Being with Others Forming Relationships in Young and Middle Adulthood Imagine yourself years from now, Your children are grown and have children and grandchildren of their own. In honor of your 80th birthday, they have all come together, along with your friends, to celebrate. Their present to you is a video made from hundreds of photographs and dozens of videos created over the decades of your life.As you watch it, you realize how lucky you've been to have so many wonderful people in your life. Your re- lationships have made your adult life fun and worthwhile,As you watch, you wonder what it must be like to go through life alone—no family, no friends (even on Facebook), no fol- lowers of your Twitter postings. You think of all the wonderful experiences you would have missed in early and middle adulthood—never knowing what friendship is all about, never be- ing in love, never dreaming about children and becoming a parent That is what welll explore in this chapter— the ways in which we share our lives with others. First, we consider what makes good friendships and love relationships, Because these relation- ships form the basis of our lifestyle, we examine +these lifestyle influences next In the third section, we consider what it is like to be a parent. Finally, we see what happens when marriages or part- nerships end. Throughout this chapter, the em- phasis is on aspects of relationships that nearly everyone experiences during young adulthood ILI Relationships 266 Friendships 366 Love Relationships 369 SPOTLIGHT ON RESEARCH: Pater anf Universal of Romantic Atachment coud the Wer 372 Violence in Relationships 274 112 Lifestyles 376 Singlehood 376 Cohabitation 377 Gay and Lesbian Couples 278 RAL PEOPLE: APPLYING HUMAN DEVELOPMENT Aavies Sry 378 Marriage 379 113 The Family Life Cycle 304 Deciding Whether to Have Crildren 384 “The Parental Role 285 114. Divorce and Remarriage 390 Divorce 390 WHAT DO YOUTHINE: Dees Mamioge Faction Wik? 392 Remarriage 294 Summary 398 Key Terme 397 usand middle age. In Chapter 12, we examine aspects of rela- tionships specific to middle-aged adults; in Chapter 14, we do the same for relationships in later life. TIL Relationships LEARNING OBJECTIVES + What ypes of friendships do adults have? How do adult + What i the nature of abuse in some relationshios? ‘fiencships develop! + What i love! How does it begin? How does it develop ‘through aduthood? Jamel ane Deb, bath 25, have heen maclyin love since they mat ct @ party about « month age, They spend os much time together os possible and pledge that they wil stoy together ferever Deb finds herself daydreaming about Jara at work and con't wot go over to his partment. She warts te move in, but her coworkers el er to slow do, ‘You know what Jamal and Deb are going through. Each of us wants to be wanted by someone else. What would your life be like if you had no one to share it with? There would be no one to go shopping with or hang out with, no one to talk to on the phone, no one to cuddle clase to while watching the sunset ata mountain lake, Although there are times when being alone is desirable, for the most part, we ate social creatures, We need people. Without friends and lovers, life would be lonely. In the next sections, we explore both life-enhancing and lifestiminishing relation: ships. We consider friendships, what happens when love enters the picture, and how people find mates. Unfortunately, some relationships turn violent; well also examine the factors underlying aggressive behaviors between partners Friendships What is an adult friend? Someone who is there when you need to share? Someone not afraid to tell you the truth? Someone to have fun with? Friends, of course, are all of these things and more. Researchers define friendship as a mutual relationship in which those involved influence one another's behaviors and beliefs, and they define friendship quality as the satisfaction derived from the relationship (Blieszner & Roberto, 2012; Flynn, 2007}, ‘The role and influence of friends for young adults is of major importance from the late teens to the mid-wenties (Arnett, 2012, 2013) and continues to be a source of support throughout adulthood. Friendships are based predominantly on feelings and are grounded in reciprocity and choice. Friendships are different from love re- Iationships in that they ate less emotionally intense and usually do not involve sex (Blieszner & Roberto, 2012) Having good friendships helps boost self-esteem (Bagwell tal, 2005) and happiness (Demir, 2010). They also help us become socialized into new roles throughout adulthood. Friendship in Adulthood From a developmental perspective, adult friendships can be viewed as having iden- tifiable stages (Levinger, 1980, 1983): Acquaintanceship, Buildup, Continuation, BM 3660 | PART THRE: YOUNG AND MIDDLE ADULTHOODDeterioration, and Ending. This ABCDE model describes not only the stages of, friendships but also the processes by which they change. For example, whether a friendship will develop from Acquaintanceship to Buildup depends on several factors that include the basis of the attraction, what each person knows about the other, how good the communication is between the partners, and the perceived importance of the friendship. Although many friendships reach the Deterioration, stage, whether a friendship ultimately ends depends on the availability of alter native relationships, If new potential friends appear, old friendships may end; if not, they may continue even though they may na longer be considered important by either person. Longitudinal research shows how friendships change across adult- hood, sometimes in ways that are predictable and sometimes not. For ex- ample, as you probably have experienced, life transitions (eg, going away to college, getting married) usually result in fewer friends and less con- tact with the friends you keep (Blieszner & Roberto, 2012). People tend to have more friends and acquaintances during young adulthood than at any. subsequent period (Sherman, de Vries, & Lansford, 2000). Friendships are Important throughout adulthood, in part because a person's life satisfac- sion is strongly related to the quantity and quality of contacts with friends College students who have strong friendship networks adjust betler to stressful life events whether those networks are face-to-face (eg, Brissette, Scheier, & Carver, 2002) or through online social networks (DeAndrea et al, 2012). ‘The importance of maintaining contacts with friends cuts across eth- nile lines as well. in addition, people who have friendships that cross ethnic groups or are diverse on other dimensions, such as religion or sexual orienta tion, have more positive attitudes toward people with different backgrounds (Aberson, Shoemaker, & Tomolill, 2004; Goldstein, 2013}. Thus, regardless of| one's background, friendships play a major role in determining how much a person enjoys life Researchers have long used three broad themes to explain the bases for adult friendships (de Vries, 1996): ‘The most frequently mentioned dimension represents the affective, or emotional, basis of friendship. This dimension refers to self-disclosure Desote concer soc nesworkng webster and expressions of intimacy, appreciation, affection, and support, all of which are 403 Facebook mve not recuced the csay based on trust, loyalty, and commitment, of Bendtips [A second theme reflects the shared, or communal, nature of friendship, in which friends participate in or support activities of mutual interest, “The third dimension represents sociability and compatibility; our friends keep us entertained and are sources of amuisement, fun, and recreation, ‘These themes are found in friendships among adults of all ages (Blieszner & Roberto, 2012). They characterize both traditional (e.g, face-to-face) and online (eg, Facebook) forms of friendships (Abbas, 2013). These three dimensions are fundamen: tal to understanding how friendships are used to explain how people derive happiness from friendships. The key is that when people believe that they matter to friend, they feel happy (Demir et al, 2013), But why does friendship have such positive benefits for us? Although scientists do not know for certain, they are gaining insights through neuroscience research. For example, Coan and colleagues (Beckes & Coan, 2013; Beckes, Coan, & Hasselmo, 2013) Coan, 2008) have found that being faced with threatening situations results in very different brain processing when faced alone or with a close friend. Specifically, neure- Imaging showed definitively that the parts of the brain that respond to threat operate ‘when facing threat alone but do not when facing the same threat with a close friend Itis becoming elear that elose friendship literally changes the way the brain functions, resulting in our perception of feeling safer and that the trials we face are more manage: able with friends than without thern, CHAPTER 11: BEING WITH OTHERS | 367 I‘The development of online social networks such as Facebook raised concerns among social commentators that adults’ social friendship networks would decline in quality because in-depth interactions would be replaced with quick e-mails or postings. Research shows that this concern has no basis. Wang and Wellman (2010) examined {friendship networks in adults aged 25 and 74. They documented that the quality of the friendship network was good overall, actually improving between 2002 and 2007. Most important, this improvernent was documented whether people were nonusers of the Internet or heavily virtual In fac, they found that heavy Internet users had the most friends, both online and offline. ‘These resulls were supported by a study in Australia of adults aged 21 10 57 (Young, 2013}, Facebook users were extremely positive about their online friendship activity However, they mentioned thatthe risk of “de-friending”is areal phenomenon In the case of online friendships, trust is an important factor because visual cues may not be present to verify the information being presented. Online environments are more conducive to people who are shy, allowing opportunities to meet others in an initially more anonymous setting in which social interaction and intimacy levels can be carefully controlled (Morahan-Martin & Schumacher, 2003). This relative anonym: ity provides a supportive context for the subsequent development of friendships on- line, Online connections can facilitate strong commitment between friends; research shows tat most adulls who have online, committed friendships report that they ean get stronger and that such friendships go through the same cycles as traditional face to-ace friendships (Johnson et al, 2003} ‘A special type of friendship exists with one’s siblings, who are the friends that people typically have the longest and that share the closest bonds; in addition, the Importance of these relationships varies with age (Carr & Moorman, 2011; Moor- man & Greenfield, 2010}. We will consider sibling relationships in more detail in Chapter 15, Men's, Women's, and Cross-Sex Friendships Men's and women's friendships tend to differ in adulthood, reflecting continuity in the learned behaviors from childhood (Blieszner & Roberto, 2012; Mehta & Strough, 2003}, Wornen tend to base their friendships on more intimate and emotional sharing and use friendship as a means to confide in others. For women, getting together with friends often takes the form af geting together to discuss personal matters. Confiding in others is a basis of women's friendships. In contrast, men tend to base friendships fon shared! activities or interests. They are more likely to go bowling or fishing orto talk sports with their friends. For men, friendships are often, but not always, less intimate (Greif, 2009), Although men often use shared activities rather than shared confidences as the basis for friendships, men do tend to have a small number of friends with whom they have a close, personal relationship and with whom they share intimate informa tion and feelings. ‘What about friendships between men and women? These friendships have a beneficial effect, especially for men (Piquet, 2007). Cross-sex friendships tend to help men have lower levels of dating anxiety and higher capacity for intimacys itis inter esting, however, that such benelils are not evident for women. These patterns hold across ethnic groups, too, But cross-sex friendships ean also prove troublesome as a result of misperceptions and pressures from third parties (e ., spouses/partners) and organizations (eg, companies may discourage such friendships} (Blieszner & Roberto, 2012; Mehta & Strough, 2003}. Misperception about one’s own or one’s partner's sexual attractiveness to others is common and can be the basis for relation: ship difficulties (Haselton & Galperin, 2013). Some research shows that men tend to overperceive and women tend to underperceive their friends’ sexual interest in them (Koenig, Kirkpatrick, & Ketelaar, 2007}, Maintaining cross-sex friendships once in- dividuals enter into exclusive dating relationships, marriage, ar committed relation- ships is very difficult, and it often results in one partner feeling jealous (Hasellon & Galperin, 2013), BE 358 | PART THREE: YOUNG AND MIDDLE ADULTHOODLove Relationships Love is one of those things everybody feels but nobody can define completely. (Test yourself: Can you explain fully what you mean when you look at someone special and say, "love you"?