Yeah, depression is probably underdiagnosed in most countries. The few studies that claim to be able to compare all the countries of the world in actual cases of depression as opposed to diagnosed cases aren’t very good. They just look at the number of cases of certain symptoms of depression. The comparison of depression today in the U.S. with past times for actual cases as opposed to diagnosed cases aren’t very good either. They also look at symptoms. I don’t think there’s any good way to compare two times or societies with different amounts of psychiatric testing going on.
Seeing as many mental illnesses - including depression - have a genetic component, I’d expect rates to be similar around the world.
This is true, but to a much smaller extent than I think you’re giving it credit for. Because remember, you need to accurately predict 20+ years into the future for both you and your spouse, because you both have equal changes to increase the risk for divorce during that time span.
Sure, you can go into the marriage with some odds on your side - but if life has taught me anything, it’s that unpredictable change rules the day, and considering your odds of divorce over 20+ years, I’m guessing the correlation with your starting odds is only slightly better than chance.
There are no statistics on this, please refer to post #168 - essentially, it is certainly some non-zero number, so using a frank and honest assessment of the quality of your friends, relatives, and colleagues’ marriages, you estimate it and plug in whatever you want.
That’s why I’ve been using the range 40% - 70% throughout here - at a minimum, the failure rate is the 40% floor of divorce, which we do have hard statistics for, but the “real” failure rate if we consider net-miserable marriages is higher. I estimated half of the marriages amongst my cohort are probably net miserable, but if that’s high to you, plug in your own number and adjust the 40% upward appropriately. Regardless of what you feel the net-miserable numbers to be, the floor of 40% itself is an unacceptable failure rate for something that is directly causing many millions of misery-years per year in the US with little tangible benefits.
I understand the desire for that to be your “family,” and to be committed to your SO, and to be able to make sacrifices for your SO’s without fearing they’re going to walk out tomorrow, but you don’t need a piece of paper for any of those to be true.
What’s funny about this is all the pro-marriage folk have kept demanding rigorous cites all along while not providing any of their own, but when I’ve provided cites showing that my assumptions are probably correct, I hear not a peep afterwards, just more of the same arguments.
I don’t think the 40% divorce rate is the minimum. I have cited in the past that roughly two thirds of those considering divorce are in low- to medium-conflict marriages, and those who remain in the marriage and work on it tend to report that their marriages improve and that they are happier than if they divorced. So the 40% includes a number of marriages that could be happier without divorce.
Regards,
Shodan
When I fell out of love with The Idiot Boyfriend, my first thought was “boy, am I glad I did not marry him; that saved me a divorce.”
If I’d fallen out of love with his US-citizen ass after being married? Oh, I would have divorced him… once I had the green card 
A divorce does not tell us about anything but a point in time in a marriage. The fact that a marriage ended does not mean that the marriage was full of misery. It tells us that one or both parties wanted out at that time (and maintained their wanting out for a while, depending on the jurisdiction).
Take a made-up but plausible example: A couple is married for five years and is happy. They get into an argument that turns into a fight and one spouse hits the other. The one who was hit files for and gets a divorce.
Net misery? I feel like you’d say yes for a marriage and no if they weren’t married, because somehow a non-marital breakup doesn’t equal “net misery” for you, but a divorce equals “net misery.”
Apropos of nothing, I’m always startled to remember that I had two couples among my high school friends who married shortly after high school. Both were getting a divorce within the month. One within the week.
I’m willing to concede I’m overestimating, but personality is relatively stable over time. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Without a baseline for personality and behavior, who you marry is a harder judgment to make. The only way to get a baseline is time.
I wouldn’t consider myself pro-marriage. I’m pro- MY marriage. I’m pro - whatever works. I see a lot of people I know rushing into marriage, and while I’m happy for them, I worry for them. But I don’t think claims that it’s a terrible idea are any more valid than claims that it’s a wonderful idea. It’s an idea.
My contention is not that marriage makes you happier. My claim is that there is no evidence that marriage makes you happier or unhappier over the long term. Incidentally, if you had lots of friends in high school that got married immediately after high school, then you had an untypical set of friends. Most people these days don’t get married immediately after high school. Perhaps you need a new set of friends. The statistics are clear that the later you get married (up to the age of 32), the less likely you are to get divorced. It’s also a good idea to take a lot of time to think about whether the person you just met is the one you really want to marry or even to have a long-term relationship with. If you have a long history of marriages and relationships that don’t work out, I would suggest that you tell the person you just met about the fact that you have such a history. Then you can both think about whether the two of you have a chance.
