Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T20:50:05.286Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Divorce and Union Dissolution: Reverberations over Three Generations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2010

Ingrid Arnet Connidis
Ingrid Arnet Connidis*
Affiliation:
University of Western Ontario
*
Requests for offprints should be sent to: / Les demandes de tirés-à-part doivent être adressées à : Ingrid Arnet Connidis, Ph.D., Department of Sociology, University of Western Ontario, London, ON N6A 5C2, Tel.: (519) 661-3691, Fax: (519) 661-3200. (connidis@uwo.ca)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

High divorce rates over the past 40 years have affected multiple generations and have long-term consequences for family relationships. This article applies a life course perspective as it explores the reverberation of relationship dissolution beyond the nuclear family. Qualitative data from a study involving 86 adults from 10 three-generation families illustrate the extensive reach of divorce across time and generations. An intensive analysis of two families reveals six key areas of negotiation following divorce: relationship dissolution itself; balancing work and family obligations; inlaw ties; parent-child ties; sibling ties; and intimate relationships. Multiple voices from three generations demonstrate the complexity of family relationships over time and the reverberation of individual life course transitions throughout family networks. Applying the concept of ambivalence highlights variations among social groups in the ongoing renegotiation of relationships and situations that follows the dissolution of long-term unions.

Résumé

Le nombre élevé de divorces enregistré depuis 40 ans affecte plusieurs générations et a des répercussions durables sur les relations familiales. Cet article examine la question sous l'angle du cycle de vie et étudie les retombées de la dissolution des relations au-delà de la famille nucléaire. Les données qualitatives tirées d'une enquête menée auprès de 86 adultes (issus de 10 familles comptant trois générations) illustrent l'impact profond qu'a le divorce – dans le temps et à travers les générations. L'analyse approfondie de deux familles permet de dégager six secteurs clés de négociation après un divorce : dissolution des relations ; conciliation des obligations professionnelles et familiales ; liens avec la belle-famille ; liens entre parents et enfants ; liens entre frères et soeurs ; et relations intimes. Les nombreux témoignages recueillis auprès de membres des trois générations révèlent que les relations familiales restent longtemps complexes et que les étapes qui marquent la vie de chacun se répercutent à travers tout le réseau familial. L'application du concept d'ambivalence met en lumière les différences existant entre les groupes sociaux face à la renégociation permanente des relations et à la dissolution des unions durables.

Keywords

divorceintergenerational relationsambivalencelife coursesiblingsagingdivorcerelations intergénérationnellesambivalenceparcours de viefratrievieillissement
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , Winter/Hiver 2003 , pp. 353 - 368
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*The author thanks the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for funding the research project from which the data are drawn and Julie McMullin for helpful suggestions and feedback.

