Mentoring marriages - Harry Benson explains how an ordinary married couple can provide valuable support and encouragement to a young couple starting out together. You don't need to be an expert to make a huge difference. All you need is experience and a few easy tricks! (Harry's book on Mentoring Marriages is available here)

Old habits die hard - Allow me to take you on a short journey into the world of relationship research. The skills we teach are based on the subtle patterns of behaviour that distinguish between successful and unsuccessful couples.

Why get married - For most of us, marriage is one of our lifelong aspirations. Yet in the back of our minds are lingering doubts. So if you're happy living together, why bother getting married?

Why fuss about cohabitation - Just because many now live together without getting married, does that make it a good idea? Research shows that cohabitation is linked to a high risk of family breakdown and more negative consequences for both adults and children.

Being a friend indeed - What do you do when a friend or neighbour casually mentions to you that their marriage is on the rocks? You want to help but don't know what to say or do.

Domestic violence and marriage - One in five separated women have experienced domestic violence in the previous year. Yet Home Office policy fails even to consider the possibility that family stability can be improved as a preventive measure.

The government's lowest priority? - Politicians often tell us how pro-family they are. Mr Blair said this in February 2004: "The Government's first priority is with the stability of relationships where children are involved." So how exactly do these fine words translate to fine actions?

The myth of amicable divorce - Behind amicable divorce lies the idea that what's good for the adults is good for the children. Alas, it's a myth. Adults may feel better if divorce is amicable. Children see things differently.

Bristol's Community Marriage Policy - Community Marriage Policies have been shown to reduce divorce rates in the US. Bristol church leaders signed a policy in February 2004.

Is divorce getting worse - Everyone assumes divorce is getting worse. It's not. Divorce rates have hardly changed in 25 years. Let me give you a reality check about what's really happening to Britain's families.

Why pre-nups are a bad idea - Pre-nups are becoming more popular. Yet the likelihood is that they compromise the very thing they try to achieve - a successful marriage - by getting couples to think about divorce.

Giving your marriage an MoT - Imagine we could offer you a five year warranty on your marriage. You want a marriage that runs at peak performance? Then read on because this warranty is definitely for you.

The dangers of a safety net - Couples who have his and hers bank accounts tend to have high break-up rates. Couples who have joint bank accounts have low break-up rates. Does having a safety net make people more likely to use it?

Taking the pressure off presents - Birthdays, Christmas and anniversaries can bring huge pressures on couples who have no idea what presents to give each other or how to live up to each others romantic ideal. The answer is remarkably simple. Ask!

Relationship education in prison - Inmates want their relationships to work just like you or me. Yet how can they do that when dysfunctional relationships are so much the norm in their families?

---

Mentoring Marriages
(Families Together magazine, Summer 2005)

Could you help strengthen someone else's marriage? HARRY BENSON looks at marriage mentoring, and provides a few tips for keeping yours free from bugs …

When it comes to helping people build stronger marriages, experience is often more relevant than expertise. Mentoring is simply the transfer of experience from those with more to those with less. Experience is therefore much more relevant that expertise. Extended families used to do the job automatically. As we have become more individualistic, we may now enjoy freedom from family interference. But we have also lost the sense of family values, social learning and support contributed by uncles and aunts, grandparents, cousins.

Mentoring marriages

Many people assume that couple-to-couple mentoring requires a reasonable level of expertise and training. Some professionals even claim this is essential. After all, if difficult issues arise, mentors need to know how to handle them. But this is both patronizing and plain wrong. If true, it would rule out any contribution from family and friends!

What makes mentoring so easy is the use of an inventory (questionnaire) that provides a format. Mentors simply walk their couple through an inventory, subject by subject, question by question, and get them to talk to each other. No preparation or expertise is needed because mentors are not there as experts. They are there as well-informed uncle and aunt figures.

Who can become a mentor or support couple? More or less any married couple. Mentoring is a job for ordinary couples. This very ordinariness can be a hard idea to accept. Yet if you've been married a few years and had your share of ups and downs, if you care that other peoples marriages matter, if you can sit down with a couple and talk about marriage – both theirs and yours – then you can be a good enough support couple. No other qualifications are needed. If you can learn a few practical skills on top, you can be a truly excellent support couple.

Survival stories

In particular you don't need to have a perfect marriage. People who come across as too good to be true are usually exactly that. You need to have a good enough marriage that is sometimes joyful and exhilarating, sometimes mundane and workaday, and sometimes downright disappointing and painful. You're still married and you've survived. Your story acts as a powerful reminder to younger couples that marriage is not always a bed of roses. And when it's not, you don't have to give up.

Over the years, we've been conditioned to think about marriage in terms of “ guidance ”, “ counselling ”, “ therapy ”, “ help ” and “ problems ”. This not only creates a barrier for those who might like to talk and learn about marriage. It also creates the illusion that you have to be a trained expert. You don't.

So don't allow the experts to tell you how well qualified you need to be. Nor should you pay attention to the little voice that questions how much you have to offer. The simple fact that you give your time, your hospitality, your interest and your care to another couple you barely know sends a huge message that their marriage is important.

You can be a support couple and make a difference. As a bonus, you'll even find the experience will help you focus on and strengthen your own marriage.

Failure to communicate?

One of the most insightful things I've learned from the field of marriage research is that communication is not the big deal. Successful couples do not necessarily use fantastic communication skills – such as active listening or the speaker/listener technique. Although many marriage courses spend much of their time exclusively highlighting and encouraging such skills. Dozens of studies have yet to show any link whatsoever between communication skills and a reduction in divorce rates.

The latest research involves engaged couples being videoed as they discuss a contentious issue for a few minutes. The video is analysed and coded. Remarkably, couples who end up happy, conflicted or divorced five years later can be distinguished with up to 90% accuracy.

(Fortunately this doesn't mean we can look at a couple today and say either “cancel the wedding guys, you're doomed” or “you guys are so right together”. The formula works for averages only.)

What this research does tell us is the behaviours that most accurately predict successful marriage. In the early years of marriage, it's the absence of negative behaviours that counts. At first, it doesn't seem to matter whether we are nice to one another or not. The big trick is not to hurt one another. Later on of course, the chickens come home to roost and the presence of positive behaviours matters like mad.

Watching for STOP signs

So although communication is important for happiness – I feel good when you listen to me – it's how we hurt each other than counts most if we want to avoid divorce.

STOP signs are four habits we tend to do automatically and without thinking about it. The table describes them in a little more detail: Scoring points, Thinking the worst, Opting out or Putting down. The first big trick is to identify STOP signs in yourself. For me personally, I find it hard not to Think the worst or Opt out.