I think that’s the most accurate thing we can say. Marriage. It’s an idea.
That is sad and made me laugh.
I’m picturing it delivered by the 50s guy with the coffee cup: Meme Generator
I’d like to get to my original OP that I felt many men will forgo marriage because they simply see other men being totally screwed over by the system. I know of more than one case where the man didnt do a damn thing wrong (“wrong” in the sense they were not abusers or fooling around and yes they did help out around the house) and she STILL up and divorced him. Why? Oh they felt lonely or someone better came along.
Yes men do lose out on seeing their kids. Why? Well usually she gets custody and I’ve heard more than once when he goes to pick them up they hear 'Oh, they cant see you today - they are sick". Or “they have homework”. Of course her new boyfriend is there and whom the kids are told to call “Dad”. Oh and she can up and move far away so he has trouble getting to see them.
On money, I know one guy who’s ex while they were married, she up and took a trip to England without him, on their shared credit card, when she got back she filed for divorce and gave him the credit card bill.
Oh, and the worse thing a guy can do if he marries a woman with kids, is to adopt them. I’ve heard of several times where he adopts her kids, then she turns around and divorces him and then suddenly he is stuck making child support payments.
Now I’m not saying there are not some scumbag men. Men who expect her to be their maid. Men who dont work. Men who are abusive. Men who just up and leave when kids come along. I know one jerk I once worked with who up and left his family - Why? His new son had autism and he said he couldnt handle the pressure.
Frankly almost everyone I know who married before age 24 later got divorced.
I have too, and know of a couple of cases where a woman adopted his kids and the reverse happened.
I have always heard that people should never adopt stepchildren until they have been married at least 5 years. Not together; MARRIED. I can’t get over how many (usually) women get divorced, remarry within a year or two, and he adopts the kids with the wedding money. :eek: Sometimes it works out, and sometimes it doesn’t.
There’s a woman on another board who was widowed several years ago with toddlers (twins) and when she remarried, she could not have him adopt those kids fast enough, mainly to get her first husband’s mother out of the picture. :dubious: I agree, this sounds like a disaster waiting to happen but have kept my cyber-mouth shut.
From what I’ve seen, step-parent adoptions are usually done to get the ex out of the picture, and the ex happily signs the relinquishment papers because (usually) he won’t have to pay child support anymore.
I was adopted by my Mom’s fourth husband. My bio Dad had just lost custody and all visitation rights with his other child, and he never paid child support anyway, so it wasn’t a hard sell to the judge.
It ended… poorly.
We were 23, but it bears repeating, we were together for four years before we married. Relative to other people in my family and community, 23 seemed really old to get married, but when we moved to the East coast, everybody was freaking out over how young we got married. I guess it’s all relative.
All the issues you bring up–custody disputes, charges on a shared CC, and child support–would all happen with a LTR. The guy can’t just come over and get the kids whenever he wants (and the same goes for the woman). There will be a schedule. And adoption means you are now the parent of the child, so of course there would be child support.
WRT the title of the OP, the answer is, of course, yes. Some men avoid marriage because they are worried about divorce. But it’s not clear if that’s a rational decision. One thing that isn’t clear is how a man would get screwed over in a marriage but not an LTR given the situations you describe: A long relationship with bio-kids, shared finances, and adopted step kids. How is it better for the man in the LTR in that case?
And this is ignoring that in many states, a LTR is often viewed as a common-law marriage anyway. A guy in an LTR hoping to skip away may find out he has the same responsibility as if he had been married.
I made no such statement. Do not misrepresent my arguments instead of supporting your own.
I do not know what you mean by ‘… it is 100% normal for the parent initiating the divorce to claim “the kids are better off”.’ If you mean it is very common, perhaps that is because it is true.
And I am surprise you have never heard the adult child of divorced parents - or of unhappily married ones - speak in favor of divorce. The worst thing about divorce for the kid is when a parent can’t get passed it and keeps arguing and belittling and generally being petty.
I think this is a misconception, in most circumstances. First, I think it’s becoming less common for states to recognize common-law marriages. More importantly, you don’t become married by just living together but by making people believe that you are married and intending on being married. So I don’t think that nowadays you can generally accidentally find yourself married because of common-law rules.
:dubious:
this thread has been interesting reading but only because of the people ignoring your premise and talking about their actual experiences.