Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The U.S. divorce rate has remained at a stubbornly high rate ever since the 1970s at around 50%. We're always told that people who get married younger have a greater of getting divorced. Back in the '70s, women usually married at around 21 and men at 23. Now we marry about 4 years later, women at 25 and men at 27. But the chances of your marriage succeeding has barely edged downwards. Not so long ago, back in the 1950s, more girls married at 18 than any other age and men usually married at 18-24. The divorce rate then was half the rate it is today and most marriages from then are still together.
Europeans get married a lot later than we do. In Denmark, first time grooms are 34.5 years of age and first time brides are 32.1 years of age. In Sweden, people there also get married at well past 30, the same goes with the United Kingdom, Spain, Ireland and many other Europeans countries. Yet, all of these countries have a high divorce rate nearly the same as Americans.
Back to the United States... in Utah , people get married the youngest, at around 18-23 for women and 21-25 for men. According to their statistics, in 2008, they had a marriage rate of 8.7 and a divorce rate of 3.5, thus a 40.22% divorce rate, while the U.S. nationally had a marriage rate of 7.1 and a divorce rate of 3.6, a 50.7% divorce rate. Utah has a 10% lower divorce rate and yet they get married the youngest in the country.
So, does marrying later really mean you'll less likely get divorced because according to these statistics, I'm not really seeing that.
Your stats overlook regional, social, and religious factors in the results. Utah, being a strongly conservative religious state, is not typical of the entire country. However, I don't have any other stats at hand to offer.
The U.S. divorce rate has remained at a stubbornly high rate ever since the 1970s at around 50%. We're always told that people who get married younger have a greater of getting divorced. Back in the '70s, women usually married at around 21 and men at 23. Now we marry about 4 years later, women at 25 and men at 27. But the chances of your marriage succeeding has barely edged downwards. Not so long ago, back in the 1950s, more girls married at 18 than any other age and men usually married at 18-24. The divorce rate then was half the rate it is today and most marriages from then are still together.
Europeans get married a lot later than we do. In Denmark, first time grooms are 34.5 years of age and first time brides are 32.1 years of age. In Sweden, people there also get married at well past 30, the same goes with the United Kingdom, Spain, Ireland and many other Europeans countries. Yet, all of these countries have a high divorce rate nearly the same as Americans.
Back to the United States... in Utah , people get married the youngest, at around 18-23 for women and 21-25 for men. According to their statistics, in 2008, they had a marriage rate of 8.7 and a divorce rate of 3.5, thus a 40.22% divorce rate, while the U.S. nationally had a marriage rate of 7.1 and a divorce rate of 3.6, a 50.7% divorce rate. Utah has a 10% lower divorce rate and yet they get married the youngest in the country.
So, does marrying later really mean you'll less likely get divorced because according to these statistics, I'm not really seeing that.
The problem is states like California and Maryland both have low divorce rates and higher meidans on first marriage. You will also notice states fluctuate....back in 2002 Utah was number 22 on the list. Moderator cut: link removed, linking to competitor sites is not allowed
You fail to acknowledge that the laws governing divorce have drastic effects on the overall divorce rate.
Personally, I don't care if people divorce I only care if they are happy.
In regards to your original question - no I don't think the age of the participants in a first time marriage makes one single bit of difference, it all comes down to compatibility and having the intelligence and/or luck to choose the correct partner in the first instance.
You fail to acknowledge that the laws governing divorce have drastic effects on the overall divorce rate.
Personally, I don't care if people divorce I only care if they are happy.
In regards to your original question - no I don't think the age of the participants in a first time marriage makes one single bit of difference, it all comes down to compatibility and having the intelligence and/or luck to choose the correct partner in the first instance.
Very true, up until this year ny was the only state with a no fault divorce and it has one of the lowest rates of divorce.
The U.S. divorce rate has remained at a stubbornly high rate ever since the 1970s at around 50%. We're always told that people who get married younger have a greater of getting divorced. Back in the '70s, women usually married at around 21 and men at 23. Now we marry about 4 years later, women at 25 and men at 27. But the chances of your marriage succeeding has barely edged downwards. Not so long ago, back in the 1950s, more girls married at 18 than any other age and men usually married at 18-24. The divorce rate then was half the rate it is today and most marriages from then are still together.
You are not analyzing the statistics correctly. The main thing you need to realize that in any given year or decade, the marriages that are being entered into aren't the same marriages that are being dissolved through divorce. This is the main flaw in the arguments of people who use today's divorce rate to predict the likelihood of future divorces. And so: people who got married in the 1950's didn't divorce in the 1950's -- they divorced in the 1960's and the 1970's, when the divorce rate skyrocketed. Given the fact that people in the 1950's married considerably younger than in the previous decades of the 20th century, this would support the proposition that the age of the parties at marriage is correlated with the divorce rate.
Second, divorce rates have been declining for 30 years -- and when broken down by age group, it is clear that the younger the parties are at the time of marriage, the more likely they are to divorce.
