Scott Lloyd Posted September 22, 2015 Posted September 22, 2015 http://thoughtfulwomen.org/2014/08/25/may-heard-divorce-rate-church-50-get-ready-shocked/This blog post, link above, purports to explode conventional wisdom about 50 percent of marriages ending in divorce, etc. Says marriages are much more successful than modernists let on, especially among religious folk and especially among Latter-day Saints. Thoughts?
jkwilliams Posted September 22, 2015 Posted September 22, 2015 According to the latest CDC numbers, marriage rates are declining, and so are divorce rates. If you look at raw numbers, the divorce rate is half the marriage rate per 1.000 population, which is around 50%. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/marriage_divorce_tables.htm It would be interesting to see how she came up with her numbers.
Gray Posted September 22, 2015 Posted September 22, 2015 Yes, I've seen this debunked before. Including "serial" marriages in the divorce statistics has inflated the divorce rate. A strong majority of first marriages are successful. Or at least they don't end in divorce.
ALarson Posted September 22, 2015 Posted September 22, 2015 (edited) It would be interesting to see how she came up with her numbers. This. I didn't see where she gave any sources for her opinions (other than her own study?). I'd love for it to be true though. Edited September 22, 2015 by ALarson
Scott Lloyd Posted September 22, 2015 Author Posted September 22, 2015 This. I didn't see where she gave any sources for her opinions (other than her own study?). I'd love for it to be true though.There are links to a book and to an interview. Could the numbers be found therein, perhaps?
jkwilliams Posted September 22, 2015 Posted September 22, 2015 There are links to a book and to an interview. Could the numbers be found therein, perhaps? They're not in the interview, and I'm not in the mood to buy a book just to see the numbers.
jkwilliams Posted September 22, 2015 Posted September 22, 2015 Here are some encouraging actual numbers: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/upshot/the-divorce-surge-is-over-but-the-myth-lives-on.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&bicmp=AD&bicmlukp=WT.mc_id&bicmst=1409232722000&bicmet=1419773522000&_r=4&abt=0002&abg=0 2
Scott Lloyd Posted September 22, 2015 Author Posted September 22, 2015 Here are some encouraging actual numbers:http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/upshot/the-divorce-surge-is-over-but-the-myth-lives-on.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&bicmp=AD&bicmlukp=WT.mc_id&bicmst=1409232722000&bicmet=1419773522000&_r=4&abt=0002&abg=0This doesn't address the matter of marriage among religious folk -- and among Mormons in particular -- being more successful than had been thought. Also, the blog post doesn't just say that divorce is declining. It says that divorce never was close to a 50 percent rate in the first place.
Scott Lloyd Posted September 22, 2015 Author Posted September 22, 2015 They're not in the interview, and I'm not in the mood to buy a book just to see the numbers.In the old days, we went to places called public libraries. Perhaps there are a few still around. 1
ALarson Posted September 22, 2015 Posted September 22, 2015 This doesn't address the matter of marriage among religious folk -- and among Mormons in particular -- being more successful than had been thought.Also, the blog post doesn't just say that divorce is declining. It says that divorce never was close to a 50 percent rate in the first place.Do you know where the 50 percent rate originated? Were there statistics to support this figure (among Mormons and outside of the church too)?
jkwilliams Posted September 22, 2015 Posted September 22, 2015 In the old days, we went to places called public libraries. Perhaps there are a few still around. Snark aside, the library here has a couple of her books, but not this one. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted September 22, 2015 Author Posted September 22, 2015 Snark aside, the library here has a couple of her books, but not this one.Inter-library loan?
Scott Lloyd Posted September 22, 2015 Author Posted September 22, 2015 Do you know where the 50 percent rate originated? Were there statistics to support this figure (among Mormons and outside of the church too)?I've heard the 50 percent figure for many years -- so many I don't remember the original source, if I ever knew it.
jkwilliams Posted September 22, 2015 Posted September 22, 2015 I've heard the 50 percent figure for many years -- so many I don't remember the original source, if I ever knew it. As I noted, the raw numbers from the CDC indicate that, in a given year, roughly half as many people divorce as are married, hence the 50% figure. I'm not saying those numbers are accurate, but there is a source for that figure.
