Haltzman Survey/ Evansville / Fireproof Date / Super-Duper Program / Gungor Radio / Teen Marriage - 9/8/08

[Smartmarriages]

- SCOTT HALTZMAN SURVEY
- EVANSVILLE COUPLES ON MARRIAGE EDUCATION
- FIREPROOF GREAT DATE
- SUPER-DUPER MARRIAGE PROGRAM
- GUNGOR LAUNCHES WEEKLY LAUGH YOUR WAY ON-LINE RADIO SHOW
- TEENAGE MARRIAGES AND PICTURE-PERFECT FAMILIES

######################
- SCOTT HALTZMAN SURVEY

Scott Haltzman is conducting a survey as the basis for his latest book The
Secrets of Happy Families.  The survey explores family structure and
attitudes and will take less than five minutes to complete. In addition to
the satisfaction of helping Scott on another great book you'll gain insight
and awareness about your family AND the chance to win a set of his books:
The Secrets of Happily Married Men and The Secrets of Happily Married Women.
Get to the survey by going to http://www.drscott.com/ and clicking on the
button that says, Win Free Books. While you're there, check out Scott's
great website.   - diane

#########################
- EVANSVILLE COUPLES ON MARRIAGE EDUCATION
I've just added a link from the Smart Marriages video page to a wonderful
segment produced by Community Marriage Builders of Evansville Indiana.  It's
terrific and I encourage you to watch.  Also, send me the urls to your clips
so I can get them posted. - diane

http://www.youtube.com/CMBevansville

#########################
- FIREPROOF GREAT DATE

Hi Diane, Those who are already using the 10 Great Dates program or who are
interested in launching it in their church or community may be interested in
knowing about the Official FIREPROOF 10 Great Dates Exercise. At the request
of producers we put together a special guide so couples can go out after the
movie and talk. The date is non-threatening, safe, husband-friendly, and can
be a perfect segue to launching a marriage group in your church. People can
download the FREE FIREPROOF GREAT DATE at www.marriagealive.com (Click on
download date under FIREPROOF on the home page.) You can also download it at
http://www.fireproofmymarriage.com/couples/10greatdates/ For more
information or to learn what others are doing, call or contact us through
our website.
Claudia & Dave Arp
703-444-4505
http://www.marriagealive.com

#############################

- SUPER-DUPER MARRIAGE PROGRAM

Diane,  Last Spring I took over Marriage Ministries at our church and I'm
building an entire new Marriage Lovers program built on 5 basic concepts:
 
1. A $300 fee to take any program. If a couple completes it, including the
20 item pre-, post-, and 6 month follow-up, we will refund their money in
American Express gift certificates they can spend on their marriage anywhere
in the world. Why $300? Because that is what it would cost to do their own
divorce, including filing fees, in Orange County.
 
2. All curricula have been redesigned as stand alone classes that allow
needy couples to enter a program at any time. No more waiting for the class
they need to come around.
 
3. Free, In-home babysitting. A group of trained, certified, and
fingerprinted husband-wife teams are prepared to come to a couple's home the
night of the class to take care of their kids for up to 3 hours (2 hours for
the class and 1 hour for the couple to have coffee afterwards in order to
debrief on what they learned). No more excuses about not being able to
attend.
 
4. All participants will have a mentor couple assigned to them who will
follow up after class completion. We currently have 80 such couples trained
and we anticipate that every one of them will be used this year. This is a
requirement to participate in our programs.
 
5. We are currently working on a 20 item questionnaire that will be
administered pre-, post-, and at 6 months to verify the benefits of what we
are offering. I'm doing my own in order to save the couple money and to give
the largest refund possible back to them.
 
In 3 or 4 years I will be able to tell you what works and what doesn't, but
one thing for sure, nobody in this area (our program is open to the public)
will ever be able to say, "It was too expensive, we couldn't afford the
babysitting, or we lost interest as we waited for the class to start."  By
the way, if you don't finish the class, we keep your money! It will be used
to offer scholarships to other couples!
 
Whatcha think? 
 