For example, I sometimes catch myself assuming I'm in trouble with Kate. I'm thinking the worst. Most of the time, I'm not in trouble. But the result is that I behave like a dog with a tail between its legs. If I expect trouble, I behave defensively. This is not great for my marriage. I'm learning to recognise that I have to think the best. Then I'm nicer to be around.

I also sometimes catch myself hiding away in my office at home a bit longer than I should. I'm opting out. It's easier for me to sit on my own than face the difficult stuff of relationships. This is not healthy for my role as husband or father. When I opt out, I send the message that I don't care. Some researchers claim that opting out is the number one predictor of divorce. After opting out of subjects, one by one, eventually there is little or nothing to discuss. The relationship dies.

The second big trick is to work together as a team against your STOP signs. STOP signs are not about me or you alone. They are the way we behave towards each other. Once we know what they are, we can then help each other minimise their destructive effect on our marriage. STOP signs are bugs to be squashed.

Support couples can add value by watching for these STOP signs. Gently bringing them to a couple's attention at an early stage of the marriage or relationship could make a massive difference to their prospects together. Spotting patterns like these is what changes good enough mentoring into great mentoring.

Becoming a mentor

• Harry Benson's new book Mentoring marriages explains clearly and simply how to become a mentor or support couple.
• www.2-in-2-1.co.uk provides comprehensive information on marriage courses and information around the country
• www.nacft.org.uk and www.themarriagecourse.org run courses using support couples

Recognise Your STOP Signs

• S – SCORE POINTS – Don't defend yourself by changing subject “ You did this ” … ” Well, you did that ”. Stick to the issue “ You did this ” … “ So what I did really upset you ”
• T – THINK THE WORST – Don't assume people are out to get you “ Flowers? What's he done wrong? ”…” She's being nice? What's up ?” Think the best “ He's being thoughtful ” … “ She's just being nice ”
• O – OPT OUT – Don't walk away from difficult issues “ I'm not talking about it any more…It's a closed issue .” Take time out to cool down “ This is not a good time to talk. I'm really tired… ” Then come back and discuss it “… But I'd really like to talk tomorrow before work ”
• P – PUT DOWN – Don't insult “ You idiot !” or belittle “ You shouldn't feel like that .” Put downs kill relationships

Take action early

One third of all divorces happen in the first five years of marriage. One half of unmarried parents split up before their child's fifth birthday.

 

 

Old habits die hard
(Bristol Evening Post, 29 May 2004)

Allow me to take you on a short journey into the fascinating world of marriage research.

Ever since divorce rates started to rise sharply in the 1960s, social scientists have wanted to find out why it is that some marriages succeed and some fail. If we know why marriages go wrong, we can better help couples stay out of trouble or recover from a bad patch.

Initially, most marriage research involved asking couples questions about their marriage. That sounds sensible enough. Unfortunately what people say about their marriage is not always what actually happens. For example, most people rate their marriage very highly or above average. Clearly not everyone can be above average. Few will admit to being below average.

However asking questions tells us that family background has a particularly big influence. For example, if your parents divorced, you're more likely to divorce. If your parents fought, you're more likely to fight. If you had a whirlwind romance or got married young, you're more likely to have problems. Of course nobody is guaranteed success or disaster just because of their family background. But family background definitely sets the scene and changes the odds.

It soon became clear that this kind of research had fairly limited value. What was needed was a way of watching how couples actually behave. Researchers sat couples down in a laboratory and got them to talk about some difficult issue - money, sex, children, mother-in-law. The couple is videoed while they talk. Analysts then study the tapes and code the couple's behaviour. They look for eye contact, body language, and the positive and negative responses the couple gives each other. These behaviours are tracked over just a few minutes of film. The data is shoved into a computer and processed.

Now it starts to get really amazing. One man especially has developed this technique. Professor John Gottman in Seattle claims that he can predict how couples in his "Love Lab" will turn out five years later with 90% accuracy. All it takes is 3 minutes of observation.

The biggest clue comes from how one person reacts when their spouse says something negative. A negative reaction is especially bad news. Another clue is that the couples who do well tend to say between 5 and 20 positive things to each other for every negative thing. Couples who end up doing badly have a lower positive to negative ratio.

Gottman and other research groups have now shown that it is not so much the positive things that matter. The really big breakthrough is the discovery that it's the negative things that most affect our future success. Our bad habits. It's the ways we hurt one another that count most.

This makes obvious sense once you've thought about it. If you're feeling a bit vulnerable after a row, you are much less open to compliments. I know I am.

The message from this is that how we get on with one another becomes established automatically very early on in a relationship. Early patterns of behaviour set the path for the future. They start off very subtle at the beginning. But as they become ingrained and deepen over time, bad habits exert a bigger and bigger influence. Left unchecked they eat away at the relationship until it dies. Old habits die hard.

Gottman calls this whole process a cascade - like a waterfall. One thing leads naturally to another. Criticism leads to contempt. Contempt leads to withdrawal. Withdrawal leads to blocking. You start with some minor bad habits. You end up with a major bad attitude. This is not the way to run a healthy marriage! This is the path to destruction.

So where does this leave you? You want a great marriage or relationship with the person you love. You can't do a whole lot about changing your background. It's history. But what you can do is change the way you behave toward one another.

This is what marriage education is all about. It's not counselling. It's not for people with problems. It's for anyone who wants to make sure they get the best from their marriage. If you know what the biggest danger signs are, you can work out ways of avoiding them.

Marriage education basically teaches couples bad habits to avoid and good habits to build up. It's obviously easiest to do this when you're engaged and in love and invincible. But it's never too late to learn.

In Bristol, there is now more opportunity to do a marriage education course than almost anywhere else in the UK. The course I run for engaged and newlywed couples boosts happiness and cuts divorce by 50-80%. That can't be bad. "The Marriage Course", mostly run in churches, is brilliant for couples at any stage.

Old habits may die hard. Now it's your choice what those habits are. Great marriage really can be learnt.

 

WHY GET MARRIED
(Bristol Evening Post, 31 July 2004)

For most of us, marriage is one of our top life aspirations. A happy lifelong marriage is what we want most. Yet in the back of our minds are lingering doubts. We know of awful experiences of marriage within our own circle of family or close friends and in the press.

So if you're happy living together, why bother getting married?

My first response to you is that getting married, on its own, is not the big deal. It's what getting married represents.

