How does the experience of living together with a partner impact the likelihood that a couple will later divorce quizlet?

Recommended textbook solutions

Human Resource Management

15th EditionJohn David Jackson, Patricia Meglich, Robert Mathis, Sean Valentine

249 solutions

Operations Management: Sustainability and Supply Chain Management

12th EditionBarry Render, Chuck Munson, Jay Heizer

1,698 solutions

Anderson's Business Law and the Legal Environment, Comprehensive Volume

23rd EditionDavid Twomey, Marianne Jennings, Stephanie Greene

369 solutions

Operations Management

13th EditionWilliam Stevenson

980 solutions

1. Deviancy model:
- The deviancy model pathologizes divorce and presents the divorced family as being deviant and leading to a number of problems. The divorced family is seen as being short term, aberrant and 'no longer intact', as opposed to intact families which are the preferred, normative type. With remarriage and formation of a blended, reconstituted or stepfamily, the divorced family once again becomes normative.

2. Opportunity for personal growth:
- The opposing model sees divorce as an opportunity for personal growth that challenges people to increase their adaptive abilities by coping with the challenges of divorce. Divorce is seen as women's resistance against oppressive familial and societal structures.

- It is unrealistic to view divorce purely in terms of a negative pathology or a positive personal growth opportunity, since it negates different experiences of individuals.

- Divorce is a complex process and depending on circumstances individuals will cope and adapt in numerous ways.

- The initial experience of divorce may be one of relief, but when the reality settles in it brings a number of serious issues with it. Stress, fear and ongoing concerns about money, housing, childcare, etc. emerge.

Using the microsociological approach does not explain much about divorce in the bigger picture. A micro analysis would look at the grounds for divorce, dynamics in relationships, communication issues, and conflict resolution, for example, and this doesn't tell us much about the wider society.

Using a mesosociological approach enables researchers to identify the major life course and demographic variables that predict the likelihood of divorce. Such variables cannot cause divorce but can be identified as predictors. Everyone does not have the same likelihood of divorcing. So by looking at age at marriage, socioeconomic status, religiosity, education level, geographic locality, etc. it can be determined who is more likely than others to divorce.

Using the macrosociological approach would involve looking at the bigger changes in society.

Changes in the institution of marriage and the legal structure of society, for example, contributed to the rise in divorce rates in Canada. The changes in the divorce laws in 1968 and 1985 made divorce much more accessible, so rates increased. Changing cultural values mean less stigma, more options outside marriage, etc.

Economic cycles play a role as well. Couples are less likely to divorce during recessions, probably because they were working hard together in tough times. This is only a temporary phenomenon though. Gender role expectations may be contributing to increased divorce rates as well.

- Age is cited as a critical factor in mate selection, so it is interesting to examine the impact of age at marriage on probability of divorce. It is the strongest predictor of divorce in first 5 years of marriage.

- The risk is particularly high for those who marry as teenagers. For women, risk of divorce is much higher for those who marry young (before age 20) and it declines with age at marriage until about age 25, then remains fairly constant. This means that after age 25 age at marriage is not a factor in predicting divorce. For men, too, early marriage is related to a higher probability of divorce. The risk of divorce does not decline until about age 30, then remains fairly constant.

Those who marry early face a higher risk of divorce because they are still in process of maturation. Late teens and those in their 20s are at a time of the life cycle in which people's values and expectations change dramatically.

This can place additional strain on marriage and make adjustment to marriage more difficult. Also, they are more likely to have other attributes associated with higher risk of divorce, like, for example, low level of education, lower incomes, and fewer communication skills.

In societies where a lower age at marriage is the norm, for example, countries in South America and Islamic countries, there are fewer divorces.

This is due to the fact that other features in these societies keep divorce rates low. These societies have high rates of childbearing, so they are more family oriented. Extended families are closer and more important there as well. These societies have more strongly institutionalized religions, that either strongly frown on divorce or ban it entirely. These societies often have restrictive divorce laws as well.

2nd marriages are 10% more likely to fail and are shorter in duration. The risk of divorce is even higher in subsequent remarriages. This is especially true if children are involved.

In remarriages, there are more people involved, like ex-partners, ex-in laws, children of one or both partners, etc., which can increase a couple's circle of support, but can also increase the difficulties in a marriage. Children may, for example, resent the new partner and make the success of the marriage more difficult.

Difficulties can arise from the differences in how each partner thinks family is done. For example, holiday traditions may be very different in the former marriages, so this can cause issues in a remarriage.

Also, if behaviours that led to the early divorces continue, there is likely to be another divorce. For example, if excessive drinking or extramarital affairs continue in a remarriage, there is a greater likelihood of another divorce.

Whether or not a couple has children has an impact on the likelihood of divorce. 'Shotgun weddings', those marriages that occur because the woman is pregnant, are at higher risk of divorce because of the motivation for the marriage.

Having children produces marital stability in the short run, although marital satisfaction declines with the presence of children, which reduces likelihood of getting a divorce.

The 'braking hypothesis' suggests that, while children do not eliminate chances of divorce, they succeed in slowing down movement toward divorce. Divorce among those with children are thus likely to occur later than among similar couples who have not had children.

Having children increases the stresses and need for cooperation between partners, which might be problematic if the partners have differing views of parenting. It may be that childless couples may put an emphasis on marital satisfaction and end the marriage if they are not happy or couples who are not happy or stable may delay or forego having children due to problems and divorce before children arrive.

More controversial, recent research has also found that couples with boys are less likely to divorce. This is true for all races, socio-economic status groups and ages of children. In addition, the likelihood of couples staying together increases with the number of boys they have.

Due to higher levels of financial insecurity facing those from lower socioeconomic statuses they experience more marital stresses.

Those who have fewer resources and assets have less to lose from divorce and less to gain by staying married. Typically having a lower material investment in marriage, means that a divorce 'costs' them less. So, if a couple has few possessions, they can divorce and accumulate a few more possessions; however, a wealthy couple will have to divide up assets, like a big house, a vacation home, savings, etc. and one partner may be responsible for paying spousal support.

Recently, the number of divorces among middle and upper classes has been increasing. Some research finds an increase in probability of divorce as wives' socioeconomic status increases and they are participating in the labour force, especially when the wives' status is higher than husbands' status.

On the other hand, other research shows that improvements in a wife's status increased marital stability, perhaps by reducing economic stresses in the family and increasing the wife's autonomy and fulfilment.

There is a clear relationship between level of education and risk of divorce for men. As education goes up, risk of divorce goes down. But the relationship is more complicated for women. It appears that the risk of divorce is lowest among those with moderate levels of education. For women with little education the risk is higher. Interestingly, there is an increased risk of divorce among women at the highest educational levels. Professional women - those with 5 or more years of college or university education - have an increased risk.

There is a greater risk of divorce in couples who differ considerably on significant social characteristics, like age, education level, race, religion, etc.

This suggests that spouses who differ in these key areas may encounter more problems either between themselves or as a result of greater social pressure from family, friends, and society.

Looking at race, for example, even though mixed race marriages are legal and have become more common in recent years, couples in these marriages will face more issues that could lead to difficulties than those in marriages with someone of the same race or cultural background. They may face discriminatory behaviour from strangers on the street or disapproval by family members. If they have children, they will have additional issues to overcome that other couples do not.

How does the experience of living together with a partner cohabitation impact the likelihood that a couple will later divorce?

Are couples who live together more likely to divorce?

How could cohabitation increase the risk a couple might divorce?

What are the effects of cohabitation on marriage quizlet?