DAVID CARDER
http://www.TornAsunder.org

I think this is all very impressive and very inspiring. I'll share it with
the list in the hope you'll have many imitators. I can't wait to hear more
about it.  Maybe this is something you should present in Orlando?
- diane  

######################

- GUNGOR LAUNCHES WEEKLY LAUGH YOUR WAY ON-LINE RADIO SHOW

Mark Gungor's new weekly call-in on-line radio show launches Tuesday, Sept 9
at 10a-12pCST.  To listen just go to http://www.laughyourway.com/ and click
on the radio show logo. Email your questions to radio at laughyourway.com or
call in and talk with Mark at 866-966-MARK.

##########################

- TEENAGE MARRIAGES AND PICTURE PERFECT FAMILIES

Instead of posting the many comments on the Bristol Palin/Levi Johnston
upcoming marriage (they varied across the board with lots of opinion, heat,
emotion tossed in) I'm going to share a few articles and acknowledge that
we're a coalition made up of many different ideologies, we're all aware of
the upcoming baby and wedding plans, and we have many concerns about how
this is handled and the messages that sends. Bottom line is everyone wishes
the young couple well. -diane

Now, the Bad News on Teenage Marriage
The New York Times 
September 4, 2008
By SARAH KERSHAW

> But even those who acknowledge that teenage marriage is a risky proposition
> say it is a healthier choice for a mother and her childhood than single
> parenthood, even at 17.
> 
> ³For a teen who gets and stays married, she is dramatically increasing the
> odds that both she and her child will do well in terms of income, wealth and
> physical well being,² said W. Bradford Wilcox, an associate professor of
> sociology at the University of Virginia, ³reducing the odds that her son will
> end up in jail as a young man or that her daughter will drop out of high
> school.²

IN announcing on Monday that her daughter Bristol was five months pregnant,
Sarah Palin, John McCain¹s choice for a running mate, added a quick
qualification that might, in another era, have eliminated the potential for
embarrassment: The 17-year-old girl was to be married to the 18-year-old
father of the baby.

He would be the gentleman, she would be the lady, and with the backing of a
strong family they would do what was expected of them. That would, of
course, be consistent with the views of Ms. Palin, a mother of five children
(including one with Down syndrome) who opposes abortion.

Bristol¹s impending nuptials to Levi Johnston (no date has been given) did
not stir up nearly the same hullabaloo as the revelation of her pregnancy,
on the eve of the Republican convention. But it is teenage marriage today,
not teenage pregnancy, that is the rarity. And, statistics show, teenage
marriages tend not to endure.

The Bristol Palin drama, something of an after-school-special story running
parallel to the saga of Sarah Palin¹s nomination as the Republican candidate
for vice president, has a lot of sociologists and psychologists talking
about youth and the state of marriage.

The median marrying age for women in the late 1950s was about 19, according
to David Popenoe, co-director of the National Marriage Project at Rutgers
University and an emeritus professor of sociology there. But a marriage
between 19-year-olds ‹ or even 17- or 18-year-olds ‹ then would not have
been described as a ³teenage marriage,² he said. It was too routine to be
given a special label.

There is no way to know how many of those unions were prompted by a
pregnancy ‹ a phenomenon that has decreased sharply in the population in
recent decades as the marriage rate itself has declined, sociologists say.

Studies show that today teenage marriages are two to three times more likely
to end in divorce than are marriages between people 25 years of age and
older. The most comprehensive study on marriage and age that sociologists
cite was published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in
2001, from 1995 data, and it found that 48 percent of those who marry before
18 are likely to divorce within 10 years, compared with 24 percent of those
who marry after age 25.

³Most young women don¹t fare very well when it comes to raising a family as
a teenager, and those precious few who get married, the marriages are very
short-lived,² said Bill Albert, chief program officer for the National
Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. ³I know and respect a lot
of 17-year-olds, but I don¹t think any of them are ready to be married and
begin the lifelong task of raising a child.²

Census data on teenage marriage, from 1998, showed that only 1 percent of
15- to 17-year-olds had ever been married. But the rates were higher among
18- and 19-year-olds ‹ 6.5 percent for white women, 13.4 percent for
Hispanic women ‹ and they vary by region, with higher rates in the South and
lower rates in the Northeast. Experts say that teenage marriage tends to be
more common in religious and immigrant families, particularly among
Hispanics, and more common in so-called red states like Alaska.

