I wish I’d seen this report last week, when I was writing about heartbreak. There’s not a great deal of scientific data mentioned, but it does offer some indications that marital demise may shorten your lifespan.
Specifically, this article positions divorce as being as likely to kill you as smoking. And the reasons cited – to be expected – the many complex and interrelated health impacts of stress on the body.
Among the stresses that shorten lifespan?
Financial worries, though that particular element is buried in discussion of other aspects of marriage, divorce, and happiness.
Are we surprised?
Should we really be studying the extent to which being poor will shorten your lifespan – not to mention, impact the pursuit of personal fulfillment?
Impacts of Divorce
While most discussion of the deleterious impacts of divorce have to do with children and their emotions (understandably), with at least one study (dating to 1920) concluding that the lifespan of our offspring may be affected by our uncouplings – would the news that we may be slicing years off our own lives encourage married adults to take divorce less lightly?
I’m not suggesting that we take our breakups lightly per se, but it’s rare that we enter divorce with any inkling of what lies ahead: the months or years of court proceedings and their aftermath, out-of-pocket legal costs and expense of splitting households, the psychic wounds we inflict on each other; the loss of friends, of extended family, and potentially – job, home, and belief system.
I’m also not suggesting we remain in horrendous marriages forever either. For some, there’s a way back from marital troubles to finding each other again, rebuilding something respectful and loving. For others, exiting a bad marriage may mean sacrificing a great deal, but the path eventually leads to something better.
Post-Divorce Reinvention
As for life after divorce, some of us cobble together a framework within which to reinvent ourselves. We learn so much in the process, that even if our lives are marred materially, we find the gems in our experience that teach us to look inward, to see others with a more discerning (and compassionate?) eye, and to take subsequent relationships more slowly – savoring the process.
That, of course, is offset with significant issues in child-rearing, and typically an unexpectedly painful drain on finances – for one ex or the other, and possibly both.
And anyone who’s been reading around this little gathering spot knows – it isn’t so easy – especially at midlife, and depending upon your particular circumstances.
Popular culture may paint a prettier picture than reality; Under the Tuscan Sun with a refreshing Diane Lane in its starring role gets the wronged divorcée an Italian adventure and a whole new life. Likewise, the (strangely?) controversial Eat, Pray, Love with its depiction of trading in marriage for a journey of self-discovery.
Health, Happiness, and the Doctor?
Returning to the article at hand, I quote:
Indications that the risk of dying is a full 23 percent higher among divorcées than married people surprised even the researchers, who didn’t think life expectancy would be slashed to ages comparable with smokers, heavy drinkers, and the obese.
However, the writer is quick to point out that there is no causality which can be derived, though among the conclusions offered is this:
Ex-husbands are at significantly higher risk of early death than their ex-wives. Why? Because wives help keep their husbands alive.
Conventional wisdom (since the 1970s) tells us that when a man’s health falters, generally he ignores it; the implication remains that a nurturing partner in the picture will encourage him to address it. Yet statistics reflect that men remarry more quickly than women, and at a higher frequency.
This suggests to me a direct conflict with one of the points made in the study – that the negative health impacts of divorce affect men more than women. What other gender-biased but convenient conclusions will arise from this report?
What about the women (in marriage or out), who ignore their faltering health due to crazed schedules or lack of money? Any studies looking into that phenomenon?
Good Relationship, Better Health
Not to focus solely on my concerns with this brief bit of (non?) news, the article addresses the complex relationship issues in marriage (as well as divorce), and ultimately concludes
The key isn’t just marriage, but a good relationship.
Of course, if serial marriage and divorce become part of the process of seeking that “good relationship,” if the pursuit of happiness at all cost leaves damage in its wake – then what?
I find many of the summary statements drawn from this data to be simplistic, though the reporting of this study is intriguing – and a step in the right direction, in my opinion.
Digging deeper, the results come from a review of more than 30 studies, and regardless of the emphasis (and possible bias?), I’m grateful that any such discussion may encourage a few to sit up and take notice. And more importantly – to focus on developing those good relationships prior to marriage, to working on marriage rather than assuming an “easy out,” and to balance the God of Personal Happiness with the needs of a stable Family Unit.
And yes, that’s my bias.
© D. A. Wolf
“…among the conclusions offered is this:
Ex-husbands are at significantly higher risk of early death than their ex-wives. Why? Because wives help keep their husbands alive.”
There are so many individual differences as to make general conclusions of dubious value. Staying married to my former wife until the children were young adults often felt deadly, but I survived and now I’ve got a new lease on life. Her unhealthy life style affected the entire family. While married, I did what I could to help keep her healthy and keep the children from picking up her habits. Unfortunately, but not a total surprise, my former wife (only a bit older than I am) died suddenly in November. It’s sad to think of — she had many positive qualities. In any case, sometimes the stereotyped roles are true; sometimes things are the reverse.
A shame we increasingly gravitate to the brevity of easy conclusions, Paul. As you say – sometimes the stereotype is true; sometimes, the reverse. All the more reason we need to read – everything – with a grain of salt, and always consider that there are other possibilities.
Great post D A. The mainstream media always oversimplifies and slants stories to get the best response. It’s up to people like us to point out the things that most miss, like the fact that maybe a big part of this increase is caused by mothers and children being dropped into poverty by divorce . . .
Oh Wendy. Yes. But you’ll find that whenever data is brought forth to support your statement (and there is some) – it’s almost immediately bombarded by certain sectors claiming the opposite. Barriers for women to so many critical resources remain, albeit less (statistically) than a few decades ago. And being poor?
