white bear yacht club dress code

White Bear Yacht Club Dellwood MN | Membership Cost, Amenities, History, What To Know When Visiting

Disclaimer:  CountryClubMag.com is an independent resource and is not associated with any of the clubs on this website. Club initiation and membership cost information are estimates only and should not be relied upon for making club membership decisions. Is there information in this article that’s inaccurate or out-of-date? Please contact us and let us know.

Nestled along the picturesque shores of White Bear Lake in Dellwood, Minnesota, the White Bear Yacht Club stands as a true gem among the state’s exclusive recreational destinations. This historic and elegant yacht club embodies the essence of lakeside luxury, offering members and guests an unparalleled experience in a serene, natural setting.

With a rich heritage dating back over a century, White Bear Yacht Club is a beloved institution renowned for its pristine waters, world-class amenities, and warm sense of community. Join us as we embark on a journey to discover the timeless beauty and hospitality that defines the White Bear Yacht Club in Dellwood, MN.

White Bear Yacht Club History and Founding

The White Bear Yacht Club, located in Dellwood, Minnesota, boasts a rich and storied history that dates back to its founding in 1889. Designed by renowned architect Cass Gilbert , who later became famous for his work on iconic structures such as the United States Supreme Court Building and the Woolworth Building in New York City, the club’s architecture reflects the grandeur and elegance of a bygone era.

Founded by a group of enthusiastic sailing and boating enthusiasts, the White Bear Yacht Club quickly established itself as a hub for leisure and social activities along the pristine shores of White Bear Lake. Cass Gilbert’s architectural brilliance is evident in the club’s timeless design, which seamlessly integrates with the natural beauty of the surrounding landscape.

Over the years, the club has played host to a myriad of sailing regattas, social events, and gatherings, earning a reputation for its commitment to promoting the sport of sailing and fostering a strong sense of community. Today, the White Bear Yacht Club stands as a testament to its enduring legacy, preserving the historic charm and architectural marvels that have captivated generations of members and guests alike.

White Bear Yacht Club Membership Costs and Dues

Here are the estimated and rumored Membership Costs and Dues for the White Bear Yacht Club in Dellwood MN:

Estimated Costs:

• Initiation Fee: $10,000-$20,000
• Monthly Dues: $400-$600
• Food and Beverage Minimum: $150/month (May-September only)

Rumored Costs:

• Initiation Fee: $20,000-$30,000
• Monthly Dues: $500-$700
• Food and Beverage Minimum: $200/month (May-September only)

It is important to note that these are just estimates and rumors, and the actual Membership Costs and Dues may vary depending on the type of membership you choose and other factors.

Here are some additional things to keep in mind about the White Bear Yacht Club Membership Costs and Dues:

• There is a non-refundable application fee of $250.
• Initiation fees can be paid in full upfront or over a period of time.
• Monthly dues are charged year-round, regardless of how often you use the club.
• The food and beverage minimum is only applicable during the summer months (May to September).
• There are additional fees for some activities and amenities, such as golf, tennis, and swimming.

White Bear Yacht Club Amenities

The White Bear Yacht Club in Dellwood, Minnesota, offers a range of amenities to its members, catering to a diverse set of interests and recreational activities. While specific offerings may change over time, here are some of the typical amenities you might find at such a yacht club:

• Sailing Facilities: As a yacht club, sailing is often at the forefront of its activities. Members can enjoy access to sailing lessons, sailboat rentals, and various types of sailboat racing and regattas.
• Dining: Many yacht clubs offer fine dining options, providing members with an elegant and comfortable setting to enjoy meals with a scenic view of the lake.
• Tennis and Other Sports: Yacht clubs often feature tennis courts, swimming pools, and other sporting facilities to cater to a variety of athletic interests.
• Social Events: Yacht clubs frequently host social events, including parties, galas, and special gatherings for members and their guests.
• Marina Services: Access to boat slips, docking facilities, and maintenance services for members who own boats.
• Clubhouse: A clubhouse typically provides a central hub for members, offering meeting spaces, lounges, and event facilities.
• Junior Programs: Many yacht clubs have programs for children and young adults, including sailing lessons and other activities.
• Waterfront Access: Direct access to the lake, with facilities for swimming, paddleboarding, kayaking, and more.
• Golf: Some yacht clubs may have golf courses or partnerships with nearby golf clubs to offer golfing opportunities to members.
• Fitness and Wellness Facilities: Gyms, fitness centers, and spa facilities to promote health and well-being.
• Social and Networking Opportunities: Membership often includes access to a community of like-minded individuals who share a passion for boating and watersports.

White Bear Yacht Club Event Information and Dining Options

The White Bear Yacht Club in Dellwood, Minnesota, offers a variety of events and occasions for members to celebrate and enjoy. While specific events may vary from year to year, common events and celebrations at yacht clubs like White Bear Yacht Club may include:

• Sailing Regattas: Yacht clubs often host a series of sailing regattas throughout the season, where members can compete in various boat classes and racing formats.
• Opening Day and Closing Day Celebrations: Many yacht clubs mark the beginning and end of the sailing season with special ceremonies and social gatherings.
• Themed Parties: Clubs may organize themed parties throughout the year, such as costume parties, tropical luau nights, and holiday-themed events.
• Concerts and Entertainment: Enjoy live music performances, outdoor concerts, and other entertainment options that the club may host.
• Junior Sailing and Youth Programs: Clubs typically offer programs and events specifically designed for young sailors and their families, including junior regattas and summer camps.
• Social Mixers: Casual gatherings where members can socialize and network with fellow boating enthusiasts.
• Weddings and Private Events: Yacht clubs often provide event spaces for weddings, corporate functions, and private celebrations with stunning lakeside settings.
• Educational Seminars: Some country clubs host workshops and educational events related to sailing, boat maintenance, and other nautical topics.
• Holiday Celebrations: Special events for holidays such as Independence Day, Labor Day, and other relevant occasions.
• Annual Awards Banquet: A formal event where the club recognizes and honors outstanding achievements in sailing and contributions from members.
• Regatta Parties: Celebrations held in conjunction with major sailing races and regattas, featuring award ceremonies and social gatherings.
• Member’s Birthday Celebrations: Some clubs organize birthday parties for members, to celebrate their special days.

The dining options at the White Bear Yacht Club in Dellwood, Minnesota, may vary, but typical options you might find at a yacht club include:

• Fine Dining: Many yacht clubs offer upscale dining options in an elegant and formal setting. These restaurants often feature gourmet cuisine and a carefully curated wine list. Members can enjoy a refined dining experience with lakefront views.
• Casual Dining: Yacht clubs may provide more relaxed dining options, such as a grill, bistro, or pub-style restaurant. Casual dining areas are perfect for members seeking a more laid-back atmosphere and a variety of comfort foods.
• Outdoor Dining: Enjoy the beautiful lakeside scenery with outdoor dining on patios or decks. Outdoor dining areas often offer a more relaxed atmosphere, allowing members to soak in the natural beauty while enjoying their meals.
• Member’s Bar: Many yacht clubs have a dedicated bar area where members can socialize, relax, and enjoy drinks and light fare. It’s a popular spot for post-sailing gatherings and casual meetups.
• Private Dining Rooms: For special occasions and private events, yacht clubs may have private dining rooms available for members to reserve. These spaces provide an intimate setting for celebrations or business meetings.

White Bear Yacht Club Dress Code and Guest Policy

The dress code and guest policy at the White Bear Yacht Club, like those at many private clubs, are typically designed to maintain a certain level of decorum, uphold the club’s traditions, and create a pleasant and respectful atmosphere for all members and guests.

Here are some general guidelines that are often found at private clubs:

Dress Code: The dress code at the White Bear Yacht Club may include the following:

• Appropriate Attire: Members and guests are generally expected to wear attire that is neat, clean, and in good condition.
• Formal Dress: Some areas of the club may require more formal attire, such as collared shirts, slacks, dresses, and appropriate footwear.
• Casual Dress: Other areas, like outdoor dining or casual dining spaces, may permit more relaxed attire, such as shorts and casual shirts.
• Swimwear: Swimwear is typically restricted to pool and beach areas, and cover-ups may be required in indoor areas.
• Hats and Headgear: Some clubs have policies regarding hats and headgear, often requiring the removal of hats when indoors.
• Denim: Some clubs may restrict the use of denim in certain areas, while others allow it as long as it is clean and presentable.

Guest Policy: The guest policy at the White Bear Yacht Club will outline the rules and limitations for inviting non-member guests to the club. Common elements may include:

• Guest Limits: Clubs usually have restrictions on how often and for how many guests a member can extend an invitation.
• Registration: Guests may need to be registered with the club in advance, and there could be a fee associated with hosting guests.
• Sponsorship: A sponsoring member may be required to accompany their guest during the visit.
• Compliance: Guests are typically expected to adhere to the club’s dress code and behavioral expectations.

White Bear Yacht Club in Dellwood, Minnesota, represents a cherished haven for those seeking a unique blend of lakeside luxury, nautical adventure, and a strong sense of community. With a rich history dating back to the late 19th century and an enduring commitment to preserving its traditions, this esteemed yacht club offers a wide range of amenities and opportunities for members to enjoy.

From world-class sailing facilities to fine dining and social events, the White Bear Yacht Club continues to be a beacon of leisure and camaraderie on the shores of White Bear Lake. Its timeless appeal and dedication to fostering a close-knit community make it a special place where members can create lasting memories and celebrate the beauty of lake life.

Leave a Review

There are no reviews yet. Be the first one to write one.

• New Arrivals
• Best Sellers
• Murray's Nantucket Reds
• Shamrock Shop
• Patriotic Americana
• Derby Duds Shop
• Family Matching
• Smather's & Branson
• Embroidered Shorts
• Embroidred Pants
• Button-Down Shirts
• Sweaters & Sweatshirts
• All Mens Styles
• Shoes & Socks
• Boxers & Sleeper Pants
• Hats & Visors
• Accessories
• New Arrival Ladies
• Ankle Capri Pants
• Tunics & Dresses
• Tops & Shirts
• Ladies Outwear & Sweaters
• All Ladies Styles
• New Arrivals Kids
• Girls Dresses
• Boys Shorts & Swim
• Boys Shirts
• Family Matching Outfits
• All Kids Styles
• Toast to Summer
• Madras Shop
• The Summer Sale

(866) 488-0642

Returns & Exchanges

Hassle-Free 30-Day Returns

Find your answer fast

10% off for new Subscribers

Best Sellers >>

Nantucket Reds >>

Harbor Pants >>

Madras Shop >>

New Arrivals >>

The Ali Skirt >>

Ladies Tops >>

Nantucket Reds » >>

The Sailor's Style Guide: How to Dress at a Yacht Club

If you've been invited to a casual yacht club rendezvous, you'll need the right threads to fit in.  in this guide, we'll walk you through the yacht club attire you'll need to fit in. hint: you can find the perfect outfit head to toe with castaway.

You've been invited to a meal or event at a local yacht club, but you've never been to one before. Suddenly, the panic sets in. What should you wear? Fortunately, there are lots of options and visiting a yacht club does not mean you have to spend a lot of money just to fit in. This post will give you some pointers on yacht club attire so that you feel neither under nor overdressed, and can really enjoy yourself and have a great time at the club.

Before you even think about what to wear, check to see if the yacht club you're going to has a dress code posted online. Most of them do, and the rules can vary from club to club. The Nantucket Yacht Club , for example, requires semi-formal attire for its dinners and cocktail attire including ties for men during its dinner dances and balls. The Hyannis Yacht Club goes into a little more detail. It accepts stylish casual wear including clean, neat jeans and shorts for lunch. For dinner, guests are expected to step it up by leaving the denim at home and wearing sports coats. Different areas of a club may also have different dress rules. Bars and outdoor decks tend to more lax and allow casual clothing.

Sometimes, the easiest way of narrowing down what to wear is to eliminate what you should not wear. This is just a partial list of how not to show up at any kind of yacht club unless you want to be denied admittance or receive a lot of disapproving glares. All rules listed apply to the inside of the club, and can vary for beach and dock rulings.

Flip Flops or Going Barefoot: This rule applies INSIDE the club, or for any meal time. Most people love the beach, but going barefoot is not only unacceptable, but unhygienic.

You'll want to wear appropriate footwear such as sturdy sandals or closed toe shoes. While a lot of children and adults love their flip-flops, they may be a little too casual for a yacht club atmosphere. The most popular choice here is a boat shoe style but a bridle bit driver is always appropriate - check the latest . The lightly worn leather and pencil-curled laces fit the bill in the cool department.

Torn, Stained, or Worn Clothing: Any attire that is showing signs of wear such as rips, stains that never came out, holes, missing buttons, etc. should be left at home.

Baseball Caps and Other Hats: Most yacht clubs prefer that men remove their caps when inside the venue. Save them for the sailing excursions.

Extra points on the water if you rock the Club’s Burgee on the hat!

Swimwear: Just a no-no. Save it for the boat and the beach. A cover-up can be acceptable for the patio.

Going Shirtless: Nope!

Undershirts as Shirts: See above. You may also want to be careful about choosing a t-shirt, particularly one with graphics, when visiting a yacht club. Most prefer that you wear a collared shirt, even if it's a casual one such as a polo shirt.

Tank tops for men and any tank tops for women that are skimpy and don't hide undergarments should be saved for another occasion.

Women have a lot of options when it comes to visiting a yacht club. Linen and cotton make the perfect summer blouses. A light but structured Sleeveless Top paired with a  sweater is perfect for warding off cool sea breezes when you're out on the deck. A polo or collared shirt works well for the yacht club scene as well. You can also consider a dressy blouse that has a little bit of flounce to it. If shorts are allowed for the time and area of the club you're visiting, consider sporting  Sailing  shorts  with a cute anchor embroidery. They're cool, classy, and show off just the right amount of leg. Casual skirts and dresses are perfectly fine as well as long as they're not too short and revealing. If you're attending a party at a yacht club you may need to wear a nice cocktail dress, or a classic Tunic Dress for a day event. Special events such as balls and dinner dances usually specify what is appropriate attire on the invitation.

Don't forget to have fun with accessories! A straw handbag can complete a nautical themed look.

For most casual yacht club occasions, men can't go wrong with a collared shirt and long pants or Cisco Shorts . Pastel and preppy shades such as summer green, hurricane red, and islander blue rule here.

When casual attire is allowed, collared sport or polo shirts are always in fashion. Seersucker and linen shirts are available in several colors and patterns for summer club get-togethers. If jeans are not allowed, seersucker or cotton canvas pants are still casual and comfortable yet dressy enough for all areas of a yacht club. If you really want to show your love of nautical dressing, consider wearing a fun Embroidered Pant !

Or you can opt for solid pants but add some nautical flair with an embroidered belt . Classic summer staples like Seersucker and Madras Patches will make you the talk of the Club, in a good way!

For those chilly sea breezes and evenings, a quarter zip pullover wards off the cool air while keeping you stylish and casual.

It's a good idea to keep a sportcoat and a few ties in your closet just in case the yacht club you're visiting requires it. Opt for a fun all over embroidered jacket, or a Madras Patchwork style to really up your game.

Kids' clothing should conform to the same yacht club rules as established for grown-up guests. If you really want your son to look cute, consider dressing him in the same matching outfit as dad.

Whether you're looking to make a splash with yacht club attire or just want to look good on the boat or while meeting with friends, we have the seaside looks that you'll look and feel wonderful in for men, women, and children.

It’s a very knowledgeable post for readers. I Got the latest collection of <a href=”https://www.sunbrightlighting.com/ ”>outdoor landscape lights of best quality at the lowest price this month. It enhanced the appearance, safety and security of my garden and home.

Hi, This is a very Impressive and also very informative post. I will share it with my friends too. I experienced Low Voltage (12v) <a href=”https://kingsoutdoorlighting.com/ ”>outdoor landscape lightsfixtures, that enhanced the appearance, security, and safety of my home.

Black Art Fashion is an Australian men’s clothing brand. We have some exciting deals on Men’s pants, Mens jeans, Mens chinos. Visit our online store<a href=”https://blackartfashion.com/collections/mens-pants-jeans-chinos ”> Men Pants or you can also try on one of our outlets in Australia.

about Buy Wedding Dress for Bride Hi there, all is going fine here and ofcourse every one is sharing information, that’s really good, keep up writing.

buy dapoxetine online usa

Leave a comment

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

You may also like

FedEx St. Jude Championship

TPC Southwind

TOTAL GOLF FITNESS

• Course Rankings
• Search Courses

White Bear Yacht Club

White Bear Lake, MN , United States • Private

• Best In State

David A Parker Photography

Before he moved to California where he laid the foundation of many of that state's best courses from the pre-Depression era, William Watson was a pioneer of golf in Minnesota. He arranged the first nine holes at White Bear Yacht Club in 1912 near the shore of White Bear Lake on some of the most roly-poly land imaginable. Several years later, Donald Ross, it is believed, added nine holes and remodeled the course. That rumpled, unmodified land is the heart and soul of White Bear Yacht Club. Modern architects would likely have leveled and softened the slopes and ravines, but here they bring the golf to life visually and psychologically, offering nary a level stance and asking the player to hit approaches with extreme control. Over the last two decades under the guidance of Jim Urbina the surrounding canopy of forest has been pared back to better reveal the massive, enthralling undulations of the course.