Sociologists say that what drives the failure of teenage marriages ‹ and
some also say the postwar young marriage boom may have contributed to the
divorce explosion of the 1970s ‹ is the complex condition of being an
unformed adult.

³They may not know quite what they want in a lifetime partner,² Dr. Popenoe
said. ³They still often have years of education to complete, as well as
getting settled in the work world, and those two things may change their
outlook on life considerably.²

But even those who acknowledge that teenage marriage is a risky proposition
say it is a healthier choice for a mother and her childhood than single
parenthood, even at 17.

³For a teen who gets and stays married, she is dramatically increasing the
odds that both she and her child will do well in terms of income, wealth and
physical well being,² said W. Bradford Wilcox, an associate professor of
sociology at the University of Virginia, ³reducing the odds that her son
will end up in jail as a young man or that her daughter will drop out of
high school.²

The young-marriage issue highlights another debate, about the meaning of
being a teenager in the modern age. Some experts say that teenagers two or
three generations ago expected to take on more responsibility at a younger
age, and that parents and others today too often assume they cannot.

³We have this complicated idea of what it means to be a teenager,² said
Karen Sternheimer, a lecturer in sociology at the University of Southern
California. ³We¹ve redefined adolescence as an extension of childhood,
whereas it used to be a precursor to adulthood.²

Both Dr. Sternheimer and Dr. Wilcox said that the debate over whether
teenagers are prepared for marriage was being framed through the lens of a
middle-class, well-educated demographic, for whom marrying before being able
to drink legally now may look alien, or hillbillyish. In fact, they said,
18-year-olds in working-class and immigrant families in particular already
shoulder a lot of adult responsibilities, including fighting the war in
Iraq, supporting their families and raising children.

³We like to infantilize teens, or focus on their bad behavior, even though
some of them are functioning as adults,² Dr. Sternheimer said. ³We have this
image, and it¹s popular in the press. It¹s the Montel Williams, ŒHelp, my
daughter is a slut! What can I do? My teen daughter wants to get pregnant on
purpose.¹ ²

Over the last 35 years the median age for first marriages in America has
risen dramatically, from 23 for men and 21 for women in 1970 to 27.5 for men
and 25.5 for women in 2006, according to William A. Galston, a senior fellow
in governance studies at the Brookings Institution.

Mr. Galston said he believed the median would continue to rise, mirroring
that of European countries, where the age of first marriage is higher, and
that attitudes toward young marriage would become more negative. ³I do think
the trend, such as the changing role of women over all in society and the
changing role of education and training in determining life prospects, has
created a presumption in the middle class and professional classes that
early marriage is a bad thing,² he said.

But he added, ³It¹s possible to come at this question from a very different
point of view, one that is driven by duty, by moral obligation, by fidelity
to community, by keeping faith with your family. And in those circumstances,
getting married at the age of 17, if you get pregnant, may very well appear
to be the clearly preferable option.²

----------------------------
- THE PICTURE-PERFECT AMERICAN FAMILY? THESE DAYS, IT DOESN'T EXIST
The Washington Post
By Andrew J. Cherlin
September 7, 2008

With the debut of the Palins before a nationwide audience, a presidential
campaign that was supposed to be about the economy, Iraq or even race has
unexpectedly become -- for a little while, at least -- a conversation about
family. But even before the surprising news of 17-year-old Bristol Palin's
pregnancy, the Obamas, Bidens and McCains had spent an inordinate amount of
precious convention time introducing us to their loved ones: videos,
scripted shout-outs, smiling tableaus as the confetti came down. Both
parties clearly thought that it was crucial for the candidates to show how
deeply they value their family lives.

But if the candidates wished to convince viewers that their families were
just like ours, they were undone by a 21st-century reality: There is no
typical family anymore -- at least not in terms of who lives in the
household and how they are related. Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin noted as much on
Wednesday. While introducing her clan to a cheering crowd of the Republican
faithful, the GOP vice presidential nominee said: "From the inside, no
family ever seems typical. That's how it is with us."

