根据单方面离婚法,越来越多和越来越少的离婚倾向人群的离婚

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q1 FAMILY STUDIES
Linus Andersson, Jan Saarela, Caroline Uggla
{"title":"根据单方面离婚法,越来越多和越来越少的离婚倾向人群的离婚","authors":"Linus Andersson,&nbsp;Jan Saarela,&nbsp;Caroline Uggla","doi":"10.1111/jomf.13056","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>This study analyzes heterogeneity in divorce rates after the 1987 transition from mutual consent to unilateral no-fault divorce in Finland.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Marriage and divorce legislation can impact divorce rates. However, some groups may be more responsive to changes in legal context than others. We propose that unilateral no-fault divorce laws either (a) increase divorce more in more or less divorce-prone groups, or (b) increase divorce equally across these groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We use population-wide individual-level register data from Finland to identify salient social groups with different divorce propensity, including ethno-linguistic and religious affiliations with divergent divorce propensity and couples of different parental status, marriage length, and marital history. We use piecewise constant exponential survival models to estimate the association with divorce proneness before and after the introduction of mutual consent divorce laws.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Divorce rates increase in all studied subgroups by about 60% in the years following unilateral divorce. We found no support for the hypothesis that groups that were either more or less divorce-prone prior to the reform would be particularly responsive to divorce liberalization in the short-to-medium term.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The findings speak toward a universal rather than heterogeneous effect of divorce law liberalization.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48440,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marriage and Family","volume":"87 3","pages":"1038-1059"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jomf.13056","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Divorce among more and less divorce-prone populations following unilateral divorce laws\",\"authors\":\"Linus Andersson,&nbsp;Jan Saarela,&nbsp;Caroline Uggla\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jomf.13056\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>This study analyzes heterogeneity in divorce rates after the 1987 transition from mutual consent to unilateral no-fault divorce in Finland.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Marriage and divorce legislation can impact divorce rates. However, some groups may be more responsive to changes in legal context than others. We propose that unilateral no-fault divorce laws either (a) increase divorce more in more or less divorce-prone groups, or (b) increase divorce equally across these groups.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We use population-wide individual-level register data from Finland to identify salient social groups with different divorce propensity, including ethno-linguistic and religious affiliations with divergent divorce propensity and couples of different parental status, marriage length, and marital history. We use piecewise constant exponential survival models to estimate the association with divorce proneness before and after the introduction of mutual consent divorce laws.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Divorce rates increase in all studied subgroups by about 60% in the years following unilateral divorce. We found no support for the hypothesis that groups that were either more or less divorce-prone prior to the reform would be particularly responsive to divorce liberalization in the short-to-medium term.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The findings speak toward a universal rather than heterogeneous effect of divorce law liberalization.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48440,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Marriage and Family\",\"volume\":\"87 3\",\"pages\":\"1038-1059\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jomf.13056\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Marriage and Family\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jomf.13056\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FAMILY STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Marriage and Family","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jomf.13056","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本研究分析1987年芬兰双方同意离婚向单方无过错离婚转变后离婚率的异质性。婚姻和离婚立法可以影响离婚率。但是,有些群体可能比其他群体更能适应法律环境的变化。我们建议,单边无过错离婚法要么(a)在或多或少倾向于离婚的群体中增加离婚率,要么(b)在这些群体中平均增加离婚率。方法:我们使用芬兰全国人口的个人登记数据来识别具有不同离婚倾向的显著社会群体,包括具有不同离婚倾向的民族语言和宗教信仰,以及具有不同父母地位、婚姻年限和婚姻史的夫妇。我们使用分段常数指数生存模型来估计引入双方同意离婚法前后与离婚倾向的关系。结果在所有被研究的亚组中,在单方离婚后的几年中,离婚率增加了约60%。我们发现,在改革之前或多或少倾向于离婚的群体在中短期内对离婚自由化特别敏感,这一假设没有得到支持。研究结果表明,离婚法律自由化的影响是普遍的,而不是异质的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Divorce among more and less divorce-prone populations following unilateral divorce laws

Divorce among more and less divorce-prone populations following unilateral divorce laws

Objective

This study analyzes heterogeneity in divorce rates after the 1987 transition from mutual consent to unilateral no-fault divorce in Finland.

Background

Marriage and divorce legislation can impact divorce rates. However, some groups may be more responsive to changes in legal context than others. We propose that unilateral no-fault divorce laws either (a) increase divorce more in more or less divorce-prone groups, or (b) increase divorce equally across these groups.

Methods

We use population-wide individual-level register data from Finland to identify salient social groups with different divorce propensity, including ethno-linguistic and religious affiliations with divergent divorce propensity and couples of different parental status, marriage length, and marital history. We use piecewise constant exponential survival models to estimate the association with divorce proneness before and after the introduction of mutual consent divorce laws.

Results

Divorce rates increase in all studied subgroups by about 60% in the years following unilateral divorce. We found no support for the hypothesis that groups that were either more or less divorce-prone prior to the reform would be particularly responsive to divorce liberalization in the short-to-medium term.

Conclusions

The findings speak toward a universal rather than heterogeneous effect of divorce law liberalization.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
81
期刊介绍: For more than 70 years, Journal of Marriage and Family (JMF) has been a leading research journal in the family field. JMF features original research and theory, research interpretation and reviews, and critical discussion concerning all aspects of marriage, other forms of close relationships, and families.In 2009, an institutional subscription to Journal of Marriage and Family includes a subscription to Family Relations and Journal of Family Theory & Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信