The Challenges of Offering Relationship and Marriage Education to Low-Income Populations

Relationship and marriage education has been primarily developed for and offered to middle-class committed couples. Increasing government funding of these programs raises questions about the extent to which these curricula and programs need to be adapted for low-income populations. We review the limited body of relevant research and program experience to identify the challenges and guiding principles that need to be addressed when offering these programs to more diverse populations. Key Words: low income, marriage education, minorities, programs, relationship education. Marriage is now on the public policy agenda. Federal and state public officials have discovered the field of couples and marriage education and are beginning to invest significant public dollars in demonstration programs and research designed to promote "healthy marriage" (Brotherson & Duncan, 2004; Ooms, Bouchet, & Parke, 2004). If the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) welfare program is reauthorized as expected in 2004, there will be a major infusion of public dollars into the field-up to $300 million annually for 5 years-and much of it is expected to be targeted to low-income communities. Of the nine types of marriage activities to be funded in the TANF legislation, seven fall into the category of couples and marriage education. (For the history of the evolution of the federal government interest in marriage, the family-formation goals in the TANF program, and list of allowable activities in the TANF reauthorization legislation, see Ooms, Bouchet, & Parke, 2004, pp. 5, 7 and Brotherson & Duncan). Although policymakers are now interested in strengthening marriage in low-income populations, most traditional couples and marriage education programs have been developed for and mostly offered to Caucasian middle-class couples who are committed to each other-either engaged or already married. This raises the issue of whether existing program models and curricula are appropriate for the needs and circumstances of low-income couples from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds-many of whom are unmarried parents-and, if not, in what ways they need to be adapted (Dion et al., 2002). Here we address the following questions: What are the patterns of marriage, couple relationships, and family formation in low-income communities? What are some of the factors that appear to explain their much lower rates of marriage? Are low-income couples interested in marriage education? What is the experience thus far with providing marriage education to low-income populations? What new efforts are under way? What has been learned about how programs and curricula might be designed to meet the needs of low-income populations? Government and Marriage: Strange Bedfellows? Before addressing these questions, we acknowledge the vigorous national debate about the appropriateness of government intervention in marriage. Some believe that government has no business promoting marriage, and they view marriage as a private issue best left to individuals and religious authorities. Others believe that the negative effects of the rise in single parenthood on child well-being offer a compelling justification for government involvement (Ooms, 2002b). Among those who are persuaded that some government action may be needed, some have criticized as too narrow the federal government's emphasis on couples and marriage education as the primary marriage promotion strategy (Levin-Epstein, Ooms, Parke, Roberts, & Turetsky, 2002). Skeptics question whether taxpayer money should be spent on untested programs to promote marriage among the poor instead of on the better paying jobs, child care, housing, and health care they desperately need. Supporters assert that investments in programs to find out how to strengthen marriage are long overdue and, if successful, would help reduce child poverty. Meanwhile, three state survey indicate that low-income populations highly value marriage, with the large majority expressing interest in learning how to improve their relationships through educational programs (see discussion on p. …