Do men today simply have more to lose in the case of a divorce?
In the case of the divorce, the mother is likely to get custody of the children, which means she's likely to get the house, which means the father -- if he earned more than her -- will have to support her with alimony and child support, and if he didn't significantly earn more than her, he'll still have to pay child support (and only have visitation rights or have the kids 4 days a month.) It could also happen that he wasn't earning that much but was still the sole breadwinner of the family, in which case, his child support payments will be through the roof, not leaving him much to live on.
With 50% of marriages failing (and women filing for 75% of divorces) is marriage, today, a raw deal for men? Do we as a society need a new model for bringing children into this world? Perhaps contracts along the lines of "we'll conceive this child and we'll both be parents to it for the next 18 years." This way both the man and the woman can be parents, and the child will get two parents, without there being the trouble of marriage.
Posts: 532 | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to find out that the favorable circumstances for divorce from a spouse who earns more than you prompts people to more quickly file divorce papers. Now, we know that on average men earn more in wages than women, for many different reasons- so it makes a bit of sense that more women file for divorce than men. If you were thinking of divorce, but your spouse earned less than you, and so it would cost you money to divorce them, then you might decide not to. If, on the other hand, they made all the money, then you could divorce them and keep everything you have now.
I'm very much against the practice of awarding a percentage of a spouse's income to the other spouse in case of divorce, or the practice of awarding an amount to pay for the "lifestyle to which the spouse is accustomed." This comes out in some cases to millions of dollars a year, which doesn't make a ton of sense to me- if you divorce someone, you shouldn't get to keep all your privileges, and forsake all your commitments- and certainly this shouldn't happen for only one side of the marriage.
At the same time, it's more complicated than just that, because in many marriages the wife or sometimes husband has spent many years raising a family, and the marriage was in some sense based on the idea that one spouse would earn money for both. A divorce leaves one partner without much means to earn a living, and the other with all the means. Even so, I don't think 50% is the solution to that problem, most especially if the amount of money in question was already barely enough to support the family.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
But women totally bear the majority of the risk and responsibility of marriage and kids. To start with, pregnancy can kill you or wreck your health. I've seen so many of my female friends who got divorced raise their kids alone. The fathers write a check every so often, and get to have the kids for fun things like weekends, but the whole burden, financial, emotional, diurnal, goes on the mom.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to find out that the favorable circumstances for divorce from a spouse who earns more than you prompts people to more quickly file divorce papers. Now, we know that on average men earn more in wages than women, for many different reasons- so it makes a bit of sense that more women file for divorce than men. If you were thinking of divorce, but your spouse earned less than you, and so it would cost you money to divorce them, then you might decide not to. If, on the other hand, they made all the money, then you could divorce them and keep everything you have now.
Yes, but don't you think the fact that the mother is likely to get custody of the child is also a factor? A man who becomes dissatisfied in a marriage that has produced kids has a very strong disincentive against initiating divorce -- he'll lose the kids.
Posts: 532 | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: Child support only lasts to age 18, and there is no alimony anymore so basically the contract is up then anyway.
Is there really no alimony anymore? I guess that would be the case when the partners aren't far apart in what they bring to the table financially. But suppose a man who earns a 100k gets divorced, and his ex-wife never worked. He won't be forced to pay alimony?
quote: But women totally bear the majority of the risk and responsibility of marriage and kids. To start with, pregnancy can kill you or wreck your health. I've seen so many of my female friends who got divorced raise their kids alone. The fathers write a check every so often, and get to have the kids for fun things like weekends, but the whole burden, financial, emotional, diurnal, goes on the mom.
These men have their capacity to be fathers determined by women who might very well hate them. And "write a check every once in a while"? Child Support requires a substantial amount of money from a man's earnings. If he doesn't earn much, the guy is royally screwed.
Posts: 532 | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is marriage a raw deal because in the case of divorce you might get screwed? Um...no...DIVORCE is a raw deal. So don't marry someone you're likely to divorce!
Look, people fling that 50% number around as if it's some kind of omen for their own marriage. Oh no, I might not want to get married because it's even odds it won't work out.
Not true. First of all, FIRST marriages do not fail 50% of the time. First marriages fail something like 1/3 of the time (can't remember the exact statistic.) Second marriages fail something like 60% of the time, third marriages more, 4th marriages even more...and so on.
Not only that, but marriages are significantly more likely to fail when people get married too young. There is a much higher rate of divorce in people who get married younger than 25 or 26.