Marriage is a choice to stand up in public and declare your intention to stick things out together no matter what - for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health. Sure, such a commitment can get easily forgotten years later when things aren't so rosy. Sure, lots of people divorce.

Yet despite what we read in the press, couples who are happily married for life are still the norm in the UK. Couples who are happily unmarried ten years on are the tiny exception.

In fact we should be hearing far more stories of unmarried couples than married couples splitting up. Whereas divorce rates amongst married couples are largely unchanged in 25 years, rising family breakdown is now almost entirely driven by the break-up of unmarried couples.

So what is it that distinguishes those who marry from those who don't? In essence the big distinction is an attitude that puts "us" first rather than "me" first. Amongst those who don't marry, a high sense of personal autonomy is really important. For example, unmarried couples mostly prefer to keep their money separately. They talk about "my money" and "your money". This is rare amongst the first time married who invariably use joint accounts. They talk about "our money".

Amongst those who don't marry, a sense of equality and fairness is also especially important. Household jobs tend to be divided equally or in turns. Amongst married couples, household jobs tend to be specialised. For example, he makes sure bills and tax returns are sorted out. She makes sure that food and clothes are organised. Or vice versa. Specialising is by far the less stressful and more efficient arrangement.

What do these differences suggest? They suggest that for married couples it's more OK to risk sharing our money. And it's more OK to risk handing over responsibilities, such as paying tax. But it's only more OK if I am reasonably confident that you will be here tomorrow.

In other words, giving you the full extent of my love, time, effort, money and other resources, is only worth risking if I trust you. When we get married, both of us make that promise in front of a bunch of family and friends. The result is that we have a support network around us. Social scientists call this a constraint - which is the external form of commitment. Constraints make it easier for you to stay with me than to leave.

As far as I'm aware, there aren't any studies yet showing that separate bank accounts or equally shared household roles make it more likely that couples will split up. But the link is certainly there.

So if you are asking yourself the question - why get married? - my response is don't. Come on a relationship education course instead. The whole point of relationship education is to give you the tools to discuss in private these kinds of issues more openly and fully than you have done before. What is it that makes me keep my money separate from your money? How would I feel if I let you take responsibility for organising our finances?

You'll only get married if you're willing to let go and trust one another. To love and be loved to the full, getting married is a risk you have to take.

 

WHY FUSS ABOUT COHABITATION?
(BCFT e-newsletter January 2004)

Recent surveys suggest that nearly all couples getting married are already living together and nearly half of all babies are now born to unmarried couples. Given that living together has undoubtedly become the social norm, it's perhaps not surprising that the government and government-backed national organisations such as Relate and NFPI no longer distinguish between married and unmarried couples. National institutions have to be seen to appeal to the broadest population.

So why fuss about cohabitation? The starting point is that just because many do it, that doesn't make it a good idea. Smoking used to be far more popular than it is now. When researchers showed that it was linked to lung cancer, smoking became a public health issue. The story is remarkably similar with cohabitation. Researchers are showing more and more clearly that cohabitation is linked to a high risk of family breakdown, which in turn has negative consequences for both adults and their children.

• I quote from a study published by the Office of National Statistics in December 2003. "Children born to cohabiting parents and to mothers not in a partnership when they have their baby have less advantaged lives than their contemporaries who are born to married parents."
  
• In January 2003, the Department of Work and Pensions showed that cohabitation was, on its own, a significant factor in raising the risk of family breakdown - regardless of income, education, employment, age or race.
• A study from Essex University showed that cohabiting in a first union is much more likely to lead to serial cohabiting rather than marriage - with consequently high risk of separation.
• Yet another study in the Journal of Marriage and Family showed that cohabiting did not lead to improvements in mental health, in contrast with marriage which did.
• A few years ago, the Home Office produced a report showing that the single biggest domestic violence risk factor for men was cohabiting. I could go on.

Some of these studies do show cause and effect. Others only show association. Either way the link between cohabitation and negative outcomes for families is increasingly clear. Yet the government refuses to talk about married or cohabiting couples and instead talks only of committed couples or stable couples. Stability and commitment are the norm amongst married couples and the exception amongst unmarried couples. Take away the political spin and the psychological explanation for such differences in behaviour is self-evident. The intent and attitude behind cohabitation is more oriented towards individual interests. Marriage is more oriented towards relationship interests. This is borne out by research. The research case for a public pro-marriage policy and anti-cohabitation policy is every bit as sound as the case for a public anti-smoking policy.

Last December I issued a press release commenting that the new government policy on domestic violence completely ignored the two biggest risk factors identified by the Home Office's own research - separation for women and cohabitation for men. One of our Bristol MPs very sensibly took this case up directly with the Home Office. I was shown a copy of a somewhat dismissive response from a Home Office minister. The minister argued that the Home Office research study in question did not show cause and effect (which is true), that the risk factors could be explained away by age differences (highly presumptious since the reverse could equally be true), and that the government already supports couples through its "important" MARS policy. BCFT has been a beneficiary of this policy for which support I and the BCFT trustees are extremely grateful. However it is an interesting use of the word "important" given that the policy represents just one 3,000th of what the taxpayer already spends on family breakdown.

The final paragraph concludes that "the Government does recognise the importance of stable relationships". The minister can't quite bring herself to say marriage, regardless of the array of research findings that link marriage to stability and cohabitation to instability. Because of the popularity of cohabitation, I doubt there will be much government recognition until the tide changes back towards marriage as the norm.

That's why this month's signing of a Community Marriage Policy for Greater Bristol is so important. Church leaders can and must stand up for marriage as the best option for families. The drift towards cohabitation is both easy to understand and deceptively attractive. "We love each other. We're committed because we have a mortgage and a baby. Why do we need to get married?" The facts suggest this is not nearly enough. The trend towards cohabitation needs to be reversed because the evidence is so clear that cohabitation is destructive to families.

Church leaders are well used to speaking truth whilst loving those who choose other ways. I hope their example on 10th February will inspire politicians to do likewise.

 

BEING A FRIEND INDEED
(Bristol Evening Post)

What do you do when a friend or neighbour casually mentions to you that their marriage is on the rocks? They've got young children and you know divorce will be devastating. You want to help but it's all very embarrassing. You just don't know what to say or do. So you let your friends go with a heavy heart, wishing you could have had the courage to say something.

Most family breakdown is completely avoidable and unnecessary. Perfectly good relationships end in tears. The most common reasons - at core - are either that the couple has neglected to spend time on sustaining their friendship or they have allowed arguments to close each other down. They have grown apart and the love has died. They feel undervalued or misunderstood.

Almost always couples are better off staying together and making it work. By far the worst divorces for children are the ones where there's no fighting.