In fact, the diversity of American households was the unspoken lesson of
both conventions, as four strikingly different kinds of families came into
view. First, the Obamas. The Democratic nominee's half-sister, Maya
Soetoro-Ng, spoke to the Denver crowd, highlighting his biracial family
background, dominated by an often single mother and a largely absent father.
Obama's wife Michelle also took a powerful turn at the podium, focusing on
her husband's biography but also playing up her own high-powered career and
modest roots. The Bidens were introduced to a national audience that week as
well, a stepfamily formed after the tragic death of the senator's first
wife. With the McCains, we see another stepfamily, formed this time after
the senator's divorce. Their family also includes Bridget, a daughter
adopted from Bangladesh. And the Palins bring to the stage two working
parents with five children, including a pregnant teenager and an infant with
Down syndrome.

Divorce itself is not new to the presidential politics -- Ronald Reagan and
John F. Kerry both campaigned with second wives by their sides -- but never
has such an extraordinary range of family histories been center stage.
ad_icon

A half-century ago, when the two-parent, breadwinner-homemaker,
first-marriage family was at its peak, all of the candidates would have
conformed to the same mold. In the 1950s, iconic TV shows -- the ones that
you can still find while channel-surfing -- celebrated the Cleavers and
their ilk. Ward went to work and earned enough so that his single paycheck
could keep June, Wally and the Beaver happily provided for at home.
Sentiment against divorce in public life was so strong that New York Gov.
Nelson Rockefeller's presidential aspirations were stymied in 1964 because
he had recently divorced and remarried.

But the Cleavers are only available in reruns now, and the prominence of the
breadwinner-homemaker family rapidly declined in the last third of the 20th
century. Married women moved into the workforce, divorce rates rose, and
more children were born outside of marriage.

That traditional family unit has been replaced by a wide variety of living
arrangements. Today, only 58 percent of children live with two married,
biological parents. Many others live with stepparents or with single
parents. Even having a pregnant teen in the home is not that unusual: About
one out of six 15-year-old girls will give birth before reaching age 20,
according to the National Center for Health Statistics.

The candidates seemed to realize that none of their families is typical in
the old sense. None of them tried to look like the '50s family. Instead,
they focused on being "typical" in a different, 21st-century sense: They
worked hard to show us how emotionally close they are.

Over the past few decades, the emotional rewards of family life have become
more important to Americans, as compared to the rewards of bringing home a
paycheck or raising children. In a 2001 national survey conducted by the
National Marriage Project, more than 80 percent of women in their 20s agreed
with the statement that it's more important "to have a husband who can
communicate about his deepest feelings than to have a husband who makes a
good living."

Personal satisfaction, the feeling that your family is helping you grow and
develop as a person, communication, openness: These are the kinds of
criteria people use in evaluating their family lives. Practical concerns
still matter, but if that's all that holds your family together these days,
people may view it askance. Given the demographic diversity of American
families, emotional closeness, not who the Census takers find in your home,
has become the new gold standard.

And so all four aspiring first and second families, despite their
differences, appealed to the voters in much the same way. Each wanted to
show how much support and warmth they provide to one other. What matters
here is not whether your current wife is your first or second but whether
you draw emotional strength from her. So Obama refers to his wife as "my
rock" and McCain says of his wife, Cindy, "she's more my inspiration than I
am hers." What matters is not whether your teenage daughter is pregnant but
whether you provide loving support to her. So Palin and her husband issued a
statement assuring the nation, "As Bristol faces the responsibilities of
adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support." What
matters is being a loving, devoted father, even after the tragedy of losing
one's spouse. So Biden's son Beau introduced his father to the Democrats in
Denver as "my friend, my father, my hero."