100 Greatest: The course was part of Golf Digest's original 200 Toughest Courses list from 1967-'68.

Second 100 Greatest: Ranked 191st, 2017-'18.

Best in State: Ranked fourth, 2023-'24. Ranked fifth, 2011-'22. Ranked inside the top 5, 1991-2003. Ranked inside the top 10, 2005-'09. 2023-'24 ranking: 4th.

Golf Digest Logo Panelists

Ratings from our panel of 1,900 course-ranking panelists

100 GREATEST/BEST IN STATE SCORES

Shot options, layout variety, conditioning.

“Great layout, with a lot of Donald Ross influence throughout. You'll need to enjoy blind shots to like this course, but if you do, the abundance of undulation across the course makes this place standout."

“Amazing land movement hole to hole and w/in each shot throughout the round. Quirky in that one tees off over Dellwood Road twice on holes 5 & 12. Standout holes were the short par 3 third hole w/ the wooden bridge to the left and a large slope to the right feeding from right to left, the short par 5 ninth hole w/ the roller coaster of land movement from tee to green, and the short par 4 fourteenth that boomerangs from left to right."

“very enjoyable walk with some very interesting holes that you will see anywhere near MN. Can tell this course was built before earthmoving eqp, great to see that history."

“Wild ride of land movement and elevation change... lots of side hill lies and fantastic design variety. Hole #14 short par 4 is one of the best I've every played... can hit anything from 7 iron to Driver with double plateau green. Green complexes are very challenging."

“Classic Donald Ross course. Ross moved very little earth to build this course. It fits the terrain perfectly."

“Awesome rolling topography. Great conditions. This is such a fun course to play on these hills. The 18th hole is a little bit of a let down. Truly think they would benefit from switching the 9s."

“While still highly rated, it is the most underrated top course in the state. The variety on the course, conditions, and the unique multi-clubhouse vibe is top on the state."

“Old Donald Ross design built on undulating ground. Beautiful set of Par 3's are the highlight here. Here's a course where you will hit every club in your bag. This is a fun course to play. Jump at the chance to play here if ever invited."

“Delightful private club on a small site with considerable elevation changes. What I lacks in length is made up in variety, uniqueness/quirk, and challenging green complexes. Very soft when played, which is probably more often the rule than the exception (though reportedly, they do strive for firm conditions)"

Collection of reviews from our readers

There are no readers reviews yet. Be the first to write a review.

Featured In

Nearby Courses

Golf Nearby

Find golf courses near you

White Bear Yacht Club

In this article, we’ll give you all of the information you need to know before visiting White Bear Yacht Club in Dellwood, Minnesota.

White Bear Yacht Club is a 18-hole private golf course in Dellwood, Minnesota, built in 1915, designed by Donald Ross.

Contact Details

Course information.

Frequently Asked Questions

How much does it cost to play at white bear yacht club.

It costs $80.00 to play at White Bear Yacht Club on both weekdays and weekends.

What is the grass type used on the course?

The grass type used at White Bear Yacht Club is Bent Grass.

What is the dress code at White Bear Yacht Club?

The dress code at White Bear Yacht Club is No denim, collared shirt and bermuda shorts required.

How many rounds of golf are played at White Bear Yacht Club each year?

There are an estimated 17,000 rounds of golf played at White Bear Yacht Club each year.

Does White Bear Yacht Club have water hazards?

Yes, there are water hazards on the White Bear Yacht Club course.

Does White Bear Yacht Club have sand bunkers?

Yes, there are 61-70 sand bunkers located on the White Bear Yacht Club course.

When are the greens aerated at White Bear Yacht Club?

Aeration is needed to keep the greens healthy and involves placing small holes in the greens to allow air, water, and nutrients to reach the roots. The greens at White Bear Yacht Club are aerated in September.

White Bear Yacht Club Sailing

The White Bear Yacht Club   formed in 1889 to sponsor yacht racing at White Bear Lake, MN. We’re proud to have been one of the founding members of the I nland Lake Yachting Association and host to the first ILYA Championship regatta held in August of 1898. Learn more about our history here . Club races are scheduled every Saturday morning and afternoon, and Monday, Wednesday and Thursday evenings throughout the summer months. Sailing instruction is available for adults and children through our White Bear  Sailing School  (WBSS) .

WBYC Sailing News

Recent posts.

• Get Ready for 2024 Racing!
• 2023Registration is Open!
• Remembering Fletcher Driscoll
• WBYC Race Officer Messages
• 2022 Sailing Season is Open

More News Articles…

• Dinner Menu
• Dessert Menu
• FCYC Dining Reservations

• Guest Policies
• Information Brochure
• Vision & Mission
• FCYC Dockage Reservations
• Marina Rules
• Location By Sea
• Waterfront Activities
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Statement

Mon-Fri 9am - 7pm EST Sat-Sun 9am - 6pm EST

What to wear on a cruise

Daytime attire.

Casual wear is recommended for daytime attire. Shorts and T-shirts are permitted

Evening Wear

Theme parties, dress restrictions, msc yacht club, sport lovers, northern europe cruises, shore excursions, thank you for visiting msc cruises.

Your browser may be out of date or not compatible with our new site and may not be secure.

For a better experience and to continue your booking with MSC, please update your browser by downloading the latest version below.

Thank you for visiting our site and we look forward to seeing you on board soon!

MSC Cruises

• Become a Member

Tournaments

• Player Pathway
• Rules of Golf
• Education Series
• Sota Series Programs Info
• Tournament Selection Process
• Junior Tour
• Players Tour
• Waiting List
• Rules & Regulations
• 12U PGA Championship
• Junior PGA Championships
• MN/WI Cup Matches
• Match Play Championship
• 2023 Recipients
• College Committs
• Drive, Chip & Putt
• PGA Jr. League
• Join the Conversation
• Buy a Golf License Plate
• Earn a Free Bag
• Member Login

PT - White Bear YC Players Tour - White Bear Yacht Club

• Jun 26 Mon, Jun 26

White Bear YC

Dellwood, MN

• Leaderboard

Boys Leaderboard

IMPORTANT NOTES FOR WHITE BEAR YACHT...

Tee: Red (5,658 yds - Par 74)

Renowned for its storied history, sailing heritage, legendary Donald Ross golf course, lakeside clay tennis courts and euphoric spirit of hospitality, the White Bear Yacht Club has much to offer its members and the community it has cultivated.

Tournament Information

Event Details

Mn pga junior golf policies.

Starting Times

Membership Registration

Age Divisions

LIABILITY OF RELEASE

Course Tour

Current Events

Quick links, contact info.

© 2024 Minnesota PGA Jr. Golf

• Terms of Service Terms
• Accessibility
• Copyright © 2022 BlueGolf © 2022 BlueGolf

Create New List

White Bear Yacht Club White Bear YC About

• Dellwood, MN
• Donald J Ross
• More Hole Locations Local Rules Compare Services

Green Complex

Hole # Photos Hole #1 Hole #2 Hole #3 Hole #4 Hole #5 Hole #6 Hole #7 Hole #8 Hole #9 Hole #10 Hole #11 Hole #12 Hole #13 Hole #14 Hole #15 Hole #16 Hole #17 Hole #18

About hole # hole #1 hole #2 hole #3 hole #4 hole #5 hole #6 hole #7 hole #8 hole #9 hole #10 hole #11 hole #12 hole #13 hole #14 hole #15 hole #16 hole #17 hole #18.

• Drag the large yellow marker to see distance from / to.
• Click + to zoom the green complex.
• Drag the green or yellow markers to measure yardage.
• Click a feature under Yardage Book to see where it is on the hole.
• Click a photo to see full screen. Click and drag full screen photos to pan.

Related Services

Tm for clubs.

Tournament Finder

Yardage Book App

Scorecard App

Course Tours

BlueGolf Account

Groups for Golfers

Create New List

Attending A Boat Or Yacht Party? Try One Of These 8 Chic Outfits

If you have no idea what to wear to a boat or yacht party, check out this helpful guide for the best outfit ideas and tips on dress code.

If you tend to vacation around coastal towns, chances are that you will be invited to a boat party one weekend or another. Whether it’s a luxurious yacht soiree, a casual boat gathering, or a glamorous sailing affair, you’re in for a great time. But as you embark on this nautical adventure, one question looms large: What should you wear?

Dressing appropriately for such events requires a delicate balance between comfort, functionality, and, perhaps most importantly, style. With the shimmering sea as your backdrop, you want to look effortlessly chic without trying too hard. To help you navigate your boat or yacht party in style, we have curated this guide on what to wear to a boat or yacht party, ensuring you can make a grand entrance and set sail in style.

Chic Boat Party Outfits

1. linen, cotton and tencel dresses.

We highly recommend wearing lightweight clothes made from natural fibers like linen, tencel and cotton for your boat or yacht day trip. All of them are highly breathable, allowing air circulation and preventing you from feeling overheated in the sun or during energetic activities onboard.

In addition to this, they have great moisture-wicking properties, which means that any sweat or water on your clothes quickly evaporates, keeping you cool and dry.

While you can opt for any colors you want, light colors are especially popular in the heat of the sun, as well as nautical colors like light blue and navy, which echo the color scheme of open waters around you.

Recreate This Look

Reformation

Cami Linen Dress

$148 at Reformation

Kerrigan Linen Dress

$218 at Reformation

60mm Gradient Rectangular Sunglasses

$334 at Nordstrom

2. Wide Leg Pants

  Wide-leg pants are our favorite bottoms to wear during the summer, and boat parties are no different.

These elegant pants can be dressed up with elegant tops and a designer party bag for a chic look, or more casually with your favorite bikini top, a crop top, or a linen tank top. For ultimate comfort, stick to light colors and breathable materials like tencel, linen, and rayon.

L’Academie

by Marianna Lida Tank Top

$148 at Revolve

Alex Linen Pant

$198 at Reformation

Jaydin Slide Sandal

$70 at Nordstrom

3. Swimsuit + Shorts

To make taking a dip in the ocean easy and effortless, why not layer a pair of shorts over your swimsuit? Using the swimsuit or bikini as a top means you just need to take off your shorts when you want to jump into the sea – also, there are so many cute swimsuits that you just don’t want to cover up.

This shiny cocoa brown swimsuit has been styled with tailored camel shorts and a white cardigan to protect your shoulders from the sun.

Jenna One-Piece Swimsuit

$180 at Nordstrom

Good American

Shine Rib V-neck Cardi

$149 at Revolve

Pleated High Waist Trouser Shorts

$49.50 at Nordstrom

4. Matching Sets

A matching set is an easy, fail-safe way to create a cute summery outfit that is perfect for a boat party. This matching set is all-white and includes a strapless, bandeau-style top, a midi skirt, and a cropped bolero-style cardigan, but you could go for any smart and chic matching set that perfectly suits your personal style.

Finish with sandals to slip on and off and sunglasses – keep jewelry to a minimum in case you take a dip in the sea.

Sora Strapless Top & Shrug

$38.40 at Nordstrom

Poplin Maxi Skirt

$278 at Revolve

Triomphe Logo Oval Acetate Sunglasses

$510 at Neiman Marcus

5. Crochet Dresses

Crochet dresses are super stylish at the moment and will help you keep cool during the warmer weather too – just what you need if you are heading to a boat party.

The open weave of a crochet dress means they are great for keeping cool, plus, there are loads of different crochet dresses to choose from so you can easily find one that suits you. They also look incredible layered over a swimsuit and you just need a pair of sandals to finish the outfit.

x REVOLVE Guinevere Crochet Dress

$650 at Revolve

Odella Crochet Dress

$298 at Revolve

Out of This Shell Earrings

$44 at Nordstrom

6. Opulent Silk

If the boat party you are heading to is in the evening, then opulent silk and satin are exactly what you need. A silk or satin skirt is a great way to start a sophisticated outfit, then just style with a t-shirt or cropped top for a relaxed look or a sparkling sequined top for something a little more glam.

This shimmering blue silk maxi skirt looks incredible with the blue sequin crop top, both of which shine under the night sky lights for a striking look.

The New Arrivals by Ilkyaz Ozel

Monique Top

$430 at Revolve

Silk Midi Skirt

$495 at Neiman Marcus

7. Light, neutral tones

Sticking to light, neutral tones is always a good idea during the summer months, and will perfectly suit a boat party aesthetic. White, ivory, and light beige shades will reflect the sunlight, helping you to stay cool.

This chic neutral outfit includes a beige bikini top, a white cotton skirt, black and gold sunglasses, gold starfish earrings, and a summery raffia bag to create a stunning, refined outfit that is perfect for heading out on a boat.

Dylan Bikini Top

$145 at Revolve

Raffia-effect crochet fabric tote bag

$1,650 at Miu Miu

8. Figure-Hugging Long Dresses

For ultimate elegance, go for a figure-embracing maxi dress. Not only are they more practical than sorter dresses that may get down by the wind, but they’re also more glamorous as you glide along the deck.

While a voluminous flowy dress will look amazing blowing in the wind, it can get annoying very quickly. For daytime affairs, opt for a casual rib-knit dress, and for fancier yacht parties or black tie events, a long cocktail dress with more striking designs.

Cotton Citizens

Marbella Maxi Dress

$195 at Revolve

Lambskin Quilted Mini Top Handle Vanity Case With Chain

$2,945 at Fashionphile

Alexis Bittar

Molten Ribbon Hoop Earrings

$145 at Nordstrom

Other Essentials To Bring To A Boat Party

1. your swimsuit.

Firstly, it’s not a boat party without swimming! Don’t forget to bring your favorite bathing suit with you.

2. Suncream

It also pays to protect your skin from the sun, so pack your sunblock in your bag. A good sunblock should be at least SPF 30, since SPF 30 can block about 97% of the sun’s harmful UV rays. Make sure to reapply your suncream every 2 hours you spend in the sun for optimal protection.

3. Protective Accessories

It goes without saying, but don’t attend a boat party without a good pair of sunglasses . The sun is especially strong in the open sea as it reflects off of water, and you don’t want to spend your day squinting.

In addition to sunglasses, also consider bringing a stylish hat that protects your face and scalp. Whether you opt for a wide-brimmed hat, a floppy sun hat, a straw hat or a sporty cap, it serves as a barrier against the sun, reducing the risk of sunburn and discomfort.

4. Beach Towel

Some yachts and bigger boats will be equipped with beach towels for guests, but this is not a given. If you think you’ll be going in for a dip, pack a beach towel in your beach tote before you set off.

Now that we’ve gone over some of the best things to wear for yacht and boat parties, let’s also take a look at clothing to avoid.

What Not To Wear To A Boat Party

How you dress for a boat party is very different to what you wear on land. What looks good in a rooftop bar might not be appropriate for a yacht, so keep these things in mind when putting together your outfit:

1. High heels 

Stilettos with a sharp heel are a bit of a hazard on a moving boat; not only are you less stable when wearing them, the heel itself can also get stuck in gaps or grates on the deck, which can damage your shoes.

To be on the safe side, opt for comfortable flat sandals, boat shoes, or espadrilles, or take your shoes off entirely!

If you’re attending a dressy occasion in the evening, consider wearing platform wedges that look polished but are easy to walk in.

2. Fabrics That Make You Sweat

Avoid fibers and materials like acrylic, polyester, denim, and spandex that will make you sweat, and silk, which has moisture-wicking properties, but will not hide sweat stains.

Instead, opt for breathable fibers like cotton, linen, rayon, viscose, jersey, chambray and tencel, especially if you’re attending a boat party during the daytime.

3. Skin Tight clothing (If you’re swimming)

If you know that you’ll be swimming, avoid wearing tight clothing, as there’s nothing more uncomfortable than having to put your tight clothes back on when you have wet skin. Also, what looks good dry might not look as great when it’s all soaked in water and sticking to your skin.

Opt for clothes that are loose enough that they won’t cling to you and that allow the wind’s breeze to flow through them. Alternatively, you can always bring a change of clothes if you have a tight outfit that you definitely want to wear on your boat ride.