The keys to being a friend indeed are to listen, not to take sides, and to encourage them to re-learn how to do relationships. Next time it happens - and chances are it will - here are some easy things you can do to be a real friend to them and their family.

Firstly, give them hope. Point them at an open letter I've written at the www.bcft.co.uk website. You can find it under "Is your marriage in difficulties". This letter tells the story of my own marriage in crisis that is now unrecognisably stronger than my wife Kate and I could ever have imagined.

We see far too many stories on film or TV of couples who drift apart. What couples in crisis need is hope: hope that there is a way ahead; hope that their situation is not unique. You may be able to provide that hope with your own story. Others have been through crisis and survived. Divorce is not inevitable.

Secondly, give them a practical guide. In my letter, I've talked about a book called "Divorce Remedy" by Michele Weiner Davis. I encourage anyone to read this book who wants to make their marriage work. As a friend, just buy it and give it to them.

The book outlines some really practical and sensible steps, especially where only one person wants to make the marriage work. Remember how one person's bad attitude or sharp word can send the marriage into a downward spiral? The same is true in reverse although it undoubtedly takes longer for new positive behaviours to have an effect. The key is that the relationship will change if my behaviour changes. It takes one to tango.

Third, get them some practical skills. There are several ways of doing this. They can find a course through www.themarriagecourse.org or do our new course called "Listening, Loving Laughing". I've also recommended some other books on my website. Either way, they need to learn again how to communicate constructively, how not to hurt each other, and how to understand their different ways of loving.

Fourth, encourage them to book regular time together. No friendship survives long without the investment of time together. Kate and I have to remember to book time in our diary, just like any other meeting or event. If we're feeling distant from one another, you can bet it's because we've not spent time together for a while. That means no kids, no TV, no telephone. It's just the two of us and a walk, a bike ride, a game of tennis, a chat, a dinner, a bath, or a movie. We talk about what's important to us - interests, worries, kids, holidays, work, future plans.

I've obviously simplified things here a bit. And I'm not talking about the minority of couples in crisis who are violent. It's important to realise that, for the majority of couples in crisis, you really don't need to be an expert to make a big difference.

What couples in crisis usually want is somebody to help them fight for their marriage and somebody to tell them how to get it back on the road. Most people see problems and encourage them to give up. That takes away the immediate pain but stores up much more pain for the future. You may be the only person who's prepared to stand up for them. That's a friend indeed.

 

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE & MARRIAGE
(BCFT e-newsletter June 2003)

Domestic violence affects one in four women and one in four men at some time in their lives. A Home Office consultation paper was issued this month to find a way ahead (see www.homeoffice.gov.uk). The paper very sensibly looks at prevention, protection and support.

Part of the problem is that neither the police, courts, health services or social services collect reliable information on domestic violence. What is known comes largely from surveys, whether through NSPCC data collection in the 1970s and 80s, or a 1999 review of the Home Office's British Crime Survey conducted amongst 11,000 adults.

A striking observation from the Home Office and other research is that family structure and family breakdown have a big influence on domestic violence. For example, women separated from their partner (married or not) face 11 times the risk of married women. Single mothers face 4 times the risk. Men living with a partner face 2 ½ times the risk. Anecdotal evidence from the courts suggests that unmarried people are at 2-3 times the risk of the married.

Yet the Home Office consultation paper fails even to raise the possibility that family structure or stability can be improved as a preventive measure.

In terms of prevention, it should be obvious that at the very least we need to try to improve couple stability. An astonishing 22% of separated women experience domestic violence. Separating from a husband or boyfriend is far and away the single biggest predictor of domestic violence.

Improving couple stability is the primary aim of all Community Family Trusts. Instead of cautiously providing a bare minimum of support and waiting to see if our approach works, the government should be desperate to see us succeed. Apart from a few churches and marriage education organisations, nobody else is doing this!

Although it may seem an even steeper task, it should also be obvious that we need to turn people back to marriage. There is an abundance of evidence that married people do better than the unmarried at every level of society. Yet society is turning its back on marriage on a huge scale. For the 100 years until 1960, around 5% of babies were born to unmarried parents each year. In 1980 that had risen to 12%. In 2000, it was 40%. Unmarried parents today face 4-5 times the risk of break-up compared to married parents.

As a society, we can rightly provide lots of protection and support to those already affected by domestic violence. But we will never get to grips with prevention of domestic violence until we get to grips with the problem of marriage.

 

THE GOVERNMENT'S LOWEST PRIORITY?
(BCFT e-newsletter, April 2004)

Politicians often tell us how pro-family they are. Mr Blair said this in February: "The Government's first priority is with the stability of relationships where children are involved." So how exactly do these fine words translate to fine actions?

Let's assume that supporting one parent families, supporting same sex couples, supporting intact families, and providing information on family support services are all worthy causes - provided that the level of support is appropriate. Here's how your taxpayer money is spent on these.

1) For the 7 million families with dependent children, £1.40 per family was spent on DfES and related websites. Total cost £10m.

2) For the 80,000 same sex couples, £350-£3,500 per couple is about to be spent every year on pension rights via the new civil partnership scheme. That's after a one-off payment amounting to £1,800-£18,000 per couple. Total cost over £10-£100m annually and a one-off payment of £150m-£1.5bn.

3) For the 1.75 million one-parent families with dependent children, £8,500 per family is spent annually - mostly on income support but also including health and legal services. Total cost £15bn.

4) For the 7 million families with dependent children, 70p per family is spent annually on support via the MARS programme. Total cost £5m.

The reality therefore is that the government's first priority is in fact support for one-parent families. Few would quibble with the need. However "stability of relationships where children are involved" is hardly even a close second. In fact it turns out to be the government's very lowest priority - some way behind designing websites and a gigantic distance behind pension rights for same sex couples, the vast majority of whom do not have children.

 

THE MYTH OF AMICABLE DIVORCE
(Western Daily Press, 2 March 2004)

Late last year, headmaster Graham Able sparked a storm of media controversy by describing parents who divorced as selfish. Amongst the many resulting discussions, one subject seemed to come up again and again - the presumption that amicable divorce is a desirable goal.

Behind amicable divorce lies the idea that what's good for the adults is good for the children. If I am unhappy, my children are not happy. If I get out of the marriage, my children will be happier. If we don't fight and keep things amicable, it'll be better for the children.

Alas, all of this is a myth. Adults may feel better if divorce is amicable. Children see things differently.