} One way researchers have tried to understand love is to think about what components are essential, In an interesting series of studies, Sternberg (2006) found that love has three basic components: (1) passion, an intense physiological desire for someone; (2} intimacy, the feeling that one can share all one’s thoughts and actions with another; and (3) commitment, the willingness to stay with a person through good and bad times. ideally, a true ove relationship has al three components; when couples have equivalent amounts of love and types of love, they tend to be happier. As we will see next, the balance among these components often shifts as time passes. Love through Adulthood The different combinations of love can be use to understand how relationships develop (Stemberg, 2006), Research shows thatthe de \elopment of roma rlaonsips is eompex process infenced byrcationship nehloo and tolscene (Cline van Dalen, = 2004) that ae played out in many contexts inching socal media {Schade et a 2013) tary a roman relationship passion sus tly high, wheveasnimacy and coramitment tend below. Ths infatuation: an intense, physically based reltionshipinwhichthe two a people havea high rk of maunderstanlng and jealousy. ded tne dies nea isbn ace and hookups and dating in young adulthood (Giordano et al, 2012}. But infatuation is shortlived. Whereas even the smallest touch, Physi atracton tenes to be high early is enough to drive each partner into wil, lustful ecstasy inthe beginning, with time, it ehnonsh. takes more and more effort to get the same level of feeling. As passion fades, either a relationship acquires emotional intimacy or itis likely to end, Trust, honesty, openness, and acceptance must be a par of any strong relationship; when they are present, roman- tic ove develops. Although it may not be the stuff of romance novels or films, this pattern is a good ing, Research shows that people who select a partaer for 2 more permanent rel tionship (eg, marriage} during the height of infatuation are likely to support the idea that “love is blind, those couples are more likely to divorce (Hansen, 2006). But ifthe couple gives their relationship more time and works at it, they may become coramit- ted to each other. By spending much of thei time together, making decisions together, caring for each other, sharing possessions, and developing ways to settle conflicts, hey increase the chances that their relationship will last, Such couples usually show ‘outward signs of commitment, stich as wearing a lover's ring, having children together, or simply sharing the mundane details of daily life, from making toast at breakfast to following before-bed rituals, Lemieux and Hale (2002) demonstrated that these developmental trends hold in romantically involved couples between 17 and 75 years of age. As the length of the re lationship increases, intimacy and passion decrease but commitment increases. How: cover, the ages of the couple may matter in terms of how quickly passion decreases; when both are emerging adults in college, some evidence indicates that passion levels, do not decline over their years in school (Toba, 2010}. Falling in Love Everybody wants to be loved by somebody, but having it happen is fraught with dif ficulties. In his book The Prophet, Kahlil Gibran points out that love is two-sided Just asittean give you great ecstasy, so can it cause you great pain. Yet most of us are willing to take the risk ‘As you may have experienced, taking the risk is fun (at times) and difficult (at other times}, Making a connection can be ritualized, as when people use pickup lines CHAPTER II: BEING WITH OTHERS | 269 IIsn abar or it can happen almost by accident, as when two people literally run into each other in a crowded corridor. The question that confronts us is “How do people fall in love?" Do birds ofa feather flock together? Or do opposites attract? assortative mating The best explanation ofthe process isthe theory of asortative mating, Which states theory stating that people find partners that people find partners based on their similarity to each other. Assortative rating based on ther similarity teach other occurs along many dimensions, inchuding education, religious beliefs, physical traits, age, socioeconomic status intelligence, and political ideology, among others (Schwartz, 2013). Such nonrandom mating occurs most often in Wester societies, which allows people to have more control over their own dating and paizing behaviors. Common activities are one basis for identifying potential mates. Except, that is, in speed dating situations, In that case, when people have very limited time to explore potentially com: ‘mon interests, it comes down to physical attractiveness (Luo & Zhang, 2009) People meet people in al sorts of places, both “real” and “virtual” Does that mat- ter in terms of whether they will form a couple? Kalmijn and Flap (2001) found that it did. In an unusually large study they showed that among 1,500 couples, meeting at school was most likely to result in the highest levels of homogamy—the degree to which people are similar. Some evidence also suggests that certain specialized social ‘media environments can foster homogamy by bringing together people with com. :mon interests (Schwartz, 2013}, Not surprisingly, the pool of available people to meet Js strongly shaped by the opportunities available, which in turn constrain the type of people one is likely to meet ‘Speed dating provides a way to meet several people in a short period of time. Speed dating is practiced most by young adults (Fein & Schneider, 2013). The rules governing partner selection during a speed dating session seem similar to those of traditional dating: Physically attractive people, outgoing and self-assured people, and moderately self-ocused people are selected more often, and their dates are rated as smoother (Eastwick, Sagal, & Finkel, 2010) ‘The explosion of online dating makes it possible for adults to meet, ir, date, and rate through virtual connections (Albright & Simmens, 2014; Fein & Schneider, 2013) But it isnot only the socially anxious who are meeting this way. Surveys indicate that rncarly 1 in every 5 couples in the United States meet online (compared with 1 in 10 in ‘Australia and 1 in 20 Spain and the United Kingdom; Dutton et al, 2009). Not surpris: ingly, people who meet online tend to be young and middle-aged adults, with a slightly stronger preference among middle-aged adults for online as opposed to speed dating, Re- search indicates that virtual dating sits offer both problems and possibilities, especially in terms ofthe accuracy of personal descriptions (Albright & Sirens, 2014}. In the online world, initial decisions whether to pursue a potential mate work similarly to those of the offline world. First impressions are driven mainly by the per ceived attractiveness ofthe person's photograph, whereas more deliberative decisions are influenced by perceived attractiveness as well as such self-described attributes as ambition (Sritharan etal, 2010). But this differs for men and women targets. A study of eye movements of people viewing Facebook profiles indicated that participants paid more attention to the physical appearance of female profile owners and tothe personal information of male profile owners (Seidman & Miller, 2013}. ‘One increasing trend among emerging adult is the hookup culture of casual sex of ten without even knowing the name of one's sexual partner (Garcia etal, 2013}. Research indicates that both men and women are interested in having hookup sex, but also prefer a more romantic relationship over the long run. However, the perception that there are no strings attached to hookup sex appear wrong, as nearly three-fourths of both men and ‘women eventually expressed some level of regret at having hookup sex. How do couple-forming behaviors compare cross-culturally? A few studies have cxamnined the factors that attract people to each other in different cultures. In one now classic study, Buss and a large team of researchers (1990) identified the effects of culture and gender on heterosexual mate preferences in 37 cultures worldwide. Men and women in each culture displayed unique orderings of their preferences concern: ing the ideal characteristics of a mate, When all of the orderings and preferences were compared, two main dimensions emerged. BEN 370 | PART THREE: YOUNG AND MIDDLE ADULTHOODIn the first main dimension, the characteristics of a desirable mate changed because of cultural values—that is, whether the respondents country has more traditional values or Western.industrial values. In traditional cultures, men place a high value on a woman's chas- tity, desire for home and children, and ability to be a good cook and housekeeper; women place a high value on a man being ambitious and industrious, being a good financial prospect, and holding fa- vorable social status. China, india, Iran, and Nigeria represent the traditional end of this dimension. In contrast, people in Western- industrial cultures value these qualities to a much lesser extent. The Netherlands, Great Britain, Finland, and Sweden represent this end of the dimension; people in these countries place more value on. Western ideals ‘The second main dimension reflects the relative importance of education, intel: ligence, and social refinement—as opposed to a pleasing disposition—in choosing 1a mate, For example, people in Spain, Colombia, and Greece highly value education, intelligence, and social refinement; in contrast, people in Indonesia place a greater ‘emphasis on having a pleasing disposition, Note that this dimension emphasizes the same traits for both men and women. Chastity proved to be the characteristic showing the most variability across cul tures, being highly desired in some cultures but mattering litle in others. It is inter esting that in their respective search for mates, men around the world value physical attractiveness in women, whereas women around the world look for men capable of being goad providers, But men and women around the world agree that love and ‘mutual altraction are most important, and nearly all cultures rate dependability, eme- sional stability, kindness, and understanding as important factors. Atraetion, it seems, hhas some characteristies that transcend culture Overall, Buss and his colleagues concluded that mate selection is a complex pro- cess no matter where you live. However, each culture has a describable set of high- priority traits that men and women look for in the perfect mate. The study also shows that socialization within a cullure plays a key role in being attractive to the opposite sex; characteristics that are highly desirable in one culture may not be so desirable in another. Im the Spotlight on Research feature, Schmitt and his team of colleagues (2004) hhad 17808 participants from 62 cultural regions complete the Relationship Ques- tonnaire (RQ), a self-report measure of adult romantic attachment. They showed that secure romantic attachment was the norm in nearly 80% of cultures and that “preoccupied” romantic attachment was particularly common in Bast Asian cultures. In general, what these large multicultural studies show is that there are global pat terns in mate selection and romantic relationships. The romantic attachment pro- files of individual nations were cortelated with sociocultural indicators in ways that supported evolutionary theories of romantic attachment and basic human mating strategies. ‘The growing popularity of online dating sites has also affected the role of cul- ture in dating and mate selection, For example, traditional Chinese culture emphae sizes the need to stay within one’s status (Xu, Ji, & Tung, 2000). However, research examining couples who met on the Baihe website (a Chinese online dating service) showed that similarities on many dimensions in addition ta social hierarchy are increasingly important (He et al, 2013}. Emotional investment in a romantic rela tionship also varies by culture (Schinitt et al, 2004). Specifically, across 48 different cultures globally, people from cultures that have good health care, education, and resources and that permit young adults to choose their own mates tend to develop more secure romantic attachments than do people from cultures that do not have these characteristics. ‘Cultural norms are sometimes highly resistant to change, Arranged marriages are a major way that some cultutes ensuze an appropriate match on key dimensions. For ‘example, loyalty of the individual to the family is a very important value in India; so “These Sgptn women 3e-orning radians cular ses, are mare ely tobe desree a6 CHAPTER 11: BEING WITH OTHERS | 371Spotlight ON RESEARCH. Who were the ivestigaors ad whet wos the Ai of he sty? One's atach-yent style may have amajr influence en how ene forms romantic relat onships. To test this hypethasis, David Schmit (Sehrntt et al, 2008) assem- ble a large international ream of researchers. How dl he investigators measure the topic ofnteres? Great care was taken to ensure ceuivalent translation of tre survey across ‘he 6 cultural repone inclucee, The evey was a two-dimenson,fourcategery mensure fault romantic attachment (the Reaton= ship Questionnaire) tat measured model of self snd others relive to eae other: cure romantic attachment (nh scores indicate posive madel of self and ethers), dsmising remanticatlacheant (nigh scores indicate» positive macel of ef and anegatve of others), presecuned romante attachment (high scores inccate aregatve model f self 2c 2 postive madel of others} and feat romantic attachment (nigh scores incicate negative model of self and other). An overall score of the model of ses computes by aed ing the sere ane demvsong scorer ane then subtractag the combnton of preeccusieg ane fearfulscore. The overall model ofethars scores computed by acding the seize anc preoccupied scores and then subtracting she ‘combination of dissing and earful scores In accton, thare ware measures of cae esteem, personaly vats, and seciaeutura corrals of romantic attachment (efi ity rate ational protilesafndvivalsm ver: sus collective) Who were te portant the sty? ‘total of 17804 people (2432 men anc 10.372 women) for 6 eulwralregons around ‘he world took part in the sty. Such hrge and dlverse sams are unusual in develop mental research, ‘What ws the design ofthe such? Data for ths crase-sacvonal nonexperimental study were gathered hy esearch teams each country, The prncpalresearchers asked the research colaborators te seminicters es Ale rinespage su-vey tothe participants hat took Asa showed the pattern of mee of self 20 minutes to complete skoreshigher than model a others scores Were dere ethical concems with the stud? What have the ivesUgotors concluded? Because the suty involved volunteer, thare Overall Schmit anc coleaquas concluded were no ethiel concerns, Howaver ancuring that athaugh he same sttachmant astern ‘hat all partepants rights were protected holds acrass mos: cukures, no ene pattern vas achalenge because ofthe number of hale across ll of thems East Asan cares in countres and caluresinvobes particular tenet fit a pattern in which people What were the resuts? The researchers __raport that others do not get 2s ematonally frst camenctratd thatthe measures ueec for close asthe rasponcet wouls le ane that adel sefand mocel af ates were vad respencents “int ificu 0 wust ethers or ser9ss cultural regions, which provides general te depend an ther support for the independence of measures Wihat converging endence would strengthen fix. they measure diferent thing). Spectic these conlson? Although 2s one of the raves showed that 9% ofthe cata roups best designed among large crss-cltural udec demonstrated secure romante atach= _stuces several adctional Ines of evidence rents but that North Amerian euures woule Aap boliter the conelsions. Mest ended tobe high on csmssive ane East Asan inportant. representative simples Fam the cares hig on areoce.aie romante attach= countries unéerstucy would provide more rmant. These patterns are shown in Figure Ill. accurate insights into seople's romantic Note tata he cuturalregons encent East attachment patterns Figure 11.1 In ths model of self ne model of others levels across on work regions. nite that arly in East ‘Asan catires were model of ethers scores sical hghe- than moc of self core. * odel af self ts cits lithe. Ly dos E 00 = u = “g @ £ Ea £ € 8 8 2 pag 5 bat rm sett 208 despite many changes in mate selection, about 95% of marriages in India are care- fully arranged to ensure that an appropriate mate is selected (Dommaraju, 2010). Simi larly, Islamic societies use matchmaking as a way to preserve family consistency and continuity and to ensure that couples follow the prohibition on premarital relation: ships between men and women (Adler, 2001). Matchmaking in these societies occurs through both family connections and personal advertisements in newspapers. To keep BN 372, | P87 THREE: YOUNG AND MIDDLE ADULTHOODup with the Internet age, Muslim matchmaking has gone online, too (Lo & Aziz, 2003}, increasing the pressure for the individuals in the couple to make their