Close Relationships-Dissolution Issues

 
 

1. Dissolution: Similar processes in non-marital or marital break-ups, except usually kids & custody. Too little Understanding of process of break-down of CRs (partially because methods usually retrospective).

2. Annette Lawson's work on adultery (Adultery, 1988, Basic Books)

REPORTED REASONS:

For Women:

For Men:

3. Leslie Baxter’s (1984) work, 6 issues of the dissolution process (Leslie

is a professor in the UI Communications Studies Dpt. who teaches in

the area of close relationships):

She finds the most common dissolution trajectory to be "preserving indirectness" (unilateral decision & use of indirect strategy resisted by partner). How do partners deliver the bad news? Baxter (1986):

Direct strategies including:

  1. fait accompli ("It’s over & no hope for repair);
  2. state of the relationship talk (about problems, with break-up suggested);
  3. attribution conflict (intense argument used as basis for break-up);
  4. negotiated farewell (clear, bi-lateral communication of termination).
Indirect strategies including:
  1. withdrawal (spend less time with partner);
  2. pseudo-de-escalation (stating that s/he wants the relationship to be less close);
  3. cost-escalation (increasing the costs for the partner in hopes partner will break it off—"passive aggression");
  4. fading away (little talk, just disappear).

4. As Ellen Berscheid said in Contemporary Psychology (1999, Vol.44, p. 426) in a review of a book by Sternberg: "Endings...Sternberg must draw extensively on sociologist Diane Vaughan’s book Uncoupling, which have the ring of truth... But beyond that? Nothing, because there is nothing, or, at least, not much."

5. "Leaver" vs. "Left" in a close relationship: Weiss (Marital Separation, 1975) and Vaughn (Uncoupling,1986) have conducted valuable work on the processes of recovery from dissolution. Vaughn finds that the "left" person experiences a longer and more difficult recovery. Weiss finds that it is more complicated than that. Who leaves whom, especially after a long CR/marriage may not be clear, since each party may leave at one time or another. Further, both parties likely experience many negative emotions (including guilt on the part of the leaver).

6. Children of Divorce The topic of children of divorce (even adult children in families in which divorces occur) has a vast literature. Judith Wallerstein has followed individuals in the San Francisco Bay Area for over 3 decades since their parents divorced and has documented many negative impacts (e.g., difficulties in their own CRs, lower self-esteem, lower trust of close others, even less accomplishment in work and career). However, it is clear also from research that children may grow and become more mature in positive ways due to the break-up of their parents’ relationship. Further, children who have to endure major conflict in their parents’ relationship often experience greater negative impacts over time than do children whose highly conflicted parents divorce.


Table 10.1
Phases of Close Relationship Disaffection

Phase 1: Disappointment
Feelings: anger, hurt, shattered assumptions
Thoughts: heightened awareness of partner's faults; who is responsible for problems?
Behaviors: attempts to resolve the problems unilaterally, may involve trying to please partner; avoidant and passive coping (e.g., silence)
may be used.

Phase 2: Disappointment and Disaffection
Feelings: intense anger and pain
Thoughts: partner's negative traits seen as pattern; dilemma of staying or leaving is faced.
Behaviors: continued attempt to problem-solve; confrontation of partner; physical and emotional withdrawal

Phase 3: Reaching Disaffection
Feelings: anger, apathy, hopelessness
Thoughts: making plans to end the relationship; focus on partner's negative qualities
Behaviors: actions to dissolve the relationship; possibly counseling to help disengage
Adapted from Kayser, 1994
 

Kayser's (1994) research on disaffection with a sample of 49 formerly married persons also showed that the participants believed that
the partner's control, lack of intimate behaviors, and other negative traits (e.g., disloyalty, over-dependence, inability to give) were at the
top of the issues that had been faced in their relationships.

While Kayser's analysis and evidence are valuable, there are lots of variations in people's patterns of relationship dissolution. For
example, Table 10.1 only refers to the "blaming" pattern often shown by partners who become disaffected. However, sometimes
partners become convinced that their own qualities are to blame for the problems and ultimate demise of the relationship.

Table 1.1
Demographic Trends for Divorce

1. Since 1960, the number of divorces has tripled. There were a little over 1 million divorces in 1998, involving more than 1 million children. There are 70 million people in the U.S. (out of a total population of 260 million) who have been divorced at least once.

2. Today 10 million children live with a parent who is separated of divorced.

3. At least 150,000 divorces, or 1 in 7, will involve custody battles.

4. The number of single-parent families has more than quadrupled since 1960. There are approximately 27 million children under 18 living with only their mothers, up from 8 million in 1960.

5. The median duration of a marriage is only 7.2 years.

6. Seven million children live with an alcoholic parent, and almost 1.2 million children run away from home each year. Not surprisingly, in this context of changing structure and meaning, suicide is the leading case of death among American teenagers.

7. The median age of divorce for men is 35.6, and 33.2 for women.

8. The number of women who are stalked by a husband or ex-husband every year is approximately 380,000. The number of men who are stalked by a wife or ex-wife is approximately 52,000.

9. The combined age of the world's oldest couple to get a divorce is 188.

10. The percentage of remarriages that end in divorce is 60%.

11. The estimated average length of divorce proceedings is 1 year, and the estimated average cost of divorce is $15,000.

12. The number of cohabitating couples in 1960 was 430,000 versus 4.2 million in 1998.

Source: National Center for Health Statistics