Up next: What to Wear in the South of France: Your French Riviera Style Guide

Amelia is the luxury fashion writer for Chic Pursuit, discussing all you need to know about designer brands as well as the top handbags, shoes, clothes, and jewelry so you can find the perfect new luxe piece to add to your wardrobe. She has previously studied for a BA at Central Saint Martins and MA at London College of Fashion in fashion history and can often be found fawning over gorgeous dresses in old Hollywood films, or browsing the fashion collection at the V&A in London.

Similar Posts

10 Luxury Websites Like Ssense For Your Designer Item Needs

10 Chelsea Boot Outfits That Are Effortlessly Cool

Common Projects Vs Golden Goose: Which Sneaker Brand Is Best For You?

These 18 Designer Beach Bags Are The Best For Chic Vacation Looks

Tory Burch Vs Michael Kors: Which Is The Better Brand For You?

10 Trendy Brands Like I.Am.GIA Fashion Girls Need To Know

Hours of Operation & Dress Code

Hours of operation, courtesies, customs, traditions & uniforms.

Click HERE to view.

For occasions requiring a uniform, the dress code is as follows: 

Summer Uniform: White shoes, white pants with white web belt and brass buckle, white shirt without tie but with shoulder boards. Winter Uniform:  White shoes, white pants with white web belt and brass buckle, white business shirt with Club burgee tie, navy blue blazer with Club badge. Formal Uniform:  Winter Uniform except black bow tie (no cummerbund or tuxedo shirt). Summer Uniform for Ladies: White (no open toe) shoes, white pants or white (knee length straight) skirt with white web belt and brass buckle, white shirt without tie or without Women’s black cross-over tie but with shoulder boards. Pearls are allowed for ladies.

Winter Uniform for Ladies: White (no open toe) shoes, white pants or white (knee length straight) skirt with white web belt and brass buckle, white business shirt with Club burgee tie or Women’s black cross-over tie, navy blue blazer with Club badge.

Formal Uniform for Ladies: White (no open toe) shoes, white pants or white (long or knee length straight) skirt or dress with white top without collar or white formal long or knee length straight dress without belt and a navy-blue blazer. Pearls are allowed for ladies.

Uniform Details

• Your Cart is Empty

OUR HISTORY

White Bear Yacht Club was founded as a Yacht Club in 1889. Famed as a Club northeast of the Twin Cities, the property sits on the shorelines of White Bear Lake and was founded by group of St. Paul sailors. By the spring of 1890, the Club had more than 42 members who paid $5 initiation fees and annual dues of $3. 

Formal sailing competitions began in 1895 between the White Bear and Minnetonka clubs. On Aug. 24, 1897, the Inland Lake Yachting Association was formed between WBYC and nine other yachting clubs. Today, the association continues to honor its heritage in governing competitive sailing and creating a strong camaraderie among the sailing community.

1912 | golf is added

Many of the sailors who founded WBYC were also avid golfers and tennis players. In 1899, the club added two clay tennis courts and remodeled the clubhouse to accommodate its membership. Then in 1912, the first nine holes of the Golf Course opened for play. Several years later, the second nine opened for play.

"Awesome rolling topography. Great conditions. This is such a fun course to play on these hills."

- Golf Digest, 2021

building a legacy

Over the years of WBYC's history, famed golfers, such as Tom Vardon and Jimmy Johnston, have helped shape the legacy we've built. Tom Vardon, brother of Six-Time British Open Champion Harry, served as one of the original Golf Professionals from 1916-1937. Jimmy Johnston, a Minnesota Native and six-time Walker Cup participant, grew up playing at WBYC and is best known as the first golfer to win the U.S. Amateur west of the Mississippi, hosted at Pebble Beach Golf Links in 1929. He went on to beat Dr. O.F. Willey 4&3 in the final match. 

• Membership Inquiry
• Employment Inquiry

Sign up to get the latest on sales, new releases and more…

© 2024 White Bear Yacht Club .

Stay connected with our newsletter

research paper about effects of divorce

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 02 August 2021

Effects of divorce and widowhood on subsequent health behaviours and outcomes in a sample of middle-aged and older Australian adults

• Ding Ding 1 , 2 ,
• Joanne Gale 1 , 2 ,
• Adrian Bauman 1 , 2 ,
• Philayrath Phongsavan 1 , 2 &
• Binh Nguyen 1 , 2  

Scientific Reports volume  11 , Article number:  15237 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

7193 Accesses

23 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Epidemiology
• Risk factors

Marital disruption is a common life event with potential health implications. We examined the prospective association of divorce/widowhood with subsequent lifestyles, psychological, and overall health outcomes within short and longer terms using three waves of data from the 45 and Up Study in Australia (T1, 2006–09; T2, 2010; T3, 2012–16). Marital status and health-related outcomes were self-reported using validated questionnaires. Nine outcomes were examined including lifestyles (smoking, drinking, diet and physical activity), psychological outcomes (distress, anxiety and depression) and overall health/quality of life. Logistic regression was adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics and baseline health outcomes. Of the 33,184 participants who were married at T1 (mean age 59.5 ± 9.3 years), after 3.4 years, 2.9% became divorced and 2.4% widowed at T2. Recent divorce was positively associated with smoking, poor quality of life, high psychological distress, anxiety and depression at T2. Similar but weaker associations were observed for widowhood. However, these associations were much attenuated at T3 (5 years from T2). Marital disruption in midlife or at an older age can be detrimental to health, particularly psychological health in the short term. Public awareness of the health consequences of spousal loss should be raised. Resources, including professional support, should be allocated to help individuals navigate these difficult life transitions.

Similar content being viewed by others

Moderation of marital status and living arrangements in the relationship between social participation and life satisfaction among older Indian adults

Obesity, psychological well-being related measures, and risk of seven non-communicable diseases: evidence from longitudinal studies of UK and US older adults

Psychological distress and health behaviours in people living with and beyond cancer: a cross-sectional study, introduction.

Marital status and transitions may have important implications for health. It is generally well recognised that marriage can be protective for health and reduce morbidity and mortality 1 . Possible explanations for the beneficial effects of marriage may include a sense of greater social and financial support, overall healthier behavioural patterns, and self-selection where healthier individuals tend to marry 2 . In contrast, transitions out of marriage, such as becoming divorced or widowed, are stressful life events that have been associated with poor health and survival outcomes 1 , 3 , 4 . Marital disruption is a common life event: around 42% of marriages in England and Wales 5 and about a third of marriages in Australia end in divorce  6 . Between 1990 and 2010, the divorce rate in American adults aged 50 years and above doubled, implying a rising trend of “grey divorce” 7 . Even if a marriage survives without divorce, it will inevitably end with the death of a spouse, leaving the other one in widowhood, often for years. Several meta-analyses have shown that compared to married adults, divorced and widowed adults have a higher risk of mortality from all causes 1 , 8 , 9 and specific causes including cardiovascular disease (CVD) 4 and cancer 10 .

Contrary to the consistent observations about the disadvantage in health and survival following divorce or widowhood, the mechanisms underpinning these associations are less understood 11 . Amato’s Divorce-Stress-Adjustment Perspective postulates that the process of divorce leads to stressors, which in turn, increases emotional, behavioural and health risk. The risk, which could be either short- or long-term, may differ by individual characteristics and circumstances 12 . Within this model, psychological distress is a significant intermediate outcome of marital dissolution/bereavement, which may arise from financial and emotional challenges, and can lead to adverse health outcomes 11 . Another plausible intermediate outcome includes changes in lifestyle behaviours, which may be developed as a coping mechanism to deal with psychological distress, or a response to environmental, financial and other circumstantial changes. Such psychological and behavioural outcomes could in turn affect health, quality of life and wellbeing in the immediate-to-long term and longevity in the long term. To date, there has been limited longitudinal research on how divorce/widowhood affects both psychological wellbeing 13 and lifestyle behaviours 14 , 15 , 16 . Furthermore, individuals respond and adjust to marital disruption differently 12 . Specifically men and women may have different coping strategies to psychological stressors 17 , and suffer from different consequences as a result of marital disruption 18 . For example, recent marital disruption has been associated with increased alcohol intake 19 and decreased body mass index and vegetable intake in men 14 , and higher physical activity levels and a higher risk of smoking initiation/relapse in women 15 . Individuals with better socioeconomic status 20 and social resources, such as supportive friends 21 , have also been reported to better cope with marital disruption.

With most marriages ending in divorce or widowhood, understanding the implications of marital disruption on health has important relevance to the life of many around the world. To date, most research has focused on the more “distal” outcomes, such as mortality. It is important to investigate modifiable and immediate outcomes on the pathways that lead to ill-health so that health deterioration may be prevented. It is also informative to examine whether such potential health effects persist over time. Such knowledge could improve the current understanding of the effects of major life events on health and inform interventions that aim to help individuals during marriage disruption. Moreover, previous research more commonly focused on divorce in younger populations, while the body of literature on divorce in older populations is much smaller despite the large proportion and the rising trend in “grey divorce” 7 . The objectives of this study were to examine the association of divorce and widowhood with subsequent changes in groups of selected outcomes: (1) health-related lifestyles, (2) psychological health, and (3) overall health and wellbeing, within both immediate and longer terms in middle-aged and older Australian adults.

Study population

Study participants were a subsample from the Sax Institute’s 45 and Up Study. Between February 2006 and December 2009, 267,153 adults aged 45 years and above from the state of New South Wales, Australia, submitted the baseline survey (T1, participation rate: 18%) 22 . Prospective participants were randomly sampled from the Services Australia (formerly the Australian Government Department of Human Services) Medicare enrolment database, which provides near complete coverage of the population. People aged 80 and over and residents of rural and remote areas were oversampled. In 2010, the first 100,000 respondents were invited to participate in a sub-sample follow-up study (T2): the Social, Economic, and Environmental Factor study (SEEF) (participation rate: 64.4%) 23 . Between 2012 and 2016, all living baseline participants were invited to participate in a full-sample follow-up, and 142,500 (53%) returned the survey (T3). Participants completed consent forms for all surveys. The baseline and full-sample follow-up data collection was approved by the University of New South Wales Human Research Ethics Committee (reference: HREC 05035) and the SEEF study by the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee (reference: 10-2009/12187). The reporting of our analysis follows the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines (Supplementary file).

The study sample for the main analysis (Analysis 1) that focused on immediate outcomes included 33,184 men and women who reported to be in a married or cohabiting relationship at T1 and completed the marital status question at T2 (Supplementary Fig.  1 ). For those with additional follow-up data at T3, we conducted a subgroup analysis on the longer-term effects of marital disruption (Analysis 2) among those who reported to be married at T1, reported marital status at T2 and T3, and did not change marital status between T2 and T3 (Supplementary Fig.  2 ).

Sex-specific baseline and full-sample follow-up questionnaires can be found at https://www.saxinstitute.org.au/our-work/45-up-study/questionnaires/ . The SEEF questionnaire is included in Supplementary File.

Exposure variable

For the purpose of the study, both divorce/separation and widowhood were considered marital disruption 14 , 24 , but were considered as separate categories in the analysis because the two events usually happen at different stages in life within distinct circumstances and may have different implications on health 14 . For the purpose of the analysis, we combined those who were married and in a de facto relationship (living with a partner) together as “married”, because in Australia, those in a de facto relationship are considered legally similar to married couples 25 . In our sample, those in a de facto relationship are slightly younger than their legally married counterparts and account for 7% of the participants who were classified as “married” at T1. For Analysis 1, those who were married at both T1 and T2 were defined as “remained married”, those who were married at T1 but reported to be single, divorced or separated at T2 were defined as “recently divorced/seperated (‘divorced’ thereafter)” and those who were married at T1 but widowed at T2 were defined as “recently widowed”. For Analysis 2, those who reported to be in a married relationship at all three time points were defined as “continuously married”, and those who reported to be single, divorced or separated at T2 and T3 were defined as “remained divorced” and those who reported to be widowed at T2 and T3 were defined as “remained widowed”. Because the objective of Analysis 2 is to examine long-term implications of divorce and widowhood, we focused the analysis on those whose marital status remained the same between T2 and T3, and excluded those who became divorced or widowed between T2 and T3 due to the recency of events (n = 1768), those who remarried/re-partnered between T2 and T3 due to the lack of consistent exposure (n = 145), and those who changed between divorced and widowed because the events were difficult to interpret (n = 27).

Outcome measures

We examined nine self-reported outcome variables in three categories: (1) health-related lifestyles: smoking, alcohol consumption, diet and physical activity; (2) psychological outcomes: psychological distress, anxiety and depression; (3) overall health and wellbeing: self-rated health and quality of life. Responses were coded as 1 for being “at risk” and 0 for “not at risk”, as described in Table 1 .

Covariates and effect modifiers

The following variables were selected as covariates: age (continuous), sex, educational attainment (up to 10 years, high school/diploma/trade, university), residential location (major city vs regional/remote, based on the Accessibility Remoteness Index of Australia 26 ), country of birth (Australia vs overseas) and follow-up time. Specifically, we selected education, rather than income, as a socioeconomic indicator, because previous research repeatedly concluded that education generally has the strongest effects on health behaviors 27 , and it has nearly complete data in the 45 and Up Study. Therefore, it has been consistently recommended as a stable and reliable socioeconomic indicator for the current cohort 28 , 29 .

In addition, several variables were selected as potential effect modifiers based on evidence from previous studies, including: age categories, sex, educational attainment and social support 14 , 17 , 21 , 30 , 31 , 32 . Based on previous evidence suggesting that friends’, rather than family’s support buffers health deterioration following marriage disruption 21 , we used one question from the Duke Social Support Index 33 to measure social support outside of family. The question asks about the number of people outside of home within one hour of travel one can depend on or feel close to. Based on previous investigation in the SEEF study, this single question had the most consistent association with psychological distress across sex and age categories and was therefore chosen as an indicator for social support 34 . Responses were dichotomised at the median into low (0–4 people) and high (5 + people).

Statistical analysis

Baseline sociodemographic characteristics and health-related outcomes of the three marital transition groups were compared using ANOVA and χ 2 tests. For Analysis 1, those who remained married served as the reference category when comparing outcomes with those who became divorced and widowed. For Analysis 2, those who were “continuously married” between T1 and T3 served as the reference category when comparing outcomes with those who “remained divorced” or “remained widowed”. Separate binary logistic regression models were fitted for each dichotomous outcome, adjusted for all covariates and the value of each outcome at T1. Effect modification was tested by including a multiplicative interaction term in the adjusted model followed by a likelihood ratio test. Given the small amount of missing data (< 8%), we used missingness as a category for analysis. Considering that people who became divorced or widowed by T2 may be at a higher risk for death or loss to follow up by T3, posing threats to selection bias, we conducted additional analyses outlined in Supplementary file (page 5 “Methodological supplement”). All statistical analyses were conducted using SAS 9.4 and significance levels were set at p  < 0.05.

Ethical approval

Approved by the University of New South Wales Human Research Ethics Committee (reference: HREC 05035) and the SEEF study by the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee (reference: 10-2009/12187).

Baseline descriptive statistics

Of the 33,184 participants who were married at baseline (T1, 2006–2009), after a mean follow-up time of 3.35 (standard deviation [SD] = 0.95) years, 31,760 (95.7%) remained married at the first follow-up (T2, 2010), 616 (2.9%) became divorced and 808 (2.4%) became widowed. At T1, compared with those who remained married, those who recently divorced were younger and had slightly higher levels of education, were less likely to live in major cities and more likely to be born overseas. On the contrary, those who recently widowed were much older, predominantly females, had lower educational attainment, and were less likely to live in major cities (Table 2 ).

At T1, compared with those who remained married, those who recently divorced had around twice the prevalence of fair/poor self-rated health and quality of life, high psychological distress, anxiety, depression, and reported smoking. They also had a slightly higher prevalence of high alcohol consumption, physical inactivity, and insufficient fruit and vegetable intake. Those who were recently widowed had a higher prevalence of fair/poor self-rated health and quality of life, high psychological distress, and physical inactivity, but lower prevalence of depression, smoking, at-risk alcohol consumption, and insufficient fruit and vegetable intake.

Analysis 1: short-term health outcomes following marital disruption

After adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics, health-related outcomes at T1, and follow-up time, those who recently divorced had much higher odds of fair/poor quality of life (Odds Ratio [OR] = 2.98), high psychological distress (OR = 2.78), smoking (OR = 2.40), anxiety (OR = 2.23) and depression (OR = 2.92) at T2 (Table 3 ). The associations of divorce with fair/poor self-rated health (OR = 1.22), high alcohol consumption (OR = 1.12), physical inactivity (OR = 1.04) and insufficient fruit and vegetable consumption (OR = 1.25) were non-significant. For nearly all outcomes, adjusting for covariates attenuated the associations. When comparing those who were recently widowed with those who remained married, based on adjusted analysis, recent widows had higher odds of fair/poor quality of life (OR = 1.80), high psychological distress (OR = 1.92), anxiety (OR = 1.55), depression (OR = 2.11), smoking (OR = 2.51), and insufficient fruit and vegetable consumption (OR = 1.60). Recent widows also had a marginally lower prevalence of high alcohol consumption at T2 (OR = 0.75).