Third, divorce statistics are overinclusive, in that they lump together marriages of different duration. If someone files for divorce a year after getting marriage, it's safe to say without qualification that that marriage is a failure. But what about a marriage that lasted 15-20 years? In all likelihood, it's a marriage that's seen both good and bad times, and though it did end in divorce, it's not quite in the same category as the first example.
Quote:
Europeans get married a lot later than we do. In Denmark, first time grooms are 34.5 years of age and first time brides are 32.1 years of age. In Sweden, people there also get married at well past 30, the same goes with the United Kingdom, Spain, Ireland and many other Europeans countries. Yet, all of these countries have a high divorce rate nearly the same as Americans.
That's because age isn't the only factor.
Quote:
Back to the United States... in Utah , people get married the youngest, at around 18-23 for women and 21-25 for men. According to their statistics, in 2008, they had a marriage rate of 8.7 and a divorce rate of 3.5, thus a 40.22% divorce rate, while the U.S. nationally had a marriage rate of 7.1 and a divorce rate of 3.6, a 50.7% divorce rate. Utah has a 10% lower divorce rate and yet they get married the youngest in the country.
On the other hand, the lowest divorce rates are in MA, where people tend to marry a lot later. You also don't take into account the provenance of the Utah statistics -- because if it has particularly tough divorce laws, all an unhappy couple has to do is drive to Nevada. It isn't far.
Quote:
So, does marrying later really mean you'll less likely get divorced because according to these statistics, I'm not really seeing that.
How about you use direct statistics? Like, what are the divorce rates for people who get married between the ages of 18 and 23, versus people who get married after, say 28?
You are not analyzing the statistics correctly. The main thing you need to realize that in any given year or decade, the marriages that are being entered into aren't the same marriages that are being dissolved through divorce. This is the main flaw in the arguments of people who use today's divorce rate to predict the likelihood of future divorces. And so: people who got married in the 1950's didn't divorce in the 1950's -- they divorced in the 1960's and the 1970's, when the divorce rate skyrocketed. Given the fact that people in the 1950's married considerably younger than in the previous decades of the 20th century, this would support the proposition that the age of the parties at marriage is correlated with the divorce rate.
Second, divorce rates have been declining for 30 years -- and when broken down by age group, it is clear that the younger the parties are at the time of marriage, the more likely they are to divorce.
Third, divorce statistics are overinclusive, in that they lump together marriages of different duration. If someone files for divorce a year after getting marriage, it's safe to say without qualification that that marriage is a failure. But what about a marriage that lasted 15-20 years? In all likelihood, it's a marriage that's seen both good and bad times, and though it did end in divorce, it's not quite in the same category as the first example.
That's because age isn't the only factor.
On the other hand, the lowest divorce rates are in MA, where people tend to marry a lot later. You also don't take into account the provenance of the Utah statistics -- because if it has particularly tough divorce laws, all an unhappy couple has to do is drive to Nevada. It isn't far.
How about you use direct statistics? Like, what are the divorce rates for people who get married between the ages of 18 and 23, versus people who get married after, say 28?
For women it's about 63 and men it's about 50. So if you can figure out the average out of that it might help us lol.
You are not analyzing the statistics correctly. The main thing you need to realize that in any given year or decade, the marriages that are being entered into aren't the same marriages that are being dissolved through divorce. This is the main flaw in the arguments of people who use today's divorce rate to predict the likelihood of future divorces. And so: people who got married in the 1950's didn't divorce in the 1950's -- they divorced in the 1960's and the 1970's, when the divorce rate skyrocketed. Given the fact that people in the 1950's married considerably younger than in the previous decades of the 20th century, this would support the proposition that the age of the parties at marriage is correlated with the divorce rate.
Second, divorce rates have been declining for 30 years -- and when broken down by age group, it is clear that the younger the parties are at the time of marriage, the more likely they are to divorce.
Third, divorce statistics are overinclusive, in that they lump together marriages of different duration. If someone files for divorce a year after getting marriage, it's safe to say without qualification that that marriage is a failure. But what about a marriage that lasted 15-20 years? In all likelihood, it's a marriage that's seen both good and bad times, and though it did end in divorce, it's not quite in the same category as the first example.
That's because age isn't the only factor.
On the other hand, the lowest divorce rates are in MA, where people tend to marry a lot later. You also don't take into account the provenance of the Utah statistics -- because if it has particularly tough divorce laws, all an unhappy couple has to do is drive to Nevada. It isn't far.
How about you use direct statistics? Like, what are the divorce rates for people who get married between the ages of 18 and 23, versus people who get married after, say 28?
You fail to acknowledge that the laws governing divorce have drastic effects on the overall divorce rate.
Personally, I don't care if people divorce I only care if they are happy.
In regards to your original question - no I don't think the age of the participants in a first time marriage makes one single bit of difference, it all comes down to compatibility and having the intelligence and/or luck to choose the correct partner in the first instance.
From the other thread I read where people are hopping in and out of the sack...
Why get married at all? Seriously.
If you have no morals than just get your fix with a partner and keep single.
I don't quite understand that whole thing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