own decisions (Ahmad, 2012). As urbanization and globalization effects continue, pressures to move toward individ selection and cornmitment and away from traditional matchmaking THINK About It continues to increase in many societies (Abela & Walker, 2014) Whit are the efect of increasing ntractons among euburs on mat selection? Developmental Forces and Love Relationships As you no doubt know from your own experience, finding a suitable relationship is tough. Many things must work just right: timing, meeting the right person, luck, and effort are but a few of the factors that shape the course of a relationship. Centuries ‘of romance stories describe this magieal process and portray it as one of life's great mysteries From our discussion here, you know that who chooses whom {and whether the feelings wll be mutual} results from the interaction of developmental forces described in the biopsychosocial model presented in Chapter 1. Neuroscience research is also demysifying love relationships. Let's see how Love is one of three discret, interrelated emotion systems (the sex drive andl at- tachment are the other two; Fisher, 2006}, ‘The brain circuitry involved in romantic love, maternal love, and long-term attachment overlap (Stein & Vythilingum, 2005}, In terms of love, neurochemicals related to the amphetamines come into play eaely in the process, providing a biological explanation for the exhilaration of falling madly in love. Aron and colleagues (2005) reported that couples who were in the early stages ‘of romantic love showed high levels of activity in the dopamine system, which is in- volved in all of the basic biological drives. Once the relationship settles into winat some people might cal long-term commitment and tranquility, the brain processes switch rneurochemically o substances related to morphine, a poweeful narcotic, People with a predilection to fallin love also tend to show left hemisphere chernical dominance and several changes in neurochemical processing (Kurup & Kurup, 2003). ‘Additional research indicates that the hormone oxytocin may play an important, role in attachment, In men, it enhances theit partner’ attractiveness compared to ‘other females (Scheele et al, 2013); in women, it enhances their orgasms, among other things (Cacioppo & Cacioppo, 2013), which has earned it the nickname of the ‘cuddle hormone” (Lee etal, 2008). Love really does a number on your brain! ‘And that’s not all The interactions among psychological aspects, neurological aspects, and hormonal aspects of romantic love help explain why couples tend to have exclusive relationships with each other. For wornen (but not men), blood levels of serotonin increase during periods of romantic love (Langeslag, van der Veen, & Fekkes, 2012) In adltion, the stronger the romantic bond with their boyfriend, the less likely they are to be able to identify the body odor ofa different male friend (Lundstrom & Jones Physical aggression ——> Severe aggression ——> Murder lene Fusing Besing dent of level of severity, Overall, each year ling lapping ching Me ne sam Pes abet about 5 million women and 3 million men ex- perience partner-elated physical assaults and rape in the United States (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 20123); worldwide, between 10% and 69% of women report be ing physically assaulted or raped (World Health Organization, 2002}, The second interesting point, depicted in the table, is that the suspected underlying ‘causes of aggressive behaviors differ as the type of aggressive behaviors change (O'Leary, 1993}. Although anger and hostility in the perpetrator are associated with various forms of physical abuse, the exact nature of this relationship re mains elusive (Norlander & Eekhard, 2005). ‘As can be seen in the table, the number of suspected causes of aggressive behavior ine Newd to contelt) ‘Accept violence ar amean of cones] ———> Modeling of physical eggression —— > Abused child ————— Aggresive personaly ayes > ‘eohol abuse = Poor seltestean > CCntrbatng factor: jo steees and unemployment ‘Note: Ned ocotrl and oer variables onthe lf are asocated wth al forms of seztesson; acceptance of vekence and eter vatiables nthe nde are arvociated with ysl aggression severe aggression, and murder, etna disorders and the variables fon the righ ae ssnrated with severe aggression and mae “More eleva for ales tha for female. SOURCE: O Leary KD 1995, Though prychologial len: Personality ais personlty dix ‘order nd levels of violence In | Cells DK Lashes), Curent controversies on fry lence pp 7-30) BE 3740 | PAR 7 THREE: YOUNG AND MIDDLE ADULTHOOD creases asthe level of aggression increases. Thus, the causes of aggressive behavior become more ‘complex asthe evel of aggression worsens, Such differences in cause imply that the most effec- tive way to intervene with abuses i to approach each one inivicually andl not ty to apply a one siveitsall model (Butel & Carney, 2007)Men are also the victims of violence from intimate partners, a though at a rate about one-third that of women (Conradi 8: Geffner, 2003}, Studies in New Zealand and the United States revealed that both men and women showed similar patterns of holding tradi- ional gendered beliefs and lacking communication and anger man agement skills; however, intervention programs tend to focus on male perpetrators (Hines & Douglas, 2003; Robertson & Murach= ver, 2007). Research in Canacla showed that heterosexual couples reported more instances of violence than did gay or lesbian couples (Barrett & St. Pierre, 2013}. Culture is also an important contextual factor in understand: ing partner abuse. In particular, violence against wornen worldwide reflects cultural traditions, beliefs, and values of patriarchal societ- ies commonplace violent practices against women, which include sexual slavery, female genital cutting, inti- mate partner violence, and honor killing (Parrot & Curnmings, 2006) For example, cultures that emphasize honor, that portray females as passive (nurturing supporters of men's activities), and that empha- size loyalty and sacrifice for the family may contribute to tolerance of abuse, In addition, international data indicate that rates of abuse are higher in cultures that emphasize female purity, male status, and family honor. For example, a common cause of women’s raurders in Arab counties is brothers or other male relatives killing the viet because she violated the family's honor (Kulwicki, 2002) Intimate partner violence is prevalent in China (43% lifetime risk in one study) and has strong associations with male patriarchal values and conflict resolutions (Xu etal, 2005} ‘Alarmed by the seriousness of abuse, many comraunities have established shelters for battered women and theie children as well as programs that (reat abusive men. However, the legal system in many localities is still rot set up to deal with domestic violence; women in some locations cannot sue their husbands for assault, and restraining orders all too often offer little protection from additional violence, Much remains to be done to protect women and theit children from the fear and reality of continued abuse. any commanites have established soekars forwomen uno nave experencee sure 9 rehtionthps TEST YOURSELF II.1 Recall Interpret Friendships based on intimacy and emotional sharing are more characteristic of. ‘Why, according to Erikson, is intimacy (discussed in Chapter 8) a necessary prerequiste for adult relationships! What aspects of 2. Competition is a major part of most rendships among relationships discussed here support (0 refute) this view! aver lorlips nwtlehintaacy and paston are present POU bout commitments not are tees Based on Schmitt and coleagues’ (2004) research, what at- 4. Chastity is an important quality that men look for in a ‘tachment pattern would Korean women likely have regarding, potential female mate in caltures. romantic atachment 5._ Aggressive behavior that is based on abuse of power ‘Check our answers to he Recll Question at heen ofthe caster jealousy, orthe need to control s more likely to be displayed by. CHAPTER 11: BEING WITH OTHERS | 275 ITP 12 Lifestyles LEARNING OBJECTIVES + Why do some people decide to remain single, anc what are» What are gay and lesbian relatonships Ike? ‘these people Ike? + What is marriage lke through the course of adulthood? + What are the characteristics of cohabiting people? Kevin and Beth are on cloud nine, They got married one month ago and have recently re- ‘umed from ther honeymoon, Everyane who sees them can tll that they lave each other a great deal. They are highly compatble and have much in common, sharing most of their leisure activites. Kevin and Beth wonder what las ahead in their marrage, Developing relationships is only part of the picture in understanding how adults live their lives with other people, Putting relationships such as Kevin and Beth’s in context is important for us to understand how relationships come into existence and how they change over time. In the following sections, we explore relationship lifestyles: single hood, cohabitation, gay and lesbian couples, and marriage. Singlehood When Sharon graduated from college with a degree in accounting, she took a job at a consulting firm. For the first several years in her job, she spent more time traveling than she did at home, During this time, she hada seties of love relationships, but none resulted in commitment even though she had marziage as a goal. By the time she was der midsthiries, Susan had decided that she no longer wanted to get married. "Tm now a partner in my firm, T enjoy traveling, and I'm flexible in terms of moving if something better comes along,” she stated to her friend Michele. "But I do miss being with someone to share my day oto just hang around with” Like Susan, most men and women during early adulthood are single—defined 5 not living with an intimate partner Estimates are that approximately 80% of men and 70% of women between ages 20 and 24 are unmarried, with increasing numbers deciding to stay tha way (U.S. Census Bureau, 20133). ‘What's it ike to be single in the United States? It's tougher than you might think DePaulo 2014) points aut numerous steeotypes and biases against single people. Her research found that young adults characterized married people as caring, kind, and giving about 50% of the time compared with only 2% for single people. And single people receive less compensation at work than married people do, even when age and experience are equivalent. DePaulo also found that rental agents preferred married couples 60% of the time (Morris, Sinclar, & DePaulo, 2007). Can you think of reasons why people might hold these biases against single people? ‘Many women and men remain single as young adults to focus on establishing their careers rather than marriage or relationships, which most do later. Others report that they simply didnot meet “the right person” or prefer singlehood {Ibrahimn & Has san, 2003}. However, the pressue to marry is especialy strong for women; frequent questions such as “Any good prospects yet?” may leave women feeling conspicuous ox Jeft out as many of thee friends marry. Men tend to remain single longer in young adulthood because they tend to marry ata later age than women do (US. Census Bureau, 2013b). Fewer men than women remain unmarried throughout adulthood, though, mainly because men find partners more easily as they select from a larger age range of unmnatried women. Ethnic differences in singlehood reflect differences in age at marriage, as well as social factors. For example, nearly twice as many African Americans are single dur sng young adulthood as European Americans, and more are choosing to remain so 376 | PAR 7 THREE: YOUNG AND MIDDLE ADULTHOOD(US. Census Bureau, 2013. Singlehood is also increasing among Latinos, in part because the average age of Latinos in the United States is lower than that of other ethnic groups and in past because of poor economic opportunities for many Latinos (Lamanna, Riedmann, & Stewart, 2014), However, Latino men expect to marry (even if they do not) because it indieates achievernent. Globally, the meanings and implications of remaining single are often tied to strongly held cultural and religious beliefs, For example, Muslim women who remain single in Malaysia speak in terms of jadoh (the soul mate one finds through fate at a time appointed by God) as a reason; they believe that God sizaply has not decided to hhave them meet their mate at this time (Ibrahim & Hassan, 2009). But because the role ff Malaysian women is to marry, they also understand their marginalized position in society through their singlehood. In Hong Kong and Taiwan, for instance, the number of single women has increased steadily as educational levels have risen over the past several decades, resulting in significant postponement, and even avoidance of, mar sage (Yang & Yen, 2014). However, family systems in these cultures have not yet fully adapted to these changing lifestyle patterns, which will likely result in dramatically Tower fertility rates (Jones, 2010; Yang & Yen, 2014), ‘An important distinction is between adults who are temporarily single (i, those who aze single only until they find a suitable marriage partner) and those who choose {o remain single, Results from an in-depth interview study with neversnarried women tn their thirties revealed three distinct groups: some suffer with acute distress about being single and long to be married with children, others describe experiencing the emotional continuum of desiring to be married and desiring to remain single, and others say that they are quite happy with a healthy selfinage and high quality of life (Cole, 2000}. For most singles, the decision to never marry is a gradual one, This tran- sition is represented by a change in selfattributed status that occurs over time and is associated with a cultural timetable for marriage. It marks the experience of “becom- ing single" that occurs when an inclividual identifies more with singlehood than with marriage (Davies, 2003; DePaulo, 2014} ‘As wevwill ee later when we consider marriage education, it may be a good idea to think about what you prefer to be—single or part of committed relationship. Numer- fous self-help books are on the market to guide people through this discernment (eg. cohabitation people in committed, intimate, sexual felationships who live together but are not Outcalt, 2014), However itis done, think about what you really want, married Figure 11.3 Cohabitation “There as beens rapid growth in coh ‘ston nthe Unted State ance 1970, Being unmaried dees not necesaiy mean living aloe. People in sous ‘committed, intimate, sexual relationships but who are not married st unions among women. ‘may decide that living together, or cohabitation, provides a way fo ___Uned States, 1885, 2002, and 2008-20°0. share daily life. Cohabitation is becoraing an increasingly popular ® lifestyle choice in the United States as well as in Canad, Europe, and Australia and is considered a growing hallmark of emerging Tito! Candin Mosher Chana a0) Cohan the Ute states hanced tefl over he pa te desde fat ont anges she Unie Sasha acting elo tionships, and most young adults have or will cohabit at some time } 40 tie nar Rone ooedasrood a0) Base pape doa Sergey costo ats