Grand Rapids erects a civic tent for marriage

Policy Review, Jul/Aug 1998 by Sider, Roger

Grand Rapids, Michigan, has long been known as a family-- friendly community with conservative values, but this city of 500,000 has not escaped the cultural forces buffeting the institution of marriage. The surrounding area of Kent County recorded 2,783 divorces last year, more than half the number of marriages in the same period. More than 25 percent of the county's children grow up without their fathers and mothers married and living under the same roof.

These figures got the attention of a group of local citizens: a mayor, a pastor, a social worker, and myself, a psychiatrist. Each of us had become alarmed at the mounting toll exacted by the erosion of marriage in western Michigan, especially on children. In fall 1996, we set out to establish a community marriage policy, modeled on programs enacted in 86 cities across the nation, to give children a better chance of growing up in stable, two-- parent homes.

Most other community marriage agreements rely heavily on churches to raise the bar for wedlock. Their strategies often include premarital counseling for engaged couples. That's a vital step, but we're going much further: In Grand Rapids, we are erecting a large civic tent under which a variety of community leaders-not only clergy but also political, medical, business, and judicial figures-come together to strengthen marriage.

We've formed a steering committee comprised of college presidents, attorneys, business owners, members of the clergy, a local mayor, and a judge. Together, they have helped draft perhaps the most broadly supported community marriage policy in the nation. It is surely one of the most ambitious. The policy sets three goals to be achieved within 10 years: reduce the divorce rate by 25 percent, reduce by 25 percent the number of children growing up without the benefit of married parents in a stable home, and establish thorough preparation for marriage as a community norm.

The Leaders

Changing the community's culture is a daunting task. Our policy asks everyone to take responsibility for the state of marriage in our community. A key ingredient in its success to date is the leadership shown by our steering committee.

Its chairman is Bill Hardiman, the mayor of Kentwood, a major suburb of Grand Rapids. The mayor is a passionate advocate for the Greater Grand Rapids Community Marriage Policy. Popular and charismatic, he knows how to disarm critics who believe the policy implicitly condemns divorcing couples or single-parent families. He grew up in a single-parent family of eight children and went through a divorce himself after a brief, early marriage. He and his second wife, Clova, have been together for almost 25 years.

Appearing on television and radio, speaking to the press, and addressing church services and civic gatherings on behalf of the policy, Hardiman has used his platform as a respected civic leader to attract broad, high-level support. This spring, Hardiman appointed three task forces, for physical and mental health, legal and judicial matters, and religious issues. Two additional task forces soon will be created for business and education. Their purpose is to mobilize each sector of the community to help strengthen marriage.

Joseph Scoville, a federal district judge, is a cochairman of the Legal/ Judicial Task Force. He intends to challenge judges and lawyers to become more sensitive to family considerations in their application of the law.

Scoville sees two major obstacles to this goal. The first is the strong bias in the law toward individual rights. Within this framework, marriage is regarded simply as a lifestyle choice and divorce as a right to be exercised unilaterally and at will. The second obstacle is the economic self-interest of divorce lawyers. Scoville wants the legal community to form a basic consensus about requirements-or at least recommendations-for couples seeking to marry. Judges who conduct civil marriage ceremonies might agree, for example, to strongly urge couples to seek premarital counseling.

Jerry DeRuiter, the CEO of a large mental-health services provider for families, is a cochairman of the Health/Mental Health Task Force. "We see too many kids whose parents are using them to play the game of divorce for points," he says. "No five-year-old should have to ask a therapist, `Who do I believe, Mommy or Daddy?"'

DeRuiter wants the health-care community-particularly those involved in social work, counseling, and therapy-to encourage failing couples to honor their commitments to each other and to their children. "The language of individual rights tramples on kids," he says. "It makes children commodities to be disposed of." He wants health-care providers to become more aware of the value of helping parents stay together, and he wants the community to devote more resources to early intervention for marriages under stress.

He is attracting significant support. Susan Heartwell, the executive director of a local agency that combats child abuse, is a highly regarded local expert on domestic violence and its victims. She initially declined to endorse the community marriage policy because an early draft was silent on the subject of abusive marriages. But she eventually signed on after helping draft language recognizing that abusive marriages need not be endured.