The most robust view on the effects of divorce on children comes from American psychologist Professor Paul Amato. He and his colleagues have been following 2,000 married adults and their children since 1980, interviewing them every 4 years or so and asking lots of questions about well-being, relationship with parents, extended family and friends. Along the way, most of the adults have stayed married. Some of the adults have divorced. The researchers can therefore find out how adults and children see their world before and after divorce and compare it to families who stay married. The great advantage of this approach is that families can't rewrite their past. What they thought at the time is there on paper.

Amato's most important finding is that children do better or worse after divorce depending on the level of conflict during the marriage. Where the parents fought, children's well-being generally improves as they are removed from a stressful environment. Where the parents did not fight, children's well-being drops sharply following divorce. In Amato's words, low-conflict divorce represents an "unexpected, unwelcome, and uncontrollable event" that causes a deterioration in children's friendships and well-being. Interestingly children's relations with parents tend to deteriorate independently as a result of either divorce or conflict. In other words, amicable divorces are the very worst for children.

Here's why low-conflict divorce is so destructive. Children see a relationship that has suddenly fallen apart. Mummy & Daddy have stopped loving each other. As a child, I can either conclude that this is how relationships go. They just go pop for no reason. Or I can conclude that it was my fault. Either way, it's only a matter of time before Mummy & Daddy stop loving me. So don't trust. Don't get too close to people. Look after myself first.

This argument is well supported by studies showing that school-age children of divorce generally find it hardest to adjust if they either haven't anticipated their parents divorce, or blame themselves for the divorce, or see the divorce as uncontrollable. Although most children do adjust to divorce over time, there is a big gap in wellbeing between children of divorced and married parents generally. Far from narrowing with time, this gap widens yet further during the teenage years. Parental divorce problems often persist well into adulthood, resulting in lower achievement and well-being, as well as more marriage and relationship problems.

The biggest overall legacy of divorce is how children often struggle with their own intimate relationships when they become adults, regardless of how they cope with divorce at the time. Lacking successful role models, they simply don't know what healthy intimate relationships should look like.

Although I am certain many high conflict marriages can be turned around well before divorce is reached, it is the low conflict marriages that ought to be the most salvageable. My own experience of near-divorce and rebuilt marriage fits this bill. I know of many other couples who are rebuilding marriages unrecognisable from what they had before. A little marriage education avoids most common problems in the first place.

Booth, A. & Amato, P. (2001). Parental Predivorce Relations and Offspring Postdivorce Well-Being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 197-212.

The key ingredients for getting a marriage going again are attitude, skills and support - pretty much in that order. Couples firstly need to decide to work at things. A half-hearted commitment will usually end with an easy exit. A positive attitude allows scope for learning new ways and changing. Skill-building is the easy part. Old bad habits that eat away at marriages can be identified like bugs to be squashed. New habits can be learnt that build in understanding, value, and fun. But in the end it's the support of everyday friends for the marriage and not just the individuals that keeps the changes ringing.

Marriage education helps couples get the most from their marriage as well as avoid divorce. Unmarried couples can benefit from this too. You can learn how to have a great marriage. You can keep the fire burning brightly and you can rebuild it when it dies down.

The majority of UK divorces are described as "amicable" and by definition low conflict. Given the devastating effects of low conflict divorce on children, it is a miserable indictment of our legal, mediation and counselling systems that amicable divorce is often the desired goal. Keep the peace and trash the children. It would be good to hear couple counsellors say that staying married is almost always the better option. It would be good to hear lawyers or mediators offering marriage education.

 

BRISTOL'S FIRST COMMUNITY MARRIAGE POLICY
(BCFT e-newsletter, Feb 2004)

Bristol's first ever Community Marriage Policy was launched formally on February 10th 2004 at St Mary's Redcliffe church. Over half of the 60 church leaders who have now signed the policy attended. About half of the signatories are from Anglican churches, a quarter from non-denominational churches, and the remainder from Catholic, Methodist, Baptist and URC churches.

Media coverage was both excellent and disappointing! On the one hand, we had a good two minute feature on ITV-West evening news and interviews throughout the day with all four Bristol radio stations - BBC and commercial. On the other hand, BBC TV didn't turn up and newspaper coverage was poor considering the effort made by the journalists and photographers who did turn up. Having said all this, I can hardly complain! We've had terrific newspaper coverage over the last two years - including 15 features in the Evening Post and 8 in the Daily Press and Observer - and this is likely to continue.

The really big win however is in getting so many church leaders to agree to support marriage and couples. This is already showing signs of translating into much more active provision of marriage and relationship education. Bristol probably has the best access to such programmes of any city in the UK. BCFT already has the capacity to provide marriage preparation to 400 couples a year. The Marriage Course is also available and easy to run in any church or small group setting. None of this requires any real effort from the church leader. So there's no excuse for doing nothing!

A forthcoming study shows that US CMPs lower divorce rates by an average of 18% over 7 years, compared to 8% reduction in similar non-CMP areas. Whether this can occur in Bristol will be hard to determine since divorce data are not published locally, although they are collected for publishing nationally. Although nobody yet knows for sure, it is likely that CMPs have their effect both directly through church action and indirectly through publicity.

In time, we will initiate and launch a second CMP for leaders in the fields of education, health, justice, and welfare. Maybe this will attract greater publicity. However as an excellent beginning, the Bristol CMP can now begin to make a direct impact on family stability through church action.

COMMUNITY MARRIAGE POLICY FOR GREATER BRISTOL

a) As church leaders in the area of Greater Bristol, we wish to express our intent to support marriages and families in our community as best we can through this "Community Marriage Policy".

b) We also wish to express our deep concern at the rising tide of family breakdown in our community. We are concerned at the almost total absence of any serious public policy on supporting intact families or reducing family breakdown. We see little public acknowledgement of the vast scale of the problem or of its destructive consequences for individual families and society as a whole. We see little or no evidence of any serious plan to stem the tide - let alone turn it back.

c) We therefore wish to acknowledge publicly that family breakdown and its associated social consequences are a huge problem in our community. Whilst we fully maintain our commitment to help, support and value those not married, we wish to acknowledge publicly our desire to play an active part in turning back the tide through support for marriage.

1. Firstly, we acknowledge publicly that marriage is the best family model within which to raise children.

Research overwhelmingly supports this view. Married couples and their children are far more likely to be stable, happy, healthy, economically productive and free from violence or abuse.

2. Secondly, we will support the stability of adult couples by providing marriage education programmes that explore and affirm the basic skills of married life.