Several sociodemographic characteristics seemed to have moderated the association between marital disruption and short-term health outcomes (Table 4 ). Specifically, the association between divorce and quality of life was the strongest (OR = 4.91) in the oldest group (75 + years), but the association between widowhood and quality of life was the strongest (OR = 3.35) in the youngest group (45–59 years). On the other hand, the associations of both divorce and widowhood with psychological distress were the strongest in the youngest group (OR = 2.98 and 3.53, respectively). The association between divorce and high psychological distress was stronger among those with lower education attainment (OR = 2.96, up to 10 years education; OR = 3.06, high school/diploma) but the association between widowhood and psychological distress was stronger among those with high educational attainment (OR = 4.20). The association of divorce with depression was much stronger in men (OR = 4.59) than women (OR = 1.60) but the association of widowhood was similar by sex. While there was no significant association between divorce and alcohol consumption, recent widowhood seemed to reduce the risk of high alcohol consumption among women (OR = 0.53). Finally, while there was no observed association between divorce and physical activity, widowhood was significantly associated with insufficient physical activity in those with a medium level of educational attainment only (OR = 1.46).

Analysis 2: long-term health outcomes following marital disruption

After an additional five years (mean = 4.98, SD = 0.53) of follow-up, a total of 21,605 participants reported marital status at the second follow-up (T3, 2012–2016) and did not change relationship status between T2 and T3, so that consistent relationship patterns could be determined and long-term outcomes of marital disruption that occurred between T2 and T3 could be examined. Of this subgroup of participants, 20,900 were consistently married (96.7%), 270 (1.25%) remained divorced and 435 (2.01%) remained widowed. The comparison of baseline characteristics across the three groups remained similar to that from Analysis 1 (Supplementary Table 1 ). When adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics, health-related outcomes at T1, and follow-up time, those who remained divorced still had higher odds for most adverse health outcomes compared with those who were consistently married (Table 5 ), but the associations were much weaker compared with those observed in Analysis 1, and only reached statistical significance for insufficient fruit and vegetable consumption (OR = 1.55). Compared with those who were consistently married, those who remained widowed did not have consistently higher odds for adverse health outcomes and none of the associations was statistically significant. We did not find significant effect modification by age, sex, educational attainment, or social support.

This study examined the short- and long-term health outcomes following divorce and widowhood in a large population-based Australian sample of older men and women. The findings revealed strong and adverse short-term effects of marital disruption on health outcomes, particularly within the psychological health domain. These effects seemed to attenuate in the longer term.

A number of studies have examined the associations between marital status or marriage disruption and health, with relatively consistent findings suggesting a protective effect of marriage, and respectively detrimental effects of marital disruption. For example, systematic reviews and meta-analyses have consistently found an elevated risk of all-cause mortality in adults who are divorced 35 or widowed 1 , 8 , 9 , and the effects seemed to be mostly consistent across countries and geographic areas 1 , 9 . Wong et al. extended the outcomes for CVD and found similar associations between marital status and CVD events and mortality 4 . Our current study has extended previous research by examining a broad range of relatively proximal outcomes, and in a population-based sample ranging from middle age to the “oldest old”. Examining proximal outcomes could help understand the potential mechanisms (e.g., psychological distress, unhealthy lifestyles) for the observed association between marital disruption and distal endpoints, such as mortality. Understanding the potential mechanisms has been considered an important research agenda for future studies 35 . Involving a large sample with a broad age range allows us to examine the effect of marital disruption at different life stages, including the less researched transitions, such as divorce at an old age (grey divorce) 7 and widowhood at a younger age.

To date, several proposed mechanisms might explain the health disparities by marital status 4 . The predominant debate has centered around social selection versus causation 36 . While selection theory suggests that people with poorer health are less likely to enter or maintain long-term partnerships 4 , 36 , social causation theory postulates that marriage and partnership benefit individuals’ health through spousal support, companionship and financial stability 36 , 37 , 38 . Within the causation theory framework, it has been proposed that the stress related to spousal loss could affect physical, mental, emotional and behavioural health 4 , 36 , 38 , 39 , 40 . In the current study we tested various components of these theories by: (1) comparing baseline characteristics of participants with different marriage transitions, (2) adjusting for potential confounders that could have caused self-selection into maintained partnership, such as socioeconomic status, and (3) comparing between those who have divorced and widowed, which involve different levels of self-selection.

Based on the baseline comparison of participants with different marital transition categories, those who became divorced at T2 appeared to be distinctly different from the other categories at T1: they had around twice the prevalence of fair/poor self-rated health and quality of life, high psychological distress, anxiety, depression, and current smoking, compared with those who remained married between T1 and T2. In most cases, they had much worse health risk profiles than those who became widowed, despite the latter being significantly older. Such observations may provide supportive evidence for the social selection theory. However, given that the deterioration of marriage is a gradual process, which started from the time when couples still lived together 12 , a dysfunctional relationship could have adversely affected physical and mental health years before divorce or separation formally took place 12 . In both short- and longer-term analyses, adjusted associations were much attenuated from the unadjusted associations, suggesting that the potential characteristics underlying social selection to marriages, such as socioeconomic status, may have partially contributed to the observed “marital disruption effects”. However, the adjusted associations remained strong in most cases, implying the plausibility for a causal relationship. Finally, we found generally similar patterns of associations for divorce and widowhood; if social selection was the sole explanation for the detrimental health effects of marital disruption, then one should expect strong effects of divorce but much weaker-to-no effects of widowhood, because spousal death is usually beyond the control of the surviving spouse 24 .

As an attempt to explore different mechanistic pathways, assuming that marital disruption is causally linked to health deterioration, we tested several domains of health outcomes: health-related lifestyle behaviours, psychological outcomes, and overall health and wellbeing. Our findings suggest that most of the observed “marital disruption effects” occurred within the psychological domain, with divorce and widowhood triggering initial elevations in psychological distress, anxiety and depression. The much higher odds of smoking among those who recently divorced or widowed, similar to findings from a previous study 15 , could also be stress-related 41 . Contrary to previous studies 14 , 15 , 42 , we found no overall associations between marital disruption and physical activity or alcohol consumption. We did, however, find a positive association between divorce/widowhood and insufficient fruit and vegetable consumption. Based on a small number of studies, vegetable consumption seemed to decline in men 14 and women 15 following divorce and widowhood, and the literature has cited a lack of food preparation skills among men 14 and meal skipping as a grief reaction among women 15 . Finally, within the overall health and wellbeing domain, recently divorced and widowed individuals suffered from worsening quality of life but not self-rated health. This could be because the self-rated health question focuses on the physical manifestation of health while the quality of life question holistically captures physical, mental, emotional and other aspects of health, which are more likely to be influenced by marital disruption.

An interesting finding is that although marital disruption seemed to have a detrimental effect on various health outcomes in the short-term, after a further five years of follow-up, the effects were attenuated, and in some cases, disappeared. These findings confirmed the “divorce-stress-adjustment perspective” 12 , which postulates that marital disruption led to multiple stressors (e.g., loss of custody of children, economic decline), which, in turn, lead to negative emotional, behavioural and health outcomes. The process of “adjustment” takes time, and its severity and duration differ by individual characteristics 12 . Previous research found a similar “time effect” (where the negative consequences of marital disruption was attenuated over time) with depression 43 , first-time myocardial infarction 44 but mixed results with mortality 40 , 45 . However, it is important to distinguish our study from those with morbidity or mortality endpoints, which take longer to manifest. Given that outcomes in our study are conceptually proximal, and that most people have the psychological resilience to eventually recover from marriage disruption 46 , we could expect on average a stronger effect in the short-term than the long-term.

However, it is important to acknowledge individual differences in resilience to stressful transitions like divorce and widowhood 46 . We have tested for several potential effect modifiers and found several outcome-specific interactions. For example, overall, younger participants (aged 45–59 years at T1) seemed to have suffered more from both divorce and widowhood in terms of worsening quality of life and increasing psychological distress. This finding is concordant with previous research on marital transition and mortality 9 . In terms of psychological distress, participants with high educational attainment seemed to have coped with divorce the best but widowhood the worst. This is a new and unexpected finding and may be related to the higher levels of independence, resources and support among those with higher socioeconomic status to cope with an expected traumatic event, such as divorce. Widowhood is less planned and more permanent and may exert severe emotional stress on individuals in the short-term, regardless of skills, resources and support. Divorce had a much stronger impact on depression in men than women, which is consistent with the literature on divorce and mortality 8 , 9 . It has been documented that men are more likely to dramatically lose supportive social ties 9 and experience declined social support from their children following a divorce 47 . Finally, interestingly, women who were widowed seemed to have benefited from reduced heavy alcohol consumption. A previous study in France found that women decreased heavy drinking prior to and at the time of widowhood 48 . Some evidence suggests that husbands may influence wives’ drinking behaviour 49 , it is plausible that the death of a husband may be associated with reduced drinking occasions.

Limitations

The current study is the first to our knowledge to examine short- and longer-term effects of marital disruption on a broad range of physical, psychological and behavioural health outcomes in middle-aged and older adults. Strengths include a population-based sample, comprehensive proximal health outcomes, and examination of both divorce and widowhood. However, findings should be interpreted in light of limitations. First, some relevant information was not collected by the 45 and Up Study, such as relationship quality, the exact time of marital transition (we could only infer that the event happened between T1 and T2), the long-term cumulative marital history (e.g., the total number of marriages and broken relationships) 35 . Such information is important to further elucidate whether the adverse health effects of marital disruption are due to social selection or causation. While this study focused on marital disruption, the other type of marital transition, namely remarriage could further affect health behaviours and outcomes. However, we did not model this transition because of the small number of participants who remarried and the lack of repeated measures to ascertain long-term effects of remarriage. Second, there was some evidence for selection bias as those who became divorced or widowed by T2 were more likely to become lost to follow-up by T3 (Supplementary file). Third, the number of participants who became divorced or widowed during the study follow-up was small, limiting the power of detecting potential associations and effect modification. Fourth, the 45 and Up Study cohort was not population representative and participants were on average healthier than the general population. However, a study comparing the current cohort with a population representative sample in New South Wales found the estimates for the associations between risk factors and health outcomes to be similar, despite the differences in risk factor prevalence 50 . Finally, it is important to note that the current study was conducted based on a sample aged 45 years and above and we only examined the effects of marital disruption in midlife and at an older age. Findings may not generalise to younger populations.

Conclusions

This current Australian study extends previous evidence on marital transition and health and suggests that marital disruption can be a vulnerable life stage, particularly for certain subgroups, such as men. Findings from the study have important public health implications. Given the ubiquitous and inevitable nature of marital disruption, it is important to raise public awareness of its potential health effects and develop strategies to help individuals navigate such difficult life transitions. Physicians and other health practitioners who have access to regularly updated patient information may play an important role in identifying at-risk individuals, monitoring their health and referring them to potential interventions and support programs.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the Sax Institute upon application and payment, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publicly available. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of the Sax Institute.

Manzoli, L., Villari, P., Pirone, G. M. & Boccia, A. Marital status and mortality in the elderly: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Soc. Sci. Med. 64 , 77–94 (2007).

Article   Google Scholar  

Kim, H. K. & McKenry, P. C. The relationship between marriage and psychological well-being: A longitudinal analysis. J. Fam. Issues 23 , 885–911. https://doi.org/10.1177/019251302237296 (2002).

Manfredini, R. et al. Marital status, cardiovascular diseases, and cardiovascular risk factors: A review of the evidence. J. Womens Health 26 , 624–632. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2016.6103 (2017).

Wong, C. W. et al. Marital status and risk of cardiovascular diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart 1 , 1937–1948 (2018).

Office for National Statistics. What Percentage of Marriages End in Divorce? (Office for National Statistics, 2013).

Google Scholar  

Australian Bureau of Statistics. Australian Social Trends, 2007 (No. 4102.0). Available from: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/ [email protected] /0/26D94B4C9A4769E6CA25732C00207644?opendocument (2007).

Brown, S. L. & Lin, I. F. The gray divorce revolution: Rising divorce among middle-aged and older adults, 1990–2010. J. Gerontol. Ser. B 67 , 731–741. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbs089 (2012).

Moon, J. R., Kondo, N., Glymour, M. M. & Subramanian, S. V. Widowhood and mortality: A meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 6 , e23465. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0023465 (2011).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Shor, E., Roelfs, D. J., Bugyi, P. & Schwartz, J. E. Meta-analysis of marital dissolution and mortality: Reevaluating the intersection of gender and age. Soc. Sci. Med. 75 , 46–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.03.010 (2012).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Pinquart, M. & Duberstein, P. R. Associations of social networks with cancer mortality: A meta-analysis. Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol. 75 , 122–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2009.06.003 (2010).

Sbarra, D. A., Hasselmo, K. & Nojopranoto, W. Divorce and death: A case study for health psychology. Soc. Pers. Psychol. Compass 6 , 905–919. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12002 (2012).

Amato, P. R. The consequences of divorce for adults and children. J. Marriage Fam. 62 , 1269–1287. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.01269.x (2000).

Gähler, M. “To divorce is to die a bit...”: A longitudinal study of marital disruption and psychological distress among Swedish women and men. Fam. J. 14 , 372–382. https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480706290145 (2006).

Eng, P. M., Kawachi, I., Fitzmaurice, G. & Rimm, E. B. Effects of marital transitions on changes in dietary and other health behaviours in US male health professionals. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 59 , 56–62 (2005).

Lee, S. et al. Effects of marital transitions on changes in dietary and other health behaviours in US women. Int. J. Epidemiol. 34 , 69–78 (2005).

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Stahl, S. T. & Schulz, R. The effect of widowhood on husbands’ and wives’ physical activity: The Cardiovascular Health Study. J. Behav. Med. 37 , 806–817. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-013-9532-7 (2014).

Das, A. Spousal loss and health in late life: Moving beyond emotional trauma. J. Aging Health 25 , 221–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0898264312464498 (2013).

Leopold, T. Gender differences in the consequences of divorce: A study of multiple outcomes. Demography 55 , 769–797. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-018-0667-6 (2018).

Pudrovska, T. & Carr, D. Psychological adjustment to divorce and widowhood in mid- and later life: Do coping strategies and personality protect against psychological distress?. Adv. Life Course Res. 13 , 283–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1040-2608(08)00011-7 (2008).

Kulik, L. & Heine-Cohen, E. Coping resources, perceived stress and adjustment to divorce among Israeli women: Assessing effects. J. Soc. Psychol. 151 , 5–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540903366453 (2011).

Bookwala, J., Marshall, K. I. & Manning, S. W. Who needs a friend? Marital status transitions and physical health outcomes in later life. Health Psychol. 33 , 505–515. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000049 (2014).

Banks, E. et al. Cohort profile: The 45 and up study. Int. J. Epidemiol. 37 , 941–947. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dym184 (2008).

Bauman, A. et al. Maximising follow-up participation rates in a large scale 45 and up study in Australia. Emerg. Themes Epidemiol. 13 , 6–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12982-016-0046-y (2016).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Cornelis, M. C. et al. Bachelors, divorcees, and widowers: Does marriage protect men from type 2 diabetes?. PLoS ONE 9 , e106720. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106720 (2014).

Article   ADS   MathSciNet   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Australian Government. Guides to Social Policy Law: Social Security Guide. 2.2.5.10 Determining a De Facto Relationship , https://guides.dss.gov.au/guide-social-security-law/2/2/5/10 (2019).

Department of Health and Aged Care. Measuring Remoteness. Accessibility/Remoteness Index of Australia (ARIA) (Department of Health and Aged Care, 2001).

Pampel, F. C., Krueger, P. M. & Denney, J. T. Socioeconomic disparities in health behaviors. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 36 , 349–370. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102529 (2010).

Stamatakis, E. et al. Associations between socio-economic position and sedentary behaviour in a large population sample of Australian middle and older-aged adults: The Social, Economic, and Environmental Factor (SEEF) Study. Prev. Med. 63 , 72–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.03.009 (2014).

Korda, R. J. et al. Socioeconomic variation in incidence of primary and secondary major cardiovascular disease events: An Australian population-based prospective cohort study. Int. J. Equity Health 15 , 189. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-016-0471-0 (2016).

Dupre Matthew, E., George Linda, K., Liu, G. & Peterson Eric, D. Association between divorce and risks for acute myocardial infarction. Circ. Cardiovasc. Qual. Outcomes 8 , 244–251. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.114.001291 (2015).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Floud, S. et al. Marital status and ischemic heart disease incidence and mortality in women: A large prospective study. BMC Med. 12 , 42–42. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-12-42 (2014).