So basically what I'm saying is that if you want to get married you do the thing right. You wait until you're a little older and more mature. You find someone who takes commitment seriously. You find someone who knows how to have a relationship.
In fact , it amazes me how few people know how to have a relationship. People who don't understand that love is a verb and requires hard work.
Don't marry just anyone. Marry the woman you're going to spend the rest of your life with and the odds are significantly on your side.
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Casting aside the utter ridiculousness of the author's tone, he just doesn't have his facts right.
"After a divorce, a woman’s cost of living can increase dramatically, hence the reason why court-ordered alimony and child support payments most often go to women; even so, experts report that the average woman experiences a 45% decrease in her standard of living after going through a divorce. Meanwhile, the average man experiences a 15% improvement in his standard of living (Long Island University’s National Center for Women & Retirement Research)."
As for getting the children, I do think the courts have a ways to go to make things more equitable. But I also think the marriages themselves contribute to where the kids go. If the woman was the one who did 80% of the childcare before the divorce, it makes sense to give her primary care post divorce. Like it or not, an even split of the kids is often not doable and not in the kids best interest. I would echo Christine here and say your best bet is marrying wisely and if you want to encourage financial equity post split provide equity within the marriage so that both sides have the ability to provide for themselves and the kids.
Posts: 416 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: But women totally bear the majority of the risk and responsibility of marriage and kids.
That's a surprisingly sexist thing for you to say. This is sometimes the case, and it is sometimes *not* the case. I don't believe we should structure our laws to accommodate a sexist view of marriage. Women are surprised when some men don't want to get married? They shouldn't be.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to find out that the favorable circumstances for divorce from a spouse who earns more than you prompts people to more quickly file divorce papers. Now, we know that on average men earn more in wages than women, for many different reasons- so it makes a bit of sense that more women file for divorce than men. If you were thinking of divorce, but your spouse earned less than you, and so it would cost you money to divorce them, then you might decide not to. If, on the other hand, they made all the money, then you could divorce them and keep everything you have now.
Yes, but don't you think the fact that the mother is likely to get custody of the child is also a factor? A man who becomes dissatisfied in a marriage that has produced kids has a very strong disincentive against initiating divorce -- he'll lose the kids.
Absolutely, but not all marriages involve children, and many divorces result in shared custody. The kids are generally a disincentive for divorce for both men and women.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
theresa- thanks for that statistic. After reading the OP, I thought, dang it, I now I need to go find that info (I have heard that statistic before).
Right now, I am not working. My husband and I both looked for a job, he found one that paid our bills and so I ended up with the stay at home job (if I had found a good job, he planned to stay home). But the thing is, I am losing earning potential- not just money I could make now, but years of experience, connections, etc. I tutor part time for a company so that I have references and not an empty resume, but I am still losing professional development time. So, if my husband and I were to divorce, I think it is not unreasonable for me to get something out of it more than just child support. I think each case needs to be evaluated on a case my case basis though. My sister works full time with a very nice career. She has no kids and her husband does not do housework or anything useful, but he is lazy and doesn't want to work- she wants him to. She did have to relocate for work (to Canada) and he went with her. At the time he was unemployed, so hard to argue he lost much in the relocation. So, in that case, I really don't feel much like he should get alimony. As far as courts awarding alimony, my mother in law was a SAHM for most of her life. My father in law made over 100k when they divorced. She received no alimony- just child support. To be fair to him though, he did a lot of stuff that was not court ordered because his relationship with his sons is really important and he thought that leaving their mother devastated would hurt that relationship.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Men benefit hugely by marriage. They earn more while married, they live longer, and they get more in the divorce if they get divorced. After a divorce, men get wealthier and women are often impoverished.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Therese51282 has it right. This author is simply way off base. His claims just don't match the data.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Men benefit hugely by marriage. They earn more while married, they live longer, and they get more in the divorce if they get divorced. After a divorce, men get wealthier and women are often impoverished.
You don't think this is overly simplistic?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think it is. Marriage is a vastly better deal for men than it is for women, by all sorts of metrics. Divorce is a whole 'nother thing entirely.
Posts: 957 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Men benefit hugely by marriage. They earn more while married, they live longer, and they get more in the divorce if they get divorced. After a divorce, men get wealthier and women are often impoverished.
Your statement "men benefit hugely by marriage" seems to be based on applying life quality correlations experienced by people who more readily married as things actually caused by marriage.
