15 predictors of divorce

[butterflymommy]

I happened upon this randomly but found it fascinating, especially the same-sex divorce rate which I expected would be lower for women but higher for men (it's the reverse). I'll paraphrase the risk factors below but the article explains and annotates them:

 

http://www.thedailyb...ct-divorce.html

 

1. Living in the US --40-50% divorce rate.

2. Living in a red state-- 27% more likely to divorce.

3. Arguing about money 1X a week or more-- 30% more likely to divorce.

4. If your parents were divorced-- 40% more likely; if parents remarried, 90%.

5. If one partner is a smoker, 75-90% more likely to divorce than if both partners are smokers.

6. For each daughter, 5% increase in divorce. Not sure if this is negated by sons present in the household.

7. Evangelicals are slightly less likely than catholics or other christians to divorce.

8. Living in Wayne County, Indiana

9. If both partners had previous marriages, 90% more likely.

10. If wife is older than husband, 53% more likely.

11. Below average intelligence-- 50% more likely.

12. Diagnosed with cervical cancer-- 40% more likely, Male diagnosed with testicular cancer-- 20% more likely.

13. Birth of multiples-- 17% more likely.

14. If the woman has lived with more than one man before marriage-- 40% more likely.

15. Same sex male couple, 50% more likely than heterosexual; same sex female couple, 167% more likely.

 

Maybe the same sex female couples are rushing into marriage while the men are more cautious. Re # 12, other cancers make a couple LESS likely to divorce.

[Parrothead]

 

 

Maybe the same sex female couples are rushing into marriage while the men are more cautious.

 

No, Sweetie. It is the PMS.

 

Pheromones ensure that both women end up on the same cycle. It can probably get really ugly starting the week before Aunt Flo visits.

[Guest]

That seems like a silly list. :tongue_smilie: Seriously, it's like #17 could be, "Eating ice cream, 57% more likely."

[Rhonda in TX]

Eh. Some of those seem like they could be actual indicators. Others seem very random.

[butterflymommy]

That seems like a silly list. :tongue_smilie: Seriously, it's like #17 could be, "Eating ice cream, 57% more likely."

 

 

There probably is some predictable outcome for marriage with differing eating habits or even weight. I know married couples are more likely to gain weight than single people. They think it's because people tend to eat more, when eating in the company of others.

[Crimson Wife]

Evangelicals actually have one of the highest divorce rates of all faiths. According to U.S. Census Bureau data, the divorce rates are as follows:

 

Evangelical Protestant 34%

Jews 30%

Mainline Protestants 25%

LDS 24%

Lutherans 21%

Catholics 21%

Atheists and Agnostics 21%

[kalanamak]

What's with Indiana?

[EKS]

Atheists and Agnostics 21%

 

This is interesting.

[Guest inoubliable]

This doesn't seem to be all that enlightening. LOL. Hmm...if your parents were divorced, or remarried and divorced, you may not have had a good model of a well-working marriage. Might be a bit tough for you to pull one off - you may have to work a little harder than someone who *did* have a well working marriage modeled in front of them. Your IQ is significantly higher than your spouse's? Might be a bit hard to have much conversation in the long haul. Argue about money much? I'm guessing there isn't too much you *do* agree on, then. Good luck. Your spouse smokes, but you don't? After a while, I'm betting you get tired of the stink and the notion of hauling around an oxygen tank for your spouse or for yourself when your spouse's habit deteriorates your own health might have you headed for the door.

 

You like Ben Affleck but your spouse loves Matt Damon? Whoa. Watch out. See if Laura Wasser is available.

[runbikeswim]

Number 8 made me lol. Move?

 

[Renee in NC]

It's amazing that dh and I have lasted 15 years. According to this, we are almost 300% more likely to divorce.

[Crimson Wife]

 

This is interesting.

 

Probably mostly demographic. Those who are openly atheists/agnostics tend to come from demographic groups with an overall lower divorce rate (more educated, more affluent, more likely to be Caucasian or Asian, etc.)

[EKS]

 

Probably mostly demographic. Those who are openly atheists/agnostics tend to come from demographic groups with an overall lower divorce rate (more educated, more affluent, more likely to be Caucasian or Asian, etc.)

 

 

That's probably true. It would be interesting to see what it would look like when controlling for those sorts of things.

[LaxMom]

Whenever you see an explanation for anything, try to figure out what the explanations are for those explanations.

A quote for life, right there.

 

It looks like we're about 200% more likely (than what, I don't know) to divorce. Good thing I married a smart one this time, or we'd be done for! Snort.

[kalanamak]

 

This is interesting.

 

No illusions about finding a better life. (JOKE, people, JOKE.)

[elegantlion]

According to those statistics we should have never gotten married. The saving grace is probably the fact he wasn't born in that particular county in IN. He's still a Hoosier though.