Article   ADS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hughes, R., Good, E. S. & Candell, K. A longitudinal study of the effects of social support on the psychological adjustment of divorced mothers. J. Divorce Remarriage 19 , 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1300/J087v19n01_03 (1993).

Goodger, B., Byles, J., Higganbotham, N. & Mishra, G. Assessment of a short scale to measure social support among older people. Aust. N. Z. J. Public Health 23 , 260–265. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-842X.1999.tb01253.x (1999).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Phongsavan, P. et al. Age, gender, social contacts, and psychological distress: Findings from the 45 and up study. J. Aging Health 25 , 921–943. https://doi.org/10.1177/0898264313497510 (2013).

Sbarra, D. A., Law, R. W. & Portley, R. M. Divorce and death: A meta-analysis and research agenda for clinical, social, and health psychology. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 6 , 454–474. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691611414724 (2011).

Wade, T. J. & Pevalin, D. J. Marital transitions and mental health. J. Health Soc. Behav. 45 , 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1177/002214650404500203 (2004).

Espinosa, J. & Evans, W. N. Heightened mortality after the death of a spouse: Marriage protection or marriage selection?. J. Health Econ. 27 , 1326–1342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2008.04.001 (2008).

Matthews, K. A. & Gump, B. B. Chronic work stress and marital dissolution increase risk of posttrial mortality in men from the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial. Arch. Intern. Med. 162 , 309–315. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.162.3.309 (2002).

Quinones, P. A. et al. Marital status shows a strong protective effect on long-term mortality among first acute myocardial infarction-survivors with diagnosed hyperlipidemia—Findings from the MONICA/KORA myocardial infarction registry. BMC Public Health 14 , 98. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-98 (2014).

Brenn, T. & Ytterstad, E. Increased risk of death immediately after losing a spouse: Cause-specific mortality following widowhood in Norway. Prev. Med. 89 , 251–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.06.019 (2016).

Kassel, J. D., Stroud, L. R. & Paronis, C. A. Smoking, stress, and negative affect: Correlation, causation, and context across stages of smoking. Psychol. Bull. 129 , 270–304. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.2.270 (2003).

Liew, H. The effects of marital status transitions on alcohol use trajectories. Longitud. Life Course Stud. 3 , 332–345 (2012).

Kristiansen, C. B., Kjaer, J. N., Hjorth, P., Andersen, K. & Prina, A. M. The association of time since spousal loss and depression in widowhood: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 54 , 781–792. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-019-01680-3 (2019).

Kriegbaum, M., Christensen, U., Andersen, P. K., Osler, M. & Lund, R. Does the association between broken partnership and first time myocardial infarction vary with time after break-up?. Int. J. Epidemiol. 42 , 1811–1819. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyt190 (2013).

Berntsen, K. N. & Kravdal, O. The relationship between mortality and time since divorce, widowhood or remarriage in Norway. Soc. Sci. Med. 75 , 2267–2274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.08.028 (2012).

Sbarra, D. A., Hasselmo, K. & Bourassa, K. J. Divorce and health: Beyond individual differences. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 24 , 109–113. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414559125 (2015).

Kalmijn, M. Gender differences in the effects of divorce, widowhood and remarriage on intergenerational support: Does marriage protect fathers?. Soc. Forces 85 , 1079–1104. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2007.0043 (2007).

Tamers, S. L. et al. The impact of stressful life events on excessive alcohol consumption in the French population: Findings from the GAZEL cohort study. PLoS ONE 9 , e87653. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087653 (2014).

Leonard, K. E. & Das Eiden, R. Husband’s and wife’s drinking: Unilateral or bilateral influences among newlyweds in a general population sample. J. Stud. Alcohol. Suppl. 13 , 130–138. https://doi.org/10.15288/jsas.1999.s13.130 (1999).

Mealing, N. et al. Investigation of relative risk estimates from studies of the same population with contrasting response rates and designs. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 10 , 26 (2010).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was completed using data collected through the 45 and Up Study ( www.saxinstitute.org.au ). The 45 and Up Study is managed by the Sax Institute in collaboration with major partner Cancer Council NSW; and partners: the National Heart Foundation of Australia (NSW Division); NSW Ministry of Health; NSW Government Family & Community Services—Ageing, Careers and the Disability Council NSW; and the Australian Red Cross Blood Service. We thank the many thousands of people participating in the 45 and Up Study.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, 6N69 Charles Perkins Centre (D17), Camperdown, NSW, 2006, Australia

Ding Ding, Joanne Gale, Adrian Bauman, Philayrath Phongsavan & Binh Nguyen

Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

D.D. conceptualised the research idea, D.D. and J.G. conducted data analysis, B.N. and D.D. conducted the literature review, D.D. drafted the manuscript with B.N. contributing to parts of the manuscript, all authors critically revised the manuscript and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ding Ding .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary information., rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Ding, D., Gale, J., Bauman, A. et al. Effects of divorce and widowhood on subsequent health behaviours and outcomes in a sample of middle-aged and older Australian adults. Sci Rep 11 , 15237 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93210-y

Download citation

Received : 09 August 2020

Accepted : 14 June 2021

Published : 02 August 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93210-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Trauma, adversity, and biological aging: behavioral mechanisms relevant to treatment and theory.

• Kyle J. Bourassa
• David A. Sbarra

Translational Psychiatry (2024)

Marital dissolution and associated factors in Hosanna, Southwest Ethiopia: a community-based cross-sectional study

• Likawunt Samuel Asfaw
• Getu Degu Alene

BMC Psychology (2023)

Union Status and Disability Pension

• Solveig Glestad Christiansen
• Øystein Kravdal

European Journal of Population (2023)

Network and solitude satisfaction as modifiers of disadvantages in the quality of life of older persons who are challenged by exclusion from social relations: a gender stratified analysis

• George Pavlidis
• Thomas Hansen
• Marja Aartsen

Applied Research in Quality of Life (2022)

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

• DOI: 10.7176/jcsd/46-02
• Corpus ID: 182074846

The Effect of Divorce on Families’ Life

• Mulugeta Deribe Damota
• Published in Journal of Culture, Society… 1 March 2019

Ask This Paper

By using this feature, you agree to AI2's terms and conditions and that you will not submit any sensitive or confidential info.

AI2 may include your prompts and inputs in a public dataset for future AI research and development. Please check the box to opt-out.

Ask a question about " "

Supporting statements, 10 citations, divorce in the families of the uae: a comprehensive review of trends, determinants, and consequences, the relationship between differentiation of self and psychological adjustment to separation, balancing personal and professional life: a study of experiences and perceptions of divorced people, violation of women's rights on divorce: study on religious court decision, factors associated with divorce from first union among women in ethiopia: further analysis of the 2016 ethiopia demographic and health survey data, cinta pertama hilang: mengungkap dinamika forgiveness, psychometric properties of dyadic data from the marital quality scale of indonesian javanese couples, spatially-informed insights into early marriage and school dropout: an advanced bivariate binary multilevel model for understanding ethiopia's context, the influence of registered divorces on outbound tourism: empirical evidence from mexico, the impact of demographic trends on families, 28 references, the effects of divorce and marital discord on adult children's psychological well-being, handbook of marriage and the family, women after divorce : exploring the psychology of resilience, delayed parental divorce: how much do children benefit, divorce in ethiopia: the impact of early marriage and childlessness..

• Highly Influential

The Transmission of Marital Instability across Generations: Relationship Skills or Commitment to Marriage?

Children's adjustment following divorce: risk and resilience perspectives, coping with family transitions: winners, losers, and survivors., divorce in east gojjam zone: rates, causes and consequences, separation from a parent during childhood and adult socioeconomic attainment, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The Effect of Divorce on Families' Life

Related Papers

hassan nazari

Divorce is an effect of several complicated psychosocial causes. It is an obvious reason for the underlying conflicts, lacking the balance and harmony of a relationship, which lead couples through a decision making process to end up their marriage. In all cultures, divorce has not been welcome. Reviewing statistics and studies on its causes that strived to find solutions for its reduction, indicates the significance of divorce and the traces of its negative effects left on various aspects of the human society. Divorce, either directly or indirectly, affects the mental health of couples, children, relatives and friends. The lack of comprehensive and inclusive studies on this issue urged us to set the aim of this study to identify the consequences of divorce. (Shamsi Miri Ghaffarzadeh, Hassan Nazari. Consequences of Divorce. Life Sci J 2012;9(4):281-285) (ISSN:1097- 8135). http://www.lifesciencesite.com . 41

Journal of Divorce & Remarriage

Ludwig Lowenstein

ABSTRACT Most research conducted has come from the United States but a number of countries also provided information in connection with divorce and separation and thier causes. Little information is available, however, on how to deal with this problem effectively.Among the causes indicated are: women&amp;#39;s independence; too early marriage; economic factors; poor intellectual, educational, and social skills; liberal divorce laws; sexual factors leading to incompatibility; role conflicts; alcoholism and substance abuse; risk-taking behavior; differences between the partners leading to acrimony; religious factors; attitudes to divorce and various other factors.The consequences of divorce are the diminishing of fathers&amp;#39; role in the family over recent years, the poor impact separation and divorce have on children, the emotional problems suffered by all concerned, and the reduced living standard of families that have separated.

International Journal of Epidemiologic Research

Masoud Amiri

Shashi Shukla

Njoroge Mwai

The paper talks about social problems of divorce

Getnet T E F E R A Melese

The findings of this study, Indicated some have positive attitude and others have negative perception towards marital disintegration. The major Contributing factors of divorce are cultural factors, infidelity, education levels, and employment among couples, domestic violence is highly contributed to divorce on community. The major consequences or effects of divorce included poverty and psychological problems, physical consequences, social consequences, financial consequences, absence of father. The remedies or solution of divorce includes communication and the mediation by spiritual or religion leaders, elders man, supportive network, worry on children's, welfare, friends or family members would help to solve disagreements that could result in divorce. Religion or spirituality was considered to play a central role in solving marital issues that were likely to develop in to divorce. The study has recommended that community should come up with their own ways of managing issues or solving problems and not emulate what others do as marriages and people are different. Community should save for sustainability of the family. Community should respect and love each other, this way conflicts tend to be minimal. Community need to communicate with each other whenever they have a problem and try to transform the conflict for the better instead of carrying over grudges that ultimately causes build-up of issues that eventually lead to conflict.

Alochana Chakra Journal

Sanket Mohapatra

The concept of divorce is the separation of a married couple due to certain personal, domestic and matrimonial reasons which are legally and socially acceptable as both the spouses can’t coexist together peacefully in the matrimonial home and continue their ceremonial life as the marital life is disturbed due to conflict of interest, physical abuse, suspicion of extramarital affair and sexual reasons like Infertility, sexually transmitted diseases and other reasons. There are various pieces of legislations and civil codes to regulate and discharge a person from the matrimonial relationship and provide maintenance to the spouse to continue her life after separation. There are two types of Divorce Methods i.e., Legal Separation where the couple are given some time to reunite and live together otherwise divorce is granted. Divorce can’t be given before one year of consummation of marriage as it goes against the marital law and structure of family in a society. The society viewpoint of divorce has been highly conservative as it affects the dignity of the individual in a whole society and violates the social norms set for the customary social hierarchy of marriage, family and social process. The liberal nature of a free society questions the patriarchal perspective of concept of divorce and the amount of loss of reputation it causes to the individual by misogynist comments and the sociological perception of divorce is based on social norms, values, ideals and cultural practices which form the foundation of marital relationships and are a significant part of the modern society.

Dr. Mustapha Kulungu

Abstract This research paper examines the impact of divorce from an amalgamated view which combine recent literature, select studies, and my experience and knowledge accumulated while reading farrago of information on this matter. In examining the impact of divorce attention is drawn to the income / class specific marriage and divorce studies which more often also couple child development and behavioral problem associated with divorce. Beyond the individual outcomes from divorce, this paper also delves into institutional and broad cultural implications of rising divorce, single parent families, and the attendant problems caused by divorce trauma as looked at from large scale private sector and governmental programs proposed and designed to deal with economic, educational, communication, and behavioral issues. The overall purpose of this individual as well as societal examination leads to proposed solutions or pragmatic steps and procedures to take to more effectively deal with pre-marriage and marriage problems along with post divorce financial and children’s behavioral development problems.

solly dreman

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Texila International Journal of Public Health

Texila International Journal , Adaora Anyichie - Odis

Science World Journal of PEDIATRIC S

Science World Publishing

European Journal of Theology and Philosophy

novita Sahertian

Asian Journal of Humanities and Social Studies

Child Psychiatry & Human Development

Jack Westman

isara solutions

International Research Journal Commerce arts science

National journal of community medicine

sanjay mulaje

International Journal of Social Science Studies

Taghi Pourebrahim

Erzsébet Földházi

Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences

Navid yaghoubzadeh

Journal of Social Issues

Jenifer Baranda

Family Process

Stephanie Coontz

Piet Bracke

Rick-Kim Meeks

Anna Garriga

Mehmet Meder

Md Mizanur Rahman

Family Relations

Jeffrey Cookston , sanford braver

IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science

maryam bibi

Land Forces Academy Review

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

3 Signs of Going Through an "Emotional Divorce"

Signing legal papers isn't the only way to feel the effects of a divorce..

Posted August 15, 2024 | Reviewed by Michelle Quirk

• The Challenges of Divorce
• Take our Relationship Satisfaction Test
• Find a therapist to heal from a divorce
• Emotional divorce is when a couple, still legally married, experiences a significant emotional separation.
• In an emotional divorce, a couple can experience fear, relief, sadness, anger, hope, or even personal growth.
• Lack of communication creates an emotional chasm, making a couple more like roommates than life partners.

An “emotional divorce” refers to when a couple, although still legally married, experiences a significant emotional separation. This situation often precedes a legal divorce but can also occur independently.

In an emotional divorce, partners become increasingly emotionally disconnected from one another, leading to a lack of intimacy , communication, or mutual support. Couples may live together but lead separate lives, with little to no shared activities, goals , or interests.

In the process of an emotional divorce, research shows that a couple can experience fear , relief, sadness, anger , hope, or even personal growth in varying degrees, often based on who initiates the separation.

A 2023 study found that emotional divorces can also be associated with alexithymia—a difficulty in identifying and connecting with one’s emotions—and possibly depression . These mental health impacts on both individuals and their marriages highlight the importance of catching the signs early and addressing them before they escalate.

Following are three signs of an emotional divorce:

1. A Lack of Communication

A study published in March on late-life divorces found that emotional divorces often set in long before formal ones. Based on the participants’ experiences of growing apart while still married, a lack of communication is one of the most telling signs of an emotional divorce.

Partners may stop sharing their thoughts, feelings, aspirations, and daily experiences with each other. Conversations become superficial and cold, limited to necessary topics such as household chores, their children’s well-being, or finances.

The warmth and affection that once characterized their interactions are replaced by detachment and indifference. Nonverbal cues such as eye contact, touch, and attentive body language that signify connection and affection can also noticeably diminish.

“At some point it was even cold between us. A distance began to form. We no longer had the usual topics of conversation. I focused on my pleasures, she on her work and our relationship was through the children. The divorce was essentially a final stop in a process that had started years before,” says Dan, a 69-year-old participant from the study, recalling the emotional divorce that took place with his ex long before legal proceedings began.

A lack of communication creates an emotional chasm between partners, making them operate more like roommates than life partners. This can create feelings of anxiety and loneliness , even when physically together.

2. A Loss of Intimacy

In strained marriages, physical affection and sexual activity can significantly decline or cease entirely. Emotionally divorced couples also tend to experience very low levels of emotional intimacy, often due to underlying emotional disconnection, incompatibility, a lack of attraction , or unresolved conflicts.

A 2021 study found that when we perceive our partners as caring and responsive to our needs, we experience greater intimacy, which can enhance relationship satisfaction. However, emotional divorces can involve the loss of a deep connection, closeness, trust, mutual understanding, emotional availability, and responsiveness between partners.

After facing multiple relationship challenges without successful resolutions, spouses may become indifferent to each other’s needs, feelings, and well-being and stop putting effort into maintaining the relationship. This can further fuel feelings of neglect and perpetuate negative cycles of being emotionally dismissive of each other.

3. Heightened Levels of Destructive Conflict

Emotional divorces often involve heightened levels of conflict, with couples unable to resolve them or giving up after multiple failed attempts. Over time, these unresolved conflicts foster resentment and hostility. Partners may begin to avoid each other to prevent any further friction, creating further emotional distance.

“We were dragged into endless arguments about who is right, what word was said, in what tone it was said, and what it means, and what punishment is due for it. It was exhausting to the point that in the last eight or nine years, I tried as much as possible not to talk, be in a separate room and live my life,” explains Ruth, another participant from the 2024 late-life divorce study.

