 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
Strengthening Young Families
Seizing the moment
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 1 |
Serving families as families
| Click HERE for a printer-friendly version |
Most new parents, even unmarried ones, want to build a healthy, happy two-parent family. In fact, studies show that,
at the crucial time when a baby is born, most unmarried parents are still involved romantically, either living together
(51%) or seeing each other regularly (31%), and most hope to raise their child together. Though often struggling
with practical issues such as low income and limited education, most of the dads are still physically and financially
involved. This key time, when parents want to be together, but are facing a host of new challenges, is an ideal time to
offer the services and supports which can help them to meet those challenges together. Fortunately, a small upfront
investment in helping new parents to build a strong, healthy family, rather than just addressing the far greater needs
later if the family falls apart, can be as cost-effective for the state as it is good for the kids. The past BSF initiative
did wisely target new parents; the need now, however, is to serve them more effectively.
at the crucial time when a baby is born, most unmarried parents are still involved romantically, either living together
(51%) or seeing each other regularly (31%), and most hope to raise their child together. Though often struggling
with practical issues such as low income and limited education, most of the dads are still physically and financially
involved. This key time, when parents want to be together, but are facing a host of new challenges, is an ideal time to
offer the services and supports which can help them to meet those challenges together. Fortunately, a small upfront
investment in helping new parents to build a strong, healthy family, rather than just addressing the far greater needs
later if the family falls apart, can be as cost-effective for the state as it is good for the kids. The past BSF initiative
did wisely target new parents; the need now, however, is to serve them more effectively.
New programs to promote father involvement and/or marriage can’t thrive if our existing family services
inadvertently push young families apart. Sadly, however, many otherwise excellent parenting programs today serve
primarily mothers and their babies, or have separate services for moms and dads. Similarly, some shelters designated
for homeless families actually house only women and children, while separate shelters house men. These “separate
but equal” services can keep kids and caring dads apart, and can even split up romantically involved couples who want
to raise their child or children together. Yet, as noted above, fully 82% of unmarried new parents are romantically
involved and hoping to raise their child together. If we want to support their goals, we need to treat them as the
families they are, serving moms and dads together whenever possible. There are, of course, specific important
exceptions where separate services are crucial to safety (such as for domestic violence) or privacy (such as
breastfeeding support). In the absence of such needs, however, service to families as families should be the norm,
whether or not the parents are legally married. This means parenting classes and materials that are couples-friendly,
family shelters that welcome two-parent as well as one-parent families, housing vouchers that are available to
financially qualifying two-parent families, state university scholarships that don’t disappear if a single parent marries,
and so on. It’s sensible, fair, and crucial to helping families who want to stay together. It is also almost certain to be
less expensive than providing duplicative services to moms and dads separately.
inadvertently push young families apart. Sadly, however, many otherwise excellent parenting programs today serve
primarily mothers and their babies, or have separate services for moms and dads. Similarly, some shelters designated
for homeless families actually house only women and children, while separate shelters house men. These “separate
but equal” services can keep kids and caring dads apart, and can even split up romantically involved couples who want
to raise their child or children together. Yet, as noted above, fully 82% of unmarried new parents are romantically
involved and hoping to raise their child together. If we want to support their goals, we need to treat them as the
families they are, serving moms and dads together whenever possible. There are, of course, specific important
exceptions where separate services are crucial to safety (such as for domestic violence) or privacy (such as
breastfeeding support). In the absence of such needs, however, service to families as families should be the norm,
whether or not the parents are legally married. This means parenting classes and materials that are couples-friendly,
family shelters that welcome two-parent as well as one-parent families, housing vouchers that are available to
financially qualifying two-parent families, state university scholarships that don’t disappear if a single parent marries,
and so on. It’s sensible, fair, and crucial to helping families who want to stay together. It is also almost certain to be
less expensive than providing duplicative services to moms and dads separately.
Serving families efficiently
Struggling new parents may also need specific information and services to help them to build a more secure and
stable family future. To be effective, however, programs must be easy to access, and must respect the time
constraints of overwhelmed parents. This is an area in which the new federal initiative clearly can and must differ
from the past one. Under the BSF initiative requirements, all program sites used lengthy (30-42 hour) curriculums
adapted from marriage therapy or enrichment models, delivered to participants over a period of months. From the
outset, programs faced difficulty even getting couples to come to all the scheduled meetings. In fact, in most of
the program sites, only 9% of couples regularly attended (measured as presence at 80% or more of the sessions).
