Do daughters cause divorce?

[grinner]

Do daughters cause divorce?

November 13, 2003


The more daughters you have, the worse the effect on your marriage, according to new research from the United States.

New research shows the secret of a successful partnership could be in the sex of your children. Caroline Overington reports.

If you want to prevent your own divorce, don’t have daughters, have sons. As startling as it may seem, a new study from the United States has shown that parents of girls are 5 per cent more likely to divorce than parents of boys.

Not only that, in the US at least, the more daughters you have, the worse the effect on your marriage: a couple with two girls is 8 per cent more likely to divorce than a couple with two boys. A couple with three daughters is 13 per cent more likely to divorce than a couple with three sons.

"It certainly surprised me," says one of the researchers, Gordon Dahl, who is an associate professor of economics at the University of Rochester in New York. "You wouldn’t think that having girls made a difference to whether or not you get a divorce, but it very clearly does."

Dahl and his colleague, fellow economist Enrico Moretti from University of California, Los Angeles, based their study on data from 6 million mothers, which was extracted from the past 60 years of the US census.

"There is no room for statistical error," says Dahl. "In a sample that size, you have smoothed out any differences you might get from looking at a group with too many white mothers, or too many black mothers, or too many people with financial problems. All of life’s circumstances are balanced across a group this size.

"But, even when we controlled for race, for age, for the education of the mother, the figures stayed the same. There is no doubt about it: the gender of your children makes a difference, when it comes to whether or not you divorce."

Ever since the study was published — first on the website, Slate.com, and then in The New York Times, debate has raged over what it means. Do daughters cause divorce? Or is it that sons prevent divorce?
Key findings:

# A couple with one daughter is 5 per cent more likely to divorce than a couple with one son.

# The more daughters, the greater the effect: a couple with three daughters is 13 per cent more likely to divorce than a couple with three sons.

# Couples with all boys have the lowest divorce rate of any family type.

# Couples with all girls have the highest divorce rate of any family type.

# The arrival of a boy offers some protection from divorce, since mixed-gender families divorce less often than families with only girls.

# A couple with two daughters is more likely to have a third child than a couple with two sons.

# Single mothers who give birth to a boy are 42 per cent more likely to marry the father than those with girls.

"We don’t know," says Dahl. "All we can say is that couples with girls get divorced more often than couples with boys. We also know that couples who have all boys have the lowest rate of divorce, and that couples with all girls have the highest rate of divorce. And we know that couples who have girls, and then go on to have a boy, have a lower rate of divorce than couples who have only girls. We have some ideas why this might be, but we can’t know for sure."

Dahl posits that some men have a preference for a male heir, who will carry on the family name. If that sounds old-fashioned, here’s another idea: maybe sons make marriages stronger.

"Dads tend to do more with their sons than they do with their daughters, like go out in the back yard and play ball," said Dahl. "And in my opinion, families who do things together are much stronger than families who don’t do things together. Maybe dads feel they have a special role to play if they have sons."

There are other possibilities: maybe women stay married when they have sons because they want their boys to have a male role model. Or maybe they leave a bad marriage if they have daughters, because they don’t want their girls exposed to a bad male role model.

Adding to the intrigue is Shelly Lundberg, a professor of economics at the University of Washington, who last year conducted a study that found that single mothers who give birth to sons were 42 per cent more likely to marry the child’s father than single mothers who give birth to girls. "In part, it was because women were more interested in getting married if they had boys," Lundberg says.

"Maybe that was because they thought baby boys needed a man around, to be a role model. But the men were also more interested in getting married when the baby was a boy."

Lundberg says she had some "very bizarre" reactions from colleagues when she presented her findings at various seminars. "We had very heated discussions, which is quite unusual for economists," she chuckled.

"I had quite a few colleagues take me aside to assure me they loved their daughters just as much as they loved their sons. But of course, we never said they didn’t."

Lundberg’s theory — that men prefer sons — is backed by Dahl’s study, which also showed that a couple with two daughters is more likely to have a third child than a couple with two sons.

"In families with girls, the parents are more likely to say: let’s try one more time," says Dahl. "But in families with boys, they say, no, we’re OK with what we have."

Now, that could be because two boys make quite enough noise. Or maybe couples with daughters find the experience so pleasant, they are happy to add to their brood. But it could also be that couples without sons keep trying because a family feels incomplete without a boy.

"Variety is very important to people," says Dahl. "In fact, although the data about girls has got the most attention, one of the main things our study showed is that parents seem to prefer one child of each gender." To explain: if a couple has two children, and they are of different genders, the parents are not as likely to have a third child, as they would be if their first two children were of the same gender.