These skills include communication, conflict resolution and commitment. We will make such educational courses widely available to any couple in our community, regardless of religious belief or marital status. We will offer courses to couples preparing for marriage, couples already married and couples who cohabit. Marriage education is not the same as "marriage counselling" for those with problems who need "help". Marriage education is a healthy and normal ongoing activity for all couples at all stages of life.

3. Thirdly, we will encourage the development of "marriage mentoring", whereby ordinary couples with more experience of marriage develop a relationship with couples with less experience of marriage.

Simple training now makes mentoring easily accessible to any ordinary married couple. Couple-to-couple mentoring has proven highly effective in building good marriage practice and in providing a forum to discuss and resolve marital problems safely. It has also proven effective in rebuilding troubled marriages and supporting stepfamilies.

4. Fourthly, we will co-operate together as church leaders to share and develop our resources for the benefit of the whole community - in promoting the value of marriage, in offering marriage education, and in training and using mentor couples.

 

IS DIVORCE GETTING WORSE?

In the media, bad news makes good stories. Divorce is no exception. We read so much more often about failed marriages than successful ones. Celebrity divorces in particular seem to attract more media coverage than their weddings. For example, I've just read two full page articles about the divorce of a former BBC producer. His marriage would have merited almost no media interest.

There's so much myth and confusion sown about divorce rates. Is divorce getting worse or better? Are marriages doomed? Let me give you a reality check about what's really happening to Britain's families.

Fact 1 - Britain is indeed the divorce and family breakdown capital of Europe. According to Eurostat, we lead Europe with about 50% more divorces per year than the average country. According to the Office of National Statistics, our unmarried parents of young children are about 80% more likely to split up than the average elsewhere in Europe.

Fact 2 - Divorce rates have stayed the same for 25 years. Yes, it's true. Since 1980, between 12 and 14 divorces have taken place each year amongst every 1,000 married couples. So when the media talks of divorce rates rising or falling, it's by fairly trivial amounts. The divorce rate at present is about 13.

Fact 3 - Most marriages do last a lifetime. Economist John Ermisch at Essex University has tracked the divorce rate amongst groups of couples marrying in 1956, 1966, 1976 and 1986. By fiddling with his numbers and using some educated guesswork, I estimate that the average couple marrying today faces a little over 40% lifetime risk of divorce. Compare that to a 12% lifetime risk of divorce amongst those who married in the 1950s and 28% amongst those who married in the 1960s.

Fact 4 - The highest divorce risk occurs in years 3-6 of a marriage. Again using Ermisch numbers, the divorce rate peaks in these early years at about 30 divorces per thousand couples - i.e. 3% per year. Thereafter rates decline to 13 per 1,000 in the 15th year of marriage and less thereafter. Roughly two thirds of the big increase in lifetime divorce risk since the 1960s and 1970s has taken place in the first five years of married life. So if you want to reduce divorce, the first five years of marriage is the place to start.

Fact 5 - Divorce is more common amongst second marriages. After a bit more fiddling with Office of National Statistics figures, I estimate there are about 11 divorces per 1,000 first marriages every year, compared to 20 divorces per 1,000 second marriages. That means second marriages are about 80% more likely to fail than first marriages. Clearly we don't learn from our mistakes.

Fact 6 - Rising family breakdown is due to unmarried couples and not divorce. Three out of every four young children experiencing family breakdown have parents who did not marry. According to Office of National Statistics, there are roughly 2.9 million children in 1.75 million one-parent families. That's about one quarter of all families with children. These numbers are rising at about 2.5% per year. Since divorce rates have barely changed, the increase in one-parent families is almost entirely driven by the much higher break-rates of unmarried parents.

Want to avoid becoming a statistic yourself? Give your marriage or relationship an MoT with www.themarriagecourse.org or one of our BCFT courses. You've everything to gain and nothing to lose.

 

WHY PRE-NUPS ARE A REALLY BAD IDEA
(Western Daily Press, 2005)

Pre-nups should be avoided like the plague. They distort the nature of marriage, making it a commercial contract between business partners instead of a public commitment of love between a husband and wife. That, I believe, is fundamentally wrong.

When we get married we make a promise to stick around for life no matter what our circumstances - for better, for worse; for richer, for poorer; in sickness, and in health. It's the biggest commitment that any of us will ever undertake in our lives. Children, friends, houses and careers come and go, yet most marriages still last a lifetime.

What a prenuptial agreement does is add consumer conditions to the marriage. This turns marriage into a contract rather than a promise. Some might say this is more realistic. I disagree.

Pre-nups threaten a marriage from day one. Money is a difficult issue for many couples at the best of times. A pre-nup separates your money from my money. In a marriage you give yourself to someone totally. With a pre-nup, however, you are immediately holding back. You are suggesting that your partner can only have part of you. Another part is out of bounds.

This immediately creates an attitude where the world is seen as fair or unfair. Domestic chores, for example, become centres for debate. It is not fair that I should have to do the dishes tonight, it is not fair I should have to do the hoovering today. Fairness is an approach more common amongst the unmarried than the married.

This focus on fairness is thought to be a main reason why unmarried couples, even those with children, are so much more likely to break up. Married couples succeed because they tend to divide roles between them. They tend to think more about responsibility than fairness.

Another fundamental problem with a pre-nup is that it plants the seed of divorce in the minds of couples from a very early stage. It's a well-established finding that thoughts of divorce are linked to greater likelihood of actual divorce years later. If you think about something, you're more likely to do it. Prenuptial agreements focus your mind on thoughts of divorce before you even get to the wedding day. A pre-nup becomes the invisible elephant in the room. It may not be mentioned but it is always there in the back of your mind. This can easily come between people in the long term.

I think that pre-nups have risen for three main reasons. Firstly people are more self-interested than they were 50 years ago. There are many areas in which we have progressed since then. But in terms of our sense of responsibility and community values, we have gone firmly backwards.

A culture of self-responsibility is being replaced by a culture of blame, where somebody else is responsible. This has made us more litigious. When things go wrong, the instinct is to reach for the phone and call their lawyer. As just one example, daytime television bombards viewers with adverts saying you can claim money for stumbling over a paving stone.

Pre-nuptial agreements are effectively the start of this eagle-eyed, litigious society making incursions into the marriage vow, where people resign responsibility for their marriage before it is even begun. Such an agreement is an attempt to introduce a safety net, yet one which compromises the very nature of marriage.

Which brings me to the third reason why pre-nuptial agreements exist today. Fear. People today have grown up watching their parents get divorced and fear that their own relationships won't last. People want marriage yet fear divorce.

