Abstract
In the last few decades divorce figures have risen considerably in many European states.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
See: European Statistic Yearbook (2009): 151.
- 2.
Within the European Union 12 Member States allow unmarried couples of the same or different sex to have their partnership registered in the form of a civil union, a registered partnership or unregistered cohabitation. In Spain cohabitating couples are considered as “parejas de hecho”, which is a stable marriage-like union among two individuals of the same or different sex. They may have their union registered at the city authorities and there are certain legal regulations that apply to this union. For more details see García Rubio (2006): 113–138. In Germany the legislator has allowed registered partnerships (“Eingetragene Lebenspartnerschaft”) for same-sex couples since 2001. In the United Kingdom the Civil Partnership Act 2004 grants civil partnerships similar rights and responsibilities as a civil marriage.
- 3.
Same-sex marriage is a marriage between two individuals of the same gender that is legally and socially recognized. In Europe, there are six countries that have legalized same-sex marriages. The Netherlands was the first country to allow same-sex marriages in 2001, followed by Belgium in 2003, Spain in 2005, Sweden and Norway in 2009 and Portugal in 2010.
- 4.
The following amendment to Article 44 of the Spanish Civil Code on the legalisation of same-sex marriages was introduced by the Ley 13/2005 of 1 July (published in BOE, Nr. 157, de 02-07-2005, pp. 23632–23634): “Artículo 44.
El hombre y la mujer tienen derecho a contraer matrimonio conforme a las disposiciones de este Código. El matrimonio tendrá los mismos requisitos y efectos cuando ambos contrayentes sean del mismo o de diferente sexo.” (Código Civil, Art. 44). Similarly, the expressions of “man” and “woman” were replaced by “spouse” in Articles 66 and 67 of the Spanish Civil Code to refer to both, marriages among people of the same or different sex.
- 5.
These two elements go back to the view of family in the Roman tradition, whose family concept was based on the biological unit of parents, children and relatives (related by blood) living in the same socio-economic community or household (Sandkühler 1990: 17).
- 6.
See the definition of family of the United Nations: “The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State” United Nations, 1948.
- 7.
See: Mies (1990): 16.
- 8.
Affinity in sociological terms refers to “kinship of spirit”, interest and other interpersonal commonalities. It is characterized by high levels of intimacy and sharing, usually in close groups, also known as affinity groups. It differs from affinity in law and canon law which generally refer to the marriage relationship. Social affinity is generally thought of as “marriage” to ideas, ideals and causes shared by a tight community of people. See: Bidwell and Vander Mey (2000): 45f.
- 9.
See: Report on the Evolution of the Family in Europe, Institute for Family Policies, (2008): 32, http://www.ipfe.org
- 10.
According to EU-statistics of the year 2008 the average rate of family members per household ranges between two and three people (2.5) living in one household. Denmark, Sweden, Germany and Finland have lower rates (between 2 and 2.2) whereas in Cyprus, Slovakia, Malta, Poland and Spain the amount is slowly higher (2.8–3). See: European Statistic Yearbook (2008): 234.
- 11.
Within the group of non-married cohabitating couples two forms are possible, such as the registered partnership and non-marital cohabitating couple. In a registered partnership two people live as a couple and have their union registered with a public authority established by the law of their Member State.
- 12.
A stepfamily is formed when a person gets married to somebody who enters this marriage with a child or children stemming from a former partner.
- 13.
A blended family is a family that includes children of a previous marriage of one spouse or both. The parent’s significant other takes over the role of full- or part-time caregiver without adopting the child. Children of blended families live together without being stepbrothers or stepsisters. Children experience dual socialization because they have a relationship to the biological parent and to the parent’s new mate. They have to make continuous flexible adjustments between these spheres.
- 14.
See: European Statistic Yearbook (2008)
- 15.
See: European Statistic Yearbook (2009): 149.
- 16.
See: European Statistic Yearbook (2009): 151.
- 17.
See: Table 3.14 Divorces (per 1,000 persons), in Belgium the rate went up from 2.6 to 2.9 and in Denmark and Germany the rates went up from 2.4 to 2.6 (See: European Statistic Yearbook 2009: 157).
- 18.
The Czech Republic (3.0) together with Lithuania (3.4) and Lativa (3.3) have noticeably high divorce rates.
- 19.
See: European Statistic Yearbook (2009): 157.
- 20.
See: Spanish National Institute of Statistics INE (Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas), 2009.
