Divorce in America: Historical Perspectives

Divorce in America: Historical Perspectives

The purpose of this study is to examine two differing scholarly perspectives on the questions of the history and origins of divorce in America. For many the issue of rising divorce rates in the United States is perceived as a breakdown in basic social structures that provide stability. Recent changes in cultural mores are often cited as the causative factors that underlie the apparent breakdown of the marriage unit in the United States. However, according to at least two authors on the subject, the roots of divorce in the United States have a much longer historical precedent.

In "The Origins of Modern Divorce" Stephanie Coontz evaluates how the development of new ideological perspectives regarding marriage about two hundred years ago dramatically changed the relationship people have towards marriage and consequently the likelihood of divorce. Taking a different tack, Elaine Tyler May discusses the effects of rising affluence and consumerism during the early 20th century in the United States as underscoring increases in divorces in her article "The Pressure to Provide: Class, Consumerism, and Divorce in Urban American, 1880-1920." An evaluation of these two perspectives should reveal much about the historical underpinnings of changing marriage and divorce rates and patterns in the United States. Even though the authors choose very different modes and focuses of investigation, the end result is remarkably similar: the modern rise of divorce in the United States has causes stretching back a century of more.

The Relevant Points-of-View

Coontz argues that the cause of rising divorce rates in the United States is both historical and ideological. By this she means that changing attitudes and beliefs about marriage as an institution that began to occur roughly two hundred years ago had a direct impact on the slow, but steady, rise in divorce rates. Specifically, she points out that historically marriage has been perceived as an institution by which men and women can achieve socials stability and raise children (Coontz 8). However, starting during the Victorian era and taking root in the early 20th century in the United States, a new perspective on marriage emerged. The new paradigm stated that marriage should be based on love and affection primarily and that marriage should be the central commitment that any individual makes in his or her life (Coontz 7-9).

The end result of this change has been that marriage no longer performs the same role as a social stabilizer, and that men and women invest more of their personal identities and life goals in marriage. Thus, when the promise of love and affection do not necessarily materialize, the disillusionment can be so strong as to encourage higher incidences of divorce as individuals can no longer see other reasons to remain married.

Whereas Coontz looks to ideology and changing attitudes to understand rising divorce rates, May examines somewhat more tangible and materialistic issues that had an effect on the institution. Specifically, May makes the case that the emergence of a more affluent society in the latter half o the 19th century and the early 20th century placed new stresses on the institution of marriage and, not coincidentally, parallels the skyrocketing divorce rates in this country (May 180). This point-of-view places the primary cause of rising divorce rates squarely on socioeconomic changes that were occurring in the United States around the turn of the last century. Paradoxically, many might believe that rising affluence would ease pressures on marriage and lead to a decrease in divorce rates. May, however, illustrates how this has not been the case.

One might think that more affluence would mean more financial security, but this only manifested for some individuals. Those couples with more financial security were now faced with new pressures about how to spend their expanded financial resources. For those slightly less affluent concerns about status and limitations on consumption were also prevalent. And for those in the working classes, rising affluence was a far off dream that only increased frustrations and thus pressures on marriage (May 192). As affluence in the United States has continued to rise throughout the 20th century, then, May's argument can clearly be applied to illustrate why divorce rates have continued to rise throughout the century in spite of potentially reduced financial pressures on married couples.

Agreements and Disagreements

When we consider the arguments and perspectives of both Coontz and May on the subject of divorce in America, some disagreements emerge, though by and large the two agree in principle if not on all of the details. From the above discussion of the two authors' points-of-view on divorce in America, it is more than evident that there is some disagreement in what the authors believe to be at the heart of current rises in divorce rates in the United States. Coontz, on the one hand, argues that changes in the underlying cultural attitudes and beliefs about marriage shifted around two hundred years ago, and that these new beliefs are still having an effect on the institution of marriage, specifically through divorce. May, on the other hand, looks to socioeconomic changes in the history of the country to account for rising divorce rates, and ties the historical rise in divorce rates over the last century to rising affluence and the pressure of "keeping up with the Joneses."

While these two perspectives seem irreconcilable, there are fundamental similarities and agreements that actually bind these two arguments closely together. Both of the authors agree that the roots of the current problems with the institution of marriage have deep historical roots in America. Rather than look to contemporary changes in U.S. culture and cite these as the causative factors underpinning higher divorce rates, both authors go deeper to analyze some of the formative developments in marriage in the United States that occurred between a century and two centuries ago. This point of agreement is important, and could even hint at the premise that both arguments are aspects of larger cultural and socioeconomic changes that were occurring in America at that time with long-reaching effects on marriage and divorce rates.

Differences in Methodology, Tone, and Conclusions

Despite this obvious similarity, there are some differences between the two studies. Namely, Coontz's study is largely qualitative, while May's is quantitative. Both types of studies have an important place in this kind of research, however the ability of May to back up her arguments with statistical and economic indicators adds a weight of authority that is sometimes lacking in Coontz. Coontz's methodology, unlike May's, involves historical analysis and conjecture no doubt based on existing data, but which is not necessarily presented to the reader. May's willingness to showcase much of her data set for her readers grants her study a greater impact that Coontz's analysis of philosophical and ideological changes fails to accomplish.