Children of Divorce

Term Paper

Millennial Mayhem

My father passed away last year just before my parents thirty-fifth wedding

anniversary. I grew up in an intact household, surrounded by family friends who were

all married. Few of my friends were children of divorce. This led me to believe that

marriage was not only attainable, but that it was necessary for a lasting bond. Even at

this stage in my life, I have not found divorce culture to be prevalent in the thoughts of

my family and friends. In comparison though to my parents generation, romantic

relationships seem to be unclear, which may have an impact on our modern view of

marriage.

I met Taylor and Billy my senior year of high school. At the time they lived down

the street from us and soon became close family friends. They shared a number of

uncanny similarities to my family. They are in their 60s, have one daughter, grew up on

the east coast before moving to California for their careers, and have been married for

almost 30 years. Taylor and Billy met one evening at a bar on Fire Island in 1981. We

took that one-night stand back to [New York] city for a continuing romance that has

lasted a record time by Fire Island standards, Billy jokes. There is some truth to that;

next month they will be married 29 years. Their trajectory very much reflects their

generation. They followed a specific path; the nature of the courtship was rather

traditional. Because their relationship is homogeneous, similar economic background

and education, they fit into their generations mode of dating. They met at a social

scene, went on a number of dates, were introduced to their friends group and parents,
eventually moved in together and then finally got married. As Taylor is from a big

family, marriage was expected in order to have children. While I would never consider

them as institutional, their path does align to the companionate idea of marriage- fall in

love, get married, balance work and kids and then spend the rest of your life together.

The fact that Taylor and Billy had similar expectations for marriage positioned

them at a better place in their marriage. Taylor said marriage is to be with someone

you love and to build a life.a partner to help raise a family. Billy said the reason is for

a physical and emotional life exploring mutual togetherness and a happy common

family. Taylor and Billy had a set of expectations early on of what they believed a

marriage should be. Their ideas closely aligned, which according to psychologist Robert

Sternbergs love as a story may have been a reason for the success of their marriage.

Their coordination story both included children and building a life together.

Taylor and Billy married 1986 after moving to Los Angeles. Although Taylor

always knew she wanted to get married and have children, she also planned to work.

When they met, Taylor had graduated from Penns Wharton School of Business and had

already established a career for herself; It made me independent so I did not resent

being financially needy. We were equals. It essentially gave her freedom. Stephanie

Coontz, in her book Marriage, a History, writes that by the end of the 1970s women had

access to legal rights, education, birth control and decent jobs. This led to a

fundamental change of marriage in the 1980s and 1990s. This change marked a move

from a companionate view to an individualistic view of marriage in society. Taylor and

Billy were riding the wave of change. Marriage was still the end goal, however it created

a landscape that was more open. Billy was attracted to Taylors competence as

evidenced
by her life in NYC and business career. The classic breadwinner idea was eroding,

paving the way for women like Taylor to both excel in their jobs and relationships.

By their generations standards they married reasonably late; she was 31 and he

was 39. Because they married at an older age though, they both decreased their risk of

divorce. By Bramlett and Moshers findings, Taylor and Billy had a 35% chance of

divorce after 15 years. Despite the fact that the divorce rate stood at 50% in 1980 when

Taylor and Billy began to date, they both said that divorce culture has not affected them

(Coontz). In relation to Social Exchange Theory, Taylor and Billy have relatively few

barriers to divorce; they are able to support themselves financially, have no religious

affiliation and dont share the stigma that often surrounds divorce. Although they once

lived in New York City where the alternatives are greater, they now live in a much

smaller town, which has lessened the alternative pool. From what I have seen, the

rewards are high and the costs are low in their marriage. They offer each other a

comfort and companionship that has grown from their similar ideas of what their

relationship should be.

Its possible though that when they dont measure up to their ideal love story,

that arguments result. Their democratic and gardening story results in dying plants

when untendered to. Taylor mentioned both she and Billy need to physically separate

after an argument. They often go to bed angry. It's supposed to be a "No, No", but it

seems to work for us. We need that cooling off period, she said. I have known Taylor

and Billy to get into small arguments where bickering is often involved. While I have

witnessed complaining, I have never seen them critique the others personality or

character, which according to John Gottmans Love Lab, is a predictor of divorce.

However, I have seen both become defensive at times when each believes he or she is

the victim of the argument. And yet, these spurts of criticism and defensiveness are

rooted in trust. Without protective factors such as a similar story, a child, and a high

level of education (Masters degree) and a fundamental trust, these arguments might

have eventually led to divorce. Though they do need a cooling off period, Taylor said

that Billy needs talk it out resulting in better communication.

Communication then was key when their daughter, Miranda, was born. Taylor

notes, In the beginning it was a lot of work given that I traveled 50% of the time for my

career. We hired a live-in nanny/housekeeper and Billy worked from home. Because

they were financially able, hiring a nanny may have removed possible stressors that a

child can bring. It also allowed them to spend their free time together. This aligns with the

family systems theory. It was no longer just about Taylor and Billy, but rather their

relationship adapted around their baby, We spent all our free time together and took her

everywhere with us. Mirandas needs reorganized their relationship. Taylor told me that

Miranda made their marriage better as they now shared this common responsibility.

Billy said, It has made the union less self-centered, more about medium and long-term

goals and challenges. As we have learned, roles change when a baby comes along.

Taylor was no longer just a wife and Billy was no longer just a husband. They were a

team, a union, which contributed to the success of their marriage during this critical time

after having a child.

Taylor described herself and Billy as old world. Technology was not a factor for

almost the entirely of their relationship. The way they dated was uniform. Technology

though as we know has changed the dating landscape. We have the option to connect
with people we never have in the past. With the rise in representation of people of

different sexualities, or formerly marginalized sexualities, there is a greater need to

define romantic relationships. My roommate Ellie is gay and although she is out to her

friends, she still hasnt told her parents. She met her current girlfriend, Chelsi, at a bar in

New York when Chelsi was visiting for a weekend from Los Angeles. They spent two

days together before she went back to her hometown in the opposite side of the country.

Unlike Taylor and Billy who knew they were exclusive, Ellie was unsure of where she

stood with Chelsi. Was this a hookup or something more? Technology allowed for long

distance. Ellie was able to keep in touch, so much that when they reunited during the

summer they decided to date one another. Ellie and Chelsi have been together for six

months now and though they talk and joke about kids, Ive heard little about marriage.

Ellie told me marriage occupies a negligible portion in [her] comprehensive thoughts

towards relationships and love. It's possible for her to have a long-term exclusive

relationship without marriage. Although DOMA has given her the option to marry, both

she and Chelsi have not found the rights time, or the right words to tell their parents

about one another, which adds a layer of confusion. The idea of commitment is there-

she wants compatibility, to share a life with someone she loves, yet she is unsure of how

to define it.

By some standards, the fact that Ellie is gay would instantly remove her from an

institutional marriage that can easily be defined. However, it came as a surprise when

Ellie told me she would strongly consider marriage if she had kids. I would want my

children to have married parents just because logistically, a married status would cut

down childcare costs and I would want to give my kids the assurance that their parents
would stay together forever and marriage as a symbol does that. And I do want children.

I am sure of that. Ellie views are unexpectedly institutional; she is willing to put her

children first. Ellie wants the financial benefits of marriage and kids. This may stem from

the fact that although Ellies parents are still married, their marriage, by her terms, is

loveless. My parents are not in love and that is something I came to accept as a

teenager. They were selfless in choosing to stay together so that neither my sister or I

would need to relocate or experience a significant shift in the family dynamics. Ellies

parents choice to stay together for the benefit of their children follows the institutional

view of marriage and supports clinical psychologist Judith Wallersteins view that parents

should stay in the marriage if its tolerable.

Chelsi, a twenty-six year old Peruvian, has been a child of divorce since her

early teenage years. When I asked Chelsi about her parents marriage she described it

as a disaster: chronic distrust, silence, infidelity and lies. The real cause of the actual

divorce was infidelity, one of the most common and consistent precipitants of divorce.

Chelsis father cheated on her mother and they separated soon afterwards. Her parents

spilt custody; Chelsi was uprooted from her life in Peru and she and her sister moved to

California with her mother while her brother stayed in Peru with their father. Although

Chelsis mother met her new husband within a year of her divorce, she had a difficult

time uncoupling from Chelsis father.

When I asked Chelsi how her parents divorce affected her, she said she learned

to dispel the childhood illusion that human beings are perfect very early on. I learned

that anything, no matter how seemingly solid it appears, can turn on its head overnight.

This early lack of trust puts Chelsi at a greater chance for greater relationship problems
and at a greater risk of divorce. Chelsi told that for her, its both costly and pitiful to

remember childhood. Chelsis safe based crumbled. As a result she became angry

with both parents. She blamed her father for the infidelity and her mother for not being

stronger. Chelsis mother was not able to neutralize it as her parenting became

diminished. She leaned on Chelsi for support. Although its been fifteen years since

her parents divorce, Chelsi is still clearly deeply affected. Chelsis experience with her

parents divorce echoes Wallersteins findings that divorce is a long lasting

developmental disruption.

It was unexpected then when Chelsi told me she would like to marry. I think

marriage is founded on an idealist treatment of permanence. Thats silly and archaic.

Still, Ill likely marry in my early 30s because Im romantic despite my best efforts. As a

child of divorce I had expected Chelsi to be much more wary of marriage. And yet,

much like the companionate view of marriage, she seeks love, a partner to share her

life. This idea is surprisingly similar to Taylor and Billys reason for marriage.

It may be then that my generation does want to get married after all. Even Ellie

and Chelsi who dont see marriage as essential hold a somewhat institutional and

companionate view of it. Marriage is separate from love, but it doesnt have to be.

Marriage is entered with a number of expectations for personal fulfillment. Alternatives

have made is so that we want to be certain. It may be the only certain thing in a modern

romantic relationship. We have learned that words and language play a key role in

communication. By not having the words to define current romantic relationships, our

generation has lost our footing. Until we can find the right words, we may face a bigger

loss.