- 21.
See: Table 3.13 on Marriages (per 1,000 people) in European Statistic Yearbook (2009): 156.
- 22.
See: Fig. 3.15: Mean age of women at childbearing, European Statistic Yearbook (2009): 155.
- 23.
Domínguez-Folgueras and Castro-Martín (2008): 1525.
- 24.
See: European Statistic Yearbook (2009).
- 25.
- 26.
- 27.
- 28.
See: Lauer and Lauer (1986): 382–390.
- 29.
- 30.
See: Data of the Spanish National Institute of Statistics (INE), Table: Matrimonios de diferente sexo por Nivel de estudios de la esposa y Nivel de estudios del esposo. (http://www.ine.es/jaxi/tabla.do).
- 31.
Whereas an objective fact denotes a truth that remains true everywhere, independently of human thought or feelings, a subjective fact is only true for an individual person in relation to place and time.
- 32.
Explicit knowledge is codified knowledge that can be articulated and may be transmitted to others. Implicit or tacit knowledge is knowledge that a person carries in mind and that provides the context for people, places, ideas, and experiences. It is difficult to access implicit information as people are often unaware of the knowledge they actually possess. Transfer of implicit knowledge among individuals generally requires a certain amount of personal contact and trust.
- 33.
Conflict may be defined as a process of long or short term interaction in which one or both marital partners feel discomfort about one aspect of their relationship and which they attempt to resolve.
- 34.
Beck-Gernsheim and Beck define individualisation as a process during which the influence of customs and traditions becomes weaker on an individual’s biography. They describe the process in the following way: “(...) die Biographie der Menschen aus traditionalen Vorgaben und Sicherheiten, aus fremden Kontrollen und überregionalen Sittengesetzen herausgelöst, offen wird und gleichsam als Aufgabe in das Handeln jedes einzelnen gelegt wird.” Beck-Gernsheim and Beck (1998): 12–13.
- 35.
From a comparative historic point of view a couple who got married in 1870 would spend an average time of 23.4 years together, around 1900 it would be 28.2 years. Around the year 1930 a couple spent approximately 30 years together whereas a couple getting married in 1970 would spend a total amount of 43 years together. Lutz quoted in Sieder (1987): 262.
- 36.
The European social partners are: UNICE (Union of Industrial and Employers’ Confederation), UEAPME (European Association of Craft, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises), CEEP (European Centre of Enterprises with Public Participation and of Enterprises of General Economic Interest), ETUC (European Trade Union Confederation).
- 37.
See First-Stage Consultation of European Social Partners on Reconciliation of Professional, Private and Family Life (http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/news/2006/oct/consultation_reconciliation_en.pdf).
- 38.
Gender role is a sociological construct that describes a set of recognized norms of conduct that are associated with men and women in a society. Within gender roles biological sexuality is transformed into specific forms of male and female behaviour. Gender roles vary according to culture and social class, although there are also similarities among what is expected from men and women in different social and cultural contexts.
- 39.
See studies of Kürthy (1987): 23, Oerter and Montada (1982): 20.
- 40.
See: Dema-Moreno and Díaz-Martínez (2010).
- 41.
‘Gender-based violence’ and ‘domestic violence’ are used synonymously to denote abusive behaviour by one or both partners in an intimate relationship. Both terms refer mainly to violence against women because women suffer higher rates of injury or assault than men.
- 42.
Ley Orgánica 3/2007, de 22 de marzo, para la igualdad efectiva de mujeres y hombres, BOE, 71, 23.3.2007: 12611–12645.
- 43.
See the following claim for co-responsibility in the distribution of household duties: “Especial atención presta la Ley a la corrección de la desigualdad en el ámbito específico de las relaciones laborales. Mediante una serie de previsiones, se reconoce el derecho a la conciliación de la vida personal, familiar y laboral y se fomenta una mayor corresponsabilidad entre mujeres y hombres en la asunción de obligaciones familiares, criterios inspiradores de toda la norma que encuentran aquí su concreción más significativa.” (Ley Orgánica 3/2007, de 22 de marzo, para la igualdad efectiva de mujeres y hombres, BOE, 71, 23.3.2007:12612.
- 44.
Ley Orgánica 1/2004, de 28 de diciembre, de Medidas de Protección Integral contra la Violencia de Género, BOE, 313, 29.12.2004: 42166–42197.
- 45.
The law states the following: “En el campo de la publicidad, ésta habrá de respetar la dignidad de las mujeres y su derecho a una imagen no estereotipada, ni discriminatoria, tanto si se exhibe en los medios de comunicación públicos como en los privados. De otro lado, se modifica la acción de cesación o rectificación de la publicidad legitimando a las instituciones y asociaciones que trabajan a favor de la igualdad entre hombres y mujeres para su ejercicio.” For a more detailed discussion of the phenomenon of gender violence see Chapter 2.
- 46.
“See Article 68 CC: Artículo 68
Los cónyuges están obligados a vivir juntos, guardarse fidelidad y socorrerse mutuamente. Deberán, además, compartir las responsabilidades domésticas y el cuidado y atención de ascendientes y descendientes y otras personas dependientes a su cargo.” (Article 68, Spanish Civil Code).
- 47.
See: Thompson (1991): 181–196.
- 48.
Tangible asset refers to material property such as money or real estate. Intangible assets include immaterial values such as patents, copyrights etc.
- 49.
Becker (1991): 312ff.
- 50.
Becker (1991): 3f.
- 51.
See: Nock and Brinig (2002): 188.
- 52.
See the study of Wilcox and Nock (2006): 1321 ff.
- 53.
See: de Graaf and Kalmijn (2006): 483.
- 54.
Bargaining or negotiation power in relationships denotes the power that one has in order to pursue his or her interests. It includes a person’s power in economic terms as well as communication skills such as persuasiveness or art of reasoning.
- 55.
The threat point denotes the position in negotiations until a person is willing to make concessions in order to reach an agreement.
- 56.
See: Anxo and Carlin (2004): 32.
- 57.
This risk will be discussed in detail in Sect. 2.4 in connection with the structure–functional theory of family.
- 58.
Ninety percent of the divorces are submitted by women. This seems to indicate that for women, marriage as an institution has lost its importance and function as a life-long relationship. Middle class wives with work formation and in non-tenured employment living in urban areas most frequently file for divorce. Lowest divorce rates are to be noticed with non-working wives. See: Sieder (1987): 261.
- 59.
See: Ley 30/1981, de 7 de julio, por la que se modifica la regulación del matrimonio en el Código Civil y se determina el procedimiento a seguir en las causas de nulidad, separación y divorcio. In the year 1981, a total number of 202,037 couples got married and 16,334 couples divorced or separated.
- 60.
In this context it is interesting to consider the motives for marriage over time. Historically we may distinguish between four types of marriages. The first type is characterized by economic calculation where marriage was considered as security for women and was a possibility of transmitting land property. Due to political and economic changes in the nineteenth century the economically inspired marriage was replaced by an institutional legal model. The family was considered as the core of society and people married to have a family. In both forms marriage and family were legally and socially controlled by state and church. After the Second World War two aims dominated the partners’ decision to get married, emotional reasons and the desire to found a family. During the post-war years, state and church had considerable influence on the construction of parent role models. See: Sieder (1987).
- 61.
See: Gernhuber and Coester-Waltjen (2006): 4.
- 62.
According to the Christian view marriage is an inseparable band and divorce is considered a moral failure that has to be sanctioned.
- 63.
- 64.
Among the reasons for separation Article 82 of the Law mentioned a spouse abandoning home without justification, marital infidelity or any other gross violation of marital duties. See: Article 82 of Ley 30/1981, de 7 de julio, whereby the regulation of marriage was modified in the Civil Code. BOE, 20. 1. 1981.
- 65.
This legal modification has provoked a debate among scholars whether the new legislation would be responsible for the increase in divorce rates. Studies carried out on this issue over the last two decades can be divided into two groups, with the first group of studies where researchers suggest that no-fault divorce did not have any impact on divorce rates. See: Peters (1986): 437–454; Ellman and Lohr (1998): 341–359; Gray (1998): 628–642. Another group supports the view that these laws have had a significant impact on divorce rates. See: Allen (1992): 679–685; Brinig and Buckley (1998): 325–340; Friedberg (1998): 608–627). For instance, González and Viitanen (2006) investigated to which extent reformed divorce laws facilitating non-fault and unilateral divorce have contributed to increasing divorce figures. By analyzing the changes in legislation of 18 European countries within the last 50 years they found out that the introduction of no-fault, unilateral divorce is positively correlated with divorce rates.
- 66.
The following misconceptions about love and relationship are typical ingredients of conflicts: “Who loves, automatically knows what the partner wishes, wants, feels and thinks. – In a loving relationship the spouse considers the other’s needs more important than the own, wants to make him happy and always wants to be close. – One partner is incomplete without the other. – In a good marriage there are no problems and conflicts. – Partners always have the same views, aims and ideals. – A good marriage comes about by itself without the spouses’ effort to make the relationship work – the relationship is static and does not change over time. – Having divergent opinions about something is not favourable and should be avoided. In such a case only one can be right (lack of tolerance)”.
- 67.
See also the studies of Oppenheimer (1988): 563–591 and Becker et al. (1977): 1141–1187.
- 68.
Other expressions with similar meanings are egocentricity, egoism, self-centeredness or selfishness. An egocentric person has an exaggerated belief in his or her own importance and tends to strive for the satisfaction of own needs with little or no concern for others.
- 69.
Mental resources include a person’s conceptual and professional knowledge as well as practical skills such as operational and cognitive skills, relationship skills and attitudes. Resources enable a person to establish competencies in specific fields of action. For instance, relationship resources concern a person’s readiness to support and encourage the other and provide help. They refer to the amount of time, attention and affection dedicated to the other, the sense of a common bond, or the steadiness of trust and reliance someone is willing to invest in a relationship.
- 70.
Perception disorder is a disturbance in the processing of sensory impressions and denotes a disordered process in the perception, evaluation and interpretation of impressions.
- 71.
See: Willi (1998): 35 f.
- 72.
A partner therapy based on the concept of collusion aims at improving the intradyadic and extradyadic boundaries and the depolarization of extreme progressive-regressive behaviour. These goals can be reached by both systemic and psychodynamic techniques. See: Willi (1998): 16.
- 73.
In Willi’s concept of the collusion the actors have the characteristics of the Freudian psychosexual stages. See: Mitscherlich et al. (1975): 119 ff.
- 74.
Freud called this phenomenon Oedipus conflict (derived from the Greek myth of Oedipus, who unknowingly killed his father and marries his mother) which refers to a stage of psychosexual development in which boys regard the father as an adversary and competitor for the exclusive love of their mother. It is assumed that the successful resolution of the Oedipus complex is a key element in the development of gender roles and identity. See: Freud (1972): 254 ff.
- 75.
This type of collusion can take several forms such as the ruler-obedient or the sado-masochistic relationship as well as the jealousness-infidelity collusion. In the case where the fear of being dominated is present in both partners, the collusion degenerates into a power struggle. This is associated with antagonist feelings in the sense that the constant struggle unites and at the same time separates the two.
- 76.
See: Fromm (2004).
- 77.
According to Freud projection is one of the ego defence mechanism in which one attributes to others one’s own unwanted thoughts or emotions. Projection reduces anxiety by allowing unwanted subconscious impulses to be expressed in the context of the other without the own self recognizing them (Freud, 1975).
- 78.
Nichols (1989): 67–97.
- 79.
For a better understanding of interactions, Schulz von Thun (1981) added more notions to the relational aspect of a message, such as self-disclosure and appeal. These meta-communicative indicators give the reveal the receiving person information about how the content of the message shall be understood and treated.
- 80.
One of the aims of the reform of German family law was to replace the traditional concept of the ‘housewife family model’ (Hausfrauen-Ehe or Versorgungsehe) by a model based on women’s economic independence and self-responsibility. Accordingly, Gerngruber and Coester-Waltjen say about this principle: “Nachehelicher Unterhalt wird nur auf Grund bestimmter, in den §§ 1570–1576 abschliessend geregelter Tatbestände geschuldet; (...). Wenn überhaupt, so mag der Norm Bedeutung zugestanden werden als gesetzlicher Ausdruck des Vorrangs der Eigenverantwortung (mit besonderer Betonung der Erwerbstätigkeit in den „folgenden Vorschriften“) vor der Fremdversorgung und als Träger eines Enumerationsprinzips, das jedes Bemühen um weitere Anspruchsgrundlagen (etwa aus § 242) ausschliesst.“ Gerngruber and Coester-Waltjen (2006): 292. See also the principle of ‘self-sufficiency’ referring maintenance between former spouses in the Principles of European Family Law (Part II, Chap. I, Principle 2:2).
- 81.
See: Padilla-Gálvez (2008): 57ff.
- 82.
See: Olson (1972): 69–94.
- 83.
Double bind denotes a contradiction in the communication process in which a person receives two or more inconsistent messages, with one message negating the other. The receiver of such information finds himself or herself in a dilemma because if he or she responds to one message then automatically says the opposite to the other. See: Watzlawick et al. (2009).
- 84.
See: Karney and Bradbury (1995): 3ff.
- 85.
Here are some examples of communication traps that often lead to misunderstandings: A person may send vague or indefinite messages that contain ambiguous terms or incomplete sentences. Or else a sender gives only insufficient information to express a complex matter assuming that the perceiving person will guess the contents. Verbal messages may contradict nonverbal ones, which produces confusion on the side of the person receiving the message. In many cases the receiver does not ask for an explanation but tries to decode the message based on his or her experience. In such cases, the irritated receiver who is unable to decode the message tends to react by interrupting and disqualifying the sender’s statements. Another conflict may be produced when family members use different channels of communication, such as one speaks in the name of the other or two family members communicate via a third member. It is obvious that such conduct produces misleading information which results in misunderstandings, wrong reactions, and discussions.
- 86.
The phenomenon of “mobbing” is known in the context of working life but may also occur in personal relationships where the economically more dominant partner uses unsocial behaviour to put the respective other under pressure. See: Schmidbauer (2007): 33ff.
- 87.
See: Glass and Wright (1997): 483 f.
- 88.
See: “Artículo 68
Los cónyuges están obligados a vivir juntos, guardarse fidelidad y socorrerse mutuamente. Deberán, además, compartir las responsabilidades domésticas y el cuidado y atención de ascendientes y descendientes y otras personas dependientes a su cargo.“ (Article 68, Spanish Civil Code).
- 89.
This Article has been annulled by the Ley 15/2005, de 8 de Julio on the modification of the Civil Code and the Legal Procedure in the field of separation and divorce (BOE núm. 163, de 09-07-2005, pp. 24,458–24,461): 82: “Artículo 82 Son causas de separación:
1. El abandono injustificado del hogar, la infidelidad conyugal, la conducta injuriosa o vejatoria y cualquier otra violación grave o reiterada de los deberes conyugales. No podrá invocarse como causa la infidelidad conyugal si existe previa separación de hecho libremente consentida por ambos o impuesta por el que la alegue.
2. Cualquier violación grave o reiterada de los deberes respecto de los hijos comunes o respecto de los de cualquiera de los cónyuges que convivan en el hogar familiar.
3. La condena a pena de privación de libertad por tiempo superior a seis años.
4. El alcoholismo, la toxicomanía o las perturbaciones mentales, siempre que el interés del otro cónyuge o el de la familia exijan la suspensión de la convivencia.
5. El cese efectivo de la convivencia conyugal durante seis meses, libremente consentido. Se entenderá, libremente prestado este consentimiento cuando un cónyuge requiriese fehacientemente al otro para prestarlo, apercibiéndole expresamente de las consecuencias de ello, y éste no mostrase su voluntad en contra por cualquier medio admitido en derecho o pidiese la separación o las medidas provisionales a que se refiere el artículo 103 en el plazo de seis meses a partir del citado requerimiento.
6. El cese efectivo de la convivencia conyugal durante el plazo de tres años.
7. Cualquiera de las causas de divorcio en los términos previstos en los números 3., 4. y 5. del artículo 86”.
- 90.
See Civil Code, Article 81.
- 91.
See comments to Article 68 CC of M. J. Marín Lopez in Bercovitz Rodríguez-Cano (2006): 188.
- 92.
See: Hertfelder de Ardecoa (2004).
- 93.
See: Glezer and Wolcott (1999): 69–74.
- 94.
- 95.
See: Kelly et al. (2005): 26f.
- 96.
- 97.
See: Becker (1991): 21f.
- 98.
This bears the risk of a possible devaluation of the family specific capital. Such risk is minimized if the spouses are unconditionally committed to marriage as an institution or as a collective unit.
- 99.
- 100.
See: McLanahan and Adams (1987): 237–257.
- 101.
The authors assumed that young children are more demanding in terms of time whereas the presence of adolescents implies higher costs. See: Marks and Fleming (1999): 301–323.
- 102.
- 103.
- 104.
Such unit may be a large community (e.g. corporation, factory, university) or a major institution (e.g. economy, religion, politics) as well as a smaller unit such as the family.
- 105.
Talcott E. F. Parsons (1902–1979), sociologist, studied biology and philosophy in the U.S. and Europe. He obtained his PhD at the University of Heidelberg, where he studied the works of Weber and translated them into English. He founded the Department of Social Relations at Harvard University and developed an interdisciplinary approach based on sociology, anthropology and psychology. See: Parsons (1951, 1986).
