Cohabitation Risk Study/Divorce, Single Parenting and Kids' Well-being - 6/06

Smartmarriages smartmarriages at
Tue Jun 13 12:48:35 EDT 2006



A study just completed by David Olson and Peter Larson (2006) found that
cohabiting couples have a significantly higher risk for divorce than
non-cohabiting couples.  Based on a national sample of 1,000 cohabiting
couples who took PREPARE‹CC (for cohabiting couples) and 1,000
non-cohabiting couples who took PREPARE, all 2,000  were classified into one
of four couples types. Compared to non-cohabiting couples, cohabiting
couples comprised a smaller percentage in the most successful couple type
(Vitalized) and a significantly larger percentage in the most problematic
couple type (Conflicted).
For more details on this study and a review of studies on cohabitation, go

Olson and Larson will present several times at the Smart Marriages Atlanta
conference including a full-day certification training for Prepare/Enrich
Instructors and a two hour Sat workshop on their model for Mentors.

> 113 One Day - Thursday: June 22
> David Olson, PhD, Peter Larson, PhD
> Learn how to help couples prepare for marriage and enrich their relationships
> with five 165-question inventories (PREPARE, PREPARE-MC, PREPARE CC, ENRICH or
> MATE) and a series of feedback sessions focused on six couple-strengthening
> exercises. Qualifies participants to administer, interpret and give feedback
> on 5 couple inventories. Includes all training materials, PREPARE/ENRICH
> leader manual, 5 inventories, and coupon. $50 spouse discount. Click for more
> information.
> 413 - Sat 
> PREPARE/ENRICH Marriage Mentor Program
> Peter Larson, PhD, David Olson, PhD
> Learn to recruit, screen, train and supervise mentor couples to work with
> engaged, newlywed and distressed married couples using the PREPARE/ENRICH and
> Empowering Couples Programs.


Studies Show Importance of Stable Family Structure

NEW YORK, JUNE 3, 2006 ( Changes in family structures have
placed many children in difficulties. In a nutshell this is the argument of
two studies released March 30 by the Institute for American Values. The
studies, both authored by Norval Glenn and Thomas Sylvester, are based on an
examination of articles published in the Journal of Marriage and Family from
1977 to 2002.

Introducing the first study, "The Shift: Scholarly Views of Family Structure
Effects on Children, 1977-2002," the authors comment that academic opinions
can be broadly divided into two camps. The first can be termed pro-marriage,
and argues that the decline in marriage has been a troubling trend,
especially for children.

The second, labeled "pro-family diversity," maintains that families haven't
been weakened by divorce and unwed childbearing, but have just changed in
form. The changes in family structures, this opinion holds, have not had
such a negative effect on children after all.

In the 1970s, right after divorce laws were liberalized, the more optimistic
view prevailed. By the end of the 1980s, concerns increased and many
commentators worried about increases in divorce and single parenting.

Research and debate on family structure effects continued in academic
journals in the following years. More recently, the debate over divorce and
unwed mothers has taken a back seat to conflicts over the issue of same-sex
unions and their possible legalization.

Better with both

Glenn and Sylvester contend that the research over the effects of the shifts
in family structure that started several decades ago is now clearer. "Most
family scholars," they comment, "apparently now agree that the preponderance
of the evidence indicates that children tend to do best when they grow up
with their own two married parents, so long as the marriage is not marred by
violence or serious conflict."

In many cases the divergences of opinion now center more on whether society
can somehow compensate for the changes in family structures, so as to reduce
the negative effects on children.

To provide a clearer opinion of research into family issues, Glenn and
Sylvester examined all the relevant articles -- 266 in all -- published in
the Journal of Marriage and Family over a 26-year period. This publication,
they noted, is the most influential journal in family social science in the
United States.

Glenn and Sylvester looked at three main family structures: children living
with married biological or adoptive parents; children living with only one
parent; and stepfamilies.

They found there was a substantial change in the studies, in the direction
of expressing concern over changes in family structures, in the periods
1977-1982, and again in 1983-1987. Thus, concerned views became more
prevalent, but it was not a steady change.

One important study they cite is a 1991 meta-analysis by Paul Amato and
Bruce Keith, who pointed out that a host of negative outcomes are associated
with parental divorce. Amato and Keith wrote: "The results lead to a
pessimistic conclusion: the argument that parental divorce presents few
problems for children's long-term development . is simply inconsistent with
the literature on the topic."

Contrasting (and rosier) views were not absent, however. Glenn and Sylvester
cited examples of some studies that denied any significant problems related
to divorce.