Significantly, the only program which showed any measurable success was the shortest program. Yet even this was
a 30 hour program offered over 6 to 10 weeks, with less severe but still significant attendance problems. The
take-away lesson should not be to give up on clearly needed services, but instead to keep services sensibly short
enough to be accessible to busy, stressed new parents. Fortunately, a shorter, more efficient curriculum can also
spell cost savings for cash-strapped agencies and programs.
stable family future. To be effective, however, programs must be easy to access, and must respect the time
constraints of overwhelmed parents. This is an area in which the new federal initiative clearly can and must differ
from the past one. Under the BSF initiative requirements, all program sites used lengthy (30-42 hour) curriculums
adapted from marriage therapy or enrichment models, delivered to participants over a period of months. From the
outset, programs faced difficulty even getting couples to come to all the scheduled meetings. In fact, in most of
the program sites, only 9% of couples regularly attended (measured as presence at 80% or more of the sessions).
Significantly, the only program which showed any measurable success was the shortest program. Yet even this was
a 30 hour program offered over 6 to 10 weeks, with less severe but still significant attendance problems. The
take-away lesson should not be to give up on clearly needed services, but instead to keep services sensibly short
enough to be accessible to busy, stressed new parents. Fortunately, a shorter, more efficient curriculum can also
spell cost savings for cash-strapped agencies and programs.
| 4 |
| 5 |
New parents, especially young, unmarried and/or financially struggling ones, may feel overwhelmed by the pressing
demands of infant care and paying the bills. The relationship with a partner, while important, can seem like one more
demand on new parents already stretched thin. This reality may have been another barrier in the BSF model, which
focused solely on couples’ relationship issues, without addressing the high-need areas of infant care and family
finances (except, optionally, by referral). Under the new Fatherhood, Marriage and Families Initiative, however, we
have an opportunity to better integrate existing practical services for new parents with a brief and efficient family
stability component. For example, programs already providing infant care support to new parents, such as
Early Head Start or other early childhood programs, could offer a once-a-month workshop on such family stability
topics as solving conflicts, saving money, and how marriage protects children. Programs assisting with financial
needs, such as Temporary Aid to Needy Families, could provide a workshop on how teamwork and marriage can help
family finances. Or information on all the basics at-risk new parents need – infant care, family finances, and family
stability – can be combined into one efficient curriculum. Families will benefit from the one-stop-shop approach,
while agencies will enjoy the cost-efficiency of service consolidation.
demands of infant care and paying the bills. The relationship with a partner, while important, can seem like one more
demand on new parents already stretched thin. This reality may have been another barrier in the BSF model, which
focused solely on couples’ relationship issues, without addressing the high-need areas of infant care and family
finances (except, optionally, by referral). Under the new Fatherhood, Marriage and Families Initiative, however, we
have an opportunity to better integrate existing practical services for new parents with a brief and efficient family
stability component. For example, programs already providing infant care support to new parents, such as
Early Head Start or other early childhood programs, could offer a once-a-month workshop on such family stability
topics as solving conflicts, saving money, and how marriage protects children. Programs assisting with financial
needs, such as Temporary Aid to Needy Families, could provide a workshop on how teamwork and marriage can help
family finances. Or information on all the basics at-risk new parents need – infant care, family finances, and family
stability – can be combined into one efficient curriculum. Families will benefit from the one-stop-shop approach,
while agencies will enjoy the cost-efficiency of service consolidation.
Integrating services effectively
Building on community strengths
Professional program staff serving new parents need not assume the long-term, financially draining task of providing
ongoing support for all family stability needs. Instead, an effective program can provide basic needed information up
front, such as how to work as a parenting team, how to avoid or protect against family violence, and how healthy
marriages can protect and help children. Families can then be linked to local resources such as parenting networks,
schools, faith groups, and/or other community programs. Where local resources aren’t enough, programs can
sponsor volunteer family-to-family mentoring, matching experienced, stable families with struggling new families.