- 106.
‘Structure’ stands for the static elements of the system whereas ‘function’ describes its dynamic processes. According to Parsons societal changes proceed in the following four ways: 1. Differentiation, which refers to the increase in complexity of social organizations; 2. Adaptive Upgrading, whereby social institutions become more specialized; 3. Inclusion occurs where groups previously excluded from society because of race, gender or social class etc. are now accepted; and 4. Value Generalization is the development of new values that tolerate and legitimate a greater range of activities.
- 107.
See: Parsons (1968): 270.
- 108.
In exchange for the loyalty and allegiance of family members, the political institution protects the citizens. In exchange for labour, the economy provides money and goods. The political institution guarantees law and order, protection as well as health care and welfare. The religious institution provides moral standards for behaviour, approval of worthiness, help and empathy.
- 109.
Mainstream as a sociological term denotes a trend or taste that is followed by a majority of people in society. It is viewed as opposed to individuality and can induce individuals to conform to the standards or ideas set by certain groups in society.
- 110.
Our emotions do not develop in a sphere that is free of socialisation. On the contrary, we assume beliefs, attitudes and preferences that play an important role for our emotions. In fact, according to Social Interaction Theory our emotions seem to be socially mandated by so-called “socialization agents”, such as parents, priests, teachers, who transmit concepts and beliefs.
- 111.
George H. Mead (1863–1931), American philosopher, sociologist and psychologist and founder of the Symbolic Interactionist School of Sociology and Social Psychology. He presented a theory of how the mind and self arise from social processes. Mead (1934): Part III, 22–29.
References
Allen, D. (1992). Marriage and divorce: comment. American Economic Review, 82, 679–685.
Amato, P. (1993). Family structure, family process, and family ideology. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 55, 50–54.
Anxo, D., & Carlin, P. (2004). Intra-family time allocation to housework: French evidence. Electronic International Journal of Time Use Research, 1(1), 14–36.
Beck, N., & Hartmann, J. (1999). Die Wechselwirkung zwischen Erwerbstätigkeit der Ehefrau und Ehestabilität unter der Berücksichtigung des sozialen Wandels. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 51(1999), 655–680.
Becker, G. (1991). A treatise on the family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Becker, G., Landes, E., & Michael, R. (1977). An economic analysis of marital instability. Journal of Political Economy, 85(6), 1141–1187.
Beck-Gernsheim, E., & Beck, U. (1998). Das ganz normale Chaos der Liebe. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
Bidwell, L., & Vander Mey, B. (2000). Sociology of the family: investigating family issues. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Brinig, M., & Buckley, F. (1998). No-fault laws and at-fault people. International Review of Law and Economics, 18, 325–340.
Burgess, E., Locke, H., & Thomas, M. (1971). The family: from traditional to companionship. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co.
Carrasco Perera, Á. (2006). Derecho de Familia: Casos, Reglas y Paradojas. Madrid: Editorial Dilex.
Coester-Waltjen, D. (2006). “Voraussetzungen der Ehescheidung”, Jura, 105–108.
de Graaf, P., & Kalmijn, M. (2006). Divorce motives in a period of rising divorce. Evidence from a Dutch life-history survey. Journal of Family Issues, 27(4), 483–505.
De Ussel, J. (2005). Qué pasa con las familia en España? Cuadernos de pensamiento político, 7(9), 39–60.
Delgado Martín, J. (2008): “La patria potestad compartida en los procedimientos matrimoniales”, In C. Martínez de Aguirre, Novedades legislativas en materia matrimonial (pp. 153–197). Madrid: Consejo General del Poder Judicial.
Dema-Moreno, S., & Díaz-Martínez, C. (2010). Gender inequalities and the role of money in Spanish dual-income couples. European Societies, 12(1), 65–84.
Dolgin, J. (2002). The constitution as family arbiter: a moral in the mess? Columbia Law Review, 102, 337–407.
Domínguez-Folgueras, M., & Castro-Martín, T. (2008). Women’s changing socioeconomic position and union formation in Spain and Portugal. Demographic Research, 19(41), 1513–1550.
Ellman, I., & Lohr, S. (1998). Dissolving the relationship between divorce laws and divorce rates. International Review of Law and Economics, 18, 341–359.
