I Thought of Another Way to Help Stop Divorces

Great Debates
41

When my husband and I were thinking of getting married we met with ministers who wanted to counsel us before they would agree to marry us. It was clear that most dissapproved but if we were willing to reshape our relationship along roles that they were more comfortable with. Those were very stressful times with us. whenever we took their advice, we were unhappy.

Finally wwe decided that we knew best. We ignored the misguided “Christian” marriage guidelines and just went on as we had,before and were happy. We eventually got married by the Justice of the peace. 13 years later, we are still happy and still living on our own terms, not those of any counselor.

42

**sub
        [/sub]O
        º
      sub[/sub]
        +
        A
        " **

43

Another guaranteed way to stop divorces would be to outlaw marriage altogether… :slight_smile:

Lola and I have each been divorced once, I went to pre-marital counselling with my first wife and the marriage lasted four and a half years. Lola was first married for six. Neither marriage was very healthy.

So here we are coming up on five years together without any formal agreement between us.

She says that I am the person she used to talk to in her mind and I recall dreaming of her before I met her.

Some things are meant to be while others are not.

Perhaps someone will come up with an implantable chip for newlyweds that will force them stay true to their vows but until then we will have to go on using the old fashioned trial and error approach. Some will get divorced while others will continue to amaze and inspire us by their lifelong devotion to one another.

Read “Loving Each Other” by Leo Buscaglia, one section is composed of letters from readers explaining how they have continued to have successful marriages. They are touching and often amusing stories of real lives.

44

Well, Phil, at least number 4 was established as an opinion. I read numbers 1 and 2 to be opinion as well.

Even at my most gracious, though, that leaves three points to cover. It would be four, but number 3:

is patently false.

45

Peta,

That is definetely a monkey wrench I wonder why that is? Christians in the Bible Belt getting more divorces. Anybody know why that is happening?

And freyr,

Yes, you did prove it(divorec)was not in fact 50% with your data. But how accurate is your data is another matter. I don’t know how they pool all that information. But in my life experience and people I have known the divorce rate seems to be higher than 50%. As a matter of fact out of all my friends from high school that I still keep in contact with have all been divorced except for me and my wife and one other couple. So there is sample data that conflicts with yours.

My daughter that is 14 has lets say 12 to 13 friends that their parents are divorced and 1 or 2 friends where their parents are still married. That conflicts with your data.

Now I even challenge people on this board for our sample. Do you know more people that have had divorces or more people that have stayed married? This should be interesting?

46

Why do you want to stop divorce so badly?

Why do you automatically judge it a bad thing?

What makes you think it is any of the government’s business?

47

**Wildest Bill wrote:

Yes, you did prove it(divorec)was not in fact 50% with your data. But how accurate is your data is another matter. I don’t know how they pool all that information. But in my life experience and people I have known the divorce rate seems to be higher than 50%. As a matter of fact out of all my friends from high school that I still keep in contact with have all been divorced except for me and my wife and one other couple. So there is sample data that conflicts with yours.**

WB, all I can say for certain is that you and a textbook on statistics have never crossed paths before. What you’re spouting is gibberish.

I’m asking you to provide data to support your hypothesis that the divorce rate in this country is too high. So far all you’ve done is spout off how a lot of people around you have gotten divorced. I’m asking for hard facts, real numbers and you’re giving me vague generalities about your acquaintences.

You’re sitting in front of a computer, trying using a search engine on any of the multitude of websites and see if you can come up with any real data. If not, you’re just blowing hot air and your opinion isn’t worth any more than the average Joe-Blow walking down the street.

WB, it’s your hypothesis, YOU provide the data.

48

Okay, Bill, I’ll take your challenge.

Of my closest friends, 5 couples have married in the last 10 years. 1 divorce has occurred.

There are 7 couples in my extended family (including my parents, but neither of my grandparents, one of whom I will mention in a moment). Of those couples, 2 have been divorced - and I don’t particularly think one of them could have been avoided, since the man my aunt married was arrested (and convicted) for child molestation. One of my uncles is currently separated from his wife, but they are in counselling to try and resolve their problems.

Now, five of the couples mentioned above (and all of the ones with marital problems) came from my mother’s side of the family. Her mother was married and divorced three times. I can’t say this created problems for the children, though in this sample the statistics would appear to support that theory. My parents are the exception rather than the rule; they’ve been married for 30 years and show no signs of anything other than the normal problems any couple suffers.