This basic inform and connect model of service can do more than just save program dollars. As young parents learn
from established families and get encouragement close to home, they’ll be better able to build their own strong and
stable families. As that happens, our families, our communities and, most of all, our children stand to gain.
ongoing support for all family stability needs. Instead, an effective program can provide basic needed information up
front, such as how to work as a parenting team, how to avoid or protect against family violence, and how healthy
marriages can protect and help children. Families can then be linked to local resources such as parenting networks,
schools, faith groups, and/or other community programs. Where local resources aren’t enough, programs can
sponsor volunteer family-to-family mentoring, matching experienced, stable families with struggling new families.
This basic inform and connect model of service can do more than just save program dollars. As young parents learn
from established families and get encouragement close to home, they’ll be better able to build their own strong and
stable families. As that happens, our families, our communities and, most of all, our children stand to gain.
Smart new ways to help families thrive
Over the next few months, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services will be launching its new Fatherhood,
Marriage and Families Initiative, offering funding to state agencies and local organizations working to help struggling
dads to stay involved, and moms and dads to stay together. It’s the Obama administration’s stab at a big problem, the
large and growing national shift from two-parent to one-parent family households — and the resulting high costs in
increased child poverty, decreased child well-being, and strain on government social services. Today 41% of
American babies are born each year to unmarried parents, who, if they do not marry, may drift apart within a few
years. Nor even does marriage guarantee that parents will stay together, as close to half of all American marriages
end in divorce. Though many unmarried parents do well with their children, it‘s tough going it alone. Children in a
single parent household are nearly 5 times as likely to be living in poverty as children in a household with married
parents. Additionally, studies show that children raised in two-parent households throughout their childhoods tend to
do better in school, have fewer health problems, report greater happiness, and are more likely to later complete
college, become employed, and avoid brushes with the law than children whose parents live apart.
While the need is clear, the challenge is to provide services which actually work. The new initiative comes on the
heels of a nearly ended, five-year federally-funded Building Strong Families demonstration project, which had
similar goals but little success. The BSF program, a Bush administration initiative, offered relationship support and
family stability education to lower income, unmarried new parent couples in eight demonstration project sites,
hoping to increase the likelihood that the couples would marry, stay together, and raise healthier children. By the
time of preliminary evaluation, however, six of the eight demonstration project sites showed no improvement among
participants in family stability or child welfare; one program showed only modest gains; and one showed actual
negatives. So now, with the welfare of our nation’s children at stake — and with government budgets too tight to
permit speculative experimenting — the pressing question remains: What have we learned about what works? In a
rare bit of good news, recent evidence suggests that much of what works best for families can actually save programs
money. To build on what we now know, five key strategies can help:
Marriage and Families Initiative, offering funding to state agencies and local organizations working to help struggling
dads to stay involved, and moms and dads to stay together. It’s the Obama administration’s stab at a big problem, the
large and growing national shift from two-parent to one-parent family households — and the resulting high costs in
increased child poverty, decreased child well-being, and strain on government social services. Today 41% of
American babies are born each year to unmarried parents, who, if they do not marry, may drift apart within a few
years. Nor even does marriage guarantee that parents will stay together, as close to half of all American marriages
end in divorce. Though many unmarried parents do well with their children, it‘s tough going it alone. Children in a
single parent household are nearly 5 times as likely to be living in poverty as children in a household with married
parents. Additionally, studies show that children raised in two-parent households throughout their childhoods tend to
do better in school, have fewer health problems, report greater happiness, and are more likely to later complete
college, become employed, and avoid brushes with the law than children whose parents live apart.
While the need is clear, the challenge is to provide services which actually work. The new initiative comes on the
heels of a nearly ended, five-year federally-funded Building Strong Families demonstration project, which had
similar goals but little success. The BSF program, a Bush administration initiative, offered relationship support and
family stability education to lower income, unmarried new parent couples in eight demonstration project sites,
hoping to increase the likelihood that the couples would marry, stay together, and raise healthier children. By the
time of preliminary evaluation, however, six of the eight demonstration project sites showed no improvement among
participants in family stability or child welfare; one program showed only modest gains; and one showed actual
negatives. So now, with the welfare of our nation’s children at stake — and with government budgets too tight to
permit speculative experimenting — the pressing question remains: What have we learned about what works? In a
rare bit of good news, recent evidence suggests that much of what works best for families can actually save programs
money. To build on what we now know, five key strategies can help: