Archive
Cohabitation and U.S. Adult Mortality: An Examination by Gender and Race
Cohabitation and U.S. Adult Mortality: An Examination by Gender and Race (PDF)
Source: Journal of Marriage and Family
From press release (Michigan State University):
Black people who are married don’t appear to live any longer than black couples who simply live together, suggesting marriage doesn’t boost longevity for blacks the way it does for whites, according to a large national study led by Michigan State University.
“This finding implies that marriage and cohabitation have very different meanings for blacks and whites,” said MSU sociologist Hui Liu, the study’s lead researcher.
The study, in the Journal of Marriage and Family, is the first to document mortality differences between cohabiters and married people across racial groups in the United States.
The number of Americans who cohabitate (live together without being married) has increased dramatically in the past 50 years – from 400,000 in 1960 to 7.6 million in 2011, census data shows.
Liu and Corinne Reczek of the University of Cincinnati studied national health survey data of nearly 200,000 people taken from 1997 to 2004. They found that white people who were married had lower mortality rates than whites who simply lived together.
However, there were no significant mortality differences between blacks who were married and blacks who cohabitated.
Liu said whites are more likely to see cohabitation as a trial marriage, which may mean lower levels of shared social, psychological and economic resources.
In contrast, among blacks cohabitation is more prevalent and is perceived as an alternative to marriage, meaning it may mirror the dynamics of marriage and promote health like marriage tends to do, Liu said.
In addition, because blacks tend to earn less money than whites, marriage may not confer the same degree of social and economic benefits for blacks as for whites, Liu said.
Marriage Structure and Resistance to the Gender Revolution in the Workplace
Marriage Structure and Resistance to the Gender Revolution in the Workplace
Source: Social Science Research Network
In this article, we examine a heretofore neglected pocket of resistance to the gender revolution in the workplace: married male employees who have stay-at-home wives. We develop and empirically test the theoretical argument suggesting that such organizational members, compared to male employees in modern marriages, are more likely to exhibit attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors that are harmful to women in the workplace. To assess this hypothesis, we conducted four studies with a total of 718 married, male participants. We found that employed husbands in traditional marriages, compared to those in modern marriages, tend to (a) view the presence of women in the workplace unfavorably, (b) perceive that organizations with higher numbers of female employees are operating less smoothly, (c) find organizations with female leaders as relatively unattractive, and (d) deny, more frequently, qualified female employees opportunities for promotion. The consistent pattern of results found across multiple studies employing multiple methods and samples demonstrates the robustness of the findings. We discuss the theoretical and practical import of our findings and suggest directions for future research.
Relationship behaviors portrayed in a popular television drama: a critical analysis of Mad Men
Relationship behaviors portrayed in a popular television drama: a critical analysis of Mad Men (PDF)
Source: University of Central Missouri (Hawkins; Masters thesis)
Using the lens of cultivation theory, a critical analysis of the pilot episode of Mad Men was conducted to determine the relationship themes present within the drama, and whether negative relationship consequences were present for males, females, or both. Five themes were observed with regards to how women must look and behave to be considered for marriage, what rules are in place for men regarding fidelity, and how marriage is perceived. It was observed that while very little consequences are portrayed within the pilot and subsequent episodes in season one, the consequences that are depicted typically affect the female characters only.
The Second Annual Index of Family Belonging and Rejection
The Index of Family Belonging was 45.8 percent with a corresponding Family Rejection score of 54.2 percent for the United States for the year 2009. The action of parents determines the belonging or rejection score: whether they marry and belong to each other, or whether they reject one another through divorce or otherwise. Rejection leaves children without married parents committed to one another and to the intact family in which the child was to be brought up.Minnesota was the state with the most intact families in the nation and had a Family Belonging Index score of 57 percent. Regionally, the Northeast had the highest average Family Belonging Index (49.6 percent).The implications of such a high Family Rejection score for all of the nation’s major institutions are grave, and this report’s exploration of the relationship between the Family Belonging Index and such serious public policy issues as children’s schooling, poverty, and teenage unmarried births underscores the somber implications for the nation’s future.Given the national level of rejection between parents (54.2 percent), there is no way for the majority of the nation’s children to avoid the weakening effects of family breakdown. It is unavoidable that the major institutions of future families, church, school, the marketplace, and government will be similarly weakened as these children gradually take their place within these institutions. As a society we cannot but become weaker. The effects of this weakening will be played out in all these fundamental institutions in the years to come.With out of wedlock birthrates now above 40 percent, declining marriage rates, and very high divorce rates, it seems safe to predict that the Index of Rejection will continue to mount.
What Does Bristol Palin Have to Do with Same-Sex Marriage?
What Does Bristol Palin Have to Do with Same-Sex Marriage?
This article considers how anxiety about the economy, class standing, and the family effect the same-sex marriage debate. It starts with the nature of family change. The middle class, in urban areas and the coasts, has adjusted to the long-term change in family roles and is doing well financially and culturally, with divorce and non-marital birth rates comparable to those of the mid-1960s — before the sexual revolution. Family conditions for America’s poor have stabilized with high non-marital birth rates. For the middle group, divorce rates continued to climb through the nineties while falling for the college educated and high school dropouts. The most recent changes indicate that non-marital birth rates are increasing for Latinas and whites without college degrees, transforming what had been marriage-centered communities.Second, this article examines the relationship between anxiety about family change, values preferences, and the culture divide about how to discuss and manage family change.Third, this article examines the political manipulation of the anxieties underlying family change and the exacerbation of cultural differences.Finally, the article considers a dilemma for advocates of same-sex marriage. Opponents have used the issue to solidify a broad conservative coalition. Does same-sex marriage depend on an equally broad liberal coalition or does it stand on its own? One of the ironies in the debate is that more tolerant attitudes toward sexual orientation are winning even as the opposition to abortion is strengthening. The article maintains that fairness to gays is compelling in ways that stand apart from family values, and the two components of the fight — fairness for gays and general opposition to rigid traditionalism – should operate independently. Meanwhile, same-sex marriage is used to obstruct what should be the true family debate; the remaking of family relationships in an era of economic insecurity and growing inequality.
CRS — Same-Sex Marriages: Legal Issues
Same-Sex Marriages: Legal Issues (PDF)
Source: Congressional Research Service (via Federation of American Scientists)
The recognition of same-sex marriages generates debate on both the federal and state levels. Either legislatively or judicially, same-sex marriage is legal in seven states. Other states allow civil unions or domestic partnerships, which grant all or part of state-level rights, benefits, and/or responsibilities of marriage. Some states have statutes or constitutional amendments limiting marriage to one man and one woman. These variations raise questions about the validity of such unions outside the contracted jurisdiction and have bearing on the distribution of federal benefits.
The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), P.L. 104-199, prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriages and allows individual states to refuse to recognize such marriages performed in other states. Section 3 of DOMA requires that marriage, for purposes of federal benefit programs, be defined as the union of one man and one woman. Lower courts are starting to address DOMA’s constitutionality. On July 8, 2010, a U.S. district court in Massachusetts found Section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional in two companion cases brought by same-sex couples married in Massachusetts. In one case, the court found that DOMA exceeded Congress’s power under the Spending Clause and violated the Tenth Amendment. In the other, the court held that Congress’s goal of preserving the status quo did not bear a rational relationship to DOMA, and thus violated the Fifth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. While the government filed a notice of appeal in these cases, it is unclear whether the cases will continue. In February 2011, the U.S. Attorney General submitted a letter to congressional leadership stating that the government will not defend DOMA’s constitutionality under certain conditions. The Assistant Attorney General subsequently submitted a letter to the First Circuit stating that the government will cease its defense of Section 3 of DOMA. However, the United States will remain a party to the cases presumably to “provide Congress a full and fair opportunity to participate in the litigation.”
Questions regarding same-sex marriages figure prominently in California. After the state supreme court’s decision finding that denying same-sex couples the right to marry violated the state constitution, voters approved a constitutional amendment (“Proposition 8”) limiting the validity and recognition of “marriages” to heterosexual couples. Subsequent court challenges ensued. On February 7, 2012, a panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court decision finding that Proposition 8 violates both the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, inasmuch as voters took away a right from a minority group without justification when they approved Proposition 8. In a matter of first impression, the lower court found that Proposition 8 (1) deprived same-sex couples of the fundamental right to marry under the Due Process Clause and (2) excluded such couples from state-sponsored marriage while allowing heterosexual couples access in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. While the appellate court affirmed the lower court’s decision, it did so on much narrower grounds based on historical facts specific to California. As such, it appears that this decision will have little, if any, impact on other jurisdictions. However, the case will likely be appealed to the full Ninth Circuit or directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. It is unclear whether the Court would accept the case for review on the merits, as it pertains to an interpretation of a state constitutional amendment.
This report discusses DOMA and legal challenges to it. It reviews legal principles applied to determine the validity of a marriage contracted in another state and surveys the various approaches employed by states to enable or to prevent same-sex marriage. The report also examines House and Senate resolutions introduced in previous Congresses proposing a constitutional amendment and limiting federal courts’ jurisdiction to hear or determine any question pertaining to the interpretation of DOMA.
High-Interest CRS Report — Same-Sex Marriages: Legal Issues (May 9, 2012)
Same-Sex Marriages: Legal Issues (PDF)Source: Congressional Research Service (via Federation of American Scientists)
The recognition of same-sex marriages generates debate on both the federal and state levels. Either legislatively or judicially, same-sex marriage is legal in seven states. Other states allow civil unions or domestic partnerships, which grant all or part of state-level rights, benefits, and/or responsibilities of marriage. Some states have statutes or constitutional amendments limiting marriage to one man and one woman. These variations raise questions about the validity of such unions outside the contracted jurisdiction and have bearing on the distribution of federal benefits.
The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), P.L. 104-199, prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriages and allows individual states to refuse to recognize such marriages performed in other states. Section 3 of DOMA requires that marriage, for purposes of federal benefit programs, be defined as the union of one man and one woman. Lower courts are starting to address DOMA’s constitutionality. On July 8, 2010, a U.S. district court in Massachusetts found Section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional in two companion cases brought by same-sex couples married in Massachusetts. In one case, the court found that DOMA exceeded Congress’s power under the Spending Clause and violated the Tenth Amendment. In the other, the court held that Congress’s goal of preserving the status quo did not bear a rational relationship to DOMA, and thus violated the Fifth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. While the government filed a notice of appeal in these cases, it is unclear whether the cases will continue. In February 2011, the U.S. Attorney General submitted a letter to congressional leadership stating that the government will not defend DOMA’s constitutionality under certain conditions. The Assistant Attorney General subsequently submitted a letter to the First Circuit stating that the government will cease its defense of Section 3 of DOMA. However, the United States will remain a party to the cases presumably to “provide Congress a full and fair opportunity to participate in the litigation.”
Questions regarding same-sex marriages figure prominently in California. After the state supreme court’s decision finding that denying same-sex couples the right to marry violated the state constitution, voters approved a constitutional amendment (“Proposition 8”) limiting the validity and recognition of “marriages” to heterosexual couples. Subsequent court challenges ensued. On February 7, 2012, a panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court decision finding that Proposition 8 violates both the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, inasmuch as voters took away a right from a minority group without justification when they approved Proposition 8. In a matter of first impression, the lower court found that Proposition 8 (1) deprived same-sex couples of the fundamental right to marry under the Due Process Clause and (2) excluded such couples from state-sponsored marriage while allowing heterosexual couples access in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. While the appellate court affirmed the lower court’s decision, it did so on much narrower grounds based on historical facts specific to California. As such, it appears that this decision will have little, if any, impact on other jurisdictions. However, the case will likely be appealed to the full Ninth Circuit or directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. It is unclear whether the Court would accept the case for review on the merits, as it pertains to an interpretation of a state constitutional amendment.
This report discusses DOMA and legal challenges to it. It reviews legal principles applied to determine the validity of a marriage contracted in another state and surveys the various approaches employed by states to enable or to prevent same-sex marriage. The report also examines House and Senate resolutions introduced in previous Congresses proposing a constitutional amendment and limiting federal courts’ jurisdiction to hear or determine any question pertaining to the interpretation of DOMA.
2010 Census Shows Interracial and Interethnic Married Couples Grew by 28 Percent over Decade
2010 Census Shows Interracial and Interethnic Married Couples Grew by 28 Percent over Decade
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
The U.S. Census Bureau today released a 2010 Census brief, Households and Families: 2010, that showed interracial or interethnic opposite-sex married couple households grew by 28 percent over the decade from 7 percent in 2000 to 10 percent in 2010. States with higher percentages of couples of a different race or Hispanic origin in 2010 were primarily located in the western and southwestern parts of the United States, along with Hawaii and Alaska.
A higher percentage of unmarried partners were interracial or interethnic than married couples. Nationally, 10 percent of opposite-sex married couples had partners of a different race or Hispanic origin, compared with 18 percent of opposite-sex unmarried partners and 21 percent of same-sex unmarried partners.
+ Households and Families: 2010 (PDF)
The Removal of Homosexuality from the DSM: Its Impact on Today’s Marriage Equality Debate
The Removal of Homosexuality from the DSM: Its Impact on Today’s Marriage Equality Debate
Source: Journal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health
In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) removed homosexuality from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM), leading to changes in the broader cultural beliefs about homosexuality and culminating in the contemporary civil rights quest for marriage equality. This paper reviews the history of theories about human sexuality that led up to that event and outlines the current sociopolitical environment in which marriage equality debates are taking place as well as the current state of marriage equality in the United States and elsewhere.
+ Full Report (PDF)
Australian Social Trends — March 2012
Australian Social Trends — March 2012
Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics
+ Life on ‘Struggle Street’: Australians in low economic resource households
This article looks at the characteristics of people in households with both relatively low income and relatively low wealth.
+ Love Me Do
This article examines the trends in marriage, de facto relationships and divorce over the last twenty years.
+ Life after Homelessness
This article presents a comparison of people who have been homeless in the last 10 years with those who have never been homeless.
+ Disability and Work
This article looks at the characteristics of working-age people with disability and their involvement in the labour force.
First Marriages in the United States: Data From the 2006–2010 National Survey of Family Growth
First Marriages in the United States: Data From the 2006–2010 National Survey of Family Growth (PDF)
Source: National Center for Health Statistics
Objectives—This report shows trends and group differences in current marital status, with a focus on first marriages among women and men aged 15–44 years in the United States. Trends and group differences in the timing and duration of first marriages are also discussed. These data are based on the 2006–2010 National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG). National estimates of probabilities of first marriage by age and probabilities of separation and divorce for women and men’s first marriages are presented by a variety of demographic characteristics. Data are compared with similar measures for 1982, 1995, and 2002.
Methods—The analyses presented in this report are based on a nationally representative sample of 12,279 women and 10,403 men aged 15–44 years in the household population of the United States. The overall response rate for the 2006–2010 NSFG was 77%—78% for women and 75% for men.
Results—The percentage of women who were currently cohabiting (living with a man in a sexual relationship) rose from 3.0% in 1982 to 11% in 2006– 2010; it was higher in some groups, including Hispanic groups, and the less educated. In 2006–2010, women and men married for the first time at older ages than in previous years. The median age at first marriage was 25.8 for women and 28.3 for men. Premarital cohabitation contributed to the delay in first marriage for both women and men.
Interethnic Marriages and their Economic Effects
Interethnic Marriages and their Economic Effects (PDF)
Source: Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration (UK)
Immigrants who marry outside of their ethnicity tend to have better economic outcomes than those who marry within ethnicity. It is difficult, however, to interpret this relationship because individuals with stronger preferences for ethnic endogamy are likely to differ in unobserved ways from those with weaker preferences. To clarify some of the complex issues surrounding interethnic marriage and assimilation, this chapter starts by considering the determinants of intermarriage, proceeds with an examination of the economic consequences of intermarriage, and ends with a discussion of the links between intermarriage, ethnic identification, and measurement of long-term socioeconomic integration.
Childbearing Outside of Marriage: Estimates and Trends in the United States
Childbearing Outside of Marriage: Estimates and Trends in the United States (PDF)
Source: Child Trends
Overview. Having children outside of marriage—nonmarital childbearing—has been on the rise across several decades in the United States. In 2009, 41 percent of all births (about 1.7 million) occurred outside of marriage, compared with 28 percent of all births in 1990 and just 11 percent of all births in 1970. Preliminary data suggest that this percentage has remained stable in 2010. There are several reasons to be concerned about the high level of nonmarital childbearing. Couples who have children outside of marriage are younger, less healthy, and less educated than are married couples who have children. Children born outside of marriage tend to grow up with limited financial resources; to have less stability in their lives because their parents are more likely to split up and form new unions; and to have cognitive and behavioral problems, such as aggression and depression. Indeed, concerns about the consequences of nonmarital childbearing helped motivate the major reform of welfare that occurred in 1996, and continue to motivate the development of federally funded pregnancy prevention programs among teenagers and marriage promotion programs among adults.
This Research Brief draws from multiple published reports using data through 2009, as well as from Child Trends’ original analyses of data from a nationally representative survey of children born in 2001, to provide up-to-date information about nonmarital childbearing; to describe the women who have children outside of marriage; and to examine how these patterns have changed over time. As nonmarital childbearing has become more commonplace, the makeup of women having children outside of marriage has changed, often in ways that challenge public perceptions. For example, an increasing percentage of women who have a birth outside of marriage live with the father of the baby in a cohabiting union and are over the age of twenty. Moreover, the percentage of women having a birth outside of marriage has increased faster among white and Hispanic women than among black women.
The Rise of Intermarriage
The Rise of Intermarriage
Source: Pew Social & Demographic Trends Project
This report analyzes the demographic and economic characteristics of newlyweds who marry spouses of a different race or ethnicity, and compares the traits of those who “marry out” with those who “marry in.” The newlywed pairs are grouped by the race and ethnicity of the husband and wife, and are compared in terms of earnings, education, age of spouse, region of residence and other characteristics. This report is primarily based on the Pew Research Center’s analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) in 2008-2010 and on findings from three of the Center’s own nationwide telephone surveys that explore public attitudes toward intermarriage.
Unmarried Boomers Confront Old Age: A National Portrait
Purpose of the Study: Our study provides a national portrait of the baby boom generation, paying particular attention to the heterogeneity among unmarried boomers and whether it operates similarly among women versus men.Design and Methods: We used the 1980, 1990, and 2000 Census 5% samples and the 2009 American Community Survey (ACS) to document the trends in the share and marital status composition of the unmarried population during midlife. Using the 2009 ACS, we developed a sociodemographic portrait of baby boomers according to marital status.Results: One in three baby boomers was unmarried. The vast majority of these unmarried boomers were either divorced or never-married; just 10% were widowed. Unmarried boomers faced greater economic, health, and social vulnerabilities compared to married boomers. Divorced boomers had more economic resources and better health than widowed and never-married boomers. Widows appeared to be the most disadvantaged among boomer women, whereas never-marrieds were the least advantaged among boomer men.Implications: The rise in unmarrieds at midlife leaves baby boomers vulnerable to the vagaries of aging. Health care and social service providers as well as policy makers must recognize the various risk profiles of different unmarried boomers to ensure that all boomers age well and that society is able to provide adequate services to all boomers, regardless of marital status.
Barely Half of U.S. Adults Are Married – A Record Low
Barely Half of U.S. Adults Are Married – A Record LowSource: Pew Social & Demographic Trends
Barely half of all adults in the United States — a record low — are currently married, and the median age at first marriage has never been higher for brides (26.5 years) and grooms (28.7), according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of U.S. Census data.
In 1960, 72% of all adults ages 18 and older were married; today just 51% are. If current trends continue, the share of adults who are currently married will drop to below half within a few years. Other adult living arrangements-including cohabitation, single-person households and single parenthood-have all grown more prevalent in recent decades.
The Pew Research analysis also finds that the number of new marriages in the U.S. declined by 5% between 2009 and 2010, a sharp one-year drop that may or may not be related to the sour economy.
Divorce and Women’s Risk of Health Insurance Loss in the U.S.
Divorce and Women’s Risk of Health Insurance Loss in the U.S.
Source: Population Studies Center
Past research on the economic consequences of divorce for women has focused on changes in financial resources. This paper examines the impact of divorce on another important resource: health insurance coverage. Using fixed-effects models to account for selection of more disadvantaged women into divorce, we analyze monthly marital histories and health insurance experiences of nonelderly women in three recent panels of the Survey of Income and Program Participation. Results show that women who divorce not only have lower baseline rates of insurance coverage than women who remain married, but also face a significant risk of health insurance loss in the months following divorce. Women without their own employer-based coverage prior to divorce, primarily those insured as dependents on a husband’s employer-based insurance policy, are particularly vulnerable to insurance loss, while stable full-time employment serves as a buffer against loss of coverage. In addition, results suggest that rates of insurance coverage remain depressed for nearly two years after divorce. This finding suggests that a significant number of women face ongoing difficulties in securing health insurance after divorce.
The Marginalization of Marriage in Middle America
The Marginalization of Marriage in Middle America
Source: Brookings Institution
This policy brief reviews the deepening marginalization of marriage and the growing instability of family life among moderately-educated Americans: those who hold high school degrees but not four-year college degrees and who constitute 51 percent of the young adult population (aged twenty-five to thirty-four). Written jointly by two family scholars, one of them a conservative (W. Bradford Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project) and the other a liberal (Andrew J. Cherlin, professor at Johns Hopkins University), it is an attempt to find common ground in the often bitter and counterproductive debates about family policy. We come to this brief with somewhat different perspectives. Wilcox would emphasize the primacy of promoting and supporting marriage. Cherlin argued in a recent book, The Marriage-Go-Round, that stable care arrangements for children, whether achieved through marriage or not, are what matter most. But both of us agree that children are more likely to thrive when they reside in stable, two-parent homes. We also agree that in America today cohabitation is still largely a short-term arrangement, while marriage remains the setting in which adults seek to maintain long-term bonds. Thus, we conclude by offering six policy ideas, some economic, some cultural, and some legal, designed to strengthen marriage and family life among moderately-educated Americans. Finally, unless otherwise noted, the findings detailed in this policy brief come from a new report by Wilcox, When Marriage Disappears: The New Middle America.
+ Full Document (PDF)
Changes over time in the effect of marital status on cancer survival
Changes over time in the effect of marital status on cancer survival
Source: BMC Public Health
There is no obvious explanation for the increasing disadvantage among the never-married. It could be due to a relatively poorer general health at time of diagnosis, either because of a more protective effect of partnership in a society that may have become less cohesive or because of more positive selection into marriage. Alternatively, it could be related to increasing differentials with respect to treatment. Today’s complex cancer therapy regimens may be more difficult for never-married to follow, and health care interventions directed and adapted more specifically to the broad subgroup of never-married patients might be warranted.
+ Full Paper (PDF)
See: ‘Never Married’ Men Still More Likely to Die from Cancer
Productivity, Wages and Marriage: The Case of Major League Baseball
Productivity, Wages and Marriage: The Case of Major League Baseball
Source: Research Papers in Economics
The effect of marriage on productivity and, consequently, wages has been long debated in economics. A primary explanation for the impact of marriage on wages has been through its impact on productivity, however, there has been no direct evidence for this. In this paper, we aim to fill this gap by directly measuring the impact of marriage on productivity using a sample of professional baseball players from 1871 – 2007. Our results show that only lower ability men see an increase in productivity, though this result is sensitive to the empirical specification and weakly significant. In addition, despite the lack of any effect on productivity, high ability married players earn roughly 16 – 20 percent more than their single counterparts. We discuss possible reasons why employers may favor married men.