Wier 16 ewes hoe Shevacarahabtton ste chef aft ing aangeent 2 fee senupc hanced snc 98 cae Sito ite secon rotten in coecton wih tikey Sn euteainin he oui oe pound merge | (Rhoades, Stanley, & Markman, 2009; Rose-Greenland & Smock, 2013). om nee for resem convenience, ih esha sets ma anette ingexpeses ndsoutalsecsty Thee typeiynaoganen SORES cOCMKS es ay eh 95288 remanent or hese cnr and maeiage hat esl gal See Nounion Cohabitation Marriage CHAPTER 11: BEING WITH OTHERS | 377 INTHINK About It Why ight there be age diference in ‘cohbtaton res amen coun? ‘Women tend to report convenience as a factor more so than men, Because most mar riages begin as cohabiting relationships, the cohabiting couple is actually engaging in a twial marriage. If marriage does not follow, the couple usually separates, Finally, some couples permanently use cohabitation instead of marriage. ‘The global picture differs by culture (Popenoe, 2009; Therborn, 2010). For exam ple, in most European, South American, and Caribbean countries, cohabitation is a common alternative to marriage for young adults. Cohabitation is common in the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden, where this lifestyle is part of the culture; 99% of, married couples in Sweden lived together before they married, and nearly one in four couples are not legally married. Decisions to marry in these countries are typically made to legalize the relationship after children are born—in contrast to Americans, who marry to confirm their love and commitment to each other. Interestingly, having cohabitated does not guarantee that mazriages will be better Itdepends on several factors (Martin, 2013). That may be because couples are pickier about who they marry than about who they cohabit with (Sahib & Gu, 2013). The: 4s also some evidence that couples who have children while cohabiting, especially European American women (as compared with African American and Latina women; ‘Tach & Halpern-Meckin, 2003}, and couples who are using cohabitation to test an already shaky relationship (Rhoades et al, 2009) are most likely to report subsequent problems. ‘Are there differences between couples who cohabit and couples who marry right away? Longitucinal studies find few differences in couples’ behavior after having lived together for many years regardless of whether they married without cohabiting, cohab- ited then married, or simaply cobabited (Stafford, Kline, & Rankin, 2004), but married couples tend, on average, to be slightly happier (Stavrova, Fetchenhauer, & Schlosser, 2012}. No differences are reported in relationships between parents and adult children ff married versus cohabiting couples (Daatland, 2007). In addition, many countries ex tend the same rights and benefits to cohabiting couples as they do to married couples and have done so for many years Gay and Lesbian Couples Less is known about the developmental course of gay and lesbian relationships than heterosexual relationships, largely because historically, they have not been the focus of research (Rothblum, 2009}. To date, gay and lesbian relationships have been studied ‘most often in comparison to married heterosexual couples. What ist ike tobe ina gay of lesbian relationship? One woman shares her experience in the Real People feature. REAL PEOPLE Applying Human Develop Annie's Story Iam 2 28 yearcolé weran who came out as a lesbian jst before | graduated high school ‘Although las esappeintes by the reaction of some 0” my Ponds and he continues neglive comments I hear about sy lesbian beex.a and tansgencered people woulent rade my _tuaton for hing“ the closet for anything, | do not recall ev felrg ie Ins heer seal ust tual fr me knew hat Im se ‘ery hey beng borat aime when aitudes toward my esl are changing pi! hake mary eer enes whe all ma that twas sexvemely clin pas: decades to sccnowedge te onesel tht one was lesbian for exanp ke, et aleve say others am ale Ley that my fo "yievry tolerant ad open aut who Iam have many fiends whe struggle wth ove eerore family members who hive soared hers (Gre big eference [nave noticed is that can feel tre eifarence whare Iwore in have people rest met hse gotten aot batter ‘ver the five years Ihave been in the company “The changes inthe wallowing me to have access lo vere for my partner are huge for sand just one of the mrost visible anc hopetl jane that hogs are hang. at ast of al my parte and Iver abe {get married this year! Wow! When we got togetrer seven years ago, we never imagined ‘we would have ths epton in ou Wet mes. And ‘ot Toak at us legal married We have now started thinking about having chile, which will ke ove rebsionship to nev pices (Overall prety much lke everyone loath the excapion tht | naw thatthe gooe things tat have happened tome are too atten specie tothe place where Hive know thal ether sates inte Unites States and certain other counties co rot see things the same way My fondest nope f tht, the enanges have experianced vl spread there. 20. BN 378 | P87 THREE: YOUNG AND MIDDLE ADULTHOODlike heterosexuals, gay and lesbian couples must deal with issues related to effective communication, power, and household responsibilities. Research indicates that the tela tionships of gay and lesbian couples are similar to those of heterosexual couples in term of love and commitment, satis faction, and trust (Jayner, Manning, & Bogle, 2013). Most gay and leshian couples rein dualearner relationships, much lke the majority of married heterosexual couples, and are likly to share household chores. However, gay and lesbian couples do diller from heterosexual couples in the degree to which both partners are similar on demographic characteristics such as race, age, and education; gay and lesbian couples tend to be ‘more dissimilar (Schwartz & Graf, 2008) In general, though, the same factors predict longr-term sucess of couples regaré less of sexual orientation Joyner etal, 2013) Gender differences play more of a role in determining relationship styles than do differences in sexual orientation, Gay men, like heterosex- ual men, tend to separate love and sex and have more short-term relationships (Missik dine etal, 2005); both lesbian and heterosexual women are more likely to connect sex and emotional intimacy in fewer, longerlasting relationships. Lesbians tend to make a commitment and cohabit faster than do heterosexual couples (Ganiron, 2007), Men in any type of relationship tend to want more power if they earn more money. Women in any type of relationship are likely tbe mate egalitarian and to view money as a way tomaintain independence from one's partner. Cay and lesbian couples report receiving less support from family members than do either married or cohabiting couples (Strong & Cohen, 2014). The more one’s family holds traditional ethnic o religious values, the less likely the family will provide support. ‘Ava societal level, atiudes about gay and lesbian relationships are changing rap- idly in the United States. In 1996, Congress passed and President Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act, allowed states to refuse to recognize samesex marriage, and ‘imposed limits on the benelits received by legally marzied same-sex couples. By 2013, rerely 17 years later, attitudes had changed dramatically. That year, in two landmark decisions, the US. Supreme Court asserted the right of same-sex couples to be married ‘so doing the United States joined 13 other countries where same-sex marviage is legal By eatly 2014, 16 states and the istritof Columbia had legalized same-sex marviage and 33 sates conlined to ban it, (New Mexico allows each county to decide) ‘The major change attitude toward same-sex marriage means that such couples now have the same rights as heterosexual married couples under federal law (but not necessar- ily under state law}. Such rights go to many basic aspects of living, including visting loved ones ina hospital and having inheritance rights. 30 Hi Marriage » Most adults want thee love claionships to esl tm mariage: However, US. relents ar i es ofa hurey to achieve this goal the median age at fst marge for adults the United States as been sng for several decades, As you ean see im Figure 114 since the early 19905 the age at gg frat marriage has ineeased in the Urited Stes by roughly 5 years 286 for men and 26.6 for women (U.S. Census Bureau, 2014) This trend has some benefits in that, for women anyway 24 2 Average age fn mar Cay me lesan couples experience joy ard ‘ronal couples Figure 11.4 inrelsvoness sata ove of ht Mecian age frst marrage in the Untied States has nereasec mare for women than nen ance 1970 "Se90 1300 19:0 1m20 150 840 1850 1980 1970 1880 190 2000 2010 marrying at a later age lessens the likelihood of — tom U.s. Census Burenu, Current Population Survey, Merch and Anowsl Socal and Keenomic divorce: Women under age 20 at the time they Supplements 2010 andeariet CHAPTER 11: BEING WITH OTHERS >rarital success ‘ubrela trea referring to any marital marital qualicy subjective evaluation of the couple's felatonship on a numberof different dimensions marital adjustment degree to which 3 husband and wife sceommondateto each other over 3 petiod of time marital satisfaction ‘global assessment of one's marriage homegamy Similarity of values and interests exchange theory telationship, suchas marriage, based on, tach partner contributing something to the relationship thatthe other would be harctpressed to provide ae first married ate 3 times more likely o end up divorced than women who first ‘marry in thei twenties and 6 times more likely to end up divorced than first-time wives in theis thirties (US. Census Bureau, 2012) Let’ explore age and other factors that keep marriages going strong over time ‘What Is a Successful Marriage, and What Predicts It? You undoubtedly know couples who appear to have a successful marriage. But what does that mean, really? Is success in marriage defined as subjective happiness and contentment, personal fulfillment, or simply the fact that the couple is still married? Minnotte (2010) differentiates marital success, which is an umbrella term referring to any marital outcome (such as divorce rate), marital quality, which is a subjective evaluation of the couple's relationship on a number of different dimensions; marital adjustment, the degree to which a husband and wife accommodate to each other over ‘a certain period of time; and marital satisfaction, which isa global assessment of one's ‘marriage. Each of these provides a unique insight into the workings of a marriage Marriages, ike other relationships, differ from one another, but some important predictors of furure success can be identified, One key factor in enduring marriages is the relative maturity of the two partners at the time they are married. In general, the younger the partners ate, the lower the odds that the marriage will last—especially when the people are in their teens or early twenties (US. Census Bureau, 20130). In part, the age issue relates to Erikson’s (1982) belief that intimaey cannot be achieved until ater ones identity is established (see Chapter 10). Other reasons that increase or decrease the likelihood that a marriage will last include financial security (increase) and pregnaney (decrease) atthe time of the marriage A second important predictor of successful marriage is homogamy, or the similar ity of values and interests a couple shares. As we saw in relation to choosing a mate, the extent that the partners share similar age, values, goals, attitudes (especially the desire for children}, socioeconomic status, certain behaviors (such as drinking alcohol), and ethnic background increases the likelihood that their relationship will succeed (Teachman, Tedrow, & Kim, 2013) ‘A thied factor in predicting marital success is a feeling that the relationship is equal. According to exchange theory, marriage is based on each partner contributing something tothe relationship that the other would be hard pressed to provide. Satisfying and happy marriages result when both partners perceive that there isa fair exchange, fr equity, in all dimensions of the relationship. Problems achieving such equity ean arise because of the competing demands of work and family, an issue we take up again sn Chapter 12. Cross-cultural research supports these factors. Couples in the United States and Iran (Asoodeh et al, 2010; Vernon, 2013} say that trusting each other, consulting each other, being honest, making joint decisions, and being committed make the difference between a successful marriage and an unsuccessful marriage. Couples for whom reli gion is important ako point to coramonly hel faith Do Married Couples Stay Happy? Few sights are happier than a couple on their wedding day. Newlyweds, like Kevin and Beth in the vignette, are at the peak of marital bliss, But as you may have experienced, feelings change over time, sometimes getting better and stronger, sometimes not. Research shows that for most couples, overall marital satisfaction is highest at the beginning of the marriage, falls until the children begin leaving home, and rises again in later life; this pattern holds for both married and never-married cohabiting couples with children (see MUFigute 115; Hansen, 2012). Hosvever, for some couples, satisfaction never rebounds and remains low; in essence, they have become emotionally divorced. ‘Overall, marital satisfaction ebbs and flows over time. The pattern of a particular _marriage over the years is determined by the nature of the dependence of each spouse fon the other. When dependence is mutual and about equal and both people hold sima- lar values that form the basis for their commitment to each other, the marriage is BEN 320. | PART THRE: YOUNG AND MIDDLE ADULTHOODFigure 11.5 Marta satsGcon is highest ear on and in ter Ve, cropping of during the ck rearing years, High eee erence eared Adaescence Launching, Retirement ‘Adhildren — cletien Sewn work strong and close (Givertz, Segrn, & Hanzal, 2008) When the dependence of one part her is much higher than that ofthe other, however, the marriage is ikely tobe chara. terized by stress and conflict. Changes in individual lives during adulthood shift the balance of dependence from one partner (othe other; for erample, one partner nay go back ta school, become il or love status. Learning how to deal with thee changes Is the secret to long and happy marriages “The fact that marital satisfaction has agoneral downward tren! but varies widely across couples led Karey and Bradbury (1995) to propose a vulnerabiltystress adaptation model of marriage, depicted in WFigure 11.6. The vuinerablty-strent~ _vulnerabitystree_adaptation model adaptation model sees marital quality as adynamie process resulting from the couple's mae that proposes tht malay Abily to hele tresfd events nthe contest oftheir parcular vulnerabilities and _ 2dyzami proces resling tom the Tesources For example as & couple's ability to adapt to steessful stations gets berter SES ality handle cee events overtime, the quality ofthe marriage probably will improve, How well couples adapt “himia"™adscauree to various streses on the relationship determines whether the marriage continues or they get divorced. Let's see how this works overtime. Setting the Stage:The Early Years of Marriage Marriages are most intense in their early days, Early on, husbands and wives share "many activities and are open to new experiences together, so bliss results (Olson & Me- Cubbin, 1983), But bliss doesn’t come from avoiding tough issues, Discussing financial matters honestly is a key to bliss, as many newly married couples experience thet first serious marital stresses around money issues (Parkinan, 2007). How tough issues early in the marriage are handled sets the stage for the years ahead. When there is marital {on oF cisioluin of the marrage SOURCE: Karn Retrieved from 5. K (2010) Keeping mariager holly, and why io df. ‘phe spariene|sboshpn2010)02/e-bre! ape CHAPTER 11: BEING WITH OTHERS | 381Young marieemitary counes ae special types of sees on ter rebtinshin 382, | rare ints: You" conflict, the intensity of the early phase may ereate the basis for considerable unhap: piness (Faulkner, Davey, & Davey, 2005). Early in a marriage, the couple must learn to adjust to the different perceptions and expectations each person has for the other. Many wives tend to be more concerned than their husbands with keeping close ties with their friends. Research indicates that men and women both recognize and admit when problems occur in their marriage (Moynehan & Adams, 2007}. The couple must also learn to handle confrontation, In- deed, learning effective strategies for resolving conflict is an essential component of a strong marriage because these strategies provide ways for couples to discuss their problem: maturely [arly in a marriage, couples tend to have global adoration for their spouse regard ing the spouse's qualities (Karney, 2010; Neff & Karney, 2005). For wives, but not for husbands, more accurate specific perceptions of what their spouses ate really like were associated with more supportive behaviors, feelings of control in the marriage, and a decreased risk of divorce. Thus, for women, lave grounded in accurate perceptions of 4 spouse's qualities appears to be stronger than love that is “blind” to a spouse's true qualities. Sil, couples who are happiest in the early stage of their marriage tend to focus on the goodl aspects, not the annoyances; nitpicking and nagging do not bode well for long-term wedded bliss (Karey, 2010) As lime goes on and stresses increase, marital satisfaction tends to decline (Lx ‘manna, Riedmann, & Stewart, 2014). Researchers have shown that for most couples, the primary reason for this drop is having children (Hansen, 2012). But i's not just 3 matter of having a child. The temperament of the child matters, with fussier babies creating more marital problems (Greving, 2007; Meijer & van den Wittenboer, 2007). Parenthood also means having substantially less time to devote to the marriage, Mo couples are ecstatic over having their first child, a tangible product oftheir love for each other, But soon the reality of child care sets in, with 2 am, feedings, diaper changing, and the like—not to mention the long-term financial obligations that will continue Teast until the child becomes an adult, Both African American and European American couples report an increase in conflict after the bith of their first child (Crohan, 1996). However, using the birth ofa child as the explanation for the drop in marital satis: faction is too simplistic because child-free couples also experience a decline in marital satisfaction (Hansen, Moutn, & Shapiro, 2007}, It appears that a decline in general ‘marital satisfaction over time is a common developmental phenomenon, even for couples who choose to remain childless (Clements & Markman, 1996). In addition, couples who have no children as a result of infertility face the stress associated both with the biological inability to have children and the psychological impact on each other's identity, bth of which exacerbate existing stresses in the relationship and can Tower marital satisfaction (Rosner, 2012). Longitudinal research indicates that disit lusionment—as demonstrated by a decline in feeling in love, in demonstrations of affection, and in the feeling that one’s spouse is responsive, as well as an increase in feelings of ambivalence—is a key predictor of marital dissatisfaction later in the mar riage (Baucom & Atkins, 2013} During the early years of their marriage, many couples may spend significant amounts of time apart, This is especially true of ‘mazriages involving individuals in the military (Fiacham & Beach, 2010}, Recent research has focused on the special types of stress these couples face. Spouses who serve in combat areas on active cluty assignment and suffer from postraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are particularly vulnerable, as they are at greater risk for other spouse-ditected aggression, ‘What the non-deployed spouse believes turns out to be very ‘important, If the non-leployed spouse believes that the deployment will have negative effects on the marriage, then problems are more likely. In contrast, if the non-deplayed spouse believes that such challenges make the relationship stronger, then they typically can do so (Renshaw, Rodrigues, & Jones, 2008). Research indicates that IG AND MIDDLE ADULTHOODthe effects of deployment may be greater on wives than husbands; divorce rates for women service members who are deployed is higher than for their male counterparts (Karey & Crown, 2007), Keeping Marriages Happy Although no two marriages are exactly the same, couples must be flexible and adapt able. Couples who have been happily married for many years show an ability to “roll swith the punches” and to adapt to changing circumstances in the relationship. For ex ample, a serious problem of one spouse may not be detrimental tothe relationship and ‘may even make the bond stronger if the couple use good stress-and conflict-reduction strategies, Successful couples aso find a way to keep the romance in the relationship, a very important determinant of marital satisfaction over the long run. Being motivated to meet a partner's sexual needs seems to be a key factor (Muise et al, 2013). Sharing religious beliefs and spirituality with one's spouse is another good way to ensure higher quality marriages, and that’s especially the case among couples in lower socioeconomic groups {Lichter & Carmalt, 2009}. It appears that this effect goes beyond merely doing an activity together, as religion and spirituality may provide a framework for conflict resolution and a way to put one’s marriage in a bigger, more significant context. But when you get down to basics, i's how well couples communicate their thoughts, actions, an feelings to each other and show intimacy and support each other that largely determines the level of ontfiet couples experience and, by extension, how happy they are likely to be over the long term {Patrick et al, 2007). This is especially important with regard to high-stress areas such as children and work and after long separations such as military deployments (Wadsworth, Hughes-Kirchubel, & Riggs, THINIK About It. 2014), And this evidence of the importance of good communication skills forms the yaa es of merenions woul heb keep basis of most marriage education programs we will consider abit later. maredeoiphFaope? So what are the best ways to “stack the deck” in favor of a long, happy marriage? Based on research, here are the best: ‘Make time for your relationship, Express your love to your spouse. Be there in times of need Communicate constructively and positively about problems in the relationship. Be interested in your spouse's life. Confide in your spouse, Forgive minor offenses and try to understand major ones. TEST YOURSELF 11.2 Recall Interpret |. Afi fr many single peoples that other people may What sociocultural forces affect decisions to marry rather than expect them to to cohab ince 2, Young adults view cohabitation as a0) marrage. 3. Gay and lesbian relationships are similar to Apply Ricardo and Maria are engaged to be married. Ricardo works long hours asa store manager at a local coffee shop, while 4, According to____, marriage is based on each Maria works regu hours as an administrative assistant for a partner contributing something to the relationsrip that the large communications company. Based on your understanding other would be hard-pressed to provide, of the factors that affect marital sucess, what other character~ arene ate eae after istics would you want to know about Ricardo and Maria before Peete ee ‘evaluating the lcely success of their marriage? ‘Check your answers tothe Recall Questions atthe end ofthe chaster CHAPTER 11: BEING WITH OTHERS | 383 I11.3 The Family Life Cycle LEARNING OBJECTIVES + What are the common forms of familias? + Whats it ke to be a parent? What diferences are there in + Why do people have children? puclear family ‘ort common form of family in Western societies, consisting only of parent(s) and edie extended family tort common form of family around the world: one in which grandparents and other eelatives live with parents and atildren diferent types of parenting! Bob, 32, and Denis, 33 just had ther fist child, Matthew, efter several years of trying. They've heard that having children while in their cites can hove advantages, but Bob and Denise won- ler whether people are just saying that to Be nice to them. They ae olso concemed about the financial obligations they ae ikely to face “When are you going to start a family?" is a question that young couples such as Bob and Denise are asked frequently. Most couples want children because they believe they will bring great joy, which they often do, But once the child is born, adults may feel inadequate because children don’t come with instructions. Young adults may be surprised when the reality of being totaly responsible for another person hits them. Experienced middle-aged parents often smile knowingly to themselves. Frightening as it might be, the birth of a child transforms a couple (or a single parent) into a family. The most common form of family in Western societies is the ruclear family, consisting only of parent(s} and children). The most common family form around the world is the extended family, n which grandparents and other relatives live with parents and children, Because we have discussed families from the chil’ per spective in earlier chapters, here we focus an families from the parents’ point of view. Deciding Whether to Have Children One of the biggest decisions couples must make is whether to have children, This decision appears complicated. You would think that potential parents must weigh the many benefits of child rearing—such as feeling personal satisfaction, fulfilling per sonal needs, continuing the family line, and enjoying companionship—with the many drawbacks, including expense and lifestyle changes, especially the balance between work and family. But apparently, this is not what most people do. Rijken (2003) reports that potential parents don't think very deliberately or deeply about when to have a child and that those who are career-oriented or like their free- dom do not often deliberately posipone parenthood because of those factors. Rather, thoughts about having children seem not to cross their minds until they are ready to start thinking about having children, What may make a difference is the couple's self esteem about parenting—when both people feel positive about being parents, they are ‘more likely to have a child (Hutteman et al, 2013). ‘Whether the pregnancy is planned (and over half ofall US. pregnancies are un- planned), a couple's first pregnancy isa milestone event in a relationship in every cul ture, with both benefits and costs (Walker, 2014), Having a child raises many important matters for consideration, such as relationships with one's own parents, marital sta bility, career satisfaction, and financial issues. Parents largely agree that children add affection, improve family ties, and give parents a feeling of immortality and a sense of accomplishment. Most parents willingly sacrifice a great deal for thei children and hhope that they grow up to be happy and sucessful In this way, children bring happic ness to their parents (Angeles, 2010), "Nevertheless, finances are of great concern to most parents because children are expensive, How expensive? According to the US, Department of Agriculture (2013), family who had a child in 2012 would spend the following estimated amounts for food, shelter, and other necessities by the time the child turned 17: Those with house- hold incomes less than $60,640 per year (in 2012 dollars) can expect to spend total of B34 | PAR THREE: YOUNG AND MIDDLE ADULTHOOD$173,490 (in 2012 dollars) on a child from birth through high school, those with household incomes between $60,640 and $105,000 can expect to spend $241,080, and a family with a household income ‘more than $105,000 can expect to spend $399,780. College expenses would be in addition to those amounts. These costs do not differ significantly between two-parent and single-parent households, but clearly are a bigger financial burden for single parents, No wonder parents are concerned. You can get an estimate of what it may cost you toraise a child by going to the USDA Center for Nutuition Policy and Promotion website Cost of Raising a Child Calculator. Some trends in the cost of having children are important Because this survey was first done in 1960, the average cost of health cate as a percentage of total child-rearing costs has doubled, Child cate costs, on average negligible in 1960 because most mathers were not in the labor force, are now significant. For many reasons that inchide personal choice, financial instability, and infertility, an ‘nereasing mimber of couples are choosing to be child-free. Attitudes toward couples who choose not to have children have improved since the 1970s, with women having ‘more positive views than men (Karopecky}-Cox & Call, 2007], Social attitudes in many countries (Austria, Germany, Great Britain, Ireland, Netherlands, and the United States) are also improving toward child-free couples (Gubernskaya, 2010}. ‘Couples without children have some advantages: higher marital satisfaction, more freedom, and higher standards of living. A major international study of older adult couples without children in Australia, Finland, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States revealed highly similar patterns across all countries except Japan (Koropeckyj-Cox & Call, 2007}. In Japan, the cultural norm of children caring for older parents created difficulties for childless older couples The factors that influence the decision to be chld-free appear to differ for women and men (Waren & Pals, 2013), For women, higher levels of education and economic factors increase the likelihood of remaining child-free, whereas holding traditional sex role beliefs decrease the chances of that decision. For men, though, neither education nor economic factors predict deciding to remain child-ree, but traditional sex role beliefs lower the adds of that decision, Having ae laterin aduthowd hs. The Parental Role Today, couples in the United States and most other developed nations typically have fewer chiliren and have their first child later than in the past. The average age at the me of the birth of a woman's first child is about 25. This average age has been ine creasing steadily since 1970 as aresullof