conflict styles as had matching approaches (not counting couples considered to have an openly “hostile” dynamic). Depending on the type of mismatch, the data show that certain pairings present bigger red flags for relationship quality than others.
“There are several couples that work through it,” Busby said. “But we know that how couples manage conflict is one of those crucial factors that can lead to divorce.”
So what are the conflict styles and which one fits your personality? And how can you work through a mismatched pairing?
The “Avoidant” The “Validating” The “Volatile” The “Hostile”
Worst (Functional) Conflict Pairing
The worst functional mismatched conflict style is the avoidant-volatile pair. The good news is that it was the least common pairing in the study, representing a little more than 1 in 10 couples.
Many couples in this situation fall into the trap of attributing their partner’s motives incorrectly. Sincere attempts to resolve a conflict and restore harmony can be construed as nagging.
Something that can help in this situation is to wait until the emotional flood subsides before trying to resolve the issue.
“One couple I taught this to were marathon runners and they would watch their wrist watches and saw that as soon as they started arguing their pulse rates jumped way up,” Holman said. “Once they had their pulse rates back down they would start the conversation again. They said it helped them to monitor their actual physiological reaction in a conflict.”
Best Conflict Pair
Several combinations promote relationship health, and the key is that at least one of the partners is the validating type. The researchers note that it’s a skill that can be learned.
“Validating types make sure that their partner feels understood and that both perspectives are attended to,” Busby said. “They are more likely to create a positive connection around that conflict.”
The researcher who pioneered these conflict styles, John Gottman, found that in a healthy conflict style there are five positive exchanges for every one negative exchange. In dysfunctional styles the negative exchanges outnumber the positive.
“The idea that we should never argue, is clearly not what we are talking about in this article,” Busby said. “It’s that you have to find a way to work together so that you can resolve problems with a style that fits for both of you.”
Posted by Nick Peterson
I liked this for two reasons, first, we talked about going to bed angry a few weeks ago. Second, we talked about communication and different types of ways people can control. This article mentions many of the same things our book does.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
I hope I'm doing this right...
PROVO -- The average couple attending a premarital education program tends to experience about a 30 percent increase in measures of marital strength, according to a review of 23 studies on the effectiveness of such programs.
Study co-authors Jason S. Carroll of Brigham Young University and William J. Doherty of the University of Minnesota announce their findings in the feature article of the April issue of the journal Family Relations.
"After participating in these programs, couples reported or were observed to be better at resolving problems using effective communication styles, and on average they reported higher levels of relationship quality," said Carroll, a BYU assistant professor of marriage, family and human development.
"They feel a higher sense of partnership and report a higher level of adjustment to married life than couples who did not receive premarital education."
Carroll and Doherty's meta-analysis used statistical measurements to combine the effects noted by 23 studies spanning the past 30 years. Most studies compared engaged or dating couples who participated in various types of premarital education with control groups of similar couples who did not.
"The evidence indicates that premarital education is a good investment for couples who are serious about preparing for a lifelong marriage and not just a one-day wedding," said Doherty, professor and director of the marriage and family therapy program at the U of M.
"It also supports state legislation such as Minnesota's statute that gives a waiver of marriage license fees for couples who participate in a high-quality premarital education program."
The impact of premarital education programs is similar to the effect of other types of marital intervention like counseling for couples already married. The similarity is surprising to Carroll, though, since most of the studies he analyzed measured outcomes only six months to a year after marriage and studied couples who felt their relationships were already strong.
"Couples didn't come into these programs believing they needed a major overhaul -- their motivation for change is even a bit muted, yet they are still experiencing a measurable level of improvement," Carroll said. "Despite being oriented toward long-term preparation, these programs had an immediate, positive effect on relationships."
Carroll discounted the possibility that couples who sought premarital education achieved an improvement because they were more motivated. One of the studies included in the analysis found that couples who participate in premarital education are similar to couples who do not.
Noting that 93 percent of Americans rate a happy marriage as one of their most important objectives in life, Carroll believes there is a need for an increased emphasis on premarital education among couples, government and society.
"The evidence is compelling enough that we should move forward with what we know, and that could happen at a number of levels," Carroll said, recommending any or all of the following to couples considering marriage:
* Participate in a formal premarital education program or class.
* Together, seek premarital advice from a counselor or religious leader.
* Complete a couple assessment questionnaire to evaluate relationship strengths and challenges.
* Read a book together about how to build a successful marriage.
"Communities can provide premarital education, whether through church groups, universities, high schools, employers or health care providers," Carroll said.
