Divorces in The Us Society

Marriage provides couples with opportunities to share their experiences, raise families together, and officially formalize their romantic relationships and loyal commitments with the ceremonial and legal status of marriage. Although some couples can develop and maintain healthy and extensive marriages, many couples experience complicated problems that require the spouses to curtail the marriages and receive divorces. Because the United States has experienced relatively high divorce rates in the recent decades, many marital and sociological scholars have attempted to analyze the divorce statistics and determine the various causes that facilitate the high divorce rates in the US. Primary social and domestic factors that cause high divorce rates include the social conflict problems of severe financial struggles, structural functionalism changes regarding the institution of marriage, and symbolic interactive perspective issues regarding the modern meanings of romantic love and the western implications of marriage.

The divorce rates in the US have remained dramatically and disproportionately high in the last several decades. The exact number of divorces can be difficult to ascertain because in the 1990s the federal government reduced the amount of funds available for states to calculate divorce totals, the budgetary limitations impair the ability of state and county governments to accumulate accurate and comprehensive numbers, and the inadequate records prevents the US from determining specific numbers. However, many governmental and educational research organizations have conducted thorough research to determine the most reliably accurate divorce rates in the US and have established that the current divorce rate is approximately 50 percent. As a result, the research indicates that about half of all marriages are ending in divorce (Amato, 2011). Researchers have also compounded and analyzed data based on whether the divorced couple constitutes a first or subsequent marriage. Many reports assert that 45-50 percent of first marriages, 60-67 percent of second marriages, and 70-73 percent of third marriages end in divorce. Thus, the exact divorce totals can be difficult to determine, most governmental and educational researchers contend that 50 percent of marriages end in divorce, and this trend is projected to continue in the following years.

Divorces and broken families generate a substantial impact on the families involved and on the entire society. An abundance of research has demonstrated that divorce can be very detrimental for the children of the divorced parents. Although appropriate strategies of the parents and beneficial coping mechanisms from communities can help children overcome the challenges that accompany broken homes, many children experience severe difficulties attempting to adjust to the social and domestic conflicts that arise from the divorces of their parents. For instance, research indicates that the children of divorced parents are consistently confronted with social problems, trust deficiencies, and complex confusion from witnessing the disruption of their previously unified and cohesive family. Many children also experience resentful hostility, intense anxiety, and negative perceptions of the world because of the stressful and unstable living arrangements that are facilitated by divorced parents and broken homes (Amato, 2011). However, the research studies also indicate that divorce can be extremely detrimental to the wellbeing of the separated couples. The divorce proceedings bombard the couples with an excessive amount of stress as they must fulfill the arduous legal, domestic, and bureaucratic obligations that accompany finalizing the divorce and implementing new living arrangements. Studies also demonstrate that the economic stability and income levels of the former spouses substantially decline after receiving a divorce. Many possible factors can cause the decreased income of divorced couples, including the exorbitant costs of the legal procedures, increased taxes for single individuals, alimony or child-support payments, the inability to share expenses, and the reduced professional productivity caused by the distracting and time-consuming divorce process. As a result, the studies indicate that after a divorce the standard of living for men declines by approximately 10 percent, the standard of living for the women declines by about 30 percent, and both spouses experience significant reductions in their income levels and financial stability after the divorce (Zagorsky, 2005). Additionally, the high divorce rates also perpetuate problems that confront the entire US culture, for the legal expenses and income reductions experienced by divorced couples often requires governmental institutions to provide assistance with taxpayer money. Therefore, divorce facilitates a pivotal impact by exposing the children to many psychological and domestic conflicts, confronting the divorced spouses with financial and living standard declines, and by requiring the US to utilize resources to fulfill the divorce procedures and compensate for struggling single parents.

Many causes diminish the quality of relationships and encourage couples to obtain divorces. Specific causes of divorces can be difficult to identify because typically multiple factors combine to exasperate marital strife and each couple experiences different reasons for the divorce. However, researchers have compiled data to determine that the most consistent factors that disrupt marital harmony and instigate divorces include money, infidelity, frequent arguing, getting married too young, a lack of preparation, and a lack of commitment (Hawkins, n.d.). Thus, many different reasons can impair the quality of a relationship and facilitate the fulfillment of a divorce, each couple generally features different reasons or combinational factors that caused the divorce, and numerous researchers have attempted to determine the complex cultural and domestic problems that stimulate the relatively high divorce rates in the United States.

The social conflict theory helps to explain the important financial struggles that are stimulating the relatively high divorce rates of the US. The social conflict theory was generated by Karl Marx and then elaborated upon by many supporters in the previous century. Because the conditions of life and the struggle for survival can be very difficult, individuals must often compete for resources, a minimal scarcity of available resources intensifies the competition, and many conflicts derive from this challenging struggle for money and power. The competition in turn perpetuates significant conflicts, for many societies including the US experience a problem in which a small portion of individuals possess the overwhelming majority of the national wealth while many other families and communities suffer from a drastic lack of resources. This economic inequality magnifies the struggle that many individuals and families must overcome when attempting to acquire the minimal amount of resources that are available for the middle and lower classes. As a result, the ruthless and imbalanced competition for resources stimulates several cultural conflicts, including economic inequality, widespread poverty, class struggles, and excessive crime rates (Mooney, 2007). Thus, the social conflict theory elaborates on the need for individuals to compete for resources, dramatic economic inequalities provides the upper class with an abundance of power and resources while the lower classes must experience detrimental financial and social struggles, and the competition and inequality causes a contentious divisiveness and hostile animosity to persist throughout society.

The social conflict articulated by Marx and his followers yields a substantial impact on the high divorce rates of the US. Many comprehensive research studies demonstrate that financial struggles and economic problems are the leading cause of divorce and the primary reason why marital relationships fail. Because the middle and lower classes suffer from a scarcity of available resources, many spouses struggle to maintain financial stability, the economic difficulties stimulate intense anxieties, and the ensuing friction disrupts the cohesive solidarity of the relationship. For instance, a married couple with vast amounts of wealth does not experience a need to budget their money carefully, scrutinize every expenditure, or engage in contentious arguments regarding how to most effectively allocate the money. In contrast, married couples that experience severe financial difficulties often must make complex decisions of how to budget their limited amount of funds, the economic struggles can destabilize the household and instigate disagreements regarding which expenditures to fulfill, and these conflicts can deteriorate the quality of the relationship and impel the couples to eventually receive a divorce (Rampell, 2009). Because the majority of families in the US experience financial struggles, the social conflict theory helps explain why money reflects the most common reason for divorce and why the divorce rates in the US remain at such a high level. Thus, the divorce rates of modern society are substantially amplified by economic issues, many marital relationships falter due to financial disputes, and this factor of divorce is generated from the glaringly disproportionate income inequality problems confronting the country.

The structural functionalism theory also influences the divorce rates of modern society. The structural functionalism theory provides a macro-view of society as a large and complex structure, multiple parts operate and fulfill important responsibilities to maintain the stability of the structure, and numerous social institutions and professional industries must function effectively and cooperate cohesively to establish a strong society. Many intellectual scholars helped to develop and elaborate on the concept of structural functionalism, including Herbert Spencer, August Comte and Talcott Parsons. Additionally, many different aspects and institutions of a culture represent the parts that are required to efficaciously maintain the stability of the culture. For example, important institutions include the educational, infrastructural, recreational, professional, social, and political systems of a society (Subedi, n.d.). Thus, society is perceived as a large structure consisting of an abundance of interrelated and correlating parts, the different institutions of a society represent these essential parts, and the parts all must work effectively to compliment eachother and establish a healthy and stable society.

Structural functionalism yields a diverse range of influences on the realities of divorce in modern society. Supporters of the theory argue that the divorce rates are facilitated by impediments and problems impairing the institution of marriage in the country. In the 1960s and 1970s, a pivotal cultural shift featured changing attitudes regarding sexuality and marriage, for women were able to achieve liberation, assert more control regarding their domestic and professional lives, and actively formulate decisions regarding marriage and divorce. A more tolerant value of sexual promiscuity also shifted the attitudes towards marriage and increased the propensity for couples to receive divorces. Additionally, a significant cultural shift related to the perceptions of divorce permeating through society. Whereas divorce was previously stigmatized as a drastic failure and a detrimental deficiency for the former spouses, the 1960s and 1970s experienced a cultural shift in which divorces became must more acceptable, became viewed as a liberating solution to relationship problems, and the increased frequency of divorces further magnified the growing tolerance and acceptance of divorce throughout society (Thornton, 1985). As a result, structural functionalists contend that the divorce rates have been stimulated by failures regarding the impaired institution of marriage because sexual promiscuity, female liberation, and the growing acceptance of divorce without stigmatization increased the number of couples who were willing to attain divorces.

However, structural functionalists would also emphasize how the domestic structure of the individual marriages become dilapidated and crumble. For instance, marriage can be viewed as a large structure or society, the family members and their given responsibilities are the parts that maintain the structural whole of the marriage, and the structure becomes destabilized when the parts fail to cooperate effectively and when constant problems disconnect the cohesive unity of the relationship. Additionally, structural functionalists often contend that the high divorce rates are detrimental to society. Because marriage is perceived as an essential institution, functionalists argue that having a population of married parents and strong domestic households maximizes the economic and professional stability of society, whereas broken homes with divorced parents in contrast destabilize the structure of society. For instance, divorces impair society due to the unhealthy domestic situations, the burdens placed on the parents, and the psychological and social challenges inflicted upon the children (Thornton, 1985). Thus, structural functionalism impacts the divorce rates in modern society because cultural shifts have damaged the institution of marriage, rendered divorce more socially acceptable, and the high divorce rates are harmful to the institution of marriage and to the overall stability of society.

