What a ridiculous article. It's vague and simple-minded. Aside from obvious variables such as socio-economic factors, cultural attitudes and norms, religion, race, education levels, place of birth/nationality, rural/urban dwelling the statistics don't actually mean anything because too many other IMPORTANT considerations are entirely ignored.

Someone from the average OECD state with access to a College education not available to former generations, access to birth control, higher rental in an urban area, a longer period of unemployment post-graduation due to increased competition and massive debt usually doesn't have the wherewithal for marriage. A 19 year old in a 'Bible-belt' type county/rural area in the same OECD country would have a completely different experience and subsequently would have a different methodology and approach to marriage. They would also (obviously) hold different moral and ethical values and face different societal pressure to get married before 20 and remain married even if in an abusive or unhappy or unfulfilling marriage. They would also have a different number of children/dependents to consider when determining whether to terminate a marriage. This would in no way determine the QUALITY of the marriage, simply affirm that it did actually happen.

Or consider the fact that some people emmigrate to the same OECD state from a less economically developed country where their priorities are to learn a new language and culture and find a job before getting married; or conversely where their original culture prizes marriage above all else regardless of the satisfaction. Some get married for security - emotional and financial - and the more children they have the more security they perceive themselves to have. The strength of the family unit factors far more into whether they will remain married and not the age at which they get married. This can complicate things because leaving a spouse becomes considerably difficult. A young (presumably less educated spouse and parent) dependent on someone else would likely remain married not because of common values as implied by the article, but because of sheer necessity and the lack of an alternative. These same cultures typically frown upon late marriage, divorce and individualism; something also not factored into the article.

Also, even with the aforementioned factors excluded; many people who marry in their late-thirties are marrying people who had children with other people first (or have children themselves and baggage of another sort) and have baby-mama/daddy drama, financial constraints and other issues that cause more stress than "young" people in marriages. his boils down again to the quality of the marriage and not the age of the spouses.

As people get older, we tend to become somewhat unphased by convention so staying married simply for the tradition of it can become undesirable not to mention unnecessary. I have often heard unhappily married people bemoan that the reason they didn't divorce was that they couldn't afford to. When a female in particular marries without genuine prospects for economic independence, (usually as a teenager or in her early twenties); there are usually considerations like children, mortgages, religion etc to factor in and not similarities in character or personality. Older first-time brides are sometimes marrying men who are not particularly desirable (divorce) due to their difficult characters and personality traits like emotional unavailability and habits that caused divorce in the first place; and the quality of their partner - and not their AGE - is what leads to the detriment of these marriages.

Older first-time partners of both genders usually have acquired financial independence as well as have been educated and hold diverse and unconventional views of traditional marriage, so again, their focus is on marriage quality and in the case where divorce is not a financially, socially or practical impediment to their separation, the seize the opportunity... they can afford to get a job as a single parent, can afford childcare and are not dependent on a person so they are in essence not forced to stay. This is not about age, it is about options.

Anyway, I am not commenting to rewrite the article, just pointing out that it was nonsense.

More Posts