References

Allan, G. (1977). Sibling solidarity. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 39, 177–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ambert, A.-M. (1989). Ex-spouses and new spouses: A study of relationships. Greenwich, CT: Jai Press.Google Scholar
Ambert, A.-M. (2002). Divorce: Facts, causes and consequences (rev. ed.). Retrieved 19 September 2003 from the Vanier Institute of the Family Web site: http://www.vifamily.ca/library/cft/divorce.html.Google Scholar
Amato, P.R. (1996). Explaining the intergenerational transmission of divorce. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 628–640.Google Scholar
Aquilino, W.S. (1999). Two views of one relationship: Comparing parents' and young adult children's reports of the quality of intergenerational relations. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 858–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arditti, J.A. (1999). Rethinking relationships between divorced mothers and their children: Capitalizing on family strengths. Family Relations, 48(2), 109–119.Google Scholar
Booth, A., & Amato, P.R. (2001). Parental predivorce relations and offspring postdivorce well-being. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 197–212.Google Scholar
Cherlin, A. (1992). Marriage, divorce, remarriage (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Connidis, I.A. (1983). Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods in survey research on aging: An assessment. Qualitative Sociology, 6, 334–352.Google Scholar
Connidis, I.A. (1992). Life transitions and the adult sibling tie: A qualitative study. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 972–982.Google Scholar
Connidis, I.A. (2001). Family ties and aging. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Connidis, I.A. (2003). Bringing outsiders in: Gay and lesbian family ties over the life course. In Arber, S., Davidson, K., & Ginn, J. (Eds.), Gender and aging: Changing roles and relationships. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Connidis, I.A. (in press). Sibling ties across time: The middle and later years. In Johnson, M. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of age and ageing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Connidis, I.A., & McMullin, J.A. (2002a). Ambivalence, family ties and doing sociology. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 64, 594–601.Google Scholar
Connidis, I.A., & McMullin, J.A. (2002b). Sociological ambivalence and family ties: A critical perspective. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 64, 558–567.Google Scholar
Cooney, T.M. (1994). Young adults' relations with parents: The influence of recent parental divorce. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56, 45–56.Google Scholar
Downs, K.J.M., Coleman, M., & Ganong, L. (2000). Divorced families over the life course. In Price, S., McHenry, P.C. & Murphy, M.J. (Eds.), Families across time: A life course perspective (pp. 24–36). Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing.Google Scholar
Elder, G.H. Jr. (1994). Time, human agency, and social change: Perspectives on the life course. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57, 4–15.Google Scholar
Elder, G.H. Jr. (1997). Lives and social change. In Heinz, W.R. (Ed.), Theoretical advances in life course research (2nd ed., pp. 49–73). Weinheim, Germany: Deutscher Studien Verlag.Google Scholar
Elder, G.H. Jr., & Kirkpatrick Johnson, M. (2003). The life course and aging: Challenges, lessons, and new directions. In Settersten, R.A. Jr. (Ed.), Invitation to the life course: Toward new understandings of later life (pp. 49–81). Amityville, NY: Baywood.Google Scholar
Finch, J. (1989). Family obligations and social change. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Finch, J., & Mason, J. (1990). Divorce, remarriage, and family obligations. The Sociological Review, 38, 219–246.Google Scholar
Fox, B. (2001). Reproducing difference: Changes in the lives of partners becoming parents. In Fox, B.J. (Ed.), Family patterns, gender relations (pp. 287–302). Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fox, G.L., & Kelly, R.F. (1995). Determinants of child custody arrangements at divorce. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 693–708.Google Scholar
George, L.K. (1993). Sociological perspectives on life transitions. Annual Review of Sociology, 19, 353–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldsmith, J. (1982). The postdivorce family system. In Walsh, F. (Ed.), Normal family processes (pp. 297–330). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Hagestad, G.O. (1990). Social perspectives on the life course. In Binstock, R.H. & George, L.K. (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences (3rd ed., pp. 151–168). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hoffman, C.D., & Ledford, D.K. (1995). Adult children of divorce: Relationships with their mothers and fathers prior to, following parental separation, and currently. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 24(3–5), 41–57.Google Scholar
Holden, K.C., & Kuo, H.D. (1996). Complex marital histories and economic well-being: The continuing legacy of divorce and widowhood as the HRS Cohort approaches retirement. The Gerontologist, 36, 383–390.Google Scholar
Johnson, C.L. (1988). Ex-familia: Grandparents, parents, and children adjust to divorce. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Kaufman, G., & Uhlenberg, P. (1998). Effects of life course transitions on the quality of relationships between adult children and their parents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 924–938.Google Scholar
King, V. (2003). The legacy of a grandparent's divorce: Consequences for ties between grandparents and grandchildren. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 65, 170–183.Google Scholar
Luescher, K., & Pillemer, K. (1998). Intergenerational ambivalence: A new approach to the study of parent—child relations in later life. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 413–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLanahan, S., & Bumpass, L. (1988). Intergenerational consequences of family disruption. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 130–52.Google Scholar
McMahon, M. (1995). Engendering motherhood: Identity and self-transformation. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Peters, A., & Liefbroer, A.C. (1997). Beyond marital status: Partner history and well-being in old age. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59, 687–699.Google Scholar
Riley, M.W., & Riley, J.W. Jr. (1998). Generational relations: A future perspective. In Hareven, T.K. (Ed.), Aging and intergenerational relations: Life-course and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 283–291). New York: Aldine De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ross, C.E., & Mirowsky, J. (1999). Parental divorce, life-course disruption, and adult depression. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 1034–1045.Google Scholar
Stewart, A.J., Copeland, A.P., Lane Chester, N., Malley, J.E., & Barenbaum, N.B. (1997). Separating together: How divorce transforms families. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Walker, A., Allen, K, & Connidis, I. (in press). Theorizing and studying sibling ties in adulthood. In Bengtson, V., Acock, A., Allen, K., Dilworth-Anderson, P., & Klein, D. (Eds.), Sourcebook for theories and methods in family structure. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Wolfinger, N.H. (2001). The effects of family structure of origin on offspring cohabitation duration. Sociological Inquiry, 71, 293–313.Google Scholar