The State Does Have a Part to Play When It Comes to Marriage

Book Excerpt

Having worked in family policy for nearly two decades, it’s tempting to approach family issues by thinking first about what governments can do. However, our public policy experience tempers our expectations. When we contemplate the role of the state, it is helpful to consider the interest the state has in family life and the limits to actions it should undertake. Families provide love and care in ways the state can’t duplicate. Acknowledging this fact, however, does not mean denying there are ways in which the state can help families.

Growing families are a benefit to the state. The state has an interest in stable families, particularly when children are involved. Safe, stable, and nurturing homes contribute to the development of a healthy citizenry. With declining fertility rates and aging populations, the social safety net will face significant strain in the future.

Growing families develop networks within communities and connect with other civil society institutions. These bonds contribute to the development of social capital and enhance well-being. Most children in North America are born to married parents. The intact, married-parent family remains an important institution in strengthening communities. Thus, a significant factor in the state’s interest in marriage is the well-being of children. But families, not the state, are the primary institution responsible for child well-being.

Some people argue that the state should get out of the marriage licence business. It certainly would be possible to stop licensing marriages, but the state would still be involved when families dissolve. At the time of this writing, the province of Quebec has introduced a bill to create a new legal category called “parental union.” Remember, Quebec is a place with some of the lowest marriage rates in the world. It has, in some sense, gotten the state out of the marriage business, since so few Quebecers choose marriage.

Under the legislation, unmarried couples would become a parental union when they have a child together. The bill outlines which assets are divisible when a parental union dissolves. With 67 percent of births in Quebec occurring outside a married-parent union in 2022, the province has had to create a legal structure that protects partners and children in the event of a breakup. What this points to is the necessity of state involvement, if not in marriage then in dissolution, especially as concerns children.

Even in the absence of a marriage culture, the state has had to create a category of partnerships to protect children at the point of dissolution. For as long as the state issues marriage licences, it will need to define marriage and articulate a rationale for which partnerships constitute a marriage. Many companionate relationships, such as deep and meaningful friendships, provide people with meaning and well-being but don’t constitute marriage. That doesn’t mean these other companionate relationships are less important in our lives. But marriage is a particular relationship that is exclusionary by design. (For example, it excludes minors and multiple partners.)

The state needs to have a clear rationale concerning how it defines marriage and where and why it asserts itself in this domain. The state, we have argued, is not the primary actor in developing a healthy marriage culture, but it should not be disinterested. When families dissolve, the state often has to step in. It is not well-positioned to care for children when families neglect or are unable to fulfill their primary responsibilities.

Political leaders and policymakers could be more engaged in speaking about the importance of this ancient institution in modern life.

Andrea Mrozek and Peter Jon Mitchell are authors of the recently published book “I…Do? Why Marriage Still Matters.” Used by permission of Wipf and Stock Publishers, www.wipfandstock.com

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.