Citing numerous other studies that establish marriage's emotional, economic and health benefits, Carroll believes the union is important enough to the nation to warrant increased government funding of premarital education programs and further research to improve them.
"Marriage is a bedrock institution in our society that we rely upon to train children, socialize citizens and care for the needs of our communities," he said. "While we still have work to do to more fully refine and improve marriage education programs, we now have strong evidence that it is worthwhile for couples to get involved with educational programs aimed at helping their marriage get off to a good start."
Posted by Daniel Carrick
Study co-authors Jason S. Carroll of Brigham Young University and William J. Doherty of the University of Minnesota announce their findings in the feature article of the April issue of the journal Family Relations.
"After participating in these programs, couples reported or were observed to be better at resolving problems using effective communication styles, and on average they reported higher levels of relationship quality," said Carroll, a BYU assistant professor of marriage, family and human development.
"They feel a higher sense of partnership and report a higher level of adjustment to married life than couples who did not receive premarital education."
Carroll and Doherty's meta-analysis used statistical measurements to combine the effects noted by 23 studies spanning the past 30 years. Most studies compared engaged or dating couples who participated in various types of premarital education with control groups of similar couples who did not.
"The evidence indicates that premarital education is a good investment for couples who are serious about preparing for a lifelong marriage and not just a one-day wedding," said Doherty, professor and director of the marriage and family therapy program at the U of M.
"It also supports state legislation such as Minnesota's statute that gives a waiver of marriage license fees for couples who participate in a high-quality premarital education program."
The impact of premarital education programs is similar to the effect of other types of marital intervention like counseling for couples already married. The similarity is surprising to Carroll, though, since most of the studies he analyzed measured outcomes only six months to a year after marriage and studied couples who felt their relationships were already strong.
"Couples didn't come into these programs believing they needed a major overhaul -- their motivation for change is even a bit muted, yet they are still experiencing a measurable level of improvement," Carroll said. "Despite being oriented toward long-term preparation, these programs had an immediate, positive effect on relationships."
Carroll discounted the possibility that couples who sought premarital education achieved an improvement because they were more motivated. One of the studies included in the analysis found that couples who participate in premarital education are similar to couples who do not.
Noting that 93 percent of Americans rate a happy marriage as one of their most important objectives in life, Carroll believes there is a need for an increased emphasis on premarital education among couples, government and society.
"The evidence is compelling enough that we should move forward with what we know, and that could happen at a number of levels," Carroll said, recommending any or all of the following to couples considering marriage:
* Participate in a formal premarital education program or class.
* Together, seek premarital advice from a counselor or religious leader.
* Complete a couple assessment questionnaire to evaluate relationship strengths and challenges.
* Read a book together about how to build a successful marriage.
"Communities can provide premarital education, whether through church groups, universities, high schools, employers or health care providers," Carroll said.
Citing numerous other studies that establish marriage's emotional, economic and health benefits, Carroll believes the union is important enough to the nation to warrant increased government funding of premarital education programs and further research to improve them.
"Marriage is a bedrock institution in our society that we rely upon to train children, socialize citizens and care for the needs of our communities," he said. "While we still have work to do to more fully refine and improve marriage education programs, we now have strong evidence that it is worthwhile for couples to get involved with educational programs aimed at helping their marriage get off to a good start."
Posted by Daniel Carrick
WASHINGTON -- Couples in the Northeast are hearing wedding bells later than men and women elsewhere in the country -- especially Utah, where younger newlyweds are the norm.
A Census Bureau study being released Thursday found many regional differences in the marrying habits of Americans, with those near the East and West coasts generally waiting longer to get married than those in Middle America. The study also found that Southerners are the least likely to live together without getting married.
"Later marriage is very strongly associated with higher levels of education," said David Popenoe, co-director of the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University. "That's why people in the Northeast have such a late age of marriage."
The age when couples get married can also be influenced by religion and whether they are willing to live together without getting married, Popenoe said.
"It delays marriage," Popenoe said of living together before marriage. "Men marry too late from the point of view of women, especially educated men. It leaves more women single, or marrying beyond the age of childbirth."
The median age for first marriages in the United States is 26.7 years for men and 25.1 for women. That is roughly a year older than a decade ago for both, said Martin O'Connell, chief of the Census Bureau's fertility and family statistics branch.
Men wait longer than women to marry in every state, and no one gets married younger than couples in Utah, where the median age is 21.9 for women and 23.9 for men. At the other end of the spectrum, men and women in Washington, D.C., both wait until they are about 30.