For his part, Dahl has three children, all of them daughters, which surely makes him either nervous about his marriage, or else desirous of a fourth child? "I’ll say upfront, I’m a Mormon," he says with a laugh. "I am one of five and my wife is one of five, and we like a big family. I have three daughters, all are perfect, and I wouldn’t want it any other way."

And yes, they might try for another, and won’t mind if it’s a girl, or a boy. makes you wonder

[RescueFarscape]

Interesting.... my first thought was that women with female children are more likely to leave an untenable marital situation because they somehow feel more capable of raising girls on their own.

Interesting. Thanks for posting, grinner.

btw, my parents have been married almost 31 years. They have boy, girl, girl, girl, boy, girl.

[grinner]

My parents have 5 boys... and have been married for 38 years.

[who45]

I'm an only child and my parents have been married for 34. This is interesting though.

[LiLOrion]

Well my parents were only married for eight years before they got divorced...they had 2 girls.

Then both remarried (other people) and my dad had a boy - 4 girls - another boy and he's still married, so I dont know. My mother had a son and is still married.

[stellar]

My parents had 4 boys and remain married at 32 yrs.

[Shipscat]

So. LilOrion, your dad had a total of eight children? Did I count that right?

Well, I had one of each, which I thought was perfect (so that definitely goes with the article) but still ended up getting divorced.

And it doesn't seem to have made much difference in my moms' family..all divorced..my mom had one of each, sisters both had two girls and one boy, brother had three boys and one girl. But there are undoubtedly other factors.

I think I go with the theory that women who have boys feel that they need help raising boys more, and men feel that they are more necessary in son's lives.

[LiLOrion]

Originally posted by Shipscat
So. LilOrion, your dad had a total of eight children? Did I count that right?

Yep...and altogether I'm the oldest of 9.

I'm 29 and got a 5-year-old brother. I feel so...Mormon. :D

My parents were married right outta high school though, which I think accounted for the first divorce, not the fact that there were two daughters involved.

[Shipscat]

I have friends who have three kids, one girl and two boys, and the girl's twenty-two and the boys are 5 and 3, I think. They have a terrible time convincing people that they're still the first family! Same Mom, same dad..and that they're not the grandparents. :)

[LiLOrion]

Originally posted by Shipscat
I have friends who have three kids, one girl and two boys, and the girl's twenty-two and the boys are 5 and 3, I think. They have a terrible time convincing people that they're still the first family! Same Mom, same dad..and that they're not the grandparents. :)


My parents (separately) have a hard time convincing people they got a kid thats 29, cause they dont look their ages (48/49) and cause they got younger kids from the current marriages :)

[CookieCat]

My parents have two girls and have been married 39 years. They did actually consider divorce about 20 years ago, but they stuck it out. My husband's parents had one of each, and they divorced a few years ago. Dealing with a split family has been quite a learning experience.

[grinner]

My Great-grandmother on my Fathers side had 14 kids. When my Grandmother had my father... her mother had the 14th child. There is 23 years difference between my Grandmother and my dad's Aunt... who is 2 months younger than my Dad.

[fermicat]

Here's a few more examples to add to the FMD experience log:

My parents had two girls and divorced after 10 years of marriage.

Dad remarried and got a stepson and stepdaughter from his new wife and they remained married until he died (almost 20 years together).

Mom has remarried and divorced several times, with various stepchild situations (boys, girls, none). As far as I know, the kids only contributed to one of her divorces, and the "kids" in question were grown.

My fiance's parents had five boys and were married until the death of his mother (after 40-something years together).

My maternal grandparents had one boy and one girl and were married 60 years, until my Grandmother died.

My paternal grandparents had only one child - a boy - and were either divorced or separated indefinitely (it isn't clear which). I never met that grandfather, even though he lived nearby. The family lore says he "got messed up in the war" (WWII), and he died of cirrhosis of the liver due to alcoholism.

My sister and her husband have one boy, and were separated for a year but are back together and it looks like they will stay married. I think that a big part of the reason they tried so hard is because they didn't want their son to grow up in a split family like my sister and I did.

[Third EYe]

My friends parents never had any kids and they got divorced.