According to Gottman’s theory of “the four horsemen” of divorce, four destructive behaviors in a conflict can signal the end of a marriage : criticism or attacking a partner’s character; contempt, which involves a lack of respect and sarcasm; defensiveness, which entails refusing to take responsibility for one’s behavior; and stonewalling, which involves withdrawing and refusing to communicate.

Without open communication, misunderstandings and assumptions become more frequent. Partners may begin to doubt each other’s intentions, leading to suspicion and insecurity. Over time, the emotional toll of constant conflicts and unmet needs can also lead to emotional exhaustion, leaving little room for positive interactions.

A 2018 study found that when both spouses take their problems seriously, it reduces the risk of separation. However, in emotional divorces, they may feel too worn out to do so, making reconciliation increasingly difficult.

Additionally, research shows that spouses often stay together, locked in a long period of emotional divorce because their relationships have both positive and negative elements, making it difficult to end them or to continue in the face of struggles.

Realizing that you’re in an emotional divorce is not a death sentence for your relationship but an opportunity to reflect on what you, your partner, and your children, if any, would truly benefit from.

No one wins if even one partner is unhappy in a marriage. While emotional divorces can be challenging and painful, addressing the dissatisfaction is the first step toward preparing oneself to move on from an unfulfilling relationship or healing and rebuilding a stronger, more connected bond with your partner.

A version of this post also appears on Forbes.com.

Mark Travers, Ph.D., is an American psychologist with degrees from Cornell University and the University of Colorado Boulder.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Sticking up for yourself is no easy task. But there are concrete skills you can use to hone your assertiveness and advocate for yourself.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Moti Baa Ni Nani Vahu - Season 1 - Episode 881

Dhwanit signed the divorce papers.

20 Aug 2024

Moti Baa and Chirag happily announce that Dhwanit has signed the divorce papers. Now, the big question is whether Sargam will actually have to leave the house or if Anahita will intervene with a new twist. The unfolding events are sure to keep everyone on edge. Show more

S1e881 ∙ drama ∙ gujarati, will dhun reveal the truth to moti baa, s1e880 ∙ drama ∙ gujarati, truth comes in front of moti baa., s1e879 ∙ drama ∙ gujarati, what will moti baa's plan be, s1e878 ∙ drama ∙ gujarati, lajja ties a black blindfold over her eyes, s1e877 ∙ drama ∙ gujarati, will sargam be able to stop dhun and dhwanit's marriage, s1e876 ∙ drama ∙ gujarati, dhun wore a housemaid's attire, s1e875 ∙ drama ∙ gujarati, will sargam be able to protect dhwanit from bapuji, s1e874 ∙ drama ∙ gujarati, anahita arrives with ₹20 crores, s1e873 ∙ drama ∙ gujarati, will dhun reveal the truth to sargam, s1e872 ∙ drama ∙ gujarati.

Disemployment Effects of Unemployment Insurance: A Meta-Analysis

We systematically review studies of how unemployment benefits affect unemployment duration. Statistically significant findings are eleven times more likely to be published. Correcting for publication bias halves the average elasticity. Meta-analysis provides a principled way for sufficient statistics methods to aggregate estimates across policy contexts and speak to the optimality of large reforms. Although existing consumption drop-based approaches typically imply an optimal replacement rate near zero, our corrected estimates imply an optimal replacement rate of 28%. The "micro" elasticity is equal to the "macro" elasticity, suggesting that general equilibrium effects are unimportant or cancel out.

The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research.

This research was conducted prior to the author’s employment by Amazon. This paper is not sponsored or endorsed by, or associated with Amazon or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates. The views, opinions and positions included in this paper are the author’s own and do not reflect the views, opinions and positions of Amazon.

MARC RIS BibTeΧ

Download Citation Data

Working Groups

More from nber.

In addition to working papers , the NBER disseminates affiliates’ latest findings through a range of free periodicals — the NBER Reporter , the NBER Digest , the Bulletin on Retirement and Disability , the Bulletin on Health , and the Bulletin on Entrepreneurship  — as well as online conference reports , video lectures , and interviews .

• India Today
• Business Today
• Harper's Bazaar
• Brides Today
• Cosmopolitan
• India Today Hindi
• Reader’s Digest
• Aaj Tak Campus

Download App

Supreme Court's triple talaq order didn't work as 'sufficient deterrent': Centre

The centre, in its affidavit before the supreme court, said there was a need for more state action to give effect to the court's order striking down triple talaq in 2017 and to redress the grievances of victims of illegal divorce..

Listen to Story

• Centre files fresh affidavit on pleas challenging its triple talaq law
• Stresses need for more action against triple talaq violators
• Supreme Court in 2017 declared triple talaq 'unconstitutional'

The Centre on Monday filed a fresh affidavit before the Supreme Court in response to the petitions challenging the law of triple talaq or talaq-e-biddat, saying the practice that was set aside by the Supreme Court in 2017 did not work as a sufficient deterrent in bringing down the number of divorces among certain Muslim communities.

The Supreme Court had declared instant triple talaq -- where a Muslim man utters talaq (divorce) three times to his wife, without her consent, and vice versa -- as "void, illegal and unconstitutional". The Centre then implemented a law in 2019 criminalising the instant divorce practice with a maximum of three years of imprisonment and a fine.

The Centre, in its affidavit, said it was felt that there was a need for more state action to give effect to the Supreme Court's order and to redress the grievances of victims of illegal divorce.

The affidavit was filed in response to a plea that argued that there was no need to criminalise triple talaq despite the Supreme Court declaring the practice unconstitutional.

The Centre said in its affidavit that if the petitioners agreed that the pronouncement of talaq-e-biddat would have no legal effect and consequence and, in fact, is "manifestly arbitrary" after the judgement in Shayara Bano, "the petitioners or any other law-abiding citizen of the country ought not to have any grievance with the criminalisation of the said manifestly arbitrary action, as declared by this Hon'ble Court".

Citing reports of triple talaq from different parts of the country despite the Supreme Court order, the government said the victims had no option but to approach the police for redressal of their grievances. It added that the police were helpless as no action could be taken against their husbands in the absence of punitive provisions in the law.

The law was brought in to protect the rights of married Muslim women who are being divorced by way of triple talaq, the Centre argued.

The Centre stressed an urgent need for stringent provisions in the law, which act as a deterrent to Muslim husbands divorcing their wives by adopting instantaneous and irrevocable talaq.

"Since, the Supreme Court declared that divorce through triple talaq is unconstitutional, Parliament, in its wisdom, is empowered to make it an offence and hence no unconstitutionality is involved in the matter," the affidavit said.

"The practice of talaq-e-biddat was held unconstitutional and a need was felt to have a standalone legislation to address the same. In the Shayara Bano case, the Supreme Court had expressly noted that triple talaq could not be justified with reference to the tenets of Islam," it added.

"The pronouncement of triple talaq by Muslim husbands, which was set aside by the Supreme Court, has been made a punishable offence by the legislature in its wisdom," the affidavit stated.

Underlining that marriages are a social institution which the state has a special interest in protecting, the Centre said it was beyond doubt that the state can protect the stability of marriages by resorting to the device of criminal law.

"There is no basis for the claim that marriages being under personal law are exempt from the application of the general criminal law," it added.

IN THIS STORY

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

Divorce Attitudes among Older Adults: Two Decades of Change

Susan l. brown.

Department of Sociology, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH 43403, (419) 372-9521, ude.usgb@lsnworb

Matthew R. Wright

Department of Criminology, Sociology, and Geography, Arkansas State University, Jonesboro, AR 72467, (870) 972-3276, ude.etatsa@thgirwam

The authors used data from the 1994, 2002, and 2012 General Social Survey (N = 1,450) to examine whether support for divorce has increased among adults aged 50 and older. Consistent with the rise in the gray divorce rate, today’s older adults were more accepting of divorce than their predecessors were two decades ago. Attitudinal change was modest between 1994 and 2002 but accelerated after 2002. The acceleration was primarily due to period rather than cohort change, signaling the role of broader shifts in the meaning of marriage as it has become deinstitutionalized. Older birth cohorts and individuals who were either divorced or remarried were especially likely to hold supportive attitudes toward divorce.

Until recently, divorce among older adults was uncommon. Less than one in ten individuals who got divorced in 1990 was aged 50 or older. Since then, the gray divorce rate, which refers to divorces among adults aged 50 and older, has increased twofold from 5 to 10 divorces per 1,000 marriages ( Brown & Lin, 2012 ; Brown & Wright, 2017 ). The doubling of the gray divorce rate coupled with the aging of the U.S. population translates into a considerable rise in the share of divorcing individuals who are over age 50. In 2010, one in four individuals who got divorced was aged 50 or older ( Brown & Lin, 2012 ).

This increase in gray divorce purportedly signals growing acceptance of divorce among middle-aged and older adults. Yet, few studies have investigated historical change in divorce attitudes and those that have tended to exclude older adults and are now somewhat dated, failing to capture prevailing attitudes of older adults during the gray divorce revolution period ( Martin and Parashar, 2006 ; Thornton, 1989 ; Thornton & Young-DeMarco, 2001 ).

We draw on data from the 1994, 2002, and 2012 General Social Survey (GSS) to examine nearly two decades of change in divorce attitudes of adults aged 50 and older. Given the doubling of the gray divorce rate, we anticipate that older adult attitudes toward divorce have become more favorable over time. Our goal is to examine this assertion from a social change perspective designed to evaluate whether the increase in support reflects cohort replacement or intracohort (i.e., period) change ( Firebaugh, 1992 , 1997 ; Ryder, 1965 ). We assess the relative importance of cohort and period net of factors known to be associated with gray divorce to extrapolate about expected future trends in gray divorce and the implications for policy.

Explaining the Rise in Gray Divorce

The rapid growth in gray divorce reflects a confluence of factors, including some that foretell a shift in older adult attitudes toward divorce. Divorce is commonplace and thus individuals are likely to be more accepting of divorce as either they or the people in their networks experience divorce ( Wu & Schimmele, 2007 ). A primary reason why gray divorce has increased is because a larger proportion of today’s older adults are in remarriages, which are at higher risk of divorce than first marriages ( Brown & Lin, 2012 ). The Baby Boom generation experienced the divorce revolution of the 1970s as young adults and many have since remarried. The gray divorce rate is 2.5 times greater for remarriages than first marriages ( Brown & Lin, 2012 ). Remarriages are less stable in part because they are of shorter duration, on average, and marital duration is negatively associated with divorce. Also, remarriages are more prone to divorce because spouses are typically less homogamous ( Sweeney, 2010 ). Finally, the previously divorced are more willing to divorce again whereas in first marriages some of those who are unhappy are unwilling to call it quits ( Uhlenberg & Myers, 1981 ).

More broadly, the meaning of marriage has shifted such that individuals of all ages hold high expectations for their unions. Today’s individualized marriages are predicated on self-fulfillment, open communication, and flexible roles ( Cherlin, 2004 ). The deinstitutionalization of marriage has coincided with weakened norms of marriage as a lifelong institution ( Wu & Schimmele, 2007 ). Marriages change and evolve over time, and many older couples appear to grow apart, spurring gray divorce ( Bair, 2007 ). During an era of individualized marriage and lengthening life expectancies, couples are simply less willing to remain in empty shell marriages. The rise in wives’ labor force participation makes divorce a realistic option for many women ( Amato, 2010 ; Uhlenberg & Myers, 1981 ). For prior generations, wives were typically economically dependent on their husbands which may have precluded many divorces. Together, these explanations for the rise in gray divorce suggest more supportive attitudes toward divorce among older adults in recent years, especially among those who have previously divorced.

Prior Research on Divorce Attitudes

These explanations for the rise in gray divorce coupled with the doubling of the gray divorce rate suggest more supportive attitudes toward divorce among older adults in recent years. Yet, few studies have investigated whether and how divorce attitudes have shifted over time and these studies have tended to exclude older adults. For example, Martin and Parashar (2006) tracked divorce attitudes from 1974-2002, but only for women ages 25-39. There was no appreciable variation in divorce attitudes by age net of other factors. Other research uncovered a notable rise in supportive attitudes toward divorce during the 1960s and 1970s, but support remained stable (and high) from the 1980s until about 2000 ( Thornton, 1989 ; Thornton & Young-DeMarco, 2001 ). Whether or how these trends differed by age group was not investigated. Moreover, these studies are dated and thus do not address the prevailing attitudes for today’s population, regardless of age.

An intergenerational study of mothers and their children revealed that mothers’ supportive attitudes toward divorce when children are involved rose between 1962 and 1980, but did not change appreciably thereafter (the latest time point was 1993). It is unclear whether this initial rise (1962-1980) in favorability was due to within cohort change or if it affected individuals of all ages since only this cohort was followed. Between 1980 and 1993, the young adult offspring of these mothers reported high levels of support for divorce, with favorability increasing modestly over the time period. Daughters more often expressed support for divorce than sons, underscoring a gender gap in divorce attitudes that has been documented in several studies ( Kapinus & Flowers, 2008 ; Thornton & Young-DeMarco, 2001 ). Asked in 1993 whether they believed couples should not stay married for the sake of the children, about 90% of daughters and 80% of mothers agreed, versus just 70% of sons.

A distinctive pattern emerged for a different measure of divorce attitudes. In 1993 about 60% of mothers supported the notion that “divorce is usually the best solution for couples that can’t seem to work out their marriage problems” versus 41% of daughters and 40% of sons, suggesting greater support for divorce among older than younger adults. Thornton and Young-DeMarco (2001, p. 1019) posited that this pattern could be indicative “more of a life cycle phenomenon for these young adults than a historical trend….these young adults may…become more like their mothers and may see the cost-benefit ratio associated with divorce as more positive than they did” when they were younger. Our study empirically tests this assertion by examining whether attitudinal change reflects within cohort change or inter-cohort differences for a contemporary sample of older adults.

Mothers may be more accepting of divorce than are their offspring because one’s own experience of divorce is highly predictive of attitudes toward divorce. Although divorce attitudes are not associated with subsequent divorce behavior, nearly all women who experienced divorce reported supportive divorce attitudes following their own divorces ( Thornton, 1989 ). This finding is particularly relevant for the current study as the shares of middle-aged and older adults who have experienced divorce is pretty high. In 2009, 41% of individuals aged 50-59, 37% of those aged 60-69, and 22% of those aged 70 and older had ever divorced. By comparison, the proportions ever divorced in 1996 were considerably lower ( Kreider & Ellis, 2011 ). These patterns point to growing acceptance of divorce among middle-aged and older adults.

The Present Study

The current investigation charts a nearly two decade long time trend in attitudes toward divorce among older adults. The rise of gray divorce coupled with the deinstitutionalization of marriage signal that today’s older adults may be more accepting and supportive of divorce as a solution for couples who are unable to work out their marital difficulties. Prior research on attitudes toward divorce is limited in at least three ways. First, research to date has typically focused on younger adults ( Martin & Parasher, 2006 ) or a select group of middle-aged adults, such as mothers ( Thornton & Young-DeMarco, 2001 ). Second, the existing work is rather dated now and thus does not capture the contemporary population of older adults during the era of rising gray divorce rates ( Thornton, 1989 ; Thornton & Young-DeMarco, 2001 ). Third, most studies on divorce attitudes have addressed whether divorce laws should be more stringent, not whether divorce itself is a good solution when a marriage does not work out ( Kapinus & Flowers, 2008 ; Martin & Parasher, 2006 ). The deinstitutionalization of marriage argument aligns with the viewpoint that divorce is a viable option when couples do not get along.

Our study extends prior research by using recent data from 1994, 2002, and 2012 that coincides with the doubling of the gray divorce rate between 1990 and 2010 to appraise older adult attitudes toward the acceptability of divorce as an outcome for marriages that are no longer satisfactory. Our approach relies on a social change perspective which is designed to identify whether any shift in divorce attitudes is due to cohort replacement (also termed cohort succession) or within-cohort (also termed intracohort) change, or if both of these factors are operating ( Firebaugh, 1992 ; Ryder, 1965 ).

Cohort versus Period Change

Cohort replacement refers to population turnover, which occurs as older birth cohorts die and are replaced by younger cohorts who age into the older adult population. A recent study showed that the growing support among older adults for cohabitation was due to cohort replacement. As the Baby Boomers, the first to cohabit en masse in young adulthood, moved into older adulthood and succeeded generations who lacked prior experience with cohabitation, support for cohabitation among the older adult population soared ( Brown & Wright, 2016 ). These cohort effects reflect stability within the group (i.e., cohort) over time and shared experiences over the life course (e.g., widespread cohabitation as young adults). A similar logic could be applied to divorce attitudes because Baby Boomers were the generation that experienced the apex of the divorce boom, when the divorce rate accelerated in the 1970s and peaked in the early 1980s ( Cherlin, 1992 ). Their divorce experience—whether firsthand or indirectly through their cohort—presumably nudged them to adopt supportive attitudes toward divorce during young adulthood. As cohort replacement unfolds with Baby Boomers moving into older adulthood, we can anticipate broader support for divorce.