"Big cities tend to have high ages for marriage," said Zhenchao Qian, associate professor of sociology at Ohio State University.
The Census Bureau analyzed data from the American Community Survey from 2000 to 2003, developing state-by-state averages on marriage and fertility for the first time.
Among the study's findings: 29 percent of all new mothers were unmarried. Among the unmarried mothers, half were poor, compared with 12 percent of married mothers who lived in poverty.
"Single parenthood and poverty are about as closely related as you can get," Popenoe said.
The states with the most unwed new mothers also tended to be the ones with the highest percentage of new mothers living in poverty.
Washington, D.C., had the highest percentage of new mothers who were unmarried, at 53.4 percent. The city also had the highest percentage of new mothers living in poverty, at 36.3 percent. West Virginia, Mississippi and Louisiana also had high percentages of unwed mothers living below the poverty line.
Among the study's other findings:
Maine had the highest percentage of households with unmarried couples, at 7.3 percent, while Alabama had the lowest, at 3 percent.
One-fifth of all new mothers in California either did not speak English well or did not speak it at all.
Fifteen percent of all new mothers in the U.S. were not citizens.
Hispanics had the highest birth rates, while non-Hispanic whites had the lowest.
Posted by Daniel Carrick
A Census Bureau study being released Thursday found many regional differences in the marrying habits of Americans, with those near the East and West coasts generally waiting longer to get married than those in Middle America. The study also found that Southerners are the least likely to live together without getting married.
"Later marriage is very strongly associated with higher levels of education," said David Popenoe, co-director of the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University. "That's why people in the Northeast have such a late age of marriage."
The age when couples get married can also be influenced by religion and whether they are willing to live together without getting married, Popenoe said.
"It delays marriage," Popenoe said of living together before marriage. "Men marry too late from the point of view of women, especially educated men. It leaves more women single, or marrying beyond the age of childbirth."
The median age for first marriages in the United States is 26.7 years for men and 25.1 for women. That is roughly a year older than a decade ago for both, said Martin O'Connell, chief of the Census Bureau's fertility and family statistics branch.
Men wait longer than women to marry in every state, and no one gets married younger than couples in Utah, where the median age is 21.9 for women and 23.9 for men. At the other end of the spectrum, men and women in Washington, D.C., both wait until they are about 30.
"Big cities tend to have high ages for marriage," said Zhenchao Qian, associate professor of sociology at Ohio State University.
The Census Bureau analyzed data from the American Community Survey from 2000 to 2003, developing state-by-state averages on marriage and fertility for the first time.
Among the study's findings: 29 percent of all new mothers were unmarried. Among the unmarried mothers, half were poor, compared with 12 percent of married mothers who lived in poverty.
"Single parenthood and poverty are about as closely related as you can get," Popenoe said.
The states with the most unwed new mothers also tended to be the ones with the highest percentage of new mothers living in poverty.
Washington, D.C., had the highest percentage of new mothers who were unmarried, at 53.4 percent. The city also had the highest percentage of new mothers living in poverty, at 36.3 percent. West Virginia, Mississippi and Louisiana also had high percentages of unwed mothers living below the poverty line.
Among the study's other findings:
Maine had the highest percentage of households with unmarried couples, at 7.3 percent, while Alabama had the lowest, at 3 percent.
One-fifth of all new mothers in California either did not speak English well or did not speak it at all.
Fifteen percent of all new mothers in the U.S. were not citizens.
Hispanics had the highest birth rates, while non-Hispanic whites had the lowest.
Posted by Daniel Carrick
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Benefits of Healthy Marriages (Marriage Statistics)
Having a healthy marriage is not just a luxury item, it's something we should strive for and expect. Marriage researchers have determined that having a healthy, happy, fulfilling marriage benefits all family members. Below are marriage statistics from research by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Healthy Marriage Initiative.
We believe God knew these benefits existed with the marriage of man and woman and that is why He instituted it. Modern research simply echoes what God says in His Word.