Posts: 805 | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Men benefit hugely by marriage. They earn more while married, they live longer, and they get more in the divorce if they get divorced. After a divorce, men get wealthier and women are often impoverished.
Your statement "men benefit hugely by marriage" seems to be based on applying life quality correlations experienced by people who more readily married as things actually caused by marriage.
Actually, and I can't speak for exactly what katharina meant, but studies have found that married men lead longer, healthier lives than their single counterparts.
What's more, while women tend to get the short end of the stick from divorce in terms of economic quality of life, divorced women tend to be much better off emotionally than divorced men. (Though it is hard on both.)
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The fact that married men might tend to earn more and live longer could be merely correlative. Maybe women are ditching the sort of guys who aren't capable of substantial life time earnings.
quote: Marriage is a vastly better deal for men than it is for women, by all sorts of metrics. Divorce is a whole 'nother thing entirely.
Is this why it's men who are always the most excited about getting married?
Posts: 532 | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy: The fact that married men might tend to earn more and live longer could be merely correlative.
The statistics I have seen indicate otherwise.
Also, in most states, women are unlikely to get sole or even primary custody in the majority of cases. Most family court judges prefer to award joint custody, unless there has been negligence or abuse by one of the parents. Even if the mother gets primary custody, that does NOT translate into getting the house -- especially not in a community property state!
The sad fact is that financially, divorce is rough on both parents. The income that used to cover one home now has to cover two, the kids need extra clothes (because of the backing-and-forthing), and quite a few other things end up more expensive for two households. (Insurance, may need another vehicle, and the list goes on.)
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think Clive is saying that the qualities which make a man live longer are those which make him more likely to marry (and stay married). In order to get married, the man must be able to convince a woman to marry him, as well as be of a temperament that he wants to marry. A controlled study of this is pretty difficult since you can't just randomly assign people to the married group vs unmarried group. Men who look like they will be poor or unhealthy in the future might be unable to find women willing to marry them and stay single.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Is this why it's men who are always the most excited about getting married?
I'd say that overall, stereotypes notwithstanding, men are about as interested in getting married as women. What they're not as interested in is the wedding.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Is this why it's men who are always the most excited about getting married?
I'd say that overall, stereotypes notwithstanding, men are about as interested in getting married as women. What they're not as interested in is the wedding.
Still an important part of the whole decision to get married though, don't you think? I'd go further and say that men are not as interested in any number of the trappings of marriage, ie: weddings, anniversaries, his and hers towels, couples dinners, redecoration, etc. There are a number of concessions men are traditionally expected to make in their lifestyles and habits that accommodate their partner's needs. These don't have exact analogues on the female side, though women make other adjustments that are more or less difficult depending on the particular marriage.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:There are a number of concessions men are traditionally expected to make in their lifestyles and habits that accommodate their partner's needs. These don't have exact analogues on the female side, though women make other adjustments that are more or less difficult depending on the particular marriage.
I don't think that, in general, either side needs to make more concessions than the other side.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think divvying up his and her responsibilities, and keeping score about who did what when, is a good way to embitter your relationship.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Prenups people! Always sign a prenup!
Also though work should go into making marriage harder though not necessarily more expensive.
Like say a transitionary program where you need to be dating for 3 years and living together for at least 1.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy: The fact that married men might tend to earn more and live longer could be merely correlative. Maybe women are ditching the sort of guys who aren't capable of substantial life time earnings.
quote: Marriage is a vastly better deal for men than it is for women, by all sorts of metrics. Divorce is a whole 'nother thing entirely.
Is this why it's men who are always the most excited about getting married?
Not to mention that if you look at how income and standard of living correlate to age and number of years in a career it is natural that the income and standards increase.
They would regardless of marital status. Since men tend to get married later than women, that along could skew the data.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't object to prenups on principal but I certainly don't think all marriages need them. I got married when I was 23 and my husband was 22. We had both just finished degrees and were starting our lives together in a new city with our first real jobs. What on earth did we need a prenup for? We had no assets and no debt other than some minimal student loans. Everything we earn in life is going to be earned in a partnership so regardless of which of us goes on to earn more financially, it seems fair to split our assets if we ever got a divorce down the middle. as for requiring X amount of dating and living together I think that's silly. Studies don't back up living together bringing down the divorce rate and they also don't suggests that the longer a couple dates the more likely they are to stay together. Everyone is different. Couples should decide when to commit.