This is not to say that the modern family is a free-for-all,
choose-your-own-Thanksgiving-guest-list adventure for everyone. Social
conservatives, for instance, still hold the family to stricter moral
standards. In 1998, sociologist Penny Edgell asked all of the pastors in
four upstate New York communities whether they agreed with the statement,
"There have been all kinds of families throughout history, and God approves
of many different kinds of families." Eighty-eight percent of pastors from
the more liberal Protestant denominations agreed; none of the pastors from
conservative denominations did. Social conservatives tend to disapprove of
divorce except in cases of infidelity or desertion. They teach their
children to abstain from sex until after marriage. But the religious right's
reaction to the news of Bristol Palin's pregnancy shows they are willing to
embrace a family that deviates from their ideals if the parents are willing
to support each other and their children through difficult times. As former
Baptist preacher, Arkansas governor and GOP presidential candidate Mike
Huckabee said last week, "People of faith aren't people of perfection."

What is important today, in other words, is not who you live with -- and how
you're legally bound to them -- but rather how you feel about them.

This is a barrier-breaking election in so many ways. But apart from the race
and gender hurdles being trampled, the 2008 campaign has also shown that
Americans, whether from red or blue states, have embraced a broad definition
of what constitutes a family. Some traditionalists may lament the decline of
the first-marriage, single-earner households. But diversity, in this case,
has clear virtues. Would we really want to go back to an era when a divorce
disqualified a person from running for president? Come November, it is
unlikely to bother many voters that McCain is on his second marriage or that
Michelle Obama had a demanding career or that Palin's daughter is facing
what used to be called a shotgun wedding.

Of course, Americans' tolerance for family diversity still has limits; many
voters, for instance, find it difficult to accept gay and lesbian unions. In
2004, Mary Cheney, the lesbian daughter of Vice President Cheney, sat in the
audience with her partner as her father delivered his acceptance speech at
the Republican convention. But the couple did not join the rest of the
Cheney family on stage afterward and did not sit with the vice president
when President Bush delivered his speech the following evening.

If the trend toward embracing greater diversity continues, however,
convention stages a generation from now could easily look quite different
from this year's. We could all be watching as a gay or lesbian candidate
shouts out to his or her "rock" or "inspiration": a same-sex partner,
smiling from the VIP box.

Andrew J. Cherlin is a professor of sociology and public policy at Johns
Hopkins University.

####################
Do not hit "reply" to respond to this email. This mailbox is not monitored
and you will not receive a response.

Instead, create a new email and send submissions and comments for the
listserv or for moderator, Diane Sollee, to: diane at smartmarriages.com  (In
other words, do NOT simply hit "reply". If you hit reply your email will
disappear into cyberspace.)

This is a moderated list. All submissions are read by Diane Sollee. Please
indicate if your comment is NOT to be shared with the list.  PLEASE include
your email address and/or url as part of your signature. With thousands of
subscribers, not all comments can be shared.

Also realize that opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by members
of the Coalition.

To SUBSCRIBE, UNSUBSCRIBE, or Change your subscription address,
visit: http://www.smartmarriages.com/app/Newsletter.Subscribe

To read past posts to the listserv, visit the Archive at:
http://lists101.his.com/pipermail/smartmarriages/

13th Annual Smart Marriages® Conference, Shingle Creek Resort,
Orlando, Florida, July 6-12, 2009 (General Conference July 8-11)
Pre-Conference Training Institutes July 6-8
Post-Conference Training Institutes July 12
 
Shingle Creek Resort: http://www.rosenshinglecreek.com/

Conference schedule, registration, & exhibit information will be posted as
it becomes available at:
http://www.smartmarriages.com/conferencedetails.html

List your program and resources on the Directory of Classes at
http://www.smartmarriages.com/directory_browse.html

Order conference audio & video CD/DVD/MP3s: 800-241-7785 or
http://www.iPlaybackSmartMarriages.com

Coalition for Marriage, Family and Couples Education, LLC (CMFCE)
Diane Sollee, Director
5310 Belt Rd NW, Washington, DC 20015-1961
http://www.smartmarriages.com
202-362-3332

FAIR USE NOTICE: This e-newsletter/site contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. We make such material available in our efforts to advance
understanding of marriage, family, couples, divorce, legislation, family
breakdown, etc. We understand this constitutes a 'fair use' of such material
as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with
Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes. For more
information: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to
use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.