So while I agree with you that there is probably a correlation between divorced parents and children likely to have relationship problems I disagree that divorce is the problem you’re making it out to be.

To recap (since I’m rambling on) - in my (relatively insignificant) personal sample of 12 couples we have:

3 divorces
1 separation

or a 33% divorce rate (roughly).

I’m sure someone better at statistics than I will come along and correct me, but you did ask. :smiley:

49

Originally posted by Freyr:

LOL you crack me up freyr.Touche! They did in fact but I had a crappy teacher. But one thing I have learned about stats from my real life applications is that they can have bias attached.

Is it? There is not any internet police that keeps sites from distorting information is there? Matter of fact, what keeps the gov’t from distorting information? They could and I bet they have. Don’t you?

What I suggested in my “gibberish” is a random sample you may not like it but I actually got data from two different sources. I want to get data from more people on this board.
I say once again do you(straight dopers)know more people that have got divorced or more people that have stayed married? Simple question.

What about you freyr in your experience. Do you know more that have stayed married or more people that have got divorced. Well?

There again the information on the internet sites could be distorted. Couldn’t it? How do you know the cites that you have were not disorted?

I’m not being a smart ass I am really curious about the validity of info on the internet. I mean I thought that was of the function of this board was to sift throught the BS on the net to get the “staight(not biased or tainted)dope”?

50

I’d take information over the 'net any day over your disjointed, incomprehensible ramblings.

Further, one would think that Freyr’s cites are from reputable sources - like, say, government statistics.

Oh, no, wait - the government lies. I forgot. Thanks for cluing me in. :rolleyes:

If you won’t accept any other authority on the matter besides your own life experience, then this conversation just came to a screeching halt.

For the record, more friends of mine have stayed married (or stayed together, in cases where they are not permitted to marry) than gotten divorced. But my “sample data” conflicts with yours - so does that mean I’m right now, since your “sample data” made you right before?

Whatever.

Esprix

51

Since anecdotal evidence what we’re using in place of reliable statistics, I’ll chime in with mine: Of the 17 weddings among friends and family I’ve been invited to in the 15 years since I graduated from college, 4 have been followed by divorce. (One friend was divorced after each of her two weddings that I attended, and has now been married for several years to her third husband, after a small wedding that I didn’t attend—hmm, maybe her jinx was having me for a bridesmaid! :)) So among my own intimates, the divorce rate is currently under 25% for marriages, and slightly lower for married individuals (since one of the individuals accounted for two of the divorces).

In short, Bill, maybe the people you know need more marital or premarital counseling, but most of the ones I know are doing okay. In order to make a useful recommendation for everybody, you will need some reliable data about what the trends are for the population as a whole, which is why Freyr keeps demanding better statistics. Obviously, just comparing your personal experience with my personal experience is going to be way too limited.

As for how to determine whether the data you find is reliable, you should look up the cite for the figures you find and see if the studies were carried out by trustworthy organizations and what methodology they used. True, it is very easy for statistics to be misleading or to leave out part of the picture, but that doesn’t mean that our own personal experience is a more trustworthy guide to the large-scale reality!

52

Exprix,

Now you not being fair again. I didn’t mind was right and freyr’s was wrong. What I was saying couldn’t data be manipulated? And also thanks for putting you data down. And thanks to kimstu also.

Any others?

And espix just curious do you “really” trust the gov’t that much?

53

**WB wrote:

LOL you crack me up freyr.Touche! They did in fact but I had a crappy teacher. But one thing I have learned about stats from my real life applications is that they can have bias attached.**

Yes, statistics can have biases. But so far, you’ve not shown us ANY statistics except for the tired cliche that 50% of all marriages end in divorce. You simply can’t take the number of marriages and divide by the number of divorces and then use that figure to demonstrate an accurate divorce rate. THAT is a prime example of a biased statistic. Biases, hell, it’s down right bogus.

Is it? There is not any internet police that keeps sites from distorting information is there? Matter of fact, what keeps the gov’t from distorting information? They could and I bet they have. Don’t you?