Posts: 416 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: I think Clive is saying that the qualities which make a man live longer are those which make him more likely to marry (and stay married). In order to get married, the man must be able to convince a woman to marry him, as well as be of a temperament that he wants to marry. A controlled study of this is pretty difficult since you can't just randomly assign people to the married group vs unmarried group. Men who look like they will be poor or unhealthy in the future might be unable to find women willing to marry them and stay single.
But that's not how the studies (at least the ones I was referring to) were done. They started with married men, and watched what happened to those whose wives died or divorced them as compared to those who stayed married. Similarly with women.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
How did they make sure they were only measuring the removal of a marriage benefit, and not just the additional stress of going through a divorce and adjusting to a different lifestyle?
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: I think Clive is saying that the qualities which make a man live longer are those which make him more likely to marry (and stay married). In order to get married, the man must be able to convince a woman to marry him, as well as be of a temperament that he wants to marry. A controlled study of this is pretty difficult since you can't just randomly assign people to the married group vs unmarried group. Men who look like they will be poor or unhealthy in the future might be unable to find women willing to marry them and stay single.
But that's not how the studies (at least the ones I was referring to) were done. They started with married men, and watched what happened to those whose wives died or divorced them as compared to those who stayed married. Similarly with women.
Perhaps men who are unable to make the marriage work are lacking in abilities which help them succeed at work. Dead wives, well, that is harder to justify with that logic, but still might be something there.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Many many studies have been done on the subject. Just google marriage and men's health and you will find several dozen.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Women will often bug men to eat better, get enough sleep, dress for the weather, lay off the the drugs and excessive alcohol, and avoid dangerous physical risks. They are also often more tied in to the social network, and help men keep from becoming loners. Regular sex is also good for the prostate. All of these things are probably contributors to why married men live longer. Just some thoughts.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:There are a number of concessions men are traditionally expected to make in their lifestyles and habits that accommodate their partner's needs. These don't have exact analogues on the female side, though women make other adjustments that are more or less difficult depending on the particular marriage.
I don't think that, in general, either side needs to make more concessions than the other side.
I agree as well and also with what Scott said.
My current qualification is that I'm about to get married. This Saturday my fiancé and I reorganized and stocked his apartment's kitchen. Sure, my dishes are going in and his old bachelor ones are gone, but then, you could say that I'm the one that is moving two hours north to another state and away from her family. Those are examples of adjustments that we both decided to make for the good of the relationship. It's not really about the changes and the concessions (how many there may be for either person there is no telling and it shouldn't really matter anyhow) for us but about coming together to create and start our life together. A lot of give and take is required from both partners, and a lot of how that affects the both of you depends greatly on your attitude. That brings me back round to what Christine had to say about relationships.
Posts: 691 | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
On the original article, a lot of times, when someone is writing about how terrible something else is, you can often get a glimpse of some of their personal problems. This guy, he's hitting you ever the head with them.
I agree he definitely shouldn't get married. I've little doubt he'd find it the hell he imagines it will be. That's more about him, though, than about marriage or men and women in general.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: On the original article, a lot of times, when someone is writing about how terrible something else is, you can often get a glimpse of some of their personal problems. This guy, he's hitting you ever the head with them.
I agree he definitely shouldn't get married. I've little doubt he'd find it the hell he imagines it will be. That's more about him, though, than about marriage or men and women in general.
posted
Do you know what stats I'm searching endlessly for and cannot find? Stats on the likelihood of a couple marrying with a prenup divorcing versus those without.
Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: I think divvying up his and her responsibilities, and keeping score about who did what when, is a good way to embitter your relationship.
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: They'd tell her what she wants to know.
Doubtful. I expect they might tell her what she thinks she wants to know, which is not the same thing.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rivka: A blog from a someone who has staked her professional career on claims that being single is healthier.
Yeah, I'm gonna need a BIG ole chunk of salt for that one.
So the author is either lying or she is wrong.
Let's see: She made claims which can objectively be proven to be true or false: to wit, studies that purport to show people who get married live longer ignore people who got married and divorced, and that people who remain single live as long as married people. Are you aware of anyone disputing her take on these claims? Why does the fact that she has a blog about being single discredit her to you?
She seems like more than a competent academic and, as such, someone who wouldn't so carelessly wreck her reputation by making objectively false claims about popular studies. Maybe you just don't like comforting myths getting debunked.
Posts: 532 | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