several major trends regarding women: Many women postpone children because they are marrying later, they want to establish ca reers, or they make a choice to delay childbearing. In general, the data indicate that as the average level of women’s education in a society increases, the birthrate decreases. In addition, the teen biethrate in the United States hit a historic low in 2012, contin ing a trend of roughly 20 years of declining rates (Hamilton, Martin, & Ventura, 2013) Being older atthe birth of one's first child is advantageous. Older mothers, ike Denise {im the vignette, are more at ease being parents, spend more time with their babies, and are more affectionate, sensitive, and Supportive to them. In addition, there isa higher ‘matemal investment in middle childhood and less child:perceived contfiet in adolescence (Sclilomer & Belsky, 2012). The age of the father also makes a difference in how he Interacts with children (Palkovitz & Palm, 2008), Remember Bob, the 32-year-old first time father in the vignette? Compared to men who become fathers in their twenties, ‘men {like Bob} who become fathers in their thirties are generally more invested in their paternal role and spend up to 3 times as much time caring for their preschool children as younger fathers do. Father involvement has increased significantly, due in part to social attitudes that support (Fogarty & Evans, 2010), Research cleaely shows that being a father {san important aspect of men’ lives across adulthood (Marsighio & Roy, 2013). CHAPTER II: BEING WITH OTHERS | 285 ITHINK About It Should there be mandeory programs fr pa Family tes among Native Americans tend 19 be very svong familism ides that the family's wellbeing takes pre- cedence over the conceens of individal family members IG AND MIDOL BE 3860 | vane ints: You" Parenting skills do not come naturally; they must be acquired. Having a child changes all aspects of couples’ lives. As we have seen, children place a great deal of. stress on a relationship, Both motherhood and fatherhood require major cormmitenent and cooperation. Parenting is full of rewards, but it also takes a great deal of work Caring for young children is demanding. It may create disagreements over division of labor, especially if both parents are employed outside the home (see Chapters and 11}, Even when mothers are employed outside the home (and roughly 70% of women with children under age 18 in the United States are), they still perform mast of the child-rearing tasks, Even when men take employment leave, although more likely to share tasks, they still do not spend more time with children than fathers who do not take leave {Seward & Stanley-Stevens, 2014) In general, parents manage to deal with the many challenges of child rearing reasonably well. They learn how to compromise when necessary and when to apply firm but fair discipline. Given the choice, mast parents do not regret theie decision to hhave children, Ethnic Diversity and Parenting Buhnic background matters a great deal in terms of family structure and the parent child relationship. African American husbands are more likely than their European ‘American counterparts to help with household chores, and they help regardless of their wives’ employment status (Smith-Bynum, 2013). African American parents may buffer their children from involvement with drugs and other problems owing to their more conservative views about illegal substance abuse, which may in part be responsible for lower rates of drug and aleohol use among adolescent and young adult African Americans (Seffrin, 2012) ‘Overall, most African American parents provide a cohesive, lov- ing environment that often exists within a context of strong reli gious beliefs (Smith-Bynum, 2013; Teachman etal, 2013). Having 4 national role model in President Barack and Michelle Obama has also helped focus both social opinion and research on the nor ‘mative functioning of family life in African American households {Smith.Bynum, 2013). ‘Asa result of several generations of oppression, many Native American parents have lost the cultural parenting skills that were traditionally part of their culture: children were valued, women were consid ered sacred and honored, and men cared for and provided for their families (Davis, Dionne, & Fortin, 2014). Thus, restoring and retaining a strong sense of trbalism is an important consideration for Native American families. Indeed, research shows that American Indian families receive more support from relatives in child rearing than do Puropean Americans (Limb & Shafer, 2014). This support helps with the transmission of cultural values. In 2013, one of every six Americans was Latino, with about 25% of all children under 18 in the United States in 2013 being Latino, a figure that is expected to rise about 36% by 2050 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2013b). Latino parents endorse the consteuet of proper behavior, or respeto, as a key value (Umafa-Taylor & Updegraff, 2013). For example, Latino mothers and fathers both tend to adopt similar authoritative behav jors in dealing with their preschool children, but mothers use these behaviors more frequently (Grau, Azmitia, & Quattlebaum, 2009). Latino families demonstrate two additional important values: familism and the extended family. Fanvilism refers fo the idea that the wellbeing ofthe family takes precedence over the concerns of individual ‘amily members. This value is a defining characteristic of Latino families; for example, Brazilian and Mexican families consider familism a cultura strength (Carlo eta, 200% Lucero-Liv, 2007; Umafa-Taylor & Updegeaff, 2013). Indeed, familism helps account for the significantly higher trend for Latino cole & Lopez Turley, 2009}, The extended family is also very strong among Latino families students to live at home (Desmond E ADULTHOODand serves as the venue for a wide range of exchanges of goods and services, such as child care and financial support Like Latinos, Asian Americans value familism (Meyer, 2007; Rodriguez-Galin, 2014) and place an even higher value on extended family. Asian American adoles Cents report very high feelings of obligation to their faznilies compared with Euro- pean American adolescents, although in fact, most caregiving is done by daughters or ddaughters-indaw, not sons (Rodriguez-Galan, 2014}, Contrary to commonly portrayed stereotypes, Asian American families do not represent the "Model Minority,” but ex perience the same challenges with parenting as all other groups (Xia, Do, & Xie, 2013). In general, males enjoy higher status in traditional Asian families (Tuno & Homma, 2009). Among recent immigrants, though, women are expanding their role by work: ing outside the home. Research shows that Chinese American parents experience less marital stress during the transition to parenthood than European American couples do, perhaps because of the clearer traditional cultural division of tasks between hus- bands and wives (Burns, 2005), Raising multiethnic children presents challenges not experienced by parents of same-race children, For example, parents of biracial children report feeling discrimina- sion and being targets of prejudicial behavior from others (Hubbard, 2010; Kilson & Lada, 2003), These parents also worry that their children may be rejected by members of both racial communities. Perhaps that is why parents of multiracial childeen tend to provide more economic and cultural resources to their children than do parents of single-race children (Cheng & Powell, 2007}. In multiethnic families, you might think that the parent from a rainority group, takes primary responsibility for guiding that aspect of the child's ethnic identity. How- ever, itis the mothers who are key in most respects (Schlabach, 2013}. A study of children of European mothers and Maori fathers in New Zealand showed that the ‘mothers played a major role in establishing the child's Maori identity (Kukutai, 2007). Similarly, European American mothers of biracial children whose fathers were African ‘American tended to raise them as African American in terms of public ethnic iden- tity (O'Donoghue, 2005}. In general, multiracial adolescents experience more negative outcomes socially and emotionally if their mothers, rather than fathers, are a minority (Schlabach, 2013), It is clear that ethnic groups vary a great deal in how they approach the issue of parenting and what values are mast important. Considered together, there is no one parenting standard that applies equally o all geoups. Single Parents Single-parent households represent 36% of households with children under age 18 in the United States, up from 23% in 1980 (ChildStatsgov, 2013}. Such households jecur for many reasons, such as unmarried women living alone, giving bieth, and divorcing, resulting in one custodial parent. In theUnited States, the proportion of births to unwed mothers has been increasing since the 140s and is now about 36% (Shattuck & Kreider, 2013}, The number of single parents, most of whom are women, continues to be high in some ethnic groups. About twohieds of births to African American mothers, about 43% of births to Latina mothers, nearly 26% of births to Furopean American mothers, and 11% of births to Asian American mothers are to ‘unmarried women, Among the reasons are the desire to have children, failure to use contraception, high divorce rates, the decision to keep children born out of wedlock, and different fertility ates across ethnic groups Two main questions arise concerning single parents: How are children affected when only one adult is responsible for child care? How do single parents meet their ‘own needs for emotional support and intimacy? ‘Many divorced single parents report complex feelings toward their children, such as frastration, failure, guilt, and a need to be overindulgent (Amato & Boyd, 2013}, Loneliness when childzen grow up and leave or are visiting the noncustodial parent can be especialy dificult .o deal with (Anderson 8 Greene, 2013} CHAPTER 11: BEING WITH OTHERS | 387 Ii Military families experience unique aspects of single parenting. When one parent in a two-parent household de- ploys, the remaining parent becomes a single parent. Sepa: ration anxiety is common among deployed patents, and the cycling of experience as a single parent and partner in a ‘tworparent household with both parents present can create siress (Wadsworth, Hughes-Kirchubel, & Riggs, 2014}, Single parents, regardless of gender, face considerable obstacles, Financially, they are usually less welloff than their married counterparts, especially single mothers. Hav- ing only one source of income puts additional pressure on single parents to provide all of the necessities. Integrating the roles of work and parenthood are difficult enough for two people; for the single parent, the hardships are com- pounded. Financially, single mothers are hardest hit, mainly Boing» engl parent prevents many challenges. because women typically are paid less than men and be- but sho sstseton. cause single mothers may not be able to afford enough child care to provide the work schedule flexibility needed for higher-paying jobs. ‘One particular concern for many divorced single parents is dating. Several come mon questions asked by single parents involve dating: “How do I become available again?” "Tow will my children react?" "How do I cope with my own sexual needs?” ‘They have reason to be concerned. Research indicates that single parents tend to re port that children may interfere with dating and romance {Sommer et al, 2013). They report feeling insecure about sexuality and wondering how they should behave around ‘heir children in terms of having partners stay overnight (Lampkin-Hunter, 2010) Step-, Foster, Adoptive, and Same-Sex Couple Parenting ‘Not all parents raise their own biological children. In fact, oughly one-third of North American couples become stepparents or foster or adoptive parents sometime during their lives ‘To be sure, the parenting issues we have discussed so far are just as important in these situations as when people raise their own biological children, In general, there are few differences among parents who have their own biological children or who become parents in some other way, but there are some unique challenges (MeKay & Ross, 2010) For example, research indicates thatthe predictors of relationship satisfaction of adoptive mothers are similar to predictors of relationship satisfaction among biological parents wellbeing, partner suppor, and aspects af mental health (South Fli & Lar, 2013), Abig issue for foster parents, adoptive parents, and stepparents is how strongly the child will bond with them. Although infants less than 1 year old will probably bond well, children who are old enough to have formed attachments with their bio: logical parents may have competing loyalties. For example, some stepchildren remain strongly attached to the noncustodial parent and actively resist attempts to integrate them into the new family {*My real mother wouldn't make me do that’) or they may exhibit behavioral problems. As a result the dynamics in blended families can best be understood as a complex system (Dupuis, 2010). Stepparents must often deal with con- tinued visitation by the noncustodial parent, which may exacerbate any difficulties “These problems are a major reason that second marriages are at high risk for dissol tion, s discussed later in this chapter, They are also a major reason why behavioral and emotional problems are more common among stepehildeen (Crohn, 2006). Still, many stepparents and stepchildren ultimately develop good relationships with each other (Coleman, Ganong, & Russell, 2013). Stepparents must be sensitive to the relationship between the stepchild and his or her biological, noncustodial par ent, Allowing stepchildren to develop a relationship withthe stepparent at their own pace also helps. What style of stepparenting ultimately develops is influenced by the expectations of the steppatent, stepchild, spouse, and nonresidential parent, but several styles result in positive outcomes BE 328 | P87 THRE: YOUNG AND MIDDLE ADULTHOODAdoptive parents also contend with attachment to birth parents, but in different ways, Even if they don't remember them, adopted children may want to locate and ‘meet their birth parents. Wanting to know one's origins is understandable, but such searches can strain the relationships between these children and their adoptive par tents, who may interpret the actions as a form of rejection, and create difficulties for the adopted person (Curtis & Pearson, 2010), Families with children adopted from another culture pose unique issues in terms of how to establish and maintain connection with the child's culture of origin. For mothers of transracially adopted Chinese and Korean children, becoming connected to the appropriate Asian American communily is an important way to accomplish this (Johnston et al, 2007). Research in the Netherlands found that children adopted from Columbia, Sri Lanka, and Karea into Dutch homes struggled with looking dif ferent, and many expressed a desire to be white (Juffer, 2006). Research in Sweden also revealed challenges in maintaining the culture from the child’s country of origin (Yagvesson, 2010}, Foster