4 ms·

I'm ok with generalities if they are generally true. Care to substantiate the idea that divorce benefits women or children? The first link that pops up when sea

I'm ok with generalities if they are generally true. Care to substantiate the idea that divorce benefits women or children? The first link that pops up when searching on economic effects of divorce in Google: http://www.marripedia.org/effects.of.divorce.on.financial.stability http://www.marripedia.org/effects.of.divorce.on.financial.st... Says among other things: Almost half of American families experience poverty following a divorce,1) and 75 percent of all women who apply for welfare benefits do so because of a disrupted marriage or a disrupted relationship in which they live with a male outside of marriage. ... This study found that single divorced women's median family income dropped 45 percent, while the median income of remarried or cohabiting women was 14 percent lower than before their divorce. Or this one: http://www.nber.org/digest/jul02/w8786.html http://www.nber.org/digest/jul02/w8786.html ... family income of children whose parents divorce and remain divorced for at least six years falls by 40 to 45 percent. Food consumption is also reduced by 17 percent.

microcolonel 8y ago
It certainly is bad in the long term, but I'm talking about the immediate fiscal benefits divorce itself (over being the other party, you obviously end up with less than the sum of your former family resources, anything else would be insane), not the consequences of becoming unmarried. Bad marriages and the capital toll of having children are why we make divorce proceedings lopsided, but even lopsided proceedings can't account for the cost of being unmarried after prioritizing reproduction†. That being said, the number that says household income decreases 45% seems pretty hopeful. That means that these women end up (in aggregate) making 55% of the income of (potentially) a two-income household. If you're willing to adjust your housing arrangement after a change like that, you'll generally get by just fine†. As for the food consumption figure (which seems difficult to make numeric, to me [is it normalized by dollars? by calories? by weight?]), I'm sure that was once an important outcome, generally in the U.S. a reduction in overall food consumption of less than one fifth is no disaster†. A reduction in consumption makes sense after a reduction in household income. Added: > or a disrupted relationship in which they live with a male outside of marriage This would seem to mess with the numbers a bit, since generally non-marriage relationship splits (which should be as or more common than divorces, in general†) don't end in a court-mediated property division†, and when they do, it doesn't work out the way that divorce proceedings do†. † no data to back this up, mostly baseless conjecture.

microcolonel 8y ago

It certainly is bad in the long term, but I'm talking about the immediate fiscal benefits divorce itself (over being the other party, you obviously end up with less than the sum of your former family resources, anything else would be insane), not the consequences of becoming unmarried. Bad marriages and the capital toll of having children are why we make divorce proceedings lopsided, but even lopsided proceedings can't account for the cost of being unmarried after prioritizing reproduction†. That being said, the number that says household income decreases 45% seems pretty hopeful. That means that these women end up (in aggregate) making 55% of the income of (potentially) a two-income household. If you're willing to adjust your housing arrangement after a change like that, you'll generally get by just fine†. As for the food consumption figure (which seems difficult to make numeric, to me [is it normalized by dollars? by calories? by weight?]), I'm sure that was once an important outcome, generally in the U.S. a reduction in overall food consumption of less than one fifth is no disaster†. A reduction in consumption makes sense after a reduction in household income. Added: > or a disrupted relationship in which they live with a male outside of marriage This would seem to mess with the numbers a bit, since generally non-marriage relationship splits (which should be as or more common than divorces, in general†) don't end in a court-mediated property division†, and when they do, it doesn't work out the way that divorce proceedings do†. † no data to back this up, mostly baseless conjecture.