Hard data

There is, nonetheless, an important factor to consider. The more-concerned
views tended to be based on quantitative research, while the sanguine
approach tended to be expressed in theoretical articles. "A major reason for
this difference," Glenn and Sylvester conclude, "is probably, though not
certainly, that the views of the authors of the quantitative pieces were
more constrained by 'hard data' than those of the other authors and thus
were less affected by preconceptions and ideological biases."

They do, however, add a note of caution regarding the quantitative studies.
The evidence for negative effects on children resulting from changes in
family structures is not conclusive. This is so because, ideally, evidence
would have to be based on random studies; these cannot be done since it is
impossible to divide families into groups and artificially impose divorce on
the couples in one group and use the other as a control group.

Thus, Glenn and Sylvester caution that the statistical methods used are
fallible. Nor is it possible to statistically prove a strict cause-effect
relationship between divorce and negative consequences for children, they
maintain. Still, the preponderance of the evidence "indicates that family
structure matters, and matters to an important degree, for children," they


The second paper by Glenn and Sylvester is titled: "The Denial: Downplaying
the Consequences of Family Structure for Children." It looks at some of the
arguments used by the authors of articles published in the Journal of
Marriage and Family to justify a more optimistic view of the consequences of
family changes.

In the early period, some academics argued that the increase in absences by
fathers was not new, as in the past parental death used to be quite
frequent. This thesis was debunked, however, in later years as subsequent
research showed that parental death and divorce have different consequences
for children. Outcomes for children who lose a parent to death, in fact, are
substantially better than for children whose parents divorce.

Other earlier studies maintained that, in the case of a father's absence,
other male figures (such as grandfathers, stepfathers and boyfriends) could
serve as alternative male models or substitute for the missing parental
role. Evidence to support this view is, however, scarce. "The hope that
other men can easily substitute for absent biological fathers has received
little or no empirical support," according to Glenn and Sylvester.

A more recent trend is to simply argue that divorce does not of itself
necessarily doom children to suffer. But this approach is simply
exaggerated, as serious family scholars never held that each and every child
touched by divorce would be negatively affected.

A more serious argument made by some scholars who are relatively sanguine
regarding divorce is that many problems assumed to be the result of the
divorce actually stem from pre-divorce parental conflict.

A review of the evidence examined by Glenn and Sylvester reveals that some
studies do, in fact, indicate that a portion of the alleged effects of
divorce were present before the divorce occurred. There is not, however,
agreement about the size of those effects.

Research leads to the conclusion that the end of a highly conflicted
marriage seems to normally improve outcomes for children, freeing them as it
does from an angry and unstable home life. But divorces that dissolve
low-conflict marriages appear to have a strong negative influence on
children. Importantly, the paper observes, one nationally representative
study estimates that around two-thirds of divorces stem from low-conflict

An authentic good

Benedict XVI, in a May 11 address to members of the John Paul II Institute
for Studies on Marriage and the Family, observed: "Marriage and the family
are rooted in the inmost nucleus of the truth about man and his destiny."

He continued: "The communion of life and love which is marriage thus emerges
as an authentic good for society." Moreover, the Pope insisted that we must
avoid confusing marriage with other types of unions, which are based on a
weaker type of love.

"It is only the rock of total, irrevocable love between a man and a woman
that can serve as the foundation on which to build a society that will
become a home for all mankind," the Holy Father concluded. Secular academic
research amply backs up that conclusion.

Send replies to this newslist to: diane at  Do not hit
"reply" - that goes to a filter.  This is a moderated list. Replies are read
by Diane Sollee, editor. Please indicate if your response is NOT to be
shared with the list.  PLEASE include your email address with your

To SUBSCRIBE, UNSUBSCRIBE, or Change your subscription address,
use the form at: Click Newslist - in the
column under the puzzle piece.

This newslist shares information on marriage, divorce and educational
approaches.  Opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by members of the

To read ALL past posts to the newsletter, visit the Archive at:

10th Annual Smart Marriages Conference, Atlanta Marriott Marquis Hotel,
June 22-25, 2006
Download the brochure and registration form at

List your program in the Directory of Classes at
Order conference audio & video CD/DVD/MP3s: 800-241-7785 or

Coalition for Marriage, Family and Couples Education, LLC (CMFCE)
Diane Sollee, Director
5310 Belt Rd NW, Washington, DC 20015-1961
cmfce at

FAIR USE NOTICE: This e-newsletter/site contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. We make such material available in our efforts to advance
understanding of marriage, family, couples, divorce, legislation, family
breakdown, etc. We understand this constitutes a 'fair use' of such material
as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with
Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes. For more
information go to: If you
wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own
that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright

More information about the SmartMarriages mailing list