The symbolic interaction perspective theory also influences the divorce rates of the US. The symbolic interactive perspective theory asserts that cultures determine the values, customs, and meanings that are maintained by the people and the culture. For instance, institutions and concepts initially have no meaning, each culture is capable of determining the values and definitions that accompany the institutions, and then citizens must conform to society by accepting the symbolic meanings and by adopting the defined values that have been established by the culture. Many philosophers and sociologists have perceived society with the micro-sociological perspective of symbolic interactions, including Charles Cooley, George Herbert Mead, Erving Goffman and George Simmel. These philosophers and the many supporters of the theory contend that the definitions and meanings that societies apply to certain situations and institutions impact the behavioral patterns of individuals and groups substantially more than the actual reality or implications of the situations (Mooney, 2007). Therefore, each culture can determine which values to appreciate and which behavioral customs to display, citizens generally must also adopt the definitions and meanings determined by the culture, and these symbolic interactions of society have a significant impact on the decisions and actions of individuals.

The divorce rate of modern society is substantially impacted by the symbolic interactionist perspective theory. Marriage is not a creation of nature or an original aspect of the human species, but in contrast marriage is an artificial construct established by societies to maintain order among the population. Whereas many cultures throughout history and around the world perceive marriage as a social and economic arrangement, the romanticized attitudes of the US and other western societies have caused the modern societies to define marriage as an institution of love in which the marriage is symbolic of the romantic love and intimate companionship of the couples. However, when the initial excitement of a new relationship fades and the couple experiences miscommunication problems that diminish the unbridled concept of romantic love, so too the spouses believe that the lack of love renders the marriage as inappropriate and the couple gets a divorce rather than overcoming the challenges. As a result, research indicates that lack of romantic love, frequent arguing, and lack of compatibility are among the leading causes of divorce (Witt, n.d.). Symbolic interactionists also emphasize the manner in which husbands and wives have been assigned symbolic roles by society, spouses are often unable to accommodate the expectations of those roles, and this too can impair the relationship and instigate a divorce. Additionally, the cultural shift regarding the meaning of divorce has also influenced the current rates. Whereas the US previously stigmatized divorce as a failure, in the recent decades the symbolic meaning of divorce has become much more favorable and tolerant, the more positive connotations associated with divorce makes the process more reasonable than in previous centuries, and this increases the willingness of spouses to receive divorces (Witt, n.d.). Thus, symbolic interactionists maintain that the divorce rates of modern society soared to high levels because the definition of marriage as being designated for unbridled love is impractical, the many roles ascribed to husbands and wives are unrealistic, and the frequent disagreements and consistent communication problems exasperate marital tensions and increase the divorce rates of society.

Although sustaining a marriage can be a complicated and difficult challenge, many compatible spouses enjoy sharing their life experiences with eachother and raising a family together throughout their entire lives. However, couples that are not conducive for eachother have a right to receive a divorce rather than subject eachother and their children to the detrimental circumstances and painful conditions that accompany unhappy marriages. Because the divorce rate of approximately 50 percent is excessive and harmful to the country, the US society can help reduce and minimize the number of couples who receive divorces by resolving the many factors that facilitate the high divorce rates among the population. The divorce rates of modern society are often exasperated by the social conflict theory regarding the economic inequality and financial struggles that confront many couples, the structural functionalism theory pertaining to the institutional failures of marriage, and the symbolic interaction perspective theory regarding the unrealistic meanings and detrimental values that the US has attached to the concepts of marriage and domestic life.

Works Cited

1. Amato, P. R. (2011). Divorce in the United States: Changes and consequences. Annual Review of Sociology, 37, 125-146.
2. Hawkins, A. J. (n.d.). The seven principles for making marriage work: A practical guide from the country's foremost relationship expert. Harmony.
3. Mooney, L. A. (2007). Theories of deviance (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
4. Rampell, C. (2009). The new economics of marriage: The rise of wives. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/06/magazine/06marriage-t.html
5. Subedi, B. P. (n.d.). Structural functionalism. Sociology Group. Retrieved from https://www.sociologygroup.com/structural-functionalism/
6. Thornton, A. (1985). Changing attitudes toward family issues in the United States. Journal of Marriage and Family, 47(4), 873-882.
7. Zagorsky, J. L. (2005). Marriage and divorce's impact on wealth. Journal of Sociology, 41(4), 406-424.
8. Cooley, C. H. (1902). Human nature and the social order. Charles Scribner's Sons.
9. Witt, J. (n.d.). The symbolic interactionist perspective and family studies. Sociology Group. Retrieved from https://www.sociologygroup.com/the-symbolic-interactionist-perspective-and-family-studies/
10. Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Prentice-Hall.