Violent Divorces Scar Children
The Telegraph, Alton Illinois
7/30/2006

This article presents numerous facts about direct negative effects of divorce on children. Child care experts have reported symptoms similar to post-traumatic stress syndrome, like soldiers returning from war, following violence at home. Even if the violence is not directed at them, children in violence-prone families can still suffer psychological damage. Studies have demonstrated that children of divorced and battling former couples show a marked drop in school performance on Fridays before there is to be a custody exchange. This combative environment leads children to learn to be angry and transfer this anger into hitting at school, and can also often lead to drug abuse and criminal behavior later in life. These facts seemed to be collected through interviews with professionals, but no information is provided on how the subjects were recruited. The methods of research for the findings and studies cited are not described, and therefore there is not sufficient information to evaluate the quality of this research. The political ideology of child advocacy seems to guide this article, as well as the belief that divorce and subsequent custody battles have definite negative consequences.

University of Florida Study: Girls Perform Better on Tests When Feuding Parents
Divorce
Ascribe Newswire
9/7/2006

This article presents a University of Florida study that found that a clean break from a bad marriage is actually better for the couple's school-age daughters than a troubled union. The facts presented include that while boys and girls from two-parent intact families perform better academically than boys and girls whose parents divorced, girls whose parents divorced do better in school than girls from similarly troubled families whose parents went to the brink of divorce but remained married. In the study, girls between 1st and 10th grades whose parents divorced scored an average of slightly more than eight points higher on standardized reading and mathematics tests than girls whose parents filed for divorce but later requested the case be dismissed. These differences persisted four years after the divorce. The research method used was to study detailed student records on behavior and standardized test scores, as well as divorce records, from 1993 to 2003. By matching divorce records to student records, Hoekstra was able to identify 690 students whose parents divorced and 111 students whose parents filed for divorce but later withdrew from the process. He used this method instead of the typical approach of comparing children whose parents divorced to children in traditional two-parent families, as in the traditional approach, it’s hard to control for the differences between these two types of families to ensure that you're not picking up all the things that cause the parents to divorce rather than the effect of the divorce itself. This seems to be sufficient evidence of the quality of the research. The article is guided by the political ideology that policy-makers ought to be less concerned with whether or not parents legally dissolve their marriages and more concerned with helping them overcome the types of problems that cause them to contemplate divorce in the first place, and that unless intervention can resolve the issues that got the family to the point of considering divorce, creating divorce reform ligislation will result in considerably lower academic achievement for the daughters involved. It is also guided by the belief that the negative effects resulting from divorce are not the result of a "legal event," but rather dysfunctional family processes, particularly conflict that disrupt healthy child development.

Shared custody helps kids survive divorce
San Gabriel Valley Tribune
5/12/2006

This article notes a recent proclamation in Maine, signed by Gov. John E. Baldacci, which recognizes April 25 as "Parental Alienation Awareness Day." This proclamation is noteworthy because it officially recognizes Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) as a psychological condition that can have lasting consequences for children torn between battling parents in high-conflict divorces. PAS was first identified in 1985 by psychiatrist Dr. Richard Gardner, an expert witness in custody cases. There are no research method cited, although the debate over the effects of recognizing PAS is described, and it is cited that no fathers were interviewed, and the cases reviewed for support of PAS tended to be extreme and sensational. The article remains fairly unbiased; however two beliefs guide the article: that whether parental alienation meets the scientific standards of a "syndrome" is a battle researchers should wage among themselves, and that there needs to be a presumption of shared custody following divorce, assuming no abuse.

Calling a Truce in the Battle for a Divorce
Western Morning News
2/1/2006

This article states that the effects of divorce can be devastating on children. Apart from the consequences of changed financial circumstances, children are more likely to suffer stress, insecurity and anxiety. They are less likely to achieve academically and are more prone to substance abuse and teenage pregnancy. In the United States, attending mediation during divorce proceedings is compulsory in 38 out of 50 states. In Texas, judges can order couples to see court-appointed divorce coaches to lessen the emotional impact on the children. There is no research method cited, and it is not made clear where the statistic was found. The belief that parents should try to take the least hostile divorce approach guides the article.

