-----Original Message-----
From: Portside Moderator [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 1:26 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [SPAM] Changing Marriage Patterns Reflect Economics and Class


Changing Marriage Patterns Reflect Economics and Class
by June Carbone and Naomi Cahn
New Deal 2.0
05/20/2011 
http://www.newdeal20.org/2011/05/20/changing-marriages-patterns-reflect-econ
omics-and-class-45726/

Upper classes are marrying late, while poorer women are deciding that
they're better off single.

New research shows that women are getting married at
later ages - and that the divorce rate is going down.
The results reflect some good news - later marriages are
more likely to last. Most importantly, however, these
figures correlate with widespread changes in the
American family.

First, the decrease in the divorce rate does at least in
part reflect later marriages. Teen marriages have always
been risky and most studies suggest that the increase in maturity from the
teen years to the early twenties bodes well for the stability of
relationships. Delay from the early twenties to the late twenties and
thirties, however, is more controversial. While these later marriages are
also more likely to last, economist Stephane Mechoulan found that the
increase in the age of marriage in itself accounts for only a small part of
the falling divorce rates. Instead, they reflect the increasing tendency of
the well-off to marry similarly well-off partners and those marriages are
more likely to last at any age.

Second, the overall statistics hide the class-based
dynamics at the core of the shift. Historically, college educated women were
less likely to marry than high school graduates. Today, male and female
college graduates have become substantially more likely to marry (and stay
married). At the same time, marriage has effectively disappeared from the
poorest communities. In the middle, pregnant teens like Bristol Palin have
become much less likely to marry the fathers of their children. It is hardly
surprising therefore that overall divorce rates have fallen as the highest
divorce risks (pregnant teens among them) have become much less likely to
marry.

Third, the later age of marriage for college graduates
does suggest a new middle class strategy: invest in
women's education and earning capacity as well as men's,
push back the age of marriage and childbearing from the
low ages of the anomalous fifties, and reap the benefits
of two incomes. This strategy, of course, began in the
sixties and seventies and produced much more independent
women. Today, it also reflects a new marriage strategy.
The only portion of the American population
substantially better off than a generation ago are high
income men, and it easier to tell who will be successful
(think of those Wall St. bonuses) and who will not at
thirty than at twenty. At the same time, for less
spectacularly successful men, two substantial incomes
are essential for middle class life. Today, becoming established means not
only college graduation and graduate school, but the right internships,
entry level jobs, and often repeated moves between positions, cities and
sometimes career paths. These investments pay off in terms of a stable
investment for family life, but they are rarely in place before the thirties
and earlier marriage and childbearing often makes them harder to establish.
As the economy becomes more perilous, the risks of early marriage increase.

Fourth, with the disappearance of relatively stable and
high paying manufacturing jobs, working class women may
have greater opportunities than working class men and
they have also become pickier about marriage as a
result. Women have become more likely to graduate from
high school and college and the jobs they choose -
teaching, health care, retail sales, administration -
tend to be more stable than those available to men. Construction workers,
for example, often earn more than Walmart employees, but they are also more
likely to be laid off. Studies further show that while unemployed women
spend more time on the home and the children, unemployed men spend more time
moping, drinking, watching TV, and lashing out at those around them. The new
data confirms that the Great Recession has slowed marriage rates and earlier
studies show that financial stress greatly increases the divorce rates of
young and working class couples with the most traditional attitudes toward
gender roles. In today's economy, these couples have become less likely to
marry.

Fifth, a delay in marriage and a decrease in divorce
might be a good thing, but only if it also produces a
drop in non-marital births. For the middle class, later marriage continues
to mean later childbearing, and later childrearing tends to lower overall
fertility. Women's workforce participation increases the opportunity cost
(and the family tensions) of having more children. The combination of the
suburbs, with their dependence on the automobile, and the disappearance of
stay-at-home moms dismantled the community networks that had supervised
children, placing more emphasis on the role of individual parents. Modern
studies of family time indicate that while mothers today spend substantially
less time on housework than they did a half century ago, they spend as much
time with their children and their husband spend more. Today's "helicopter"
parents invest enormous amounts of time overseeing homework, coaching sports
teams, escorting their children to after school activities, and addressing
their emotional needs.

Working class women, however, have become more likely to
have children without marrying. If the father is
chronically unemployed, uncommitted to the relationship, immature or simply
unreliable, young mothers may decide that they are better off on their own.
It is hard to assess the impact of falling marriage rates therefor without
examining the nature of childbearing. The changes of the last quarter
century indicate that marriage is increasingly becoming a marker of class -
the delayed marriages of the middle class produce steadily lower divorce
rates, very few non-marital births, and substantial resources to invest in a
falling number of children. For the rest of the country, the statistics may
simply confirm a greater move away from marriage altogether.

June Carbone is the Edward A. Smith/Missouri Chair of
Law, the Constitution and Society at the University of Missouri-Kansas City.

Naomi Cahn is the John Theodore Fey Research Professor
of Law at George Washington University Law School. She
is the author of numerous books and law review articles
on gender and family law.

Cahn and Carbone are the co-authors of Red Families v.
Blue Families.

___________________________________________

Portside aims to provide material of interest to people
on the left that will help them to interpret the world
and to change it.

Submit via email: [email protected]

Submit via the Web: http://portside.org/submittous3

Frequently asked questions: http://portside.org/faq

Sub/Unsub: http://portside.org/subscribe-and-unsubscribe

Search Portside archives: http://portside.org/archive

Contribute to Portside: https://portside.org/donate


!DSPAM:2676,4de32c3140301972721249!


_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to