Storm Rider Posted September 22, 2015 Posted September 22, 2015 It is strange how this myth of 50% divorce rate - a speculation that marriage could eventually hit that number in the future (based on the blog post quoting the author) - became perceived fact. Heterosexual marriage had become passe among academia and every talking head that used their pronostication of today's reality to belittle the social institution. This death knell of marriage has been used by a wide assortment of people to support their personal agenda of social experimentation and its rights to exist because it was at least as good as marriage between heterosexuals and the demented religious folks. 2
ALarson Posted September 22, 2015 Posted September 22, 2015 Here's an article I found that was interesting:http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700112586/Christian-divorce-rates-disputed.html?pg=all
Scott Lloyd Posted September 22, 2015 Author Posted September 22, 2015 (edited) As I noted, the raw numbers from the CDC indicate that, in a given year, roughly half as many people divorce as are married, hence the 50% figure. I'm not saying those numbers are accurate, but there is a source for that figure.Presumably the blog author has a source too. You said it would be interesting to see how she came up with her numbers. Apparently not interesting enough to motivate you to examine her cited source. Edited September 22, 2015 by Scott Lloyd
ALarson Posted September 22, 2015 Posted September 22, 2015 Presumably the blog author has a source too. You said it would be interesting to see how she came up with her numbers. Apparently not interesting enough to motivate you to examine her cited source.What is her cited source (I didn't see one other than her own book)? I did look up her book on Amazon and it has good reviews.
jkwilliams Posted September 22, 2015 Posted September 22, 2015 Presumably the blog author has a source to. You said it would be interesting to see how she came up with her numbers. Apparently not interesting enough to motivate you to examine her cited source. If I can get the book, sure, I'll take a look. My point was that the 50% number wasn't just a projection, as she claims, but is based on raw numbers. People here seem to take it as given that she is right about the 50% number having no basis in reality. Given that I can see where the 50% figure comes from, I can't imagine why she says it's based on a projection.
Scott Lloyd Posted September 22, 2015 Author Posted September 22, 2015 Here's an article I found that was interesting:http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700112586/Christian-divorce-rates-disputed.html?pg=allThanks for this. Interesting that the rate for Mormons generally and for Mormons married in the temple is so low, comparatively. I had heard this before but couldn't recall the source. Thanks for searching it out.
Scott Lloyd Posted September 22, 2015 Author Posted September 22, 2015 If I can get the book, sure, I'll take a look. My point was that the 50% number wasn't just a projection, as she claims, but is based on raw numbers. People here seem to take it as given that she is right about the 50% number having no basis in reality. Given that I can see where the 50% figure comes from, I can't imagine why she says it's based on a projection.Operative word being "raw." There may be complicating factors. gray suggested one.
jkwilliams Posted September 22, 2015 Posted September 22, 2015 Operative word being "raw." There may be complicating factors. gray suggested one. Well, that's just it. Without any information about her methodology or data, it seems a little premature to accept her assertions at face value. The article in the NY Times linked above shows that divorce rates peaked in the 1970s and have been in decline ever since, and that's worth celebrating. It just doesn't seem like too much to ask for some basic information about how she reached her conclusions.
Scott Lloyd Posted September 22, 2015 Author Posted September 22, 2015 What is her cited source (I didn't see one other than her own book)? I did look up her book on Amazon and it has good reviews.I was referring to the book.
Scott Lloyd Posted September 22, 2015 Author Posted September 22, 2015 (edited) Well, that's just it. Without any information about her methodology or data, it seems a little premature to accept her assertions at face value. The article in the NY Times linked above shows that divorce rates peaked in the 1970s and have been in decline ever since, and that's worth celebrating. It just doesn't seem like too much to ask for some basic information about how she reached her conclusions.Who's accepting it at face value? Did you notice the question mark on my thread title? I gave the gist of and linked to the blog post and asked for thoughts. The blog post itself contained a link to a book with further content. You don't have to accept it at face value, but neither should you dismiss it out-of-hand without looking at it just because you can't turn up anything with a five-second Google search, don't want to spend a few bucks and can't be bothered with some old-fashioned library leg work. Edited September 22, 2015 by Scott Lloyd
jkwilliams Posted September 22, 2015 Posted September 22, 2015 Who's accepting it at face value?Did you notice the question mark on my thread title?I gave the gist of and linked to the blog post and asked for thoughts. The blog post itself contained a link to a book with further content.You don't have to accept it at face value, but neither should you dismiss it out-of-hand without looking at it. A couple of posters in this thread seem to have accepted her statement at face value. Who has dismissed it out of hand?
Recommended Posts