A couple nurturing a tree, representing the growth and support in Utah’s Family Stabilization Program.

Beyond Love: How Utah’s Strategy Improves Marital Stability

Can federal dollars boost family stability? Utah's approach combines resources to strengthen marital bonds.

As established in the first article of this series, family relationships are the fundamental units of society, and therefore, there is a need to support these relationships with public policy. Spurred by the financial costs of increasing rates of family instability, the federal Administration for Children and Families has provided competitive grants since 2006 to community organizations to support preventative educational programs to help couples form and sustain healthy relationships and strong marriages, as well as promote responsible, engaged fathering and cooperative coparenting. Federal funds—$150 million a year—have been focused on disadvantaged families where the need is greatest and who have less access to help for their family relationships. These funds originated in the federal Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program passed during the Clinton administration that broadly reformed public welfare in the United States. The goals of the new TANF program were focused on promoting paid employment and building more stable, two-parent families. Under President George W. Bush, Assistant Secretary for Children and Families Dr. Wade Horn started providing competitive grants to community organizations to help couples form and sustain healthy relationships, as well as strengthen connections between fathers and children when parental relationships fall apart or fail to form. Those grants have been going for 17 years now. The policy initiative has been controversial, with concerns on both the political left and right, but recent research on the effectiveness of these programs has somewhat muffled the criticism. A handful of states also have tried to take up the cause of direct public support for relationship education.

Utah is noteworthy for its public policy efforts.

These public policy efforts were highlighted in a 2020 Congressional report, “A Policy Agenda for Social Capital,” produced under the direction of Utah Senator Mike Lee. The report explores “the evolving nature, quality, and importance of our associational life”—our families, communities, workplaces, and religious congregations—that “are critical to forming our character and capacities, providing our lives with meaning and purpose, and addressing the challenges we face in an increasingly disconnected world.” Utah consistently ranks as the state with the highest social capital, according to Sen. Lee, and “it provides an aspirational vision of what could be elsewhere.”

I agree with Sen. Lee here. Utah is noteworthy for its public policy efforts to develop educational resources to support stable, healthy marriages. This is a crucial element of the social capital that undergirds strong communities and societies. Conservative Utah might seem an unlikely candidate for building the premier state model for blending federal and state funds to support healthy marriages and relationships (and engaged fathering). However, under the coordinated efforts of the Utah Marriage Commission (UMC) and Healthy Relationships Utah (HRU), Utah has built an impressive, publicly-funded initiative to strengthen the most fundamental unit of civil society. 

UMC and HRU are both under the umbrella of Utah State University’s Extension System. HRU has used nearly $40 million of federal and state grants over the past 16 years (about $2.3 million a year) to teach more than 5,000 classes that reached more than 100,000 youth and adults with a variety of relationship-strengthening curricula. The Utah Marriage Commission’s funding since its inception in 1998 is harder to exactly calculate, but probably totals $7-8 million. The number of people reached by UMC is even harder to estimate, given its wide array of digital outreach services, but it would easily be in the mid-six-figure range. 

UMC and HRU combine to define the most extensive state-based initiative in the United States to make strong marriages, healthy romantic relationships, cooperative co-parenting, and engaged fathering a matter of intentional public policy. While other universities and community-based non-profit organizations use federal and state funds to support educational efforts to strengthen couple unions—two of which I will highlight in this series—Utah is unique in its formal state-level leadership of these social capital-building efforts.

About the author

Alan J. Hawkins

Alan J. Hawkins is manager of the Utah Marriage Commission and an emeritus professor in the Brigham Young University School of Family Life. His work focuses on educational interventions and public policies to help couples form and sustain healthy relationships and stronger relationships, and prevent unnecessary divorce.
On Key

You Might Also Like

The Room Next Door Review

“The Room Next Door” is the latest example of arthouse social engineering.  The film is about a troubled woman, Martha, who in the midst of cancer treatments decides to commit suicide. If this bothers you, the film implies, it is because there is something wrong with you. This is all the more troubling, because the film, in many ways, is beautiful. It is directed by Pedro Almodóvar, one of the most acclaimed living film directors, in his first full-length film in English. And you can’t help but be taken by the beauty of it all. The film is suffused with the soft colors of the woods. Despite being an entire screenplay full of little except two friends talking, the camera work keeps the film alive and moving. And Julianne Moore and Tilda Swinton who play Ingrid and Martha once again give impeccable, engaging performances, that you can’t help but admire.  But all the beauty in this film is in service of a story that is decidedly ugly—but not self-awarely so. Our two main characters are old friends who met as young writers. Ingrid has published a best seller recently, where she writes about how she can’t accept death. On her publicity tour, she learns that Martha is in the hospital with cancer. She goes to visit her and reignite their friendship. We learn through the conversations that these characters aren’t bad people, necessarily, they just struggle to see a world outside of their own desires and consciousness. They have repeatedly avoided building relationships or having families. Martha does have a daughter. But she chased her father away, then lied to her about who he was her whole life, and then proceeded to be an absent mother so she could chase the romanticism of being a war correspondent.  Now that she is sick and dying, she notices that she has no one in her life. The movie comments on this like an unusual quirk, rather than the inevitable result of a life of bad decisions. We learn early on that cancer treatment can be a roller coaster with euphoric peaks, and miserable nadirs. During one such rut, Martha purchases a suicide pill, and decides she will kill herself. She reaches out to Ingrid and asks her to come on vacation with her, so that she will have someone in the house when she does it.  Ingrid agrees. And although she early on expresses some discomfort, she quickly respects Martha’s wishes to largely pretend nothing is happening. They have a lovely vacation in upstate New York watching old movies and reading books. While they are there, Ingrid reconnects with Damien (John Turturo) an ex-boyfriend of both hers and Martha’s. He is horrified at the state of the world, and seems to only live for sex (or to constantly talk about sex.) Damien is not a sympathetic character, and perhaps the audience is supposed to read that his unpleasant and helpless politics are akin to Martha’s helpless approach to life. If so the audience hardly has time to ponder it under a heavy heaping of affirmations about the power to choose, and the dignity to die.  Eventually, Martha does exactly what she promised to do. There is a brief police investigation where the officer (Alessandro Nivola) expresses concern that Ingrid would have knowingly not gotten help for her friend. A lawyer comes and helpfully tells the audience we can ignore that concern because he is a religious fanatic. This is the kind of movie that alludes to James Joyce not just once but three times. It is so pleased with just how artsy it is. And for a film with a message like “life isn’t worth fighting for,” the best comfort is that it’s so artsy not a lot of people will watch it.  The only people I would recommend watching this film is for those studying how society has devalued human life, and how good tools can be misused to harm people. The film is rated PG-13. It includes several normalized same-sex relationships, and some joking about polyamorous relationships. But obviously the biggest warning is the way it normalizes and glamorizes suicide. If you watch it with older teenagers, I would focus on questions about the choice that Martha made, and how family and relationships could have helped her make better choices. I might ask about how Ingrid could have been a better or more caring friend. One out of five stars. “The Room Next Door” will be released in theaters nationwide January 17, 2025.

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This