Benefits of Healthy Marriages For Children and Youth (Marriage Statistics)
Researchers have found many benefits for children and youth who are raised by parents in healthy marriages, compared to unhealthy marriages, including the following statistics:
More likely to attend college
More likely to succeed academically
Physically healthier
Emotionally healthier
Less likely to abuse drugs or alcohol
Less likely to commit delinquent behaviors
Less likely to be a victim of physical or sexual abuse
Be open and honest with the couples you help
Seek wisdom and understanding from God
Have a better relationship with their mothers and fathers
Decreases their chances of divorcing when they get marriedp
Less likely to become pregnant as a teenager, or impregnate someone
Less likely to be sexually active as teenagers
Less likely to contract STD's
Less likely to be raised in poverty
Benefits of a Healthy Marriage for Women
Researchers have found many benefits for women who are in healthy marriages, compared to unhealthy marriages, including the following statistics:
More satisfying relationship
Emotionally healthier
Wealthier
Less likely to be victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, or other violent crimes
Less likely to attempt or commit suicide
Decrease risk of drug and alcohol abuse
Less likely to contract STD's
Less likely to remain or end up in poverty
Have better relationships with their children
Physically healthier
Benefits of a Healthy Marriage for Men
Researchers have found many benefits for men who are in healthy marriages, compared to unhealthy marriages, including the following statistics:
Live longer
Physically healthier
Wealthier
Increase in the stability of employment
Higher wages
Emotionally healthier
Decrease risk of drug and alcohol abuse
Have better relationships with their children
More satisfying sexual relationship
Less likely to commit violent crimes
Less likely to contract STD's
Less likely to attempt or commit suicide
Benefits of Healthy Marriages for Communities
Researchers have found many benefits for communities when they have a higher percentage of couples in healthy marriages, compared to unhealthy marriages, including the following statistics:
Higher rates of physically healthy citizens
Higher rates of emotionally healthy citizens
Higher rates of educated citizens
Lower domestic violence rates
Lower crime statistics
Lower teen age pregnancy rates
Lower rates of juvenile delinquency
Higher rates of home ownership
Lower rates of migration
Higher property values
Decreased need for social services etc.
Post By: Chris Hooley
We believe God knew these benefits existed with the marriage of man and woman and that is why He instituted it. Modern research simply echoes what God says in His Word.
Benefits of Healthy Marriages For Children and Youth (Marriage Statistics)
Researchers have found many benefits for children and youth who are raised by parents in healthy marriages, compared to unhealthy marriages, including the following statistics:
More likely to attend college
More likely to succeed academically
Physically healthier
Emotionally healthier
Less likely to abuse drugs or alcohol
Less likely to commit delinquent behaviors
Less likely to be a victim of physical or sexual abuse
Be open and honest with the couples you help
Seek wisdom and understanding from God
Have a better relationship with their mothers and fathers
Decreases their chances of divorcing when they get marriedp
Less likely to become pregnant as a teenager, or impregnate someone
Less likely to be sexually active as teenagers
Less likely to contract STD's
Less likely to be raised in poverty
Benefits of a Healthy Marriage for Women
Researchers have found many benefits for women who are in healthy marriages, compared to unhealthy marriages, including the following statistics:
More satisfying relationship
Emotionally healthier
Wealthier
Less likely to be victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, or other violent crimes
Less likely to attempt or commit suicide
Decrease risk of drug and alcohol abuse
Less likely to contract STD's
Less likely to remain or end up in poverty
Have better relationships with their children
Physically healthier
Benefits of a Healthy Marriage for Men
Researchers have found many benefits for men who are in healthy marriages, compared to unhealthy marriages, including the following statistics:
Live longer
Physically healthier
Wealthier
Increase in the stability of employment
Higher wages
Emotionally healthier
Decrease risk of drug and alcohol abuse
Have better relationships with their children
More satisfying sexual relationship
Less likely to commit violent crimes
Less likely to contract STD's
Less likely to attempt or commit suicide
Benefits of Healthy Marriages for Communities
Researchers have found many benefits for communities when they have a higher percentage of couples in healthy marriages, compared to unhealthy marriages, including the following statistics:
Higher rates of physically healthy citizens
Higher rates of emotionally healthy citizens
Higher rates of educated citizens
Lower domestic violence rates
Lower crime statistics
Lower teen age pregnancy rates
Lower rates of juvenile delinquency
Higher rates of home ownership
Lower rates of migration
Higher property values
Decreased need for social services etc.
Post By: Chris Hooley
Marriage quotes
The most important thing a father can do for his children is to love their mother.
Theodore Hesburgh
***************
My dad always asks my wife, "Is he treating you right?" It reminds me of my responsibility
to be a good husband.
National Fatherhood Initiative
**************
I got gaps; you got gaps; we fill each other's gaps.
Rocky
***************
Marriage, like a submarine, is only safe if you get all the way inside.
Frank Pittman
***************
If the grass looks greener on the other side of the fence, it's because
they take better care of it.
Cecil Selig
*************
"Remember, you married her, you didn't hire her!" - said to critical, controlling husband.
Dr Phil
*****************
There is a saying in social research, ‘A mother is a mother all of your life,
but a father is a father only when he has a wife,’ ”
Leah Ward Sears, chief justice of the Georgia Supreme Court
*****************
Theodore Hesburgh
***************
My dad always asks my wife, "Is he treating you right?" It reminds me of my responsibility
to be a good husband.
National Fatherhood Initiative
**************
I got gaps; you got gaps; we fill each other's gaps.
Rocky
***************
Marriage, like a submarine, is only safe if you get all the way inside.
Frank Pittman
***************
If the grass looks greener on the other side of the fence, it's because
they take better care of it.
Cecil Selig
*************
"Remember, you married her, you didn't hire her!" - said to critical, controlling husband.
Dr Phil
*****************
There is a saying in social research, ‘A mother is a mother all of your life,
but a father is a father only when he has a wife,’ ”
Leah Ward Sears, chief justice of the Georgia Supreme Court
*****************
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Many Americans are failing their children because they have already failed themselves.
Editor's note: Leah Ward Sears is a retired chief justice of the Georgia Supreme Court and is a partner at the Atlanta office of Schiff Hardin, LLP. Sears also serves as the William Thomas Sears Distinguished Fellow in Family Law at the Institute for American Values and is a visiting professor on family law issues at the University of Georgia School of Law.
Stay married if you want kids
Much has been written about the Obamas' marriage. The president and first lady have attested to the long and hard work it takes to stay involved and connected to each other while maintaining their separate identities.
Undoubtedly, sustaining a marriage is sometimes hard, as the first lady noted.
But the Obamas are an excellent example of how the fruits of marriage can be realized by those who are committed to reconciling their differences and "toughing it out."
The problem is that, today, too few couples are willing to make such a commitment. Ever since California became the first state to sanction no-fault divorce law 40 years ago, with every state in essence following suit -- some with certain stipulations -- the most fundamental thread in the fabric of our American values, the institution of marriage, has been unraveling.
Before I retired from the bench a few months ago, it was my job as a judge to sort through all the issues rising, in part, from the growing lack of reverence many Americans have for marriage. In court, I often saw humanity's worst behavior. I also dealt with teenage mothers, absentee fathers and parents who have never been married, often by choice.
I saw parents who didn't seem able or willing to connect their children's problems with their own failure to provide their children with the necessary road map to self-sufficiency and productivity. And these families didn't just show up in my courtroom. They exist everywhere.
The U.S. Marriage Index shows a dramatic decline in the health of marriage in recent decades. America is a society that requires its citizens to make choices and penalizes them, often harshly, for the wrong ones.
As a child grows up, the guideposts should be: finish school; become a productive citizen; marry a person you want to spend your life with; and, if you want, have children. In that order.
But many Americans are failing their children because they have already failed themselves. They often enter the court system with domestic problems and low-wage jobs, slim educational credentials and no life partners.
It broke my heart to see so many children raising babies before they are ready: young people who made no connection between the poverty and chaos in their lives and the choices they had made.
My options in addressing these problems from the bench were limited. The courtroom is seldom the stage at which social change takes place. By the time these cases appeared in court, so much damage had already been done.
What our society needs is a solution on the front end. We should begin by considering six points:
Let's stop glorifying single parenthood. Celebrity unwed parents like "Brangelina," Halle Berry and the late Michael Jackson make matrimony seem unimportant and suggest that having a baby as a single parent is "cool" and even easy.
Our children need a reality check. Many young people think that having a child means that they will finally have someone who will unconditionally love them. They don't consider, however, that babies do not and cannot love anyone but themselves, and they also take a tremendous amount of time, attention and resources.
Memo to single mothers by choice: When you decide to have a child alone in order to fulfill your deep need to parent, you may be deliberately substituting your emotional loss for that of your child, who will have to grow up without a father.
We need to respect the role of men as husbands and fathers when they do right by their families. Boys and girls need their fathers to love them and to model the sacrifice and commitment that bonds a married couple. Men who "man up" like this need our support and encouragement.
Our state legislatures should revisit no-fault divorce laws that allow one party to a marriage to opt out of it too easily.
Change now can result in change in the future. Although there are many success stories, children who grow up in single-parent families are less likely to enjoy the financial security, educational success and social skills of children living with their married parents. This only continues to fuel poverty and inequality in our country.