Esser, H. (2002a). Ehekrisen: Das (Re-)Framing der Ehe und der Anstieg der Scheidungsraten. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 31(6), 472–496.
Esser, H. (2002b). In guten wie in schlechten Tagen? Das Framing der Ehe und das Risiko zur Scheidung. Eine Anwendung und ein Test des Frames der Frame-Selektion. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 54, 27–63.
Esteve, A., & Cortina, C. (2006). Changes in educational assortative mating in contemporary Spain. Demographic Research, 14(17), 405–428.
Freud, S. (1972). Sexualleben. Vol. V, Studienausgabe. Frankfurt a.M: Fischer Verlag.
Friedberg, L. (1998). Did unilateral divorce raise divorce rates? Evidence from panel data. American Economic Review, 88, 608–627.
Friedman, D., Hechter, M., & Kanazawa, S. (1994). A theory of the value of children. Demography, 31, 375–401.
Fromm, E. (2004). Haben oder Sein. Die seelischen Grundlagen einer neuen Gesellschaft. München: Dtv.
Fthenakis, W. (1985a). Väter. Zur Psychologie der Vater-Kind-Beziehung (Vol. 1). Wien: Urban & Schwarzenberg.
Fthenakis, W. (1985b). Väter. Zur Vater-Kind-Beziehung in verschiedenen Familienstrukturen (Vol. 2). Wien: Urban & Schwarzenberg.
García Rubio, M. (2006). Las uniones de hecho en España. Una visión jurídica. Anuario de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid Derecho, sociedad y familia: cambio y continuidad, 10, 113–138.
Gernhuber, J., & Coester-Waltjen, D. (2006). Familienrecht. München: Beck.
Glass, S., & Wright, T. (1997). Reconstructing marriages after the trauma of infidelity. In K. Halford & H. Markham (Eds.), Clinical handbook of marriage and couples interventions (pp. 471–507). Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
Glezer, H., & Wolcott, I. (1999). Work and family life: reciprocal effects. Family Matters, 52, 69–74.
González, L. and Viitanen, T. (2006) “Divorce Legislation and Marriage Rates in Europe”. Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Mimeo. http://www.econ.upf.edu/docs/papers/downloads/986.pdf.
Goode, W. (1969). The theoretical importance of love. American Sociological Review, 24, 38–47.
Gray, J. (1998). Divorce-law changes, household bargaining, and married women’s labor supply. American Economic Review, 8, 628–642.
Greenstein, T. (1990). Marital disruption and the employment of married women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52(3), 657–676.
Hanson, M., & Lynch, E. (1992). Family diversity: implications for policy and practice. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 12(3), 283–306.
Hertfelder de Alcedoa, E. (2009). La familia y la vida de hoy en España. Familia y sociedad, 6, 1–4.
Joas, H. (1991). Mead’s position in intellectual history and his early philosophical writings. In M. Aboulafia (Ed.), Philosophy, social theory and the thought of George Herbert Mead (pp. 57–88). New York: Suny Press.
Kalmijn, M. (1998). Intermarriage and homogamy: causes, patterns, trends. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 395–421.
Karney, B., & Bradbury, T. (1995). The longitudinal course of marital quality and stability: a review of theory, method and research. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 3–34.
Kelly, R., Redenbach, L., & Rinaman, W. (2005). Determinants of custody arrangements in a national sample. American Journal of Family Law, 19, 25–43.
Kitson, G. (1992). Portrait of divorce: Adjustment to marital breakdown. New York: Guilford Press.
Koropeckyj-Cox, T. (2002). Beyond parental status: psychological well-being in middle and old age. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 957–971.
Lauer, R., & Lauer, J. (1986). Factors in long-term marriages. Journal of Family Issues, 7(4), 382–390.
Lehrer, E. L. (2006): “Age at Marriage and Marital Instability: Revisiting the Becker-Landes-Michael Hipotesis”, IZA DP No. 2166, Institute for the Study of Labor: Bonn.
Marks, G., & Fleming, N. (1999). Influences and consequences of well-being among Australian young people: 1980–1995. Social Indicators Research, 46, 301–323.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society: From the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Charles W. Morris (Ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mies, T. (1990). Familie. In J. Sandkühler (Ed.), Europäische Enzyklopädie zu Philosophie und Wissenschaften (pp. 15–53). Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag.
Mitscherlich, A., Richards, A., & Strachey, J. (Eds.). (1975). Sigmund Freud. Band III Psychologie des Unbewussten. Frankfurt/M: Fischer.