Alternatively, within-cohort change indicates that the group’s attitudes are actually changing over time. Intracohort change often reflects alterations in the larger historical context or events that similarly affect all age groups, which are referred to as period effects ( Ryder, 1965 ). When individuals within a given cohort experience a substantial change in their divorce attitudes that signals within-cohort change. Likewise, if support for divorce rises across time within all cohorts, that is evidence of within-cohort change. As the cultural meanings of marriage and divorce have evolved to favor individualized marriages in which personal happiness is paramount and divorce is widespread ( Cherlin, 2009 ), the growth in favorable attitudes toward divorce may reflect this larger sociohistorical context that is permeating all cohorts and thus spurring within cohort change. By this logic, intracohort change is the driving factor in shifts in divorce attitudes among older adults. There is some speculative evidence for this explanation from Thornton and Young-DeMarco (2001) , who pointed to a pattern of rising support for divorce with age which they attributed to a life cycle effect.

Sociodemographic Factors and Divorce

In addition to establishing the extent to which cohort replacement versus intracohort change accounts for the shifts in older adult attitudes toward divorce over the past two decades, we also investigate the sociodemographic correlates of supportive divorce attitudes. Our assessment draws on prior research on divorce attitudes as well as the predictors of gray divorce to identify the factors that are likely to be related to older adult support for divorce. The general trend should be in the direction of greater support over time ( Thornton & Young-DeMarco, 2001 ). Whether older cohorts are more supportive than younger cohorts is uncertain. If cohort replacement is driving attitudinal change, then younger cohorts are more supportive. However, if intracohort change is operating, then it is possible that older cohorts are as likely to express favorable attitudes toward divorce as their younger counterparts.

Marital status is arguably a key determinant of support for divorce. Those who have experienced divorce themselves are nearly uniform in their support for divorce ( Thornton, 1989 ). Also, those in remarriages have a much higher risk of divorce, including gray divorce, than those in first marriages ( Amato, 2010 ; Brown & Lin, 2012 ; Sweeney, 2010 ). Thus, we anticipate that older individuals who are either divorced or remarried are more likely to express support for divorce than first married individuals. Those who are widowed may not appreciably differ from the first married. Never married individuals are known to be more supportive than marrieds of divorce ( Stokes & Ellison, 2010 ).

Other demographic characteristics are relevant. Women are more supportive of divorce than are men, on average ( Kapinus & Flowers, 2008 ; Thornton & Young-DeMarco, 2001 ). Nonwhites are more likely than Whites to experience gray divorce ( Brown & Lin, 2012 ) and they are more often opposed to more stringent divorce laws ( Stokes & Ellison, 2010 ). Economic resources, including education, employment, and income, are protective against divorce ( Amato, 2010 ) and gray divorce in particular ( Brown & Lin, 2012 ), suggesting lower levels of support for divorce among the economically advantaged. However, there is actually a positive association between resources and liberal family attitudes ( Powell, Bolzendahl, Geist, & Steelman, 2010 ). One study of women’s divorce attitudes reveals that individuals with lower levels of education tend to espouse more permissive attitudes toward divorce ( Martin & Parashar, 2006 ). Finally, social ties could be related to divorce attitudes. For example, religiosity is associated with greater support for strict divorce laws ( Stokes & Ellison, 2010 ). Children also may serve as a barrier to divorce and tend to be related to more conservative divorce attitudes ( Martin & Parashar, 2006 ).

This study expands our limited knowledge about the gray divorce revolution by establishing how supportive of divorce older adults have become over the past two decades. Moreover, it contributes to the literature on divorce attitudes, which is dated and has focused narrowly on younger adults, emphasizing their attitudes about divorce laws. Beyond establishing the trend in older adult support for divorce during an era of rising gray divorce, we also decipher the extent to which this trend is due to cohort (i.e., cohort replacement) versus period (i.e., intracohort) change. And we identify which demographic subgroups of older adults are most likely to express support for divorce. Establishing the trend and correlates of older adult attitudes toward divorce informs our understanding of the potential for future growth in gray divorce.

We used data from the 1994, 2002, and 2012 General Social Survey (GSS) because these rounds included a measure of support for divorce. The GSS, collected by the National Opinion Research Center, is a compilation of cross-sectional survey data dating back to 1972 ( Smith, Marsden, Hout, & Kim, 2013 ). Data were collected via face-to-face interviews from nationally representative samples of adults aged 18 and older. The data were suitable for the current study because a central theme of the GSS has been opinions on social issues and respondents’ views toward divorce have been tapped over the past two decades.

The three GSS rounds contained 7,731 respondents. Only a random sample of respondents was asked their opinion on divorce and thus the 3,811 who were not asked were eliminated. Respondents were removed from the analytic sample if they were missing on the dependent variable (n = 114), birth year (n = 8), or the sample weight (n = 1), leaving 3,797 respondents. Of the remaining respondents, 1,450 were aged 50 or older. We used age 50 as the cut point because gray divorce is a phenomenon confined to those aged 50 and older ( Brown & Lin, 2012 ). An initial descriptive analysis relied on the full sample (aged 18 and older) to establish whether divorce attitudes of individuals aged 50 and older differed from those of people aged 18-49. Missing data were minimal as fewer than 1% of analytic sample cases were missing on the independent measures (the only exception was income, which was missing for 12% of the cases as explained in the next section).

Dependent variable.

During each of the three years, the GSS asked respondents, “Do you agree or disagree that divorce is usually the best solution when a couple can’t seem to work out their marriage problems?” To track change in levels of support for divorce, divorce attitude was measured as a dichotomous variable with respondents who strongly agreed or agreed coded as 1 and those who neither agreed nor disagreed, disagreed, or strongly disagreed were coded as 0.

Focal independent variables.

Birth cohort was a categorical variable that classified respondents according to their year of birth: 1905-1914, 1915-1924, 1925-1934, 1935-1944, 1945-1954, and 1955-1964 (reference). Period , the year of the survey was included as a series of dichotomous indicators, with each respective year (1994 [reference], 2002, and 2012) coded as 1.

Demographic characteristics.

Marital status was a categorical variable distinguishing among those in a first marriage (reference), remarried, widowed, divorced, and never married. Gender was coded as 1 for man and 0 for woman. Race was coded White = 1 and Nonwhite = 0.

Economic resources.

Education was coded: less than high school, high school education (reference), some college, and college educated. Employment consisted of: full time employment (reference); part time employment; and other work, including the retired, those in school, respondents searching for work, and people temporarily away from work (e.g., for health reasons). Income captured the total family income in the survey year. We constructed income quartiles to accommodate the varied number of response categories across survey years and to account for inflation. The first quartile included earnings under $1,000 to $17,499 in 1994, under $1,000 to $19,999 in 2002, and under $1,000 to $22,499 in 2012. The second quartile was $17,500-$34,999 in 1994, $20,000-$39,999 in 2002, and $22,500-$49,999 in 2012. The third quartile was $35,000-$59,999 in 1994, $40,000-$74,999 in 2002, and from $50,000-$89,999 in 2012. The fourth quartile was at least: $60,000 in 1994, $75,000 in 2002, and $90,000 in 2012. Those with missing data (12% of the sample) on income were coded to the second quartile (the modal category). The multivariate analyses included a missing income flag (1= missing, 0 = not missing). Income was missing at random as none of the other independent variables in the analyses were associated with the log odds of missing income data (logistic regression results not shown).

Social ties.

Children was coded 0 = childless and 1 = one or more children. Attendance at religious services ranged from 0 = never to 8 = more than once a week.

Analytic Strategy

We began by documenting the trend between 1994 and 2012 in older adults’ attitudes toward divorce, comparing it to the attitudinal pattern for younger adults aged 18-49. Then, we gauged the relative contributions of period and cohort change for divorce attitude shifts between 1994-2002 and 2002-2012 by constructing a period-by-cohort table for older adults. This social change perspective was explicated by Firebaugh (1992 , 1997 ) and also used by Norpoth (1987) . Next, we tracked levels of support for divorce across the three survey years by demographic characteristics, economic resources, and social ties to evaluate how divorce attitudes changed over time for these subgroups. Finally, a multivariate logistic regression model was estimated for the full sample of older adults to determine how much of the change in divorce attitudes was due to cohort replacement (i.e., a cohort effect) versus intracohort change (i.e., a period effect). Consistent with prior research, this approach relied on a two-factor model that assumed age effects were null given the average age of the population changed little over the 18-year time period, ( Brown & Wright, 2016 ; Alwin & McCammon, 2003 ; Glenn, 2003 ). Indeed, the mean age of the samples remained largely stable at 64.1 in 1994, 62.7 in 2002, and 63.4 in 2012. Our two mechanisms of interest were population change arising from the changing cohort composition (cohort replacement) and the role of period factors that contribute to change within cohorts (intracohort change). Analyses were conducted using the svy procedure in Stata to correct for the GSS’s complex sample design.

Across the 18 year time period, adults aged 50 and older more often expressed supportive attitudes toward divorce than did their counterparts aged 18-49, as shown in Figure 1 . The gap between the two age groups widened from about 14 to 19 percentage points between 1994 and 2012. In 1994, about 42% of 18-49 year olds and 56% of those aged 50 and older supported divorce. By 2012, the share expressing favorable attitudes was substantively unchanged for 18-49 year olds at 43% but had risen to 62% for older adults. The age differentials in support for divorce were statistically significant at all three time points.

SUPPORTIVE DIVORCE ATTITUDES BY AGE GROUP, 1994-2012

Note: Support for divorce is significantly higher for ages 50+ than ages 18-49 at all three time points, p < .001.

Table 1 depicts within cohort and total change in the percentages supporting divorce by cohort and period. The “%” columns represent the percentages of the cohort that expressed support for divorce. The “N” columns are the total numbers of respondents in the cohorts at a given time point. The change columns indicate the differences between values for 1994-2002 and 2002-2012, respectively. The row labeled “Total” reports the overall average percentage of respondents supporting divorce at each time point. Finally, the average within-cohort change row is a weighted average of the summed changes (1994-2002 or 2002-2012) across the cohorts. The rows in the table indicate that within cohort change during 1994-2002 was small, averaging only about 1.5 percentage points across the cohorts. Total change was a bit larger at −3 percentage points, signaling modest intercohort change, although the patterns within cohorts varied from - 7.9 to 16.4, suggesting greater heterogeneity during the 1994-2002 period. In contrast, within cohort change played a sizeable role during 2002-2012, when the shift in attitudes averaged 16 percentage points. Total change was lower at 9 percentage points, indicating that attitudinal shifts were mainly due to intracohort change. Older cohorts became increasingly favorable towards divorce during the 2002-2012 period. This pattern was evident for those cohorts born 1925-34, 1935-44, and 1944-54 as support grew from about 50% in 2002 to 66-77% in 2012. The oldest cohort (1915-24) remained quite supportive at about 75%, which was comparable to its support level in 2002 (73%). On balance, it seems that intracohort change was driving the recent growth in support for divorce among older adults, primarily during the 2002-2012 period.

Within-Cohort and Total Change in the Percentages of Older Adults with Supportive Divorce Attitudes, 1994-2012

Note: The calculations in this table exclude 5 cases in the 1905-1914 cohort for 2002 due to inadequate sample size. Percentages are weighted to correct for the complex sampling design of the GSS.

Table 2 illustrates how older adult divorce attitudes have shifted over time for various subgroups. Support for divorce varied by marital status with never marrieds at the low end and remarrieds at the high end. The attitudes of first marrieds and widoweds were stable, hovering around 52% and 63%, respectively. In both 1994 and 2012, about 44% of never-married older adults reported favorable attitudes toward divorce. Older divorced individuals experienced a nonsignificant increase in their acceptance of divorce, which grew from 62% to 73%. Support among remarried older adults rose significantly from 63% to 78% over this period. In 1994, about 56% of older women and men expressed support for divorce. By 2012, the level of support among women was largely unchanged at 58% whereas men’s support rose significantly to 66%. Support among White older adults grew significantly from 54% in 1994 to 63% in 2012 whereas Nonwhites exhibited a nonsignificant decrease in their support (from 68% to 54%).

Weighted Percentages of Older Adults Who Support Divorce by Year (n=1,450)

Analyses are weighted to correct for the complex sampling design of the GSS. Bolded coefficients are significantly different from the 2012 values, p < 0.05.

Variation in support for divorce was evident across some of the economic indicators, but consistent patterns were less apparent. The gains between 1994 and 2012 for those with either less than a high school diploma or only a high school diploma were large and statistically significant, rising from 63% to 78% and 54% to 67%, respectively. The college educated experienced a nonsignificant rise from 46% to 54%. Among those with some college, there was a nonsignificant decline in support, from 64% to 54%. Support grew modestly among the full time employed, rising from 54% to 60%. Likewise, those engaged in other work witnessed a significant increase from 59% to 66%. Support dropped slightly (not significant) for the part-time employed, from 48% in 1994 to 45% in 2012. Across the income scale, the variation in support narrowed over time such that by 2012, the range was from 58% to 66%, suggesting few differences by income group (although quartile 3 experienced significant change).

Social ties were related to divorce attitudes among older adults. Those who reported the median level of religious service attendance (i.e., several times a year) exhibited a significant shrinking of support for divorce, falling from 79% to 54% between 1994 and 2012. In the past, older adults with children more often supported divorce than their childless counterparts (57% versus 45%), but the pattern reversed such that in 2012 the childless were slightly more supportive at 64% than were those with children at 61%. The change over time was only significant for those without children, not with children.

Consistent with the period-by-cohort table ( Table 1 ), the multivariate logistic regression model depicted in Table 3 showed that both cohort and period were related to the likelihood of reporting supportive attitudes toward divorce among older adults. Older cohorts were more likely to be supportive than younger cohorts. Notably, early Baby Boomers (born 1945-54) had higher odds of supportive attitudes than later Baby Boomers (born 1955-64). Although not all of the cohorts significantly differed from one another (significant differences are denoted using superscripts in Table 3 ), the overall pattern was robust to alternative specifications (results not shown), including a linear measure of birth year (which was negatively associated with support for divorce at the p < .001 level). In addition to these cohort effects, there was also evidence for period effects. The odds of supporting divorce in 2012 were nearly twice as high as they were in 1994. As expected, the likelihood of expressing supportive divorce attitudes varied by marital status with remarried and divorced individuals more likely to report favorable attitudes than those in a first marriage. Few other factors were associated with older adult divorce attitudes. Individuals who did not complete high school were more likely to hold favorable attitudes toward divorce than their counterparts who earned a high school diploma. Those with a college degree were marginally ( p < .10) less likely to support divorce than individuals who completed high school. More frequent religious service attendance was negatively associated with the likelihood of reporting favorable attitudes toward divorce.

Logistic Regression Model Predicting Supportive Divorce Attitudes (N=1,450)

Analyses are weighted to correct for the complex sampling design of the GSS.

Figure 2 shows these cohort and period effects by graphing the predicted probabilities of divorce support for each ten year birth cohort at the three time points. There was a modest cohort replacement effect operating during the 1994-2002 period as indicated by the essentially flat lines (i.e., negligible period effects) that are stacked such that older cohorts were more likely to be favorable towards divorce. The upward slopes of the lines for the 2002-2012 period are consistent with period effects or intracohort change. Evidence of cohort replacement is also apparent because the array of the birth cohort slopes persists.

PREDICTED PROBABILITY OF DIVORCE SUPPORT BY COHORT

Note: Predicted probabilities are derived from the model shown in Table 3 .

Additional analyses were conducted to test whether the effects of cohort differed across period, but no significant interactions emerged. Likewise, the covariates operated similarly on divorce attitudes by gender and marital status.

Divorce is now common across the adult life course, and actually on the rise among older adults ( Kennedy & Ruggles, 2014 ). Consistent with our expectations, older adult support for divorce has increased. In 2012, nearly two-thirds agreed that divorce was the best solution for couples who could not work out their problems whereas support hovered at 56% in 1994. Older adults were more supportive of divorce than were younger adults, and this gap grew over time.