Marriage needs an image makeover. On the whole marriage works well, far better than its alternatives. Two-thirds of first marriages still last for life. Despite panicky media headlines, divorce rates since 1980 have remained pretty much unchanged. It is the break-up of unmarried parents that now accounts for over three quarters of family breakdown where young children are involved. Nobody gets married expecting their marriage to be anything other than a fantastic success. But it's also perfectly reasonable to have the odd nagging doubt or worry.

Instead of spending a fortune on how to divide things after the relationship goes wrong, couples should be encouraged to spend a little time making sure the relationship goes right.

Bristol Community Family Trust runs state-of-the-art relationship courses costing just £20. They have been shown to improve relationship quality, reduce conflict and cut divorce risk by 50-80 per cent over five years.

Lawyers may be experts at relationship breakdown. By all means involve them when things are over. But they are not experts at how relationships succeed.

Pre-nups put marriages at risk. If you want to stay happily married, a little relationship education is all you need.

 

MARRIAGE MoT
(Bristol Evening Post, 28 August 2004)

Imagine I said I could offer you a five year warranty on your marriage. You want a marriage that runs at peak performance? Then read on because this warranty is definitely for you.

You may have the swept up, shiny, you-can't-bend-it, go faster, deluxe model, state-of-the-art marriage. It's exciting, zippy and brand new. Or you may have the T-registered slightly damaged but basically working model marriage. It does the job quietly, consistently but unspectacularly. Or you may have a bit of an old banger that's just about surviving after many years. You know your marriage really well and have a fond affection that comes from such deep familiarity.

Yet whatever your situation, you know things could be better. There may be dark corners in your marriage that you haven't visited for years. There may be areas you'd like to improve on but have never got round to. There are bits you tolerate and endure for the greater good. You hear the stories of how things break down. But you really do want this particular marriage to beat the odds.

The good news is there really is such a warranty. This warranty will help you face the next few years with renewed confidence and certainty that your marriage is going to work really well and not break down.

The only catch is that you have to come in for a service. The warranty, a little like an MoT, can only be given to you once you have serviced your marriage.

Now of course this is just an analogy. But it's a good analogy. Whatever the state of your marriage or relationship, the most up-to-date research is telling us that the best short courses of relationship education lead to big improvements in relationship quality and big reductions in divorce risk up to five years afterwards.

After about five years, of course, the benefits of the service fade. But then so do all the associated risks. The longer a marriage lasts, the lower the risks. Once you've survived 6 years of marriage, you're through the period of highest divorce risk. After 11 years of marriage, your risk of divorce has already halved. After 25 years of marriage, your risk of splitting up is almost negligible.

So the "service" for your marriage or relationship is simply a short course. You learn, or are reminded of, how to spot the bad habits that destroy a relationship and how to build up the good habits that make relationships blossom and thrive.

My project runs one day courses for couples getting married or newlywed and three session courses for people who just want to brush up on their relationship skills. The Marriage Course is a seven evening course for those who want to make the most of their marriage. Courses range in price from £20 to £70.

Until a few years ago, it was only a minority of churches who offered educational courses. Now they are available throughout the community. It also happens that Bristol couples have better access to such courses than almost anywhere else in the country.

It takes time for a new idea to become normal. Couples often say they don't need relationship education and that it's only for those with problems. But the whole point of sending our cars for a service is partly to make sure the car runs smoothly and partly to avoid future problems. It's exactly the same thing with relationship education. It makes the marriage run more smoothly and avoids most unnecessary problems.

A select few percent of Bristol's couples have already taken advantage of this fabulous offer. You can join them easily and enjoy the confidence of a marriage that works as best it can. What are you waiting for? Get in touch and I'll point you in the right direction.

 

THE DANGER OF A SAFETY NET
(Bristol Evening Post, 12 June 2004)

One of the most difficult issues we faced when Kate and I got married was how to manage our money, in particular whether to have separate or joint accounts. Since we had spent pretty well all the money we had between us on a deposit for our flat, it was easy to decide that a joint Mr and Mrs Benson account was the best way ahead. But then we started wondering how to give each other birthday surprises. So we decided to keep individual separate accounts as well.

It wasn't very long before we got fed up with trying to juggle not very much money in three different accounts - not to mention savings. After only one year of marriage we had ditched the personal accounts and have run everything on a joint account basis ever since. Birthday presents are still surprises.

So should it matter whether couples have joint or separate accounts? I was intrigued to learn from a study last year that the kind of accounts couples choose is strongly influenced by their type of relationship. How much they earn or how well educated they are doesn't appear to make any difference. Separate accounts are the norm amongst cohabiting couples and those who had ever been divorced. Joint accounts are almost universal amongst first time married couples. The study found that this was true in countries as culturally diverse as Sweden and the USA.

Taking things one stage further, the same type of couples who have separate accounts also tend to have much higher break-up rates. In contrast first time married couples, who invariably have joint accounts, also have by far the lowest break-up rates.

I suspect the link between bank account and relationship is a common mindset. Cohabiting couples have separate accounts because they value their personal autonomy. Second time married couples keep things separate because they have been burnt once before. In both cases, couples are holding something back from each other. When push comes to shove, they simply have less sticking power.

Separate bank accounts can act like a safety net - whether intentionally or not. When the going gets tough, having the safety net of "my money" in the background might just be enough to tip the balance away from making it work and towards splitting up. You might not rely quite as much on developing your skills and expertise when you can rely instead on the safety net.

That's what the evidence suggests. Of course this doesn't apply to everyone. Not every cohabiting couple splits up. Not every married couple stays married.

There's evidence from other fields that safety nets can often end up making things more dangerous. Former England rugby star Jonathan Webb is a consultant orthopaedic surgeon specialising in sports injuries in Bristol. He is adamant that the use of protective gear in rugby would make the game vastly more dangerous. "There's clear evidence in American football that helmets started the downward trend," he says. "Helmets make you feel safer but they don't protect you from concussion. The result is that kids don't learn how to tackle properly."

The same may already be true in cricket, where one suspects many more players have been hit on the head since the advent of the crash helmet. I don't remember seeing many helmet-less batsmen laid out by bouncers. Now batsmen are frequently taking hits to the head. Are they better and safer batsmen? I doubt it.

Consider the law about seat belts. There is very good evidence that people are driving more dangerously since the advent of compulsory seat belt laws. Seat belts may prevent injuries to adults but they have also led to an increase in accidents.

When we feel safer, we may be less likely to work hard at staying alert, on top of our game, and avoiding accidents. That's why I think having separate accounts is a bad idea. Having separate accounts suggests that MY personal autonomy is more important than OUR relationship. I might be less inclined to put maximum effort into our relationship when I know I have a safety net. That might not be the case. But that's what it suggests.