[Denisemomof4]

I don't think I believe that list.

 

 

 

[TravelingChris]

In coming Apart, I found out why I hardly know divorced people IRL. People at the top end still have really low divorce rates. (Oh, and they are so much more likely to be church or synagogue attenders than the people on the lowest end).

[Forget-Me-Not]

Correlation is not causation.

[Rosie_0801]

The biggest predictor of all is having someone to divorce. :p

[Mergath]

Number fifteen is a crock. Everything that I've read says that gay couples are no more likely, or even less likely, to divorce than straight couples.

[Whitworth]

Patriarchy creates added stress. Household financial anxiety is compounded in such a system. Feudalism is the result. Members of the family are no longer equal, but rather take on the roles of Lord and vassal.

 

I intend to order this:

 

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0745307086?d=d&pd=1

 

Bringing It All Back Home uses the intimate arena of the household as the unique setting for a groundbreaking study of the relationships between class, gender and power today. The authors - and the feminist scholars who offered responses to their critique - integrate the rich traditions of Marxism and feminism, and more recent developments in Marxian theory and Lacanian psychoanalysis, to theorise a new approach to the contemporary crisis of the family.

[TranquilMind]

No, Sweetie. It is the PMS.

 

Pheromones ensure that both women end up on the same cycle. It can probably get really ugly starting the week before Aunt Flo visits.

 

 

Funny.

 

And probably also why having daughters increases the risk in a way that sons do not.

[LucyStoner]

Real indicators that a couple is likely to divorce:

 

http://www.gottmanblog.com/2012/04/four-horsemen-of-apocalypse.html?m=1

 

Because of some glaring untruths on this 15 point list, I have to wonder about any of them. And none of them are indicators of any particular couple's likelihood of divorce. They are merely (at least partially untrue) statistics presented about demographics. Gays and lesbians are not more likely to divorce. Evangelicals are the most likely religious group to divorce.

[amo_mea_filiis.]

The biggest predictor of all is having someone to divorce. :p

 

 

Agreed! I can't divorce myself so i have to work it out. I can't even get away from me for a little while.

[VeteranMom]

I think it's interesting that there is no mention of age. A lot of things I've read in the past say that a person's age at the time of the marriage is an indicator.

[Trish]

Evangelicals actually have one of the highest divorce rates of all faiths. According to U.S. Census Bureau data, the divorce rates are as follows:

 

Evangelical Protestant 34%

Jews 30%

Mainline Protestants 25%

LDS 24%

Lutherans 21%

Catholics 21%

Atheists and Agnostics 21%

 

So what group gets the U.S. to its famous 50 percent level? If all these are so low.

[Trilliums]

No illusions about finding a better life. (JOKE, people, JOKE.)

 

This is what I thought. :)

[6packofun]

Evangelicals actually have one of the highest divorce rates of all faiths. According to U.S. Census Bureau data, the divorce rates are as follows:

 

Evangelical Protestant 34%

Jews 30%

Mainline Protestants 25%

LDS 24%

Lutherans 21%

Catholics 21%

Atheists and Agnostics 21%

 

 

What does the Census question ask? If you've ever been divorced and your "religious affiliation"? So, someone who says they are of one faith--practicing or not (and this is actually important)-- and has never been married could answer that they've never been divorced?

 

It's a very different statistic if the calculation is based on the percentage of marriages that failed within each religious affiliation OR the percentage of divorced people out of the total population of the affiliation. Since one cannot get divorced if one has never been married, and there are statistics that show atheists are less than half as likely to marry at all, I can't give the census info that much attention. LOL

[butterflymommy]

No, Sweetie. It is the PMS.

 

Pheromones ensure that both women end up on the same cycle. It can probably get really ugly starting the week before Aunt Flo visits.

 

 

This has never, ever happened with me, and I lived in females dorms from age 15-21. Not once did my cycle match my roommate's. Even now that I have a DD with her period, our cycles never match. Apparently, even my ovaries are pariahs. :nopity:

[Jayne J]

Sigh. We might as well just give up and get divorced now I guess, since we are at least 200% or so more likely than...who again?

[butterflymommy]

So what group gets the U.S. to its famous 50 percent level? If all these are so low.

 

 

The divorce rate for some racial groups is much higher than 50% so it pushes up the average.

[Mergath]

 

What does the Census question ask? If you've ever been divorced and your "religious affiliation"? So, someone who says they are of one faith--practicing or not (and this is actually important)-- and has never been married could answer that they've never been divorced?

 

It's a very different statistic if the calculation is based on the percentage of marriages that failed within each religious affiliation OR the percentage of divorced people out of the total population of the affiliation. Since one cannot get divorced if one has never been married, and there are statistics that show atheists are less than half as likely to marry at all, I can't give the census info that much attention. LOL

 

Erm... not quite. It's more like 85% of Christians and 65% of atheists/agnostics.

 

http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/15-familykids/42-new-marriage-and-divorce-statistics-released

 

World Net Daily isn't super reliable when you need statistics. ;)

[butterflymommy]

Sigh. We might as well just give up and get divorced now I guess, since we are at least 200% or so more likely than...who again?

 

The same sex risk was compared to heterosexual risk in Norway & Sweden:

 

http://www.uni-koeln.de/wiso-fak/fisoz/conference/papers/p_andersson.pdf

[Parrothead]

 

This has never, ever happened with me, and I lived in females dorms from age 15-21. Not once did my cycle match my roommate's. Even now that I have a DD with her period, our cycles never match. Apparently, even my ovaries are pariahs. :nopity:

I was joking.

[I.Dup.]

I think there is something about the 20 year mark, but that is just my unprofessional opinion. By then the kids are usually grown or almost there, and there isn't much to hold the couple together anymore. Also, it seems a lot of people (dare I say men?) are going through a mid-life crisis around that time. Then again, it might be personal for me since my sister is going through this right now. It's been horrible. :(

[AdventureMoms]

No, Sweetie. It is the PMS.

 

Pheromones ensure that both women end up on the same cycle. It can probably get really ugly starting the week before Aunt Flo visits.

 

Ha! Well, that hasn't happened here, at all. We've lived together for a decade or so. However, staggered cycles isn't such a great thing either. I just get through the "want to kill someone and eat everything" phase and she starts it....never ending cycle. Heaven help us when DD starts. I'll probably still be in my late 30's, so we'll probably all get to ride the roller coaster together. The twins will be really, really good at dealing with PMSing women though.

[Guest inoubliable]

 

The same sex risk was compared to heterosexual risk in Norway & Sweden:

 

http://www.uni-koeln...p_andersson.pdf

 

 

In a study from 2004, to boot. :rolleyes: Here's some statistics from US same-sex couples and from 2011. Second to last paragraph is interesting. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frederick-hertz/divorce-marriage-rates-fo_b_1085024.html

 

That conclusion about women cohabiting before marriage was from a study in 2007. Updated information from a study in 2012. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/22/cohabitation-no-longer-predictor-divorce/?page=all

[Sun]

In coming Apart, I found out why I hardly know divorced people IRL. People at the top end still have really low divorce rates. (Oh, and they are so much more likely to be church or synagogue attenders than the people on the lowest end).

 

This sounds interesting. Which Coming Apart was this? When I googled, I came up with a few different options. Was it worth reading overall? I'm curious because I also hardly know any divorced people.

[Farrar]

Wait, what's up with Wayne County, Indiana?

 

Even if this list is statistically sound, there are so many factors not included. My parents both divorced, both remarried. But with not much drama and they remarried and ended up in very loving relationships. That's so different from parents who scream at each other, use the kids as bargaining chips, have romantic drama, etc. after the divorce. Or the multiples thing, yes, we have multiples, but surely things like how difficult your multiples are as babies and how prepared you are to deal with them vs. a singleton would be important factors.

[AdventureMoms]

Wait, what's up with Wayne County, Indiana?

 

Even if this list is statistically sound, there are so many factors not included. My parents both divorced, both remarried. But with not much drama and they remarried and ended up in very loving relationships. That's so different from parents who scream at each other, use the kids as bargaining chips, have romantic drama, etc. after the divorce. Or the multiples thing, yes, we have multiples, but surely things like how difficult your multiples are as babies and how prepared you are to deal with them vs. a singleton would be important factors.

 

Yeah, I agree with this. My mom is divorced and remarried, but it was a short marriage when she was very young. She was with my dad for 2 years before I was born and they've been together for 33 years now and have a very healthy, happy relationship. So I grew up with a great relationship model in spite of mom's prior marriage. MIL's relationship history could rival a soap opera for drama and she's never had a healthy relationship, yet on paper it's the same as my mom's - divorced once, remarried.

 

And yeah, I can see how the multiples thing could drive people apart (since I'm currently hiding in the basement from my 2yo twin boys) but it really does vary. I know people with twins who are easier than other people's singletons. Full term healthy twins seem less difficult for a relationship than a medically fragile preemie or child born with multiple special needs. And some relationships handle stress better than others, of course.

 

The list is too simplistic, in addition to the fact that I'm highly suspicious of several of those statistics.

[TravelingChris]

This was Comin Apart by Charles Murray. It is a sociological study of white Americans from 1960 to 2010. I found it a very interesting book but also kind of depressing. It helped explain my experiences but the outcome for the lower classes is very bleak.

[Catwoman]

I think the list is idiotic.