A proposed bill urging schools to promote marriage before having children has split opinion across Indiana, triggering a heated debate among lawmakers, educators, and policy experts about how far public education should go in shaping students’ personal life choices.
Last month, Indiana State Senator Spencer Deery, a Republican, made a striking claim while addressing fellow legislators. If public schools were required to teach students that marriage should come before having children, he argued, the long-term payoff would be enormous.
“The chance of them being poor is almost zero,” Deery said, presenting the idea as a powerful tool in the fight against poverty. From his perspective, this single lesson could outperform many traditional anti-poverty programs.
The Idea Behind the “Success Sequence”
At the heart of the bill is a concept known as the “success sequence.” Popular among conservative policy circles, the framework outlines three steps believed to increase financial stability: earn at least a high school diploma, secure full-time employment, and then get married before having children.
Supporters often cite research from the American Enterprise Institute and the Institute for Family Studies, which suggests that nearly all millennials who follow this sequence avoid poverty by their early 30s. According to these studies, having children before marriage significantly raises the risk of economic hardship.
Deery, who helped author Indiana’s proposal, sees the approach as both low-cost and practical. He argues that while many government programs aim to reduce poverty, not all of them deliver results. Teaching students about life choices, he says, is worth trying.
Critics Push Back on Data and Messaging
Not everyone is convinced. Critics argue that the success sequence oversimplifies poverty and places responsibility on individual choices rather than systemic issues. Matt Bruenig, founder of the People’s Policy Project, contends that the framework conveniently sidesteps discussions about wages, healthcare, housing, and public benefits.
In his view, the narrative implies that poverty exists mainly because people fail to follow a set of personal rules, rather than because of structural inequalities.
Others raise concerns about how the message could affect students from single-parent households or those born outside of marriage. They argue the lesson risks shaming children for circumstances beyond their control.
How the Idea Spread Nationally
The success sequence is not new. It first appeared nearly 20 years ago in a report from the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy. The idea gained wider attention in 2009 after being promoted by the Brookings Institution, a centrist research group.
More recently, conservative momentum has grown thanks to model legislation backed by the Heritage Foundation, the organization behind the Republican policy blueprint known as Project 2025.
Several states have already moved in this direction. Utah passed a resolution encouraging schools to teach the success sequence, while Alabama and Tennessee approved laws requiring it to be included in classrooms starting in the 2026–27 school year. Similar proposals have surfaced in Ohio, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Texas.
Indiana’s Bill Moves Forward
Indiana’s proposal, Senate Bill 88, passed the state Senate by a 39–9 vote, with opposition coming exclusively from Democrats. The bill is now headed to the House, where debate is expected to intensify.
Republican Senator Gary Byrne, who introduced the legislation, described the concept as common sense. He said the goal is simply to plant an idea in students’ minds about planning their futures and building stable families.
Concerns About Classroom Impact
Democratic lawmakers remain uneasy. Senator Shelli Yoder warned that including the success sequence as part of Indiana’s “good citizenship” curriculum could unintentionally stigmatize students.
She worries that children from nontraditional families might feel labeled as products of “bad choices,” especially if the lesson is framed as a moral standard rather than one possible life path.
Mixed Evidence From Research
Academic findings on the success sequence are not definitive. A 2021 study funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services found that young adults who graduate, work full-time, and marry are less likely to experience poverty—but the order of those steps mattered far less than completing them at all.
Another Brookings study found racial disparities, showing that Black Americans who follow the sequence are still significantly less likely to reach the middle class than white Americans who do the same.
Even so, researchers like Brad Wilcox, who co-authored multiple studies on the topic, argue that the data still show clear benefits compared to not completing the steps.
A Simple Tool or a Risky Lesson?
For supporters like Byrne, the bill is about offering guidance, not judgment. He sees the success sequence as one more tool students can use to navigate adulthood and avoid poverty.
Opponents, however, fear that turning a contested social theory into a classroom lesson could do more harm than good. As the bill advances, Indiana finds itself at the center of a national conversation about education, family values, and how society defines the path to success.