By the way, I'm neither a strait-laced goody-two-shoes nor Archie Bunker in heels. I would never condemn anyone who has had a child out of wedlock or who has gone through a divorce.
I was a divorcee, and with two children, I was also a single mom. So I know that these things happen. Indeed, sometimes they must happen. And because they do, we need to respect every family form.
But I've been around long enough to know that as marriage goes, so go our children. And with them goes the future of our country. Consequently, everyone -- rich or poor, single or married or divorced, gay or straight, all races and colors, from the first family to the single-parent family -- benefits from a vibrant marriage culture.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/11/09/sears.obama.marriage/index.html
*Finally someone with authority telling it like it really is.
-Tiffany Yack
Stay married if you want kids
Much has been written about the Obamas' marriage. The president and first lady have attested to the long and hard work it takes to stay involved and connected to each other while maintaining their separate identities.
Undoubtedly, sustaining a marriage is sometimes hard, as the first lady noted.
But the Obamas are an excellent example of how the fruits of marriage can be realized by those who are committed to reconciling their differences and "toughing it out."
The problem is that, today, too few couples are willing to make such a commitment. Ever since California became the first state to sanction no-fault divorce law 40 years ago, with every state in essence following suit -- some with certain stipulations -- the most fundamental thread in the fabric of our American values, the institution of marriage, has been unraveling.
Before I retired from the bench a few months ago, it was my job as a judge to sort through all the issues rising, in part, from the growing lack of reverence many Americans have for marriage. In court, I often saw humanity's worst behavior. I also dealt with teenage mothers, absentee fathers and parents who have never been married, often by choice.
I saw parents who didn't seem able or willing to connect their children's problems with their own failure to provide their children with the necessary road map to self-sufficiency and productivity. And these families didn't just show up in my courtroom. They exist everywhere.
The U.S. Marriage Index shows a dramatic decline in the health of marriage in recent decades. America is a society that requires its citizens to make choices and penalizes them, often harshly, for the wrong ones.
As a child grows up, the guideposts should be: finish school; become a productive citizen; marry a person you want to spend your life with; and, if you want, have children. In that order.
But many Americans are failing their children because they have already failed themselves. They often enter the court system with domestic problems and low-wage jobs, slim educational credentials and no life partners.
It broke my heart to see so many children raising babies before they are ready: young people who made no connection between the poverty and chaos in their lives and the choices they had made.
My options in addressing these problems from the bench were limited. The courtroom is seldom the stage at which social change takes place. By the time these cases appeared in court, so much damage had already been done.
What our society needs is a solution on the front end. We should begin by considering six points:
Let's stop glorifying single parenthood. Celebrity unwed parents like "Brangelina," Halle Berry and the late Michael Jackson make matrimony seem unimportant and suggest that having a baby as a single parent is "cool" and even easy.
Our children need a reality check. Many young people think that having a child means that they will finally have someone who will unconditionally love them. They don't consider, however, that babies do not and cannot love anyone but themselves, and they also take a tremendous amount of time, attention and resources.
Memo to single mothers by choice: When you decide to have a child alone in order to fulfill your deep need to parent, you may be deliberately substituting your emotional loss for that of your child, who will have to grow up without a father.
We need to respect the role of men as husbands and fathers when they do right by their families. Boys and girls need their fathers to love them and to model the sacrifice and commitment that bonds a married couple. Men who "man up" like this need our support and encouragement.
Our state legislatures should revisit no-fault divorce laws that allow one party to a marriage to opt out of it too easily.
Change now can result in change in the future. Although there are many success stories, children who grow up in single-parent families are less likely to enjoy the financial security, educational success and social skills of children living with their married parents. This only continues to fuel poverty and inequality in our country.
By the way, I'm neither a strait-laced goody-two-shoes nor Archie Bunker in heels. I would never condemn anyone who has had a child out of wedlock or who has gone through a divorce.
I was a divorcee, and with two children, I was also a single mom. So I know that these things happen. Indeed, sometimes they must happen. And because they do, we need to respect every family form.
But I've been around long enough to know that as marriage goes, so go our children. And with them goes the future of our country. Consequently, everyone -- rich or poor, single or married or divorced, gay or straight, all races and colors, from the first family to the single-parent family -- benefits from a vibrant marriage culture.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/11/09/sears.obama.marriage/index.html
*Finally someone with authority telling it like it really is.
-Tiffany Yack
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Homework
use the "I feel" statement and write 1/2 -1 page of how you used it and if it made a difference.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)