It seems it’s the greatest “shame” of all in this country. Every way you care to interpret that statement.
The headline of the article makes me crazy. It tells people that not wanting to marry is basically not an option. If you want to live, that is. What a load of crap. Stephanie Koontz and Bella DePaulo have both found that the higher level of happiness that married couples supposedly have only lasts through the honeymoon period. After about 2 years, the happiness level mirrors the level prior to marriage. And while divorcees may be unhappier after a divorce, that just goes to show that we should think long and hard before saying those vows!
Yes, and yes, and especially yes to this comment, April: we should think long and hard before saying those vows!
Somewhere recently (possibly at Huff Post), I commented that we seem driven to force couples toward marriage. We seem to have this concept of relationship – still – that is remarkably one-note, despite the fact that people are opting for other arrangements, like living (happily) solo, participating in committed relationships without cohabiting, and cohabiting (without marriage).
To me, some of the problems in these alternatives deal with money. Insufficient money to maintain even two small households. Insufficient money to cover health care / health insurance costs in a country where without an employer (or spouse’s employer) who subsidizes a portion of the cost, you go broke trying to pay premiums or go without health care / insurance. Pursuit of happiness? I’d take pursuit of societal sanity, I think. Along with a “healthy” dose of appreciating life’s very sweet and loving moments – in all their variations.
Many hidden factors in all serious study of human behavior. I have been thinking for two hours about this, while doing my usual mix of work, home-keeping, and self-care on a holiday. What about this sliver of truth inside this study:
When death comes, the “reaper” is an act of nature, driven by fate, biology, weather, slick roads, another’s deady carelessness…other ways. Tis not personal, usually, save for crimes of passion.
Divorce is not nature. Divorce results from action or violent inaction. Tis very personal. And, from a person who was affianced, betrothed, plighted, pledged, and wedded to another person. Something is sown, through an action. Tis, like murder, an offense against something bonded. I am not sure that the crime is against the person, actually, but against that third, mysterious entity, that is the bond itself. (Forgive me my idiosyncrasy here, but there it is.)
I can accept nature’s wounds and fatal blows so much more than personal actions.
Now, having said this, for my maturation, I must try to see something to forgive, so I can live better, and perhaps longer.
—
Not negating what others have said…we need a long and civil and safe conversation to become even part way clear on this. Just my thought.
—
And, dear BLW, thank you for this safe place.
“I can accept nature’s wounds and fatal blows so much more than personal actions.”
I’ve re-read this line many times. I suspect I resemble you in this, and I realize that for some, the opposite is true.
As always, NoName, thank you for sharing your thoughts with us.
@April “The headline of the article makes me crazy. It tells people that not wanting to marry is basically not an option. If you want to live, that is. What a load of crap.”
Maybe I missed something or am not understanding. The headline referenced divorce, not being single or being divorced. It made no statement about the longevity effects of never marrying.
This excerpt: “Indications that the risk of dying is a full 23 percent higher among divorcées than married people surprised even the researchers, who didn’t think life expectancy would be slashed to ages comparable with smokers, heavy drinkers, and the obese.”
Sounds like something taken from the Longevity Project–the book.
I’m only going from memory here, but I recall the book saying that it was men and not women that had earlier deaths from divorce–or divorced men died even more prematurely than divorced women. Women seemed to bounce back. Men who remarried may have regained some, but they still died earlier on average than their continuously married counterparts.
Since men seem to remarry sooner and more frequently than woman, I can understand the discrepancy in the wives-take-care-of-their-husbands reason for longer lifespan. Maybe it’s a factor, but minor…?
The Longevity Project also talked about social life. Women tend to surround themselves more with friends, family, church… I even seem to recall a piece in there that looked at women who were active members of their church community living longer than those who were either not active or had no church community. It was not religious belief, but action within community that helped them live longer. Men are not as socially involved, but the study followed a few who were and they had longer lifespans than their counterparts too.
Another thing that I wonder about…
My Uncle Tom (my hero) was mentally ill since the time I was 5 until his death 14 years later. He was legally insane. He was diagnosed as schizophrenic and later as bipolar…and it might have changed a few times through the years. He died of melanoma. On a routine check-up the doctor found a growth on his chest. I am not sure of the details, but Gram was there and I think she said it was significant in size already. He had an obvious growth on his chest and had not told anyone; he’d done nothing! So did he die of mental illness too–did his mental state prevent him from noticing or thinking it was important or… something else? Or could his years of mental instability have reduced his immunity, making him more susceptible to the cancer?
Is that what might be happening with those who divorce? Do even a few years of the severe trauma that is divorce reduce a person’s immunity? Maybe some bounce back and have full lifespans. Maybe some bounce back, but the reduction still shortened their life. And I especially wonder if during those specific years during the divorce and right after (maybe a 5-year span or so) does that population have a higher death rate in their age group? Is that still true if suicides are removed from the data? Basically – is immunity compromised and for a few years are they more likely to die?
“balance the God of Personal Happiness with the needs of a stable Family Unit.”
Yeah, that Happiness God… Joy is a choice. And the great thing about joy is that sadness doesn’t erase it. Anger doesn’t erase it. Joy accepts those as natural and necessary emotions and feelings for a full life. All my days may not be happy because that is something that happens; it is happenstance, but joy is within our control.
@RollerCoasterRider: reading down to the rest of my comment, you’ll see that that’s exactly my point. We strive and urge people to marry so that they’ll be happier. Sometimes, remaining single is the better choice and we don’t do enough to encourage that life choice.