Napp-Peters, A. (1988). Scheidungsfamilien. Interaktionsmuster und kindliche Entwicklung. Aus Tagebüchern und Interviews mit Vätern und Müttern nach Scheidung. Frankfurt: Dt. Vereins für öffentliche und private Fürsorge.
Nauck, B. (2001). Der Wert von Kindern für ihre Eltern. “Value of Children” als spezielle Handlungstheorie des generativen Verhaltens und von Generationenbezihungen im interkulturellen Vergleich. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 53, 407–435.
Nichols, W. (1989). A family systems approach. In C. Figley (Ed.), Treating stress in families (pp. 67–97). New York: Brunner & Mazel.
Nichols, K. (2007). Breaking impasses: strategies for working with high conflict personalities. American Journal of Family Law, 20, 226–233.
Nock, S., & Brinig, M. (2002). Weak men and disorderly women: divorce and the division of labour. In A. Dnes & R. Rowthorn (Eds.), The law and economics of marriage & divorce (pp. 171–190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oerter, R., & Montada, L. (1982). Entwicklungspsychologie. Ein Lehrbuch. Wien: Urban & Schwarzenberg.
Olson, D. (1972). Empirically unbinding the double bind: a review of research and conceptual formulations. Family Process, 11, 69–94.
Oppenheimer, V. (1994). Women’s rising employment and the future of the family in industrial societies. Population and Development Review, 20, 293–342.
Padilla-Gálvez, J. (2008). Die Freiheit des Spiels oder das Spiel der Freiheit. In W. Lütterfelds (Ed.), Das Sprachspiel der Freiheit (pp. 55–77). Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.
Parkman, A. (2002). Mutual consent divorce. In A. W. Dnes & R. Rowthorn (Eds.), The law and economics of marriage & divorce (pp. 57–69). Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
Parsons, T. (1951). The Social System. New York: Free Press.
Parsons, T. (1968). Sozialstruktur und Persönlichkeit. Frankfurt: Europäische Verlagsanstalt.
Parsons, T. (1986). Aktor, Situation und normative Muster. Ein Essay zur theorie sozialen Handelns. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
Peters, E. (1986). Marriage and divorce: informational constraints and private contracting. American Economic Review, 76, 437–454.
Sandkühler, J. (Ed.). (1990). Europäische Enzyklopädie zu Philosophie und Wissenschaften. Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag.
Schmidbauer, W. (2007). Mobbing in der Liebe. Wie es dazu kommt und was wir dagegen tun können. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus.
Schulz von Thun, F. (1981). Miteinander reden 1 – Störungen und Klärungen. Reinbek: Allgemeine Psychologie der Kommunikation. Rowohlt.
Sieder, R. (1987). Sozialgeschichte der Familie. Frankfurt a.M: Suhrkamp.
Thompson, L. (1991). Family work: women’s sense of fairness. Journal of Family Issues, 12(2), 181–196.
Thompson, B. (1997). Couples and the work-family interface. In K. Halford & H. Markman (Eds.), Clinical handbook of marriage and couples interventions (pp. 273–290). Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
Trommsdorff, G. (2001). Eltern-Kind-Beziehungen aus kulturvergleichender Sicht. In S. Walper & R. Pekrun (Eds.), Familie und Entwicklung: Aktuelle Perspektiven der Familienpsychologie (pp. 36–62). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
Watzlawick, P., Weakland, J., & Fisch, J. (2009). Lösungen – Zur Theorie und Praxis menschlichen Wandels. Bern: Hans Huber Verlag.
Weber, M. (1972). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
White, L. (1990). Determinants of divorce: a review of research in the eighties. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 904–912.
Wilcox, W., & Nock, S. (2006). What’s love got to do with it? Equality, equity, commitment and women’s marital quality. Social Forces, 84(3), 1321–1345.
Willi, J. (1998). Die Zweierbeziehung. Spannungsursachen, Störungsmuster, Klärungsprozesse, Lösungsmodelle. Reinbeck: Rohwolt.
Zhang, Z., & Hayward, M. D. (2001). Childlessness and the psychological well-being of older persons. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 56B(S), 311–320.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-VerlagBerlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gaffal, M. (2010). Grounds for Divorce. In: Psychosocial and Legal Perspectives of Marital Breakdown. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13896-6_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13896-6_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-13895-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-13896-6
eBook Packages: Behavioral ScienceBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)