DIVORCEavailability of gainful employment for women makes
marriage less essential and divorce more possible.
Indeed, the significant changes in women’s social
positions and the corresponding changes in nor-
mative expectations (i.e., gender) have been the
subject of significant sociological research. These
changes are recognized as fundamentally altering
almost all social institutions. Marriage is no exception.
The redefinition of marriage in the latter twenti-
eth century throughout the West reflects the pro-
found changes in relationships between men and
women that have occurred. No longer an econom-
ic institution, marriage is now defined by its emo-
tional significance. Love and companionship are
not incidents of the institution. Rather, they are
essentials. Meeting these high expectations may be
difficult, but sustaining them is certainly more so.
Taken together, the changes in the second
half of the twentieth century may be summarized
as redefining the meaning of marriage. Children
are not economic assets. Spouses are not econom-
ic necessities. Marriage is a conjugal arrangement
where the primary emphasis is on the relation-
ship between husband and wife. The reasons for
divorce are direct consequences of the reasons
for marriage. As one changes so does the other.
Since it is more difficult to accomplish and sustain
matrimonial essentials, it is easier to terminate
the legal framework surrounding them. Divorce
has become less costly (financially, legally, and
reputationally) as marriage has become more so
(in terms of the investments required to accom-
plish what is expected of it).
CORRELATES OF DIVORCESociologists have documented a number of demo-
graphic and personal characteristics that correlate
with the probability of divorce. These include
early age at marriage, premarital births, premarital
cohabitation, divorce from a previous marriage,
and low educational attainments. Social class is
inversely related to divorce, yet wives’ employ-
ment significantly increases divorce probabilities
(see Huber and Spitze 1988 for a review).
Half of all recent marriages began with cohabi-
tation (unmarried couples living together) (Bumpass
and Sweet 1989). Repeated national studies have
found that married couples who cohabited (either
with each other, or with others) before marrying
have higher divorce rates than those who never
cohabited (Nock 1995). The reason is still unclear.
Research shows that cohabiting individuals are
less committed to the idea of marriage or marital
permanence. They are also less religious and tend
to be drawn from lower social classes (both of
which are associated with higher divorce rates)
(Nock 1995). Cohabitation appears to foster (or
reflect) a belief that problems in intimate relation-
ships are solvable by ending the relationship. When
such beliefs are carried into marriage, the result is
higher divorce rates.Race correlates with divorce—even after con-
trols are imposed for socioeconomic correlates of
race—with black individuals having divorce rates
approximately twice those of whites. However,
such large differences associated with race are
recent in origin. Not until the late 1950s did
significant differences in divorce, separation, and
other marital statuses emerge between blacks and
whites, even though a pattern of marginally higher
marital disruption has been found among blacks
for at least a century. Such findings suggest that
the differences stem more from contemporary
than historical circumstances. As Cherlin suggests,
the recent changes in black Americans’ family
situations resemble those of other racial and eth-
nic groups, though they are more pronounced.
The restructuring of the American economy, the
decline in semi-skilled jobs, and the rise in service
occupations has resulted in higher rates of black
male unemployment or low wages, and better
opportunities for black women. ‘‘Faced with diffi-
cult times economically, many blacks responded
by drawing upon a model of social support that
was in their cultural repertoire, a way of making it
from day to day passed down by African Ameri-
cans who came before them. This response relied
heavily on extended kinship networks and de-
emphasized marriage’’ (Cherlin 1992, p. 113).CONSEQUENCES OF DIVORCEFor Children. A central concern of much of the
recent research on divorce is how children fare.
Developmental psychologists describe five ways in
which marital disruption may affect children’s
adjustment. First, some adults and some children
are more vulnerable to the stress and strain of
divorce. Personality characteristics, ethnicity, or