Marital Discord and Subsequent Divorce - Population Studies Center

Marital Discord and Subsequent Divorce: Perceptions of Both Wives and their Husbands

Elyse Jennings University of Michigan

Population Studies Center Research Report 12-760 June 2012

Marital Discord and Subsequent Divorce 1

ABSTRACT

We know little about what causes divorce in contexts outside of the West. This paper focuses on marital dissolution in a rural, agrarian context of Nepal that has recently experienced a great deal of social change. Marriage in this context is highly valued, with far-reaching significance for not only the husband and wife but also for their extended families. Marital dissolutions due to separation or divorce have been very rare until the recent past. Furthermore, women have few opportunities to be independent, and therefore have disincentive to dissolve their marriages. I explore the factors influencing marital dissolution in this South Asian setting, comparing these factors to Western influences on divorce. I then focus on the influence of marital discord, using unique, couple-level data with measures of three types of discord (disagreements, criticisms, and abuse), as self-reported by each spouse. Results reveal that (1) many of the factors that influence marital dissolution in Western contexts play a similar role in this context, (2) wives’ reports of discord have an important influence on the odds of marital dissolution across types of discord, while husbands reports of disagreements and abuse, only, have a significant influence, and (3) the influence of wives’ reports of