For now, my explanation still stands. Separate accounts can be hazardous to your relationship. They are a symptom of the mindset. If that's you, have a talk about it and consider burning your bridges. Cut away the safety net and make your commitment speak loudly to one another.

 

TAKING THE PRESSURE OFF PRESENTS
(Bristol Evening Post)

I can still feel the pressure ten years on. For weeks before Christmas, I had been thinking about what to give my wife Kate as a present. Every lunch hour, I had wandered aimlessly around the shops, gazing at rows of things I knew weren't quite right. Of course I knew what sort of presents I'd like. I'd mentally chosen dozens of things I'd have happily received myself. But I simply couldn't find anything that seemed appropriate for Kate. Something that would really impress her that wouldn't cost the earth.

It was no good. The last shopping day was Christmas eve and I still hadn't found anything. I was getting desperate. As my lunch hour came to an end, I panicked into buying something. I don't even remember what it was but I remember the oppressive feeling.

The present I had chosen was not going to win awards for love and appreciation. But at least it was something. I returned to work hoping that I'd get away with it. Present opening time arrived on Christmas day. I panicked again because I'd forgotten to wrap my present for Kate.

Even though Kate was politely grateful, I knew instinctively from her reserved body language that Kate felt far from valued and cherished that Christmas. What she saw was an obviously last minute present that I hadn't even bothered to wrap. What she didn't see was the huge amount of time, worry and energy I had put into getting it.

I survived Christmas by the skin of my teeth with the awful thought that Valentine's day and her birthday lurked around the corner.

I recall this story because a friend of mine was telling me how the same thing happened to him. Every Christmas. Every birthday. Every Valentine's day. Every anniversary. Instead of being fun and intimate celebrations, these events cast a long shadow of impending doom over him, as they had me. The odds of either of us ever hoping to be romantic with our wives under this kind of pressure were slim. Neither of us had a clue.

Fortunately I was able to give my friend the simple answer that somebody had given to me. It has helped revolutionise my approach to celebratory events. The pressure has long vanished and now I eagerly look forward to Valentine's day or Kate's birthday.

The answer is ask! And that's what I did. Kate, what sort of thing would you like for Christmas? Kate, what sort of thing would you like to do for Valentine's day? Kate initially worried that telling me what to do would ruin the romance and spontaneity of a present or an evening. But it didn't and it hasn't.

The very fact that I ask the question shows I'm thinking of her and care for her. When Kate gives me a few ideas, she doesn't know which I will pick, if any. Having a few ideas from which to work completely removes the pressure. I want to please my wife. I want to bless her. Now I have a good idea how to do that because she has told me.

Over the years since then, I've continued to ask Kate what she wants well in advance. I'm getting better at knowing what she likes because the same preferences crop up again and again.

My biggest success - and demonstration of my progress in this area - came a few months ago on a particularly auspicious birthday. I know Kate likes spontaneity, surprises and time alone with me. So as the kids tumbled into our bed to wake her up and wish her happy birthday, I casually handed over her passport instead of a present. I told her she had two hours to pack before we left for two days in Venice. I had secretly arranged childcare and postponed everything written in her diary. The hardest part was keeping the secret for weeks beforehand.

Kate was over the moon and I'm still enjoying the afterglow. We had the most fantastic break together and away from our kids.

So if special occasions freak you out with worry about what to get or what to do, ask! You'll thank me that a friend told me and now I've told you.

 

RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION IN PRISON
(Bristol Evening Post)

A colleague of mine and I have just run a relationship education course for five couples. Just like our normal courses, the idea was to give couples practical tips on how to make sure their relationship is the best it can be. Nothing to do with counselling. Everything to do with education, skills and coaching.

The couples were wonderful. They really engaged with the principles we taught. They asked questions. They practised the skills and allowed us to coach them alongside. I got a buzz out of seeing couples really connecting with one another and becoming more confident with each other. It was just like teaching any other group of couples.

Only this course was a bit different. We ran it behind bars in Bristol prison. The couples were all inmates with their wives or girlfriends.

Now I take my hat off to the staff at Bristol prison for allowing this course to take place at all. Normally convicted inmates are allowed just one visit every fourteen days. Prisoners on remand are allowed three visits of an hour every week. So a whole day with a loved one is a relatively huge privilege to people whose freedoms have been strictly limited. It's part of the price they pay for committing a crime.

But inmates have families just like you or me. Inmates have mates just like you or me. They want their relationships to work just like you or me.

Yet family relationships are rarely straightforward amongst those who commit crimes. For example, some 70% of young offenders come from broken homes. That's nine times more often than amongst the rest of the population. Coming from a broken home makes it vastly more likely that prisoners have also experienced child abuse and domestic violence, simply because they come from a more dysfunctional family background. Mental health problems are far more common. I am told that one third of inmates can't read or write.

It's hardly surprising to learn that inmates are far more likely to have serial girlfriends and children from different relationships than one stable family relationship.

The need is huge and obvious. We can let them continue messing up their own and their kids relationships. Or we can try to offer them a better start.

That's why several of the Community Family Trusts around the country are just beginning to gain access to prisons, such as Bristol and Dartmoor, Cardiff and York. The big attraction for the prison authorities is that inmates who have more stable family backgrounds are far less likely to re-offend. And that is good news for the community that absorbs inmates when they are released.

Short courses of relationship education have a track record of improving relationship quality, reducing conflict and increasing a couple's odds of staying together. If we can improve family stability - and we can - there should be a big benefit in bringing down re-offending rates.

So well done to the resettlement, family life and education staff of Bristol and other prisons for taking the risk of buying into this idea. It's an obviously good idea to me. But I'm sold on the benefits and don't have to think about the practicalities of organising and managing the security arrangements needed for two whole days of prison visits by wives and girlfriends.

In due course, we plan to offer inmates an informal mentoring service on top of the short course. This system is already working well at Dartmoor prison. The idea is that a mentor - usually an ordinary married person or couple trained by us - provides support to the couple both before and after prisoners are released. Relationships can be fragile and brittle when the absentee man returns having left his lover and kids to cope without him for a long period of time.

Mentors can easily reinforce the simple skills that help couples talk more constructively about these everyday issues. The very ordinariness of a mentor makes them far more approachable than a professional or lawyer or counsellor or priest.

Our first foray into Bristol prison was a great success. I hope that the prison staff will make this exciting new venture a normal part of prisoners resettlement programme.

Click here to return to the top of the page.