Drawing on a social change perspective ( Firebaugh, 1992 , 1997 ; Ryder, 1987), we assessed the extent to which this change was due to cohort replacement versus intracohort change. Initially, the growth in supportive divorce attitudes was quite modest in magnitude and was driven primarily by cohort replacement. During the more recent period, intracohort change was the main reason why there was an increase in favorable divorce attitudes. The 2002-2012 period was marked by a steep ascent in support across all ten year birth cohorts, signaling broader period-based change in attitudes that was consistent with the deinstitutionalization of marriage and the run-up in gray divorce. In fact, the groups that experienced pronounced increases in support were the divorced and remarried, who themselves might have experienced a gray divorce (unfortunately, this information cannot be ascertained from the GSS, which does not include marital history measures). Although most of these individuals probably have not had a gray divorce, this possibility certainly became more likely over the 18 year time period.

Our findings revealed that support for divorce was highest among the oldest cohorts. This pattern aligned with that from prior research on childbearing-aged adults showing that attitudes toward divorce become more favorable with age ( Daugherty & Copen, 2016 ). It may seem counterintuitive because the rate of divorce remains lower for older than younger adults, but this association is consistent with the recent growth in the gray divorce rate. As older adults either experience divorce themselves or observe others in their social networks get divorced, their attitudes toward divorce could become more accepting ( Uhlenberg & Myers, 1981 ; Wu & Schimmele, 2007 ).

The rise in divorce support since 2002 indicates that a growing share of older adults views divorce as an acceptable solution for couples who are unable to work out their problems, which coincides with the emergence of individualized marriage ( Cherlin, 2009 ) and the demise of the norm of lifelong marriage ( Wu & Schimmele, 2007 ). These forces may have been emergent during the earlier period of 1994-2002, but then intensified and became widespread during the later period of 2002-2012. Contemporary shifts in the meaning of marriage and divorce are often described as altering the family behaviors of young adults, but our study suggests that these shifts have implications for older adults, too. The retreat from marriage is evident across the life course; one in three Baby Boomers is unmarried ( Lin & Brown, 2012 ). Marriage is less obligatory now for all age groups, and the results uncovered here indicate sweeping change for older adults who are most likely to express support for divorce as a solution for couples who cannot resolve their marital problems. Unlike their younger counterparts, older adults are embracing divorce as indicated both by the doubling of the gray divorce rate and the rise in supportive attitudes toward divorce.

The rise in gray divorce coupled with the increasing acceptance of divorce among older adults signals the mounting salience of divorce during the second half of life. The policy implications are uncertain, although we can expect a growing number of older adults will experience divorce after age 50 even if the gray divorce rate remains stable, reflecting the aging of the U.S. population and underscoring the urgency of new research on the consequences of gray divorce for individuals, their families, and society ( Brown & Lin, 2012 ; Brown & Wright, 2017 ). Moreover, little is known about whether gray divorce is trending upward in other countries. Only a few scholars in Europe ( Bildtgard & Oberg, 2019 ; Perrig-Chiello, Hutchison, & Morselli, 2015 ) have examined later life divorce. Cherlin (2017) recently noted that the global demographics of divorce are changing and we posit that these shifts likely encompass cross-national variation in levels and acceptance of divorce in the second half of life. An important direction for future research is to examine international patterns of gray divorce.

This study breaks new ground by tracking the divorce attitudes of older adults, but it nonetheless has some limitations. First, the sample size is adequate although the oldest (1905-1914) birth cohort is small (n = 51), potentially undermining statistical power and impeding our ability to accurately detect significant differences across groups. Second, information about respondents’ divorce histories as well as whether close relatives or friends have experienced divorce are not available. This information might be predictive of an individual’s attitudes toward divorce. Third, the social change approach emphasized period versus cohort effects, assuming null age effects given the stable age range across the three time periods. This approach is consistent with prior research (e.g., Brown & Wright, 2016 ; Alwin & McCammon, 2003 ; Glenn, 2003 ), but we acknowledge that it is possible the effects we attribute to cohort could be driven in part by age. Age is positively associated with increased wisdom and corresponding flexibility (Gluck, 2017; Owens et al., 2016 ), which could account for the growing acceptance of divorce among older adults as they age. We estimated our models using age in lieu of cohort and found comparable results, that is, age was positively associated with support for divorce (results not shown). This is equivalent to using birth year, a linear measure of cohort.

In recent years, older adults have become much more accepting of divorce. This shift primarily reflects within cohort change as period factors such as the shifting meaning of marriage have contributed to increasing acceptance of divorce across all cohorts of older adults. The rapid increase in support for divorce has unfolded within the larger context of the doubling of the gray divorce rate and the rise of individualized marriage. Clearly, older adults are open to divorce. The share of adults who support divorce is highest among those aged 50 and older and this differential has only widened in recent years, which aligns with the ongoing gray divorce revolution and foretells a sustained upward trend in divorce among older adults.

Acknowledgments:

The authors thank I-Fen Lin for her valuable feedback on earlier versions of the paper. The research for this paper was supported in part by the Center for Family and Demographic Research, Bowling Green State University, which has core funding from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (P2CHD050959).

Contributor Information

Susan L. Brown, Department of Sociology, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH 43403, (419) 372-9521, ude.usgb@lsnworb .

Matthew R. Wright, Department of Criminology, Sociology, and Geography, Arkansas State University, Jonesboro, AR 72467, (870) 972-3276, ude.etatsa@thgirwam .

• Alwin DF, & McCammon RJ (2003). Generations, cohorts, and social change In Mortimer JT & Shanahan MJ (Eds.), Handbook of the lifecourse (pp. 23–49). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. [ Google Scholar ]
• Amato PR (2010). Research on divorce: Continuing trends and new developments . Journal of Marriage and Family , 72 , 650–666. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00723.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bair D (2007). Calling it quits: Late life divorce and starting over . New York: Random House. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bildtgard T, & Oberg P (2019). Intimacy and ageing: New relationships in later life . Bristol, UK: Policy Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown SL, & Lin I-F (2012). The gray divorce revolution: Rising divorce among middle-aged and older adults, 1990–2010 . The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences , 67 , 731–741. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbs089 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown SL, & Wright MR (2016). Older adults’ attitudes toward cohabitation: Two decades of change . The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences , 71 , 755–764. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbv053 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown SL, & Wright MR (2017). Marriage, cohabitation, and divorce in later life . Innovation in Aging , 1 ( 2 ), 1–11. doi: 10.1093/geroni/igx015 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cherlin A (1992). Marriage, divorce, remarriage . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cherlin AJ (2004). The deinstitutionalization of American marriage . Journal of Marriage and Family , 66 , 848–861. doi: 10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00058.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cherlin AJ (2009). The marriage-go-round: The state of marriage and the family in America today . New York: Knopf. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cherlin AJ (2017). Separation, divorce, repartnering, and remarriage around the world . Demographic Research , 38 , 1275–1296. [ Google Scholar ]
• Daugherty J, & Copen C (2016). Trends in attitudes about marriage, childbearing, and sexual behavior: United States, 2002, 2006-2010, and 2011-2013 . National Health Statistics Reports , 92 , 1–10. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Firebaugh G (1997). Analyzing repeated surveys (No. 115). Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
• Firebaugh G (1992). Where does social change come from? Population Research and Policy Review , 11 , 1–20. doi: 10.1007/BF00136392 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Glenn ND (2003). Distinguishing age, period, and cohort effects In Mortimer JT & Shanahan MJ (Eds.), Handbook of the lifecourse (pp. 465–476). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gluck J (2018). Measuring wisdom: Existing approaches, continuing challenges, and new developments . The Journals of Gerontology: Series B , 73 , 1393–1403 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kapinus CA, & Flowers DR (2008). An examination of gender differences in attitudes toward divorce . Journal of Divorce & Remarriage , 49 , 239–257. doi: 10.1080/10502550802222469 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kennedy S, & Ruggles S (2014). Breaking up is hard to count: The rise of divorce in the United States, 1980–2010 . Demography , 51 , 587–598. doi: 10.1007/s13524-013-0270-9 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kreider RM, & Ellis R (2011). Number, timing, and duration of marriages and divorces: 2009 Current Population Reports, P70–125 , U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lin IF, & Brown SL (2012). Unmarried boomers confront old age: A national portrait . The Gerontologist , 52 ( 2 ), 153–165. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Margolis R, & Verdery AM (2017). Older adults without close kin the United States . The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences , 72 , 688–693. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbx068 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Martin SP, & Parashar S (2006). Women’s changing attitudes toward divorce, 1974–2002: Evidence for an educational crossover . Journal of Marriage and Family , 68 , 29–40. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2006.00231.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Norpoth H (1987). Under way and here to stay: Party realignment in the 1980s? Public Opinion Quarterly , 51 , 376–391. doi: 10.1086/269042 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Owens JE, Menard M, Plews-Ogan M, Calhoun LG, & Ardelt M (2016). Stories of growth and wisdom: a mixed-methods study of people living well with pain . Global Advances in Health and Medicine , 5 , 16–28. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Perrig-Chiello P, Hutchison S, & Morselli D (2015). Patterns of psychological adaptation to divorce after a long-term marriage . Journal of Social and Personal Relationships , 32 , 386–405. 10.1177/0265407514533769 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Powell B, Bolzehdahl C, Geist C, & Steelman LC (2010). Counted out: Same-sex relations and Americans ‘ definitions of family . New York: Russell Sage Foundation. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ryder NB (1965). The cohort as a concept in the study of social change . American Sociological Review , 30 , 843–861. doi: 10.2307/2090964 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith TW, Marsden P, Hout M, & Kim J (2013). General Social Surveys, 1972-2012 [machine-readable data file] Principal Investigator, Tom W. Smith; Co-Principal Investigator, Peter V. Marsden; Co-Principal Investigator, Michael Hout; Sponsored by National Science Foundation . (NORC ed.) Chicago: National Opinion Research Center [producer]; Storrs, CT: The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, University of Connecticut [distributor]. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stokes CE, & Ellison CG (2010). Religion and attitudes toward divorce laws among U.S. adults . Journal of Family Issues , 31 , 1279–1304. doi: 10.1177/0192513X10363887 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sweeney MM (2010). Remarriage and stepfamilies: Strategic sites for family scholarship in the 21 st century . Journal of Marriage and Family , 72 , 667–684. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00724.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thornton A (1989). Changing attitudes toward family issues in the United States . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 51 , 873–893. doi: 10.2307/353202 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thornton A, & Young-DeMarco L (2001). Four decades of trends in attitudes toward family issues in the United States: The 1960s through the 1990s . Journal of Marriage and Family , 63 , 1009–1037. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.01009.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Uhlenberg P, & Myers MAP (1981). Divorce and the elderly . The Gerontologist , 21 , 276–282. doi: 10.1093/geront/21.3.276 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wu Z, & Schimmele C (2007). Uncoupling in late life . Generations , 31 , 41–46. [ Google Scholar ]

The basic purpose of this review is to provide detail information about the effect of divorce on families' life. Children dropout schools, engage in addiction, commit sex before marriage and ...

This paper reviews what is known about the association between marital separation, divorce and health outcomes. METHODS Key findings in the area of divorce and health are discussed, and the review outlines a series of specific questions for future research.

Fourth, studies are needed that include a more comprehensive array of previously researched sociodemographic- and divorce-related predictor or explanatory variables of mental and physical health. This would allow for a more thorough assessment of the individual and combined effect of these variables on mental and physical health.

This paper examines the multifaceted effects of divorce on children, focusing on their psychological and physiological well-being. It highlights the significant disruption divorce causes in family ...

Studies of parental divorce indicate that children's response to divorce varies by socioeconomic characteristics and family well-being. Children of more educated parents and white children experience greater effects of parental divorce than children of less educated parents and racial and ethnic minority children ( 2 - 6 ).

Recent divorce was positively associated with smoking, poor quality of life, high psychological distress, anxiety and depression at T2. Similar but weaker associations were observed for widowhood.

Abstract Research on divorce during the past decade has focused on a range of topics, including the predictors of divorce, associations between divorce and the well-being of children and former spouses, and interventions for divorcing couples. Methodological advances during the past decade include a greater reliance on nationally representative longitudinal samples, genetically informed ...

A comprehensive review of research from several disciplines regarding long-term effects of divorce on children yields a growing consensus that significant numbers of children suffer for many years from psychological and social difficulties associated with continuing and/or new stresses within the postdivorce family and experience heightened anxiety in forming enduring attachments at later ...

The effects of parental divorce depend on the immediate economic consequences and the general instability surrounding family dissolutions, which can have repercussions particularly on

Although many studies have examined the predictors and consequences of divorce, most of this research has focused on dissolution of first marriages. Relatively little is known about specific risk factors for divorce in remarriages ( DeLongis & Zwicker, 2017; Sweeney, 2010 ).

Children of divorce need resources, guidance, and more than ever, commitment and consistency from significant people in their lives. Divorce has no boundaries and carries no prejudice. Divorce effects all ages, ethnicities, races, gender, and socio-economic levels. In the earlier part of the 20th century, the nuclear family could be defined as ...

Yet, extant studies of divorce effects on adults have predominantly focused on only one outcome or on a set of outcomes within one domain—most commonly, economic well-being or health. Studies that cut across two or more domains are rare. This gap of research precludes a broader view of gender differences in the multiple consequences of divorce.

In this synthesis of the international literature on psychological aspects of divorce, the causes and consequences of divorce for parents and children are summarized. The majority of parents and children show no major long-term adverse psychological consequences to divorce.

Research has documented that parental divorce/separation is associated with an increased risk for child and adolescent adjustment problems, including academic difficulties (e.g., lower grades and school dropout), disruptive behaviors (e.g., conduct and substance use problems), and depressed mood 2. Offspring of divorced/separated parents are ...

Marriage and divorce are social issues as well as private concerns. Divorce is a major life stressor for the individuals involved, with potentially strong negative consequences for the mental and physical health of all members of the family. The basic purpose of this review is to provide detail information about the effect of divorce on families' life. Children dropout schools, engage in ...

This research paper focuses on the effects of divorce on children and adolescents. Based on a review of literature, there are many short-term and long-term effects including emotional, behavioral, and physical issues. Children and adolescents vary in adjustment to divorce depending on multiple factors such as communication, conflict, and ...

Divorce impacts children in many different ways. Literature detailing the effects of emotional, social and behavioral, and academic stressors of divorce that children may

sociological and psychoanalytical approaches to the study of human instit utions to study these effects on children, though not without looking at the causes of divorce. The paper reveals that the ...

The major consequences or effects of divorce included poverty and psychological problems, physical consequences, social consequences, financial consequences, absence of father. The remedies or solution of divorce includes communication and the mediation by spiritual or religion leaders, elders man, supportive network, worry on children's ...

Happy Marriages: Studying the Causes and Effects of Divorce | Penn State University. "In the 1970s, divorce escalated like crazy. Women were entering the labor force in incredible numbers. Are those two things related," asks Alan Booth, "or aren't they? "And if divorce is not related to women working, what is it related to?"

When evaluating the scientific research on the effects of divorce on children and parents, it is important to consider all of the factors affecting the outcome, including family dynamics, children's temperaments and ages at the time of divorce, and family socioeconomic status, as well as any behavioral or academic concerns present prior to divorce. Some adverse effects noted in the literature ...

Divorce 3 Signs of Going Through an "Emotional Divorce" Signing legal papers isn't the only way to feel the effects of a divorce. Posted August 15, 2024 | Reviewed by Michelle Quirk

Watch Moti Baa Ni Nani Vahu Season 1 Episode 881 - Dhwanit Signed The Divorce Papers.Moti Baa And Chirag Happily Announce That Dhwanit Has Signed The Divorce Papers. Now, The Big Question Is Whether Sargam Will Actually Have To Leave The House Or If Anahita Will Intervene With A New Twist. The Unfolding Events Are Sure To Keep Everyone On Edge.

Medium- and long-run dynamics undermine the effect of automatic enrollment and default savings-rate auto-escalation on retirement savings. Our analysis of nine 401(k) plans incorporates the facts that employees frequently leave firms (often before matching contributions from their employer have fully vested), a large percentage of 401(k) balances are withdrawn upon employment separation, and ...

We systematically review studies of how unemployment benefits affect unemployment duration. Statistically significant findings are eleven times more likely to be published. Correcting for publication bias halves the average elasticity. Meta-analysis provides a principled way for sufficient ...

The Centre, in its affidavit before the Supreme Court, said there was a need for more state action to give effect to the court's order striking down triple talaq in 2017 and to redress the grievances of victims of illegal divorce.

This increase in gray divorce purportedly signals growing acceptance of divorce among middle-aged and older adults. Yet, few studies have investigated historical change in divorce attitudes and those that have tended to exclude older adults and are now somewhat dated, failing to capture prevailing attitudes of older adults during the gray divorce revolution period ( Martin and Parashar, 2006 ...

This research enriches the existing literature by providing detailed, context-specific insights into the determinants and effects of tax evasion in urban Ghana, a lower-middle-income West African emerging economy.