parents tend to have the most tenuous relationship with their children because the bond can be broken for a number of reasons that have nothing to do ‘with the quality of the care being provided, For example, a court may award cus tody back to the birth parents or another couple may legally adopt the child. Desling with altachinent is difficult; foster parents want to provide secure homes, but they may not have the children long enough to establish continuity. Furthermore, because ‘many children in foster care have been unable to form attachments at all, they are less Uikely to form ones that will inevitably be broken, Thus, foster parents must be willing to tolerate considerable ambiguity in the relationship and to have few expectations about the future. Despite the challenges, the positive news is that placement in good foster care does result in the development of attachment between foster parents and children who were placed out of institutional settings (Smyke et al, 2010}, Finally, many gay men and lesbian women also want to be parents. Some have biological children themselves, whereas others are incteasingly choosing adoption or foster parenting (Patterson, Riskind, & Tornello, 2014). Although gay men and lesbian women make good parents, they often experience resistance from others to their hav- ing children (Clifford, Hertz, & Doskow, 2010); for example, some states in the United States have laws preventing gay and lesbian couples from adopting. The rapidly chang- {ng political landscape concerning same-sex marriage may have an irapact on adoption ‘opportunities as well Research indicates that children reared by gay ot lesbian parents do not expeti- fence any more problems than children reared by heterosexual parents and are as psy- chologically healthy as children of heterosexual parents (Biblar7 & Savci, 2010}. Sub- stantial evidence exists that children raised by gay or lesbian parents do not develop sexual identity problems or any other problems any more than children raised by hheterosexual parents (Goldberg, 2003). Children of gay and lesbian parents were no more likely than children of heterosexual parents to identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, or questioning. The evidence is clear that children raised by gay or lesbian parents suffer no ad- verse consequences compared with children raised by heterosexual parents. Children of lesbian couples and heterosexual couples are equally adjusted behaviorally, show equivalent cognitive development, have similar behaviors in school, and do not show different rates of use of illegal drags or delinquent behavior (Biblarz & Savci, 2010; Patterson, 2013) Children of gay or lesbian parents might be better adjusted than adult children of heterosexual parents in thatthe adult children of gay and lesbian parents exhibit lower levels of homophobia and less fear of negative evaluation than do the adult children of heterosexual parents. Gay men are ofien especially concerned about being good and nurturing fathers, and they try hard to raise their children with nonsexist, egalitar Jan attitudes (Goldberg, 2008; Patterson, 2013}, Evidence shows that gay parents have ‘more egalitarian sharing of child rearing than do fathers in heterosexual households (Biblare & Savei, 2010), CHAPTER 11: BEING WITH OTHERS | 339 ITEST YOURSELF 11.3 Recall |. The series of relatively predictable changes that families experience is called ‘These data will not eliminate the controversy, much of which is based on long:hele beliefs often region-based) and prejudices. Inthe United States, the topic of lesbian and gay couples'sight tobe parents is ikely to continue to play out in politial agendas for years to come Interpret ‘What diference would it make to view children asa financial asset (ie. a source of income) as apposed to a nancial burden 2. Major influences on the decison to have chikiren are marital ((e, mainly an expense)? Which of ese altitudes characterizes aan Suen eee ra most Western societies? Give an example of the other type. 3. Anew father who is invested in his parental role, but who Appl ray feel ambivalent about lime lost to his career is probably fF» ‘Would northern European cultures be Ikely to demonstrate over age ‘amilsm? Why or why not? 4. Armaor issue for foster parents, adoptive parents, and ‘Check your snewers tothe Recall Questions st the end ofthe chester stepparents is. be & aaa 1114 Divorce and Remarriage LEARNING OBJECTIVES + Who gets divorced? How does divorce aflect parental rela- ‘tonships with children? + What are remarriages Ike? How are they similar to and lifes ent from frst marviages? Frank ane Meriyn, bath in their late forties, thought tha their marrige would last forever, How ever, they weren't se lucky and have ust Been divorced. llhough two of thr chien are marred, their youngest coughter i stil college. The fnencal pressures Morin fees now thot she's en her on are begining 0 coke thei ol. She wonders whether her financial situation s similar thot of other recently duorced women, Despite what Frank and Marilyn pledged on their wedding day, their marriage did not last until death parted them; they dissolved their marriage through divorce. Even though divorce is stressful and difficult, thousands of people each year choose to try again, Most enter their second (or thitd or fourth) mareiage with renewed expectations of success. Are these new dreams realistic? As we'll se, it depends on many things; among the most important is whether children are involved, Divorce ‘Most couples enter marriage with the idea that their relationship will be permanent. Unfortunately, fewer and fewer couples experience this permanence. Rather than growing together, many couples grow apart, Who Gets Divorced and Why? ‘You or someone you know has experienced divorce, No wonder. Divorce in the United States is common—couples who marry in the United States today have about a 50-50 BEN 390) | P87 THREE: YOUNG AND MiDDLE ADULTHOODFigure 11.7 The United States has fone othe highest cinorce rates the ‘work. o 8 sarge that cod in dere 1990 1995 00 2095, 008 son United States — tly eet Sweden France United Kingdom — certnany Navona Center fr Heal Stats (20104). Mariage and dere Reteved eter 17,2010 fom hup wed gov) fastatsdvore htm, United Nations (2010). ivrces and nde divorce ates by whar/rel residence: 2004-2008 Reed tober 1720, om hwo unstatsan org uns demegraphicprodut/dyayb2008/Table5 pdf Divorces and cre vnc aes by urbana renidene: 2008-2012 Retived May 13,201 fran bp juntas argh engage products dybyhz012Tabe24 pa chance of divorce (National Center for Health Statistics, 20133). The adds are even worse if you matey young: For couples between 20 and 24 atthe Lime of marriage, the odds are about 60% for divorce. ‘But there is good news. The divorce rate has been slowly declining in the United States since it peaked in the late 1970s and early 1980s, In part, that’s due to people be- ing more serious about marriage and waiting Tonger to marry and in part to a greater social acceptance of cobabitation as an alternative ‘What about other countries? As you can see in Ml Figure 11.7, the divorce rate in nearly every other country is lower than that of the United States (National Center for Health Statistics, 2013a; United Nations, 2010). However, divorce rates in nearly every developed country have increased over the past several decades (United Nations, 2010), ‘Of those marriages ending in divorce, African American and Asian American cov ples tencied to le married longer at the time of divorce than do European American couples, and ethnically mixed marriages are at greater risk (National Center for Health Statistics, 2013a}. People with higher levels of education tend to have lower rates of divorce (Cherlin, 2013). Research indicates that men and women tend to agree on the reasons for divorce (Braver & Lamb, 2013}. Infidelity is the mast commonly reported cause, followed by in- compatibility, drinking or drug use, and growing apart. An individual couple's specific reasons for divorcing vary with gender, social class, and lifeccourse variables, Former hhusbands and wives are more likely to blame their ex-spouses than themselves for the problems that led to the divorce. Former husbands and wives agree, however, that the women were more likely to have initisted the divorce. ‘Why people divorce has been the focus of much research. A great deal of attention has been devoted to the notion that success or failure depends critically on how couples handle conflict. Although conflict management is important, it has become clear from research in couples therapy that the reasons couples split are complex (Kayser, 2010). CHAPTER 11: BEING WITH OTHERS | 391 IGottman and Levenson (2004) proposed a bold framework for understanding divorce, They developed two models that predict divorce early (within the fist seven years of marriage) and later (when the first child reaches age 14) with 93% accuracy ver the l-year period of their study. Negative emotions daplayed during conflict between the couple predict early divarce but not ater divorce. Longitudinal research with European and African American couples ovr a léyear period demonstrates that how couples deal with confict changes over time (Birdit etal, 2012), In general, European Ameticn wives and African American couples use more accommodating and fewer destructive and quiet withdrawal behaviors overtime, indicating tht they are looking for ways to defuse confit and are working through dificult isnues more effectively, European American husbands tend to remain consistent in their behavior, pethaps because they se les withdrawal early inthe marriage. These findings explain ‘why the odds for divorce are higher earlier in marriage: Couples married for shorter times are less able to dea effectively with conflict. Gottman’ framework and the research it has generated is important because it clearly shows thatthe way enuples express emotion is eritcal to marital suse Couples who divorce earlier typically do so because of high levels of negative feel: ings (eg. contemps, criticism, defensiveness, stonewalling) experienced as a result of intense marital confit, But for many couples, such intense conflict is generally absent. Although this makes teaser to stay ina mariage longer the absence of post tive emotions eventually take its toll and results in Inter divorce. Fora marrage to Tas, people need to he told that they ae loved and that what they do and feel really matters to their partner But we must be cautious about applying Gottman’s model to all married couples. kim, Capa and Crosby (2007) reported that Gltman's variables predicting early d- voree did nt hold ina sample of lawerinecre,highisk couples, However, Coan and Gottman (2007} point out that sample differences among the various studies means that, as noted in Chapter 1 conclasions about the predictive model must be drawn carefully “The high divorce rate in the United States has led to many approaches to increase the likelihood that marriages will lst. One approach to keeping couples together, covenant marriage termed coventnt mariage, makes divorce much harder to obtain. Covenant marriage Sspands the muriagecontrat to ale: expands the marriage contrat toa lifelong commitment betwen the partners within & Teng commimen between he pate ype community This approach sa rligiuscentered view founded on theses PP y that if getting married and getting divorced were grounded in religious and cultural values and divorce was made more difficult, couples would be more likely o stay together, The couple wanting to celebrate a covenant marriage agrees to participate in mandatary premarital counseling, and should problems arse later, the grounds for divorce become very limited (White, 2010) Other approaches to dectessing the likelihood of divorce focus on teaching cox ples the skills necessary for maintaining strong relationships, suchas good commune Cation skills and joint problem-solving strategies. Research related to thes initiatives bas focused on the postive aspects of mariage and on the need todo abetter jb with marriage education (Fincham & Beach, 2010), Will hey succeed in helping couples sty eke be eiSion marred longer? That remains tobe seen {Rp mil sueiveter te longa What Do YOU THINK? 22 ‘The Healthy Mariage hitative rely fused some type of education program.Do they improvement Severalreliious denominations a great deal efaterton on ways te lower work! have ther own version of mariage education te dvoree rate (Fncham & Beath 2010), Mest education programs focus on om program the Cathel's Pre-Cana program i ‘One oppracch endorsed by mary groups.caled municaton between the couplethe programs ene example marriage education is based onthe ea previce general advice, nat spite ways to “There are numeraut challanges to mare {hat the more coupes or prepored for marrage, eal wih a coup’ sues. Because only 8 sxcensve community-based marrage educa ‘he beer the reatonshp il sure over the minaiy of cousescurrenly atend a mariage on programs. For example in some cases, long rr. More than 40 states have inated education program.there is plenty of raam or the education programs were eninaly 392, | P87 THREE: YOUNG AND MIDDLE ADULTHOODdeveloped to adecess poverty (Acminsrae engagement) hive ako been developed (Hal-_at the beghning ofthe program appear to ‘Yon for Chiren ane Familes.2010).Many ford, Marken, & Staley, 2008), benef mos covsles conabt and are lee ely to atend Rather than gervene wh couples before Theve positive outcomes are cesuling marrage eduction programs eventhough they marysome programe target aFeady- ina broacenng ofthe approaches uted by ‘theres Ich evidence that cohabitation rmaried couples (O'Halloran eal, 2013).One marriage educatrs to topics beyend com ‘improves communication skis between the of the best known of these programs is Worle: munaion. How these programs develop and cousle(Fincham & Beach, 2010).Asaresut, wide Mersage Encounter. whether more couples will participate remain versions of marrage ecveston programs ae Research to date chows that theve sk” 9 be sen. What does apaeer to be the case being adanted far younger adults (whe. if based ecueston programs have modest bute that f couples agree to parvcipate ina mae marry while young have a much higher "sk —_cansisteray postive eee on martal cualty rage education program.they may lower their Tor eivorce) and for single adults (0 tech and communication (Cowan, Cowan, & Knox, risk fr problems later or. Wht co yeu thine ‘ther about communication skill} I addition, 2010; Oalloran eta, 2013) Perhaps nat su Would you be wing Lo participate ina mar Drograms med at key vansiion ponts (2g. prisngh couples who report mone problems rage eduction program! Effects of Divorce on the Couple Although changes in attitudes toward divorce have eased the social trauma associated with it divorce still takes a high toll on the psyche of the couple. Research in the United States and Spain shows great similarity in how both partners ina failed marriage fee: deeply disappointed, misunderstood, and rejected {Doohan, Carrére, & Riggs 2010; Yarnoz-Yaben, 2010) Unlike the situation of a spouse dying, divorce often means that one's exspouse is present to provide a reminder of the unpleasant aspects of the relationship