Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!usc!jarthur!ucivax!gateway
From: ma@hpclove.cup.hp.COM (Megan Adams)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Post-divorce quality of life (was: feminism ... done for men)
Message-ID: <38680001@hpclove.HP.COM>
Date: 6 Dec 90 19:47:57 GMT
References: <14993@cs.utexas.edu>
Organization: Hewlett Packard Calif. Language Lab
Lines: 32
Approved: tittle@ics.uci.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: blanche.ics.uci.edu

In article <kaveh.658769285@s.ms.uky.edu> kaveh@ms.uky.edu (Kaveh Baharestan) writes:
> That's true only if he pays alimony, and then not really.  A
> while back I got some stats on divores.  The man's quality
> of living goes up 30% and the woman's (who usually has the
> kids) goes down 60%.  Note: I could be wrong on the
> percentages but I am not wrong on the unevenness of quality
> of living. ...

To the above, Russel Turpin addresses the following (valid) questions:

> Did the study look at divorces resulting
> from the judgments in one area at one time, or just at a broad
> collection of divorced couples?  (Divorce judgments have changed
> a lot in the last fifteen years in some states.  Lumping together
> divorces that took place in Texas fifteen years ago with divorces
> that take place today in California is guaranteed to generate
> useless numbers.)
>
> Most importantly, one has to ask how the study defined "quality
> of life".

I've read the same stats. My recollections are that they were drawn
from California only, and they were intended to measure the effect of
california's no-fault divorce laws. 'Quality of life' wasn't being
measured; income subsequent to divorce was. That is, the study found
that subsequent to divorce the standard of living of the (ex) wife
fell around 60%, while the (ex) husband's rose about 30%. The results
were published in a book, whose title unfortuneately I forget. As a
result of the study, questions were raised about the fairness of
no-fault in some cases.

megana.