Two points. One, your methodology of gathering data, especially regarding divorce rates is gibberish. You’re using anocedants as evidence which have almost no value. And your method of gathering them is simply asking friends and acquaintences about their experience with marriage and divorce. WB, to gather a truly representative sample of a given population, you need to take a simple random survey. Simply asking your friends about their marriage/divorce experiences is NOT a simple, random survey.

Two, what I was saying was that many universities and the Federal government keep statistics online. And FYI, the Federal government often contracts other sources to provide such information, a reputable university for example. Their data would be published in peer review journals and would be confirmed by other people. That information would be reliable.

What I suggested in my “gibberish” is a random sample you may not like it but I actually got data from two different sources. I want to get data from more people on this board.
I say once again do you(straight dopers)know more people that have got divorced or more people that have stayed married? Simple question.

Wow! TWO WHOLE SOURCES! Totalling what? Maybe 20 people? That’s great. 20 people as a random survey to show the divorce rate in a population of 276 million people. What astounding brillance! [/ sarcasm]

WB, lets say you eventually interview about 100 to maybe 150 people and you make an appointment to see your congressional representative to consider drafting legistation for “saving marriages”. If you gave him your information you’d be laughed out of his office.

WB, please understand, I think your goal is a worthy one, but your methodology is terrible. No one will ever pay attention to what you have to say if can’t back up arguments with reliable facts.

54

My name, for the umpteenth time, is spelled “Esprix.” Thank you.

Properly, “Now you are not being fair again.”

This sentence has no structure or comprehensible meaning whatsoever; please clarify.

Properly, “What I was saying was, can’t data be manipulated?”

Properly, “And also, thanks for putting your data down, and thanks to Kimstu also.”

Once again, please - “Esprix.”

Properly, “I’m just curious - do you really trust the government that much?” Why you put in quotation marks I don’t know.

And I will answer your question with my own - why would the government lie about divorce rates, particularly since any reputable news agency (CNN, ABC, 20/20) could do their own research to either corraborate or refute the government’s own findings?

You’re pathetic.

Esprix

55

Well, actually that’s only the case when one is not preaching to the converted. When you spend most of your time with people who believe the same things you do, reason, logic, and facts are irrelevant.

Call: “Man, can you believe those orange elephants? They’re ruining the country!”

Response: “Yup. Riuning it all right.”

Call: “And over fifty percent of elephants are orange these days! It’s got to stop!”

Response: “You’re so right. Something must be done.”

56

Esprix.

I have no idea why I keep spelling your name wrong. I guess it is just the way it sounds or you spell it weird. I don’t know but sorry dude.

And you got me again. After reading my own post I want to put my head under a rock or something maybe a boulder. I have been making a effort to at least proof read once maybe I need to up that to twice. Huh?

Andros,

Hey dude, I think you are having a flashback or something(you must have done that to much of that orange sunshine from the 60s). Just close your eyes and say hummmmmmm and those orange elephants will go away. :smiley:

57

Originally posted by Freyr
Is it? There is not any internet police that keeps sites from distorting information is there? Matter of fact, what keeps the gov’t from distorting information? They could and I bet they have. Don’t you?

Maybe not “random” but definetely “simple”. :wink:

Two things on this you didn’t need to type the “[/ sacarsm]” I figured that out pretty easily. Secondly, I guess 20 as a sample size might be a wee bit small for 276 million I agree. :smiley: But heck I was asking for more.

Would 300,000 be enough? To get an accurate sample size say to match Arbitron methodology of radio station listening habits it would take that many. Now why I really believe in my idea I don’t want to call 300,000 people.

58

**Wildest Bill wrote:

Would 300,000 be enough? To get an accurate sample size say to match Arbitron methodology of radio station listening habits it would take that many. Now why I really believe in my idea I don’t want to call 300,000 people.**

Which brings me to a final point on all of this, WB, did you do a literature search before you started your questioning?

I’m pretty certain that someone with the resources and training to carry this out properly thought of this question before you. They put together the proposal, did the research and came up with an answer and published it. It’s in a journal somewhere, just waiting for you to find it. That’s why I recommended you search the 'Net and see what you might turn up.

WB, if you’re serious about this, the answer is waiting for you, you just have to find it. Check the SSCI (Social Science Citation Index) at the local college or university near you and I bet you can find the answer in a couple days.