Article Summary –
The Heritage Foundation’s report, “Saving America by Saving the Family,” proposes solutions to an assumed “family crisis” in the U.S., advocating for policies like government-funded marriage bootcamps and alternatives to traditional fertility treatments, while criticizing higher education for delaying family growth. Critics such as Joanna Grossman and Jessica Waters argue that the report selectively uses data to support its narrative, neglects important factors like poverty and women’s desires, and pushes a conservative agenda that emphasizes traditional family structures. The report is seen as a potential blueprint for future policy, similar to Project 2025, aiming to influence federal and state governments by promoting a return to traditional marriage and family roles.
The Heritage Foundation, a conservative policy group shaping the Republican agenda for Trump’s second presidency, Project 2025, released a report on Jan. 8 to transform U.S. family policy.
The report titled “Saving America by Saving the Family: A Foundation for the Next 250 Years” addresses a perceived “family crisis” in the U.S. It emphasizes restoring family homes based on two principles: children’s right to parental affection and the ideal of a stable home with married biological parents.
Jessica Waters, senior scholar at American University, commented on the ultraconservative plans like Project 2025, noting its influence on Trump administration policies. She expressed concerns that these plans, often misjudged as mere blueprints, significantly shape governmental action.
The report identifies issues affecting family life and proposes solutions, such as government-funded marriage bootcamps, reducing educational “over-credentialism,” and promoting faith-based infertility treatments.
Education
“The Education Conundrum” section argues that policies boosting college enrollment have inadvertently suppressed family growth. It suggests that these policies delay adult responsibilities, impacting fertility rates.
The report states, “More education correlates with later marriage and fewer children.” Joanna Grossman of Southern Methodist University criticized the report for neglecting women’s happiness and ignoring factors like climate change and gender dynamics.
IVF
In “What About In Vitro Fertilization (IVF)?”, the report views infertility as a symptom of health issues. It cites the right-wing Institute for Family Studies, arguing that IVF access might lower overall birth rates. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists warns that restorative reproductive medicine (RRM), advocated in the report, can limit effective fertility care.
Grossman highlighted the report’s lack of focus on infertility’s root causes, like poverty and healthcare access, which are ignored in favor of a narrative against IVF.
Marriage
The report promotes a marriage “bootcamp” for cohabiting couples with children, advocating for a societal commitment to revive marriage as essential for America’s future. It claims marriage enhances wealth, health, and happiness, fostering child success and reducing abortion rates.
Waters questioned the criticism of young people prioritizing financial independence and fulfilling careers over marriage and children. She perceived the report’s ideal family model as traditional and exclusionary.
Why the report matters
Grossman suggested the report follows Project 2025’s success as a policy blueprint. Waters criticized it for promoting a regressive family model, implying a push for traditional gender roles.
—
Read More Pennsylvania News