[grinner]

Okay... that is... okay ThirdEYe... :loco:

[Third EYe]

I've been told this before

[BlackThorn]

My parents only had me, and I'm still waiting for them to get a divorce. Somedays I'm pretty sure the only reason they're still married is that my dad wouldn't be able to function without my mom to take care of him, and my mom can't re-enter the workforce again. :dunno:

[Judith]

Lets see...My mom was married once before she married my dad, and she had one daughter. But she left because her first husband was abusive and she didn't want my sister exposed to that. I think she would have left whether she had had a son or a daughter. After my parents got married, they had me and my little sister. So there were three girls in the house, no boys.

My parents have been married for 25 years.

[Johnsgirl727]

Well. This is certainly interesting. My parents have been married for over 30 years and they had two daughters, me and my sister. No sons. I'm a single mother with one daughter and my daughter's father doesn't want to have anything to do with her. Interesting article grinner.

[AgentSun]

i'm their one little girl and they've been married (my mom remarried) for about 9 years. so i could be an example, since my biological dad and my mom divorced when i was a mere toddler...

[TechnoBoY]

My sister causes my mom and dad more headachs then I do. Dont think they will get divorced though! Just make them yell at her more. :D

[PrairieScaper]

"Do daughters cause divorce?"

Am I reading that right? :grr:

Geez, don't blame the kids. Parents cause divorce, not their children.

[trinamick]

My mother was married, had a daughter, and divorced because he was an abusive psycho.

My dad was married, had a daughter, and divorced because he was a man whore.

They married each other, had a rotten son, and were blessed with a fabulous daughter who brought joy into everyone's lives :angelgrin , and then they divorced after 13 years, because my father was still a man whore.

My grandparents had 4 girls and were married 49 years until my grandmother passed away. Maybe not 49 happy years, because my grandpa is a jackass, but my grandmother was much too stubborn to divorce him and things weren't done that way in her time.

[LiLOrion]

Originally posted by trinamick
because my father was still a man whore.


Hey, I got one of them too! :D

[Scaper_S]

"Dads tend to do more with their sons than they do with their daughters, like go out in the back yard and play ball," said Dahl. "And in my opinion, families who do things together are much stronger than families who don’t do things together. Maybe dads feel they have a special role to play if they have sons."


I had wondered whether it might be because people consciously or otherwise, revere sons more than daughters. The above extract from the article is pretty interesting though.

My parents have 4 daughters and 2 sons and my mother made no secret of the fact that she wanted her first born to have been a son (she got me!) and also preferred sons to daughters, ( the boys in the family in general can do absolutely no wrong in her eyes!). We did, however, do a hezmana of a lot as a family and still do, so the researchers view may have some truth in it. My parents have been married 36 years.

[trinamick]

We called my brother "Golden Boy" because my mother thought he walked on water (in reality, he had clay feet). My sister & I always got busted for what he did. But my mom always said he was the "planned child." I say surprises are the best gifts! :D

[Judith]

Originally posted by Scaper_S
"Dads tend to do more with their sons than they do with their daughters, like go out in the back yard and play ball," said Dahl. "And in my opinion, families who do things together are much stronger than families who don’t do things together. Maybe dads feel they have a special role to play if they have sons."


I had wondered whether it might be because people consciously or otherwise, revere sons more than daughters. The above extract from the article is pretty interesting though.

My parents have 4 daughters and 2 sons and my mother made no secret of the fact that she wanted her first born to have been a son (she got me!) and also preferred sons to daughters, ( the boys in the family in general can do absolutely no wrong in her eyes!). We did, however, do a hezmana of a lot as a family and still do, so the researchers view may have some truth in it. My parents have been married 36 years.

I've never gotten that. Maybe my dad is just extraordinary. But he always spent so much time with us...reading to us, taking us on roadtrips, talking to use. In a sense, we were spoiled a little, cause we've always known that Dad's world revolves around us. Oddly enough, it's always been my mom who's been dissapointed that I've NEVER been any good at sports.

[VBKatLou]

Even though it's not the case in my family (two daughters and my parents have been married 53 years), I think it's because the majority of men secretly want a male heir. I have no statistics to back my claim, just female intuition. :D

And I agree with PrairieScaper - adults cause their own divorce, not the kids.

My parents waited quite awhile before having children which was unusual back then. Growing up, my parents always told us that they had always wanted two girls. Of course, now I'm thinking that maybe they were just trying to make us feel good about ourselves.

Maybe my dad was just another "extraordinary" one. He did a lot of stuff with us. My mom was our Girl Scout leader, but my dad participated just as much. He was the reason that our troop got to go camping more than any other troop around, not only at girl scout camps, but all over the state.

[Judith]

Originally posted by VBKatLou

Maybe my dad was just another "extraordinary" one. He did a lot of stuff with us. My mom was our Girl Scout leader, but my dad participated just as much. He was the reason that our troop got to go camping more than any other troop around, not only at girl scout camps, but all over the state.

While I don't want to sugarcoat any issue, I do believe, from the men, my age, that I associate with, that this kind of paternal behavior will become less and less extrodinary, and more the norm.

I know so many boys my age who want nothing more than to have a family. And the way they talk...the details they give...it's not just the having that they want. They really WANT to be strongly involved in their kids' lives.

[divinedaydreams]

Well here comes my messed up family...

Mom was adopted her bio mom was married and divorced many times. Her mom also has a slew of children. Her adopted mom had a daughter and adopted my mom. Adopted mom and dad divorced.

Mom has been married three times. First time had my sister and I. They divorced when I was 5. Later found out father thought his loins couldn't have produced two girls. Second husband came and went rather quickly, no children. Third came to the table with two girls of his own. They have been married 15 years now. He still has contact with his first wifes older children a boy and a girl. He helped raise them and considers them is children. I changed my name to his at eighteen and he adopted my sister later.

My father divorced mom as I said above. He then remarried twice more from what I know. Both wives were older and had at least one son. Second on resulted in divorce. Third one his wife died.

I think men's changing attitudes towards women will have an effect on this later. Ten years down the road it may not be the case anymore.

[Anhayla]

My parents had four daughters (I'm the baby!) and they've been married happily for 46 years.

[divinedaydreams]

Oh I forgot to mention I've been married six years and we have a two year old son. We are also looking into foster/adopting. I want a girl but am happy to follow my heart.

[tribsaint]

Well, this explains everything. So far my parents' recent divorce has been the ONLY thing they haven't directly blamed me for.

So please don't show them this article, okay? They'll make my life even more of a living hell than it already is.

They were married 17 years with one girl (me) and one boy (at least that's what we like to call it). :)

[tribsaint]

Originally posted by PrairieScaper
"Do daughters cause divorce?"

Am I reading that right? :grr:

Geez, don't blame the kids. Parents cause divorce, not their children.

Oh, and I wanted to thank PrairieScaper for saying this. It needs a bump. :)

[DRD2001]

I hate articles like this one. To me, it borders on junk science. Although I am sure the statistics are right, I don't trust any survey where they claim there is no margin of error. But my main beef is the attention grabbing headline. You have to get pretty far into the article before they actually explain that it isn't necessarily the daughters who cause divorce. Somewhere, a family is getting divorced and this article is being read by children. Prariescaper is right on with the remark that parents cause divorce, not the children. I would have liked to have seen more research into the reasons for the divorces, with more analysis on the marriages.

BTW, my parents had 2 daughters, and got divorced after about 20 years. I think it had to do more with the fact that my mom could be a raging freaking PMS lunatic.

[JadedLegend3]

My father was married before, and had no children. He married my mother 25 years ago this September, and they had one girl, me.

I hope Judith_Shakespeare is right about that trend of "extraordinary" fathers continues, but I have not seen it improve, only worsen.

I've only met two guys who are about my age (22) and who have said that they want kids and want to be involved in their children's lives a lot. One, though, only wants boys, which is less than suprising to me. He refuses to believe that he may have a girl. I find him for this reason and others, to be a moron.

My friend's "husband" (they're common-law married) always said he preferred boys to girls because, and I quote, "With boys, you only have to worry about 1 d!ck, with girls, you have to worry about hundreds." He had two boys and then a girl. I don't know if his philosophy has changed or not.

One of the guys who works where I do, just learned that as a result of a one-night-stand he is going to be a father. He admantly denies that the child is his (though it's not been born yet) and says that the "bitch" is lying. He says if the child is his, he will do nothing but what the law makes him do.

My ex was of a similar thinking. He hates the idea of marriage and or children, because they would "slow him down." His best friend has a fiance and a little girl (the sweetest little girl ever) and my ex thinks his best friend should get rid of them so they can "do whatever we want whenever we want."

Perhaps I've only met the bad eggs of my generation, but I gotta tell you, from where I sit, things look pretty grim.

Back to the topic, though, I agree with PrarieScaper, parents cause divorce, not children!!!



Jacqui :love:

[BlackThorn]

Most of the young men around my age (25) I've met resembled JadedLegend's descriptions. That, or they swear up and down they want children but don't actually think of all the work involved. And when asked about it, they just pass it off as the mother's job. Mind you, most of these ones also say they don't want their wives working (when they eventually get married) because she needs to be there for the kids. Most of these ones also aren't on track for becoming high paid individuals.

