英文复兴婚姻我们能做什么应做什么v10n2-45-163-1-PB.docVIP

Reviving Marriage: Could We? Should We? Marsha Garrison* Abstract Marriage has become controversial. Some experts argue that marriage is fundamental and foundational. In their view, the decline of marriage lies at the heart of a wide range of social problems; these experts urge state efforts to revive marriage and promote marital commitment. Other experts argue that marriage is merely a label; in their view, the state should not only eschew marriage promotion, but abandon marriage regulation altogether. Both the pro- and anti-marriage perspectives have attracted adherents among policymakers. In the United States, the Bush administration has recently launched an initiative in support of “healthy marriages” that builds on earlier welfare-reform legislation designed to promote marriage among the poor. In Canada, Parliament has revised both tax and old-age pension rules so that the same standards apply to married and “common-law” partners; the Canadian Law Reform Commission has also recommended comprehensive revision of Canadian law to avoid “problems of coherence” arising from marital status classifications. Which approach is preferable? This paper analyzes the growing body of social science evidence that bears on marriage regulation and makes policy recommendations based on that evidence. It concludes that both the advocates and opponents of marriage have overstated their claims: the research data demonstrate that classifications based on marriage are sometimes desirable and sometimes not: they show that formal, ceremonial marriage provides public benefits by clearly denoting the intention to assume relational responsibilities; they show that enduring, low-conflict marriage provides larger public benefits through its positive impact on the health, wealth and happiness of spouses and their children; they show that conflicted and short-term marriage does not offer personal benefits to either adult partners or their children. Finally—ironically—the data suggest that gove