and, in some cases, feelings of personal failure. Divorced people suffer negative health consequences as well (Lamela, Figueiredo, & Bastos, 2014). Asa result, divorced people are typically unhappy in general, at leat for a while (Doohan et al, 2010), The effects of a divorce can even be traced to generations not yet born because of the long-term negative consequences on education and parent-child relations in future generations (Amato & Cheadle, 2005), Divorced people sometimes find the transition difficult; researchers refer to these problems as “divorce hangover” (Walther, 1991), Divorce hangover reflects divorced partners'inability to let go ofthe former marriage or partner, develop new friendships, br reorient theraselves as single parents ff there are children). Indeed, exspouses who are preoceupied with thoughts of—and who have high feelings of hostility toward— their former partner have significantly poorer emotional well-being than ex-spouises who are not so preoccupied or who have feelings of friendship toward the former part ner (Braver & Lamb, 2013}. Both low preoccupation and forgiveness may be indicators that ex-spouses are able to move on with thet lives Divorce in middle age has some special characteristics. If women initiate the di vorce, they report selffocused growth and optimism; if they did not initiate the di vorce, they tend to ruminate and feel vulnerable {Sakratda, 2005). However, in both cases, they report changes in thei social networks. Middle-aged women are ata signifi cant disadvantage for remarriage—an especially traumatic situation for women who obtained much of ther identity from thei roles as wife and mother ‘We must not overlook the financial problems that many divorced women face (Braver & Lamb, 2013). These problems are especially keen for the middle-aged divor cee who may have spent years as a homemaker and has few marketable job skills. For her, divorce presents an especially difficult financial hardship, which is intensified if she has children in college and the father provides litle support. Relationships with Young Children When it involves children, divorce becomes a complicated matter, especially when viewed from a global perspective (Amato & Boyd, 2014). In most countries, mothers tend to obtain custody but often do not obtain sufficient financial resources to sup: port the childten. This puts an extreme financial buscien on divorced mothers, whose standaed of living is typically reduced CHAPTER 11: BEING WITH OTHERS | 393 Ivoluntary, contractually based alternative {isp resolution process for couples who ‘want to negotiate a resolution of thelr ih Aion rather than have a ruling imposed ‘on them by a court or an arbitrator THINK About It Given he serous input of sree wat changes nite tleton might lower the dure ae? Incontrast, divorced fathers often pay ahigher psychological price. Although many would like o remain active in their children’s lives, few actually do. Child support laws in some states also may limit fathers’ contact with their children (Wadllington, 2005). When mothers who have custody remarry, visits from noneustodial fathers usually decline (Anderson & Greene, 2013), ‘One hopeful direction that addresses the usually difficult custody situations following divorce is the Collaborative Divorce Project, based on collaborative law (Mosten, 2003; Pruett, Insabella, & Gustafson, 2005). Collaborative divorce isa voluntary, contractually based alternative dispute resolution process for couples who want to negotiate a resolution fof their situation rather than have a ruling imposed on them by « court or an arbitrator (Ballard etal, 2014). Collaborative divorce is an intervention designed to assist the par ents of children 6 years ancl younger as they begin the separationjdivorce process. Early results from this approach ate positive (DeLucia-Waack, 2010}. In addition to positive evaluations from both parents, couples benefited in terms of less conflict, greater father involvement, and better outcomes for children than in the conteol group, Attorneys and court records indicate that intervention families were more cooperative and were less likely to need custody evaluations and other costly services. The Collab- orative Divorce Project is evidence that programs can be designed and implemented to benefit all members ofthe family. Divorce and Relationships with Adult Children ‘We saw in Chapter 5 that young childeen can be seriously affected by their parents’ divorce. But what happens when the parents of adult children divorce? Are adult chil dren affected, 100? It certainly looks that way. Young aclults whose parents divorce experience a great deal of emotional vulnerability and stress (Cooney & Unlenberg, 1990}, One young man put it this way: ‘The difficult thing was that it was a time where, you know, [you're] making the transition from high school to college... your high school friends are dispersed they're all over the place....I's normally a very difficult transition [college|, new atmosphere, new workload, meeting new people. You've got to start deciding what ‘you want to do, you've got to sort of stat getting more independent, and so forth. ‘And then at the same ime you find out about a divorce. You know, it’ just that ‘much more adjustment you have to make. (Cooney et al, 1986) ‘The effects of experiencing the divorce of one's parents while growing up can be quite longelasting. College-age students report poorer relations with their parents if their parents are divorced (Yu et al, 2010}. Parental divorce also affects young adults’ views on intimate relationships and marriage, often having negative effects on them (Ottaway, 2010), Wallerstein and Lewis (2004) report the findings from 2 25-year follow-up study of individuals whose parents divorced when they were between 3 and 18 years old, Results show an unexpected gulf between growing up in intact ver sus divorced families as well as the difficulties that children of divorce eneounter in achieving love, sexual intimacy, and commitment to marriage and parenthood. Even when the length of time spent in the intact two-parent family was taken into account, negative effects of divorce on adult children were still found in 2 large Dutch study (Kalmijn, 2013). The “marriage protection” factor outweighed biological relatedness, especialy for fathers, There is no doubt that divorce has significant effects regardless fof when it accurs in a child’ life Remarriage ‘The trauma of divorce does not deter people from beginning new relationships, which often lead to another marriage. In the United States, men and women both typically wait about 3.5 years before they remarry (National Center for Health Statistics, 2013). However, remarriage rates have plummeted since the 1990s by about 40% as more postedivorced couples choose to cohabit instead (Scarf, 2013), 3940 | P87 THREE: YOUNG AND MIDDLE ADULTHOODFor those who do remarry, rates vary somewhat across differ: ent groups and educational levels: European Americans are more likely to be married two or more times compared with other ethnic groups, as do people with lower educational levels (Elliott & Lewis, 2010}. Military veterans are also more likely to be married more han once compared with nonveterans. In contrast to first marriages, remarriage has few norms or guidelines for couples, especially in how to deal with stepchildren and extended families (Elliott & Lewis, 2010; Scarf, 2013). The lack of elear role definitions may be a major reason why the divorce rate for remarriages is significantly higher (about 25%; even higher if stepchildren are involved) than for first marriages. Although women are more likely to initiate a divorce, they are less likely to remarry unless they are poor (Eliott & Lewis, 2010), However, because ofthe increase n financial resources, women ge erally tend to benefit more from remarriage than do men, particu: larly if they have children (Shafer & Jensen, 2013). Although many people believe that divorced individuals should wait before remar- ying to avoid the so-called “rebound effec,” there is no evidence those who remarry sooner have less success in remarriage than those who wait longer (Wolfinger, 2007}, [Athough eats canbe difeck common acusing tit TEST YOURSELF 1.4 Recall Interpret |. Following divorce, mast women sufer disproportionately in Dessite greatly increased divorce rates over the past few de- Fe a See eee ‘cades, the rate of marriage has nat changed very much. Wry? 2. On average, within two years after a divorce, ‘fathers remain ceatralin their children’s Ives Apply Ricardo and Maria are engaged to be married, Ricardo works long hours as the manager 0° local coffee shop, while Maria ‘works regular hours as an administrative asisan ata large 3. Even many years later divorced may. not experience positive relationships with their adult children. “communications company. Based on what you know about why 4. For Aifican American couples, divorce rates forremartied couples get divorced, what factors may increase the likethood couples are —__ than for frst marriages, ‘that Ricardo and Marie's marriage wil fi? Check your ansuers to the Recall Questions a he ene of the chaster ILI Relationships emotional sharing. Gender differences in. samegender friendship patterns may explain the difficulties men and ‘What types of friendships de adults have! How do adult friendships women have in forming cross-gender friendships. develop? + People tend to have more friendships during young adulthood What is love? How does it begin! How does it develop through than during any other period. Friendships areespecially impor adulthood? feat foc rating We exert throughout walttood, 6 Passon, intimacy, and commitment are the key compo Men tend to have fewer close friendships and tobase them nents of love tn shared activities such as sports, Worten tend i have. Although styles of love change with age, the priorities more close friendships and to base them on intimate and within telationships do not Men tend tobe more romantic CHAPTER II: BEING WITH OTHERS | 295 Icarliorin relationships compared with women, who tend to be cautious pragmatists. As the length of the relationship Inereases, intimacy and passion decrease but commitment Selecting a mate warks best when there are shared values, goals, and interests. There are cross-cultural differences with regard to the specific aspects of these that are consid ered most important, ‘What isthe nature of abuse in some relationships? Levels of aggressive behavior range from displaying ver baal aggression to displaying physieal aggression 1o killing one’s partner. The causes of aggressive behaviors become ‘more complex as the level of aggression increases. People remain in abusive relationships for many reasons, includ ing low self-esteem and the belief that they cannot leave. Lifestyles ‘Why do some people decide not to marry.and what are these peo- ple lice! ‘Most adults decide by age 30 whether they plan on getting ‘married, Never-married adults often develop astzong network of close friends. Dealing with ther people's expectations that they should marry is often difficult for single people. ‘What are the characteristics of cohabiting people? Young adults usually cohabit as a step toward marriage, and adults of all ages may cohabit for financial reasons. Cohabitation is only rarely seen as an alternative to mar. riage. Overall, more similarities than differences exist between cohabiting and married couples, ‘What are gay and lesbian relationships ke? + Gay and lesbian relationships are similar to heterosexual ‘marriages in terms of relationship issues. Some countries and some states in the United States now permit same-sex ‘marriages. Lesbian couples tend to be more egalitarian and are more likely to remain together than gay couples are. ‘What is marriage lke through the course of adulthood? The most important factors in creating marriages that endure ate a stable sense of identity as a foundation for imacy, similarity of values and interests, effective com: ‘munication, and the contribution of unique skills by each partner. For couples with children, marital satisfaction tends to decline until the children leave home, although individual differences are apparent, especially in long-term marriages. ‘Most long-term marriages are happy. 11.3 The Family Life Cycle ‘What are che common forms of files? Although the nuclear family is the most common form of family in Western societies the most common form around the world is the extended family. Families experience a series of relatively predictable changes called the family life eyele. This eyele provides a framework for understanding the changes families go through as children mature. Wry do people have children? + Although having children is stressful and very expensive, ‘most people do it anyway because of the many emotional rewards the children bring, However, the number of child- free couples is increasing, ‘Whats like to bea parent! What differences are there in diferent ‘types of parenting? + The timing of parenthood is important in how involved parents are in their families as opposed to their careers. Single parents are faced with many problems, especially if they are women and are divorced. The main problem is significantly reduced financial resources. [A major issue for adoptive parents, foster parents, and stepparents is how strongly the child will bond with therm. Each of these relationships has special characteristics. Gay and lesbian parents also face numerous obstacles, but they usually prove to be good parents, 11.4 Divorce and Remarriage Who gets divorced? How does divorce affec parental relationships swith chiléren? Currently, odds are about 50-50 that a new marriage will end in divorce. Conflict styles can predict who divorces. Recovery from divorce is different for men and women. Men tend to have a tougher time in the short run, but ‘women clearly have a harder time in the long run, often for financial reasons. Difficulties between divorced partners usually involve vist tation and child support. Disruptions also occur in divorced parents’ relationships with their children, whether the chil dren are young or are adults themselves. ‘What are remarriages lke! How are they similar co and diferent {rom fist marriages? Most divorced couples remarry. Second marriages are espe- cially vulnerable to stress if spouses must adjust to having stepchildren, Remarriage in middle age and beyond tends tobe happy. IG AND MIDDLE ADULTHOOD M396 | vane Tots: You"Test Yourself: Recall Answers Ul: Le women 2. men 2, romantic love 4, traditional S, men 11.2: 1, marry 2. step toward 2, heterosexual marriages 4, exchange theory §. decreases 11.3. |. the family life cycle 2. psychological factors 3. 30 4. how strongly the child will bond with them, 114 I financial 2. few 2 fathers 4. lower Key Terms assortative mating (370) marital adjustment (380) ruclear family (384) abusive relationship (374) ‘marital satisfaction (380) extended family (384) battered woman syndrome (374) homogamy (380) familism (386) cohabitation (377) exchange theory (380) covenant marriage (392) marital success (380) vulnerability-stress-adaptation ‘marriage education (392), ‘marital quality (380) ‘model (381) collaborative divorce (394) CHAPTER II: BEING WITH OTHERS | 297 I