Grim future from my end, too.

[grinner]

maybe it needs to be the age of the father when they have children. My oldest brother just had twin girls... and he rushes home from work just to be with them... maybe maturity of the Father is more important?

[BlackThorn]

I would say maturity probably is a big factor. Not necessarily age.

I think the man's environment when growing up also plays a big role. It could be that I run across more of the bad ones here because many of them grew up here. And Nevada isn't exactly the best place to raise a family. High rate of alcoholism, gambling addictions, drugs, divorces, infidelity, etc . . . It can't make for a good environment to learn how to do things right. On the other hand, this is a pretty rural place (compared to a lot of other states.) So you end up with a lot of people with an older way of thinking (man brings home the bacon, woman stays in the kitchen and raises the kids.) Combine the two ways of thinking, and it's no wonder people here are frelled in the head.

[grinner]

I wouldn't argue with the nature vs. nurture aspect of it... I think that many young males are not raised to respect others... at least from what I have seen.

[grapeshot]

My BIL is a self-centered jerk. He and my sister have one child, a daughter. He's been unemployed for over 2 years, and drinks an awful lot. He rags on his daughter for her grades (which are in fact a respectable B- average), and, despite being unemployed, is never home when she gets home from school. She's a virtual latch-key kid. She's 13 now, but remember, this all started when she was 10. I no longer like to visit them because my sister and her husband fight all the time. My sister doesn't complain a whole lot, but from what she's let slip to my brother and me, she's seriously thinking about separation and/or a divorce. I don't think my niece is the cause of this, do you?

[I-am-so-Johns-girl]

My parents had 2 girls...me and my younger sister and have been happily married for 54 years :D

[Scarran Raptor]

I'm an only child, male, and my folks divorced when I was two, my mom remarried twice and stepdad number two just died in August

[PrairieScaper]

Originally posted by DRD2001
I hate articles like this one. To me, it borders on junk science. Although I am sure the statistics are right, I don't trust any survey where they claim there is no margin of error. But my main beef is the attention grabbing headline. You have to get pretty far into the article before they actually explain that it isn't necessarily the daughters who cause divorce. Somewhere, a family is getting divorced and this article is being read by children. Precisely. I just don't understand what the point of this study really was. I could understand if it was a look at parental attitudes toward raising boys vs. raising girls, and how that affected the children. But that doesn't seem to be the focus. Besides, what other factors besides the childrens' gender was considered? As responses here show, there is obviously so much more involved. Boiling everything down to this oversimplified article is just shoddy work.

[tracyhill]

My parents didnt get married until after I was born (F) and went on to have another 2 girls and 1 boy and are still married 35 years later. I however have 2 boys and 2 girls and my husband left after 14 years!!! (Go figure)

tracy

[DentArthurDent]

Originally posted by DRD2001
To me, it borders on junk science.

I think smack in the middle, not near the border... I am sure if they took something simple like EYE COLOR of the female children, they could find an indication that certain eye-colors are worse than others. OI! I think this finds a causality where there may not be any, or it may be infintessimally small. Lesseeee in my experience, getting married, leads to divorce for a percentage of people. DUH!?! and being born has a propensity to end in death as well...

They point out that this study stirs up a lot of controversy within the economist community. Why? :ewink:

AFD

[Eve11]

The title of the article is unfortunate :(

The bottom line is that this is an observational study, not an experiment, and as such scientifically you can say absolutely NOTHING about what "causes" this link. Take any, ANY introductory statistics class and the one thing they BURN into your brain is that "association does not equal causation".

Unless the researchers want to grab a handful of families and then assign to them the kinds of children they will have (ie, "Okay family #1 will have two girls, family #2 will have a boy and a girl, family #3 will have two boys..., etc), and follow them to see who gets divorced and who doesn't, then it's not an experiment. As such it can only say something about associations, not causation.

I'm absolutely positive the researchers knew this. It's the sensationalist reporter who needed the attention-grabbing headline who is being the idiot. :headbang:

As for "no margin of error"... 6 million is a pretty big number. There are ways of controlling for all of the variables they say (note however that the more variables you control for the smaller your "effective" sample size is). Economists know their statistics for the most part, though I'd be interested in seeing the article. But the biggest thing to me is it is spread out over 60 years! What do the results look like as a function of time? Is the trend increasing? Decreasing?

My family: 3 girls, no boys, parents are currently divorcing after 26 years of marraige.