The Disrupting Effects of Divorce
The Straits Times (Singapore)
August 28, 2006 Monday

This article states that Research on the impact of divorce on children has consistently shown that those from divorced families generally have a harder time growing up. The ability to form healthy relationships as adults has a lot to do with the parental bonds that are formed and nurtured from birth. A child’s sense of security about the world, resilience to stress, ability to balance emotions and create meaningful relationships in the future are developed from infancy through parents. Thus, when a marriage breaks down, the child's sense of security is disrupted as the family no longer functions as a stable unit. Feuding divorcing parents may not realize it, but they are unwittingly shaping their children's values, view of the world and relationships. It also states though that divorce can serve as a 'cleansing agent' when relationships are oppressive and damaging. In this sense, divorce can be positive as it provides a way out for the children involved to develop into better adjusted adults. 80% of children from divorced homes eventually adapt to their new life and become quite well-adjusted. The remaining 20% of children with serious social and emotional problems from divorced families form twice the percentage of similar children from intact families. This suggests that children coming from divorced families may have a higher probability of experiencing social and psychological problems when compared with children from intact families. 70% of adult children of divorce who later marry had relatively permissive views of divorce, compared to 40% of spouses from intact families. The facts were obtained through research but the methods and quality of research cannot be assessed. The article uses an unbiased ideological framework as it presents evidence of divorce as both a positive and a negative decision.

Generally the fact that divorce has adverse effects on children is supported in all the articles. The main controversy of the articles is whether couples should be forced to undergo therapy and mediation before obtaining a divorce. Mainly the facts and conclusion were presented under the author’s position that divorce is bad, and that regardless of whether couples are legally forced to undergo mediation, they should seriously consider the consequences that their fighting has on the children. Not much “trustworthiness” can be attributed to information about families as presented in the popular press as the sources of statistics and methods of obtaining findings are rarely presented. All the press sources I used seemed similarly objective. I think that the negative coverage of divorce in the media affects our opinion on the current decline of families and makes couples more aware of the harsh effects that divorce has on the children involved.

1

The debate surrounding the contemporary changes in American families is centered on whether the institution of family is declining or simply changing. Popenoe is one of the main critics of the current state of marriage and family, who adimantly states that society must be aware and concerned that family is in steep decline and that this has serious consequences for the children of today. His adversaries claim that the ideas he uses as proof of his argument can be looked at in a more positive light, and instead show progressive changes in current society and ideology.
Popenoe defines family as "a relatively small domestic group of kin (or people in a kin-like relationship) consisting of at least one adult and one dependent person". According to Popenoe, since the peak of family life in the 1960's, there are many demographic, institutional and cultural indicators of a decline of this definition. He claims that authority has diminished within families, the function of families is no longer as strong, that the cultural ideal of familism has weakened, and that overall individuals today are more interested in their own advancement instead of investing time and energy in others. Specifically, he states that the divorce rate increases, the number of children in families has substantially decreased, and is now below the required number for population replacement. Marital roles have dramatically changed, with both parents often in the workforce, and consequently women are no longer economically dependent on their families. The idea of marriage as a societal necessity has almost been eradicated, and not only do many couples marry at a later age now, but many even discard the institution of marriage completely.
Stacey and Cowan offer critiques of Popenoe's arguments. Stacey's opposition is grounded in the fact that she has a different definition of family from Popenoe. She claims that family "is not an institution, but an ideological, symbolic construct that has a history and a politics". She argues that Popenoe's definition is ephemeral and outdated as it fails legitimize today's diversity in race, class, gender and sexual orientation. She claims that his mistakes lie in naming family as the only prior social institution in existence, in failing to recognize the post-industrial economic transformations in our country, and that his declaration that one must either believe that the family has strengthened or that its institutional power within society has remained unchanged, is flawed. Although she agrees with come of his points, she sees women's ability to survive outside of marriage as a positive societal change and claims that Popenoe continuously confuses symbol with reality in labeling the causes of family distress, and that instead of trying to keep that traditional ideology of the family alive, we should create a social environment in which diverse family forms can survive. Cowan claims that many of Popenoe's analysis is scientifically and logically flawed in its conclusions from data on family trends, as correltion does not prove causation. He also ignores alternate causal hypotheses, such as birth control to explain the reduced number of children in families, the idea that earlier family arrangements posessed inherent inequalities, especially for women, and the fact that very few individuals actually choose to be child-free just to increase their own personal growth. Cowan claims that a more logical solution to strengthen the idea of family is for politicians to start adressing family issues and policies, and to make the environment more favorable in order to foster the growth of marriage and family.
I would steer away from Popenoe's argument and adopt Cowan's approach, as his proves more realistic and actually acknowledges the positive side of the societal changes that Popenoe simply blames for the decline of family. He sees the equality and power that women have gained in recent years, and doesn't ignore the fact that despite today's anti-marriage and family values, the majority of adults still get married, still have children, and many stay married for life. Along with this more optimistic approach, he also offers very realistic solutions to counter the decline, such as reconsidering the dated definition of family, discovering more sophisticated and accurate ways of studying family functioning, and ending the neglect of family policy by politicians in both parties.