Late-Life Divorce and Life Satisfaction

Schedule:
Saturday, January 17, 2015: 8:55 AM
Preservation Hall Studio 2, Second Floor (New Orleans Marriott)
* noted as presenting author
Gary L. Bowen, PhD, Kenan Distinguished Professor, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
Todd M. Jensen, MSW, CSW, Doctoral Student, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
Background and Purpose: The divorce rate among individuals who are 50 years old or older (late-life divorce) doubled between 1990 and 2010, and roughly 1 in 4 divorces in 2010 involved persons aged 50 and older. Yet, this population has received little empirical attention. This investigation seeks to identify the correlates of post-divorce life satisfaction of women and men who divorce at age 50 or older.

Drawing on Schlossberg’s Transition Theory, four sets of risk and protective factors are modeled for their influence on the success of the divorce transition: (a) situation (e.g., previous experience), (b) self (e.g., health) (c) support (e.g., new relationship), and (d) coping responses and strategies (e.g., cognitive appraisal). The task of identifying “malleable mediators” that account for variation in an outcome of interest is the first step in an intervention research model.

Method: Source of Data: The data were collected from nationally representative sample of the U.S. population via an online survey in December 2003 as part of AARP’s study, The Divorce Experience: A Study of Divorce at Midlife and Beyond (Montenegro, 2004). A stratified random sample of 1,148 respondents who reported a divorce between the ages of 40 and 69 completed the survey. Sample: The sample was restricted to those respondents who reported a divorce at age 50 or older, which included 131 women and 150 men. Measures: Single items were used to assess the constructs in the empirical model, including life satisfaction. Analysis: The life satisfaction of sample respondents was regressed on a set of time covariates and sets of situation, self, support, and strategy variables for women and men. Analyses were averaged over five imputations to account for missing data, and robust standard errors were used to correct for slight heteroskedasticity.

Results: Overall, the regression model accounted for 28.0% of the variance in the life satisfaction of women and 40.0% of the variance in the life satisfaction of men. Being in a new relationship with a marital or domestic partner had a positive influence on the life satisfaction of both women (β = .26) and men (β = .37); current stress, strain or pressure had a negative influence for women and men (β = -.31 and β = -24, respectively). Compared to women without children, having at least one child 18 years old or older at the time of divorce was positively associated with the life satisfaction of women (β = .24).

Conclusions and Implications: The availability of companionship and social support from a spouse or partner may help account for the higher level of life satisfaction of those respondents who had remarried or who were in domestic partnerships. Not surprising, the life satisfaction of divorced men and women is compromised in the face continued stress, strain or pressure—a “malleable mediator” for intervention planning. Future analysis is needed to determine the profile of women and men reporting high levels of current stress. The cross-sectional nature of the data warrants caution in the interpretation of findings.