This paper examines two competing perspectives on marital divorce and its consequences for family welfare. The first perspective holds that divorce is deeply harmful to children, disrupting their home lives and predisposing them to relationship difficulties in adulthood. The second, more contemporary view argues that prolonged parental conflict within an unhappy marriage is more damaging to children than divorce itself. The analysis considers changing cultural norms, longer life expectancy, and empirical data on marital happiness to evaluate which perspective is better supported, ultimately finding broader professional consensus behind the view that chronic marital disharmony poses the greater risk to child welfare.
The question of whether marital divorce is harmful to the welfare of family members — and children in particular — has long been debated among researchers, counselors, and policymakers. Two distinct perspectives have emerged: one holding that divorce is inherently damaging and should be avoided, and another arguing that the conditions leading to divorce are often more harmful than the divorce itself.
The classic position on marital divorce is that marital dissolution is tremendously harmful to all family members, and to children in particular. According to this view, married couples should remain married even if they are unhappy, mainly because divorce is very harmful to children. The rationale is that children are the parties most victimized by divorce because it disrupts their home life and interferes with their relationships with their parents.
Proponents of this position suggest that children of divorced parents typically develop problems in the area of trust and may be far more prone to relationship difficulties as adults — difficulties that predispose them to divorce in their own marriages. In fact, this is one of the primary reasons that many unhappy married couples who might otherwise choose to divorce ultimately choose to remain married, at least until their children are old enough to leave home and begin their own adult lives.
The more contemporary position on marital divorce acknowledges that dissolution is harmful to all family members and to children, but argues that the comparative consequences of living within a home where the parents are miserable is more damaging to children's welfare than divorce itself. According to this view, married couples who are deeply unhappy living together should not remain married solely on the rationale that divorce is necessarily harmful to children.
Certainly, divorce is more harmful to children's happiness and welfare than living in a happy home with two happy parents. However, by the time a couple is seriously contemplating divorce, their children are already being subjected to continual tension and conflict — a parental relationship that is more damaging than beneficial. The rationale for this perspective is that children are more deeply victimized by exposure to perpetual parental conflict, and that in many cases this ongoing conflict is even more disruptive to their home life and their relationships with their parents than a divorce would be.
"Evidence-based synthesis supporting the contemporary view"
You’re 58% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.