In recent years, there have been several studies that suggest that some happy and satisfied newlyweds were still getting divorced. Paul Amato and Bryndl Hohmann-Marriott's 2007 research is one such example; they found that there was a surprising number low-distress couples that were splitting up.
These findings led UCLA researchers Justin Lavner and Thomas Bradbury to speculate about the possible reasons for divorce among these seemingly happy couples. They suggested that there are four broad reasons for the findings: First, maybe the couples are just simply not as committed as other couples that stay together. Commitment has been shown to be an important factor as couples deal with difficulties and challenges in married life. Second, maybe one or both of the partners who seem satisfied with marriage have difficult personalities that, over time, lead to a decline in marital satisfaction. A third explanation could be that these satisfied couples encounter more stressful and challenging situations in life and that these difficulties lead to divorce. Finally, despite the aspects of marriage and life that are rewarding, perhaps there are subtle communication and conflict difficulties that progressively undermine the relationship over time.
To examine these possible explanations, Lavner and Bradury conducted a longitudinal study of 136 couples that provides some insight into the reasons why happy and satisfied newlyweds may eventually divorce. They selected a group of couples who, for the first four years of marriage, reported high satisfaction and general happiness with their marriages. These were not couples who were unhappy in these first few years. Lavner and Bradbury collected information about their levels of stress, their personalities and their commitment to the marriage. They also measured their communication skills in a laboratory activity that has been shown to reliably detect positive and negative strategies of communication and problem-solving. They then followed up these couples ten years later to see which ones were still married. By comparing those that were still married with those who got divorced, they were able to identify factors that distinguished the two groups.
They first compared whether or not the two groups were comprised of the same types of people. The results suggest that they were somewhat different groups. The group that divorced was younger, and the husbands had lower incomes. Also, the husbands in the divorced group were nearly twice as likely to have divorced parents than the husbands in the couples who stayed married. Wives' incomes and history of parental divorce did not differ between the two groups. There were also no differences between the groups in terms of cohabitation and whether or not the couples had children. Yet, these findings suggest that the lives and experiences of individuals in these two groups of couples were somewhat different.
The next test was to determine if the couples who divorced were simply not as committed to the relationship. It is commonly believed that some couples just aren't as willing to work hard on their relationship, but that was not the case in this sample. Both those who were still married and those who divorced had expressed similar commitment to the relationship in those early years of marriage.
In general, the two groups also did not differ in terms of the amount of stress that they experienced or in the personality traits of the husbands and wives.
The last hypothesis they tested was whether or not there were different communication styles between the couples. Although there were no differences in the degree of positive communication, there were notable differences in negative communication patterns. Couples who eventually divorced displayed more anger and contempt for their partners. When solving problems, they were more likely to disagree, and blame and invalidate the feelings of each other. In the laboratory, when asked to talk about an aspect of their lives that they would like to change, couples who divorced were more likely to express inappropriate pessimism, discourage the expression of feelings and insist that their partners resolve the situation on their own. Thus, it appears that the difference between these seeming satisfied young couples who divorce and those that don't may be tied to negative communication and lack of support for each other that may eventually poison a satisfying relationship.
Lavner and Bradbury suggest that although there are positive aspects of these couples' marriages, there are troublesome communication patterns that slowly grind away at the relationship. They write, "low-distress spouses may be able to avoid, "compartmentalize," or rationalize the negative exchanges that do occur in the relationship." It appears that in the long-run this strategy does not work.
Waiting is a very intelligent decision. Though not a guarantee either..I waited until I was 36 to marry.. Had many relationships..some i ended some were ended on me...(nothing too reflective or indicative of any dysfunction on my part!). When I finally did marry, I married for the right reasons, but found a partner who married for the wrong ones....as it turned out. He married out of a need. I found out 20 years later that he was a very dependent and emotionally needy man who wound up having his second marriage ending affair...with me. Needeless to say, I divorced him.
Bottom line to you Beatnik: marry for the right reasons. AFTER you've shed those fairy tale images that are so common when we are young, impressionable, naive. And most importantly AFTER you no longer feel the need to cave in under the pressure to marry!
As opposed to 50 years ago women stayed in a marriage because they had no money of their own, no job and therefore no power. I guess all was well with the men as long as they held the sole power over women, now that women in the last 50 years are gaining financial independence, and power of their own, men don't like it. This means he can't keep a woman trapped in an unhappy marriage, the way grandmas and great grandmas were trapped because they had no where else to go. Men have always had the opportunity to have greater involvement with their children, they just chose not to, because historically raising the kids and taking care of the home has been considered woman's work. Now that women work outside of the home, they expect men to pull their fare share too, a lot of men are still stuck in the traditional marriage mindset of the past. Women of today do not want to deal with men who can't evolve. Why keep bathing in stinking nasty bathwater. You'll never get clean. It's best to throw out that old bathwater.
Do you know the history behind child support laws? Go read up on it and get back to me.
The woman should be realistic and continue to look like she did when her husband married her. She also needs to know and accept that man does not only want to appreciate her beauty; he wants to ravish her body at every opportunity he gets.
The man should not be lazy too, he should continue to pursue her even after "getting" her, so that she can continue to feel beautiful.
In the end, the single most important reason divorce is common is ignorance and selfishness. Marrying people want to continue to live as singles. Bad idea. Each partner wants to have their own way. Another bad idea.
The woman should be realistic and continue to look like she did when her husband married her. She also needs to know and accept that man does not only want to appreciate her beauty; he wants to ravish her body at every opportunitÂy he gets. "
LOL you obviously know very little about what makes women happy, and are speaking from a male perspective which involves shallow things like how she looks, and beauty and of course sex. As if this alone makes a marriage successful. Hot women file for divorce all the time, sex in and of itself and beauty does not make for a successful marriage. A woman can sex up her husband 7 nights a week and look like the hottest hollywood star, but that's not going to make her have a successful marriage. What exactly does 'pursue' her mean in a marriage? Are you married, you have no clue about what women need to make a marriage work.
And how do you describe what married life should be like according to you?
I hate to say it, but most people who tend to talk biblese are ignorant of the actual historical facts. So don't confuse them with the facts, all they care about is what 'they believe' not what is actual fact.
Because they are not supposed to... like milk that will eventually spoil, so will marriages. All of them. No exceptions for milk; no exceptions for marriages.
H
If you use that milk before it spoils then you won't ever have to worry about having spoiled milk. A plant will die, if it isn't nourished, if you don't take care of your body, it will not function well. We all will die, yes it is inevitable, but does this mean that you have to have such low expectations, and not do anything to have 'quality of life' because since we will all die anyway what's the point? Talk about a pessimist. I hope you never get married. What's the point.
"What's the point" is the main question, for sure.
Been married twice. Still married now. Talk to other people too -- not only dissent voice yet. Speaking from experience, my friend.
H
I stand corrected on the analogy. Still correct on the results, but now, because of you, better spoken.
H
(Sorry - bogus headlines madden me.)
Otherwise, maybe the question to ask is, "Why DO any marriages last?" In previous centuries, marriage had all kinds of outside help, not least the fact that the wife (or often wives) had virtually no power and the fact that men's infidelity was pretty much taken as a given. Never mind all manner of economic and political imperatives.
Take all that away and what do you have? Two growing, changing independent human beings who are expected to be satisfied with only each other for the rest of their lives. As it is, even couples that stay together often have affairs. As for people who really and truly have found the ONE for Life and don't stray or get restless, well, they exist (and include some of my friends). But that's as unique to those people as having perfect pitch is to others.
Add to this the fact that many people (especially women) seem to be happier when they grow old alone and an enduring marriage today begins to seem like an accomplishment as rare and unique as being a prize-winning athlete.
This story is so bogus. The reason marriages don't last anymore is because both partners start being deceitful to each other during the wedding ceremony. Do either of them really believe that they will remain faithful to each other and to love and cherish each other, in sickness and in health, for richer or poorer, for better or worse, and to accept children lovingly into their lives, until DEATH DO US PART? Neither is really committing to the vows, because both know that if worse comes to worse, its easy to get a divorce, especially in states with no-fault divorce laws. With a flawed foundation at the altar or judges desk, no lifetime relationship is possible.
The ability to divorce is one of the first great freedoms women were granted aside from voting rights. What part of "women were property" do you not get? They were seen as children in the eyes of the law. How humiliating is that? Set aside the anger and try on a little empathy. The results may surprise you.