Repartnering After Union Dissolution in Later Life
| Published date | 01 August 2016 |
| Author | Zheng Wu,Christoph M. Schimmele |
| Date | 01 August 2016 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12315 |
C M. S Z W University of Victoria
Repartnering After Union Dissolution in Later Life
The authors estimated the timing of repartner-
ing among individuals who had experienced a
union dissolution at age 45 or older, treating
cohabitation and marriage as competing risks.
The analysis used retrospective data from the
2007 Canadian General Social Survey and
life table analysis and Cox models to examine
patterns of repartnering. The study offered three
major conclusions. First, age constraints on
repartnering are large when union dissolution
occurs in midlife or later. This age constraint is
particularly strong for women and contributes
to a wide gender gap in repartnering. Second,
in contrast to repartnering at earlier life stages,
cohabitation is not the predominant choice
of repartnering for those experiencing union
dissolution at age 45 and older. Third, union exit
status (divorce, cohabitation separation, and
widowhood) is a key repartnering differential.
The most disadvantageous routes to repartner-
ing are through the experience of cohabitation
separation and widowhood.
With the rise of divorceand cohabitation, repart-
nering has become a commonplace event in the
life course (Wu & Schimmele, 2005). The lit-
erature on repartnering is, however, small and
dated and centered on remarriage. Few studies
have considered cohabitation and marriage as
competing risks of repartnering or examined the
Department of Sociology, Universityof Victoria, 3800
Finnerty Rd., Victoria, British Columbia V8W 3P5, Canada
(zhengwu@uvic.ca).
This article was edited by Linda Waite.
KeyWords: cohabitation, divorce, remarriage,repartnering,
widowhood.
repartnering behaviors of separated cohabitors.
Moreover, theories about the union-formation
process are based on the behaviors of younger
people (Brown, Lee, & Bulanda, 2006; Vespa,
2012; Wu, Schimmele, & Ouellet, 2015). There
is a paucity of studies on union formation or
repartnering in midlife and later (Sassler, 2010).
The little that is understood about repartnering at
these life stages comes from studies of the wid-
owed and tends to neglect the life course experi-
ences of the divorced and of separated cohabitors
(Brown, Bulanda, & Lee, 2012).
The prevalence of union dissolution in later
life has increased because of two demographic
trends. First, population aging is contributing to
the frequency of this event (Manning & Brown,
2011). The aging of the baby boomers is the
main reason for the increase of the older popu-
lation. This generation experienced high rates of
divorce and remarriage, which could predispose
them to union dissolution and repartnering
in later life (Brown & Lin, 2012). Second,
the prevalence of cohabitation among people
age 50 and older doubled between 2000 and
2010 in the United States and tripled between
1991 and 2012 in Canada (Brown et al., 2006;
Statistics Canada, 2012). Given the relative
instability of cohabiting-couple unions (Wu,
2000), the increase of cohabitation could also
contribute to the frequency of union dissolution
in later life.
The effect of life course stage on repartnering
has received limited attention in the literature
(Brown et al., 2006). This is a major short-
coming considering that life stage inuences
the opportunities for union formation and the
preference between marriage, cohabitation, and
living-apart-together (LAT) relationships (de
Jong Gierveld, 2004; Vespa, 2013; Wu et al.,
Journal of Marriage and Family 78 (August 2016): 1013–1031 1013
DOI:10.1111/jomf.12315
1014 Journal of Marriage and Family
2015). This study provides a national portrait
of repartnering among Canadians who expe-
rienced union dissolution at age 45 and older.
In the analysis we used retrospective data to
estimate the timing of repartnering, treating
cohabitation and marriage as competing risks.
Using a life course perspective, our objec-
tive was to examine how repartnering differs
according to age at union dissolution, marital
history, and the structural context of people’s
lives.
B
The decision to repartner is weighed against
the costs and benets of remaining single. Prior
studies have observed that some older peo-
ple refrain from remarriage to maintain their
personal and nancial independence, protect
preexisting social relationships, and avoid the
costs of caregiving (Davidson, 2001; de Jong
Gierveld, 2004; Karlsson & Borell, 2005). The
desire for emotional intimacy and the other
positive aspects of marriage could outweigh
these perceived costs (Carr, 2004). De Jong
Gierveld (2002) stated that marriage is the opti-
mal source of social support because of the prox-
imity (coresidence) and long-term commitment
between spouses. The decision to remain single
can have costs because coresidence is associ-
ated with social integration and the emotional
and instrumental benets this provides (de Jong
Gierveld, 2004). Living alone increases the risk
of loneliness and means that companionship and
social support must be obtained from sources
outside the household.
The net benets of marriage are assessed
against cohabitation as well as singlehood (Wu
et al., 2015). Cohabitation provides the benets
of coresidence but is a more exible arrangement
than marriage with regard to gender roles and
the pooling of economic resources, which could
make it an attractive repartnering choice (Brown
et al., 2012; Vespa, 2013). Age groups differ on
the meaning of cohabitation. In middle and later
life, cohabitation tends to be a more durable
union than it is at earlier life stages (Brown et al.,
2012). Older cohabitors tend to perceive their
relationships as an alternative to marriage, but
younger people tend to see them as a prelude to
marriage (King & Scott, 2005; Sassler, 2010).
Although a lack of marriage plans has nega-
tive effects on union stability and satisfactionfor
younger cohabitors, this is much less the case for
older cohabitors.
Some of the disincentives to marriage are ger-
mane to cohabitation because it also involves
coresidence. The costs of coresidence include
the losses of personal space, autonomy, and time
available to spend with children and friends
(Davidson, 2001; de Jong Gierveld, 2002). Many
widows are reluctant to coreside with a new
partner because of the domestic and caregiv-
ing workload it tends to involve. But living
alone does not necessarily mean being single.
A growing number of older people are opting
for LAT relationships, which provide intimacy
and companionship without the costs of cores-
idence (de Jong Gierveld, 2002; Karlsson &
Borell, 2005). Establishing an LAT relationship
provides a source of intimacy and allows peo-
ple to maintain an independent household, their
personal freedom, and preexisting relationships
with family and friends. In Canada LATs are
rare, however,with only 4% of those ages 50–59
and 2% of those age 60 and older in such a rela-
tionship (Turcotte, 2013).
T F
To examinerepartnering at age 45 and older, our
analysis used a life course perspective (LCP) as
an orienting framework. The primary focus of
the LCP is on life transitions, the timing of these
transitions, and the implications of these tran-
sitions in the social context of individual lives
(Bengtson, Elder, & Putney,2005). The LCP is a
fertile approach for situating repartnering behav-
ior within the biographical context of an individ-
ual’s life. To compare diversity in repartnering
trajectories, our empirical analysis focused on
the following four life course variables: (a) the
timing of life transitions, (b) union exit status,
(c) linked lives, and (d) the structural context of
repartnering. The analysis controlled for socio-
economic status and health, which could affect
the chances of repartnering and the preference
between marriage and cohabitation.
Timing of Life Transitions
A central concept of the LCP is that the timing
of a life transition shapes its implications and the
chances of subsequent transitions. In our analy-
sis, the phrase timing of life transitions refers to
the effects of age at rst union and age at union
dissolution on the chances, timing, and choice
of repartnering. There are two reasons for the
relationship that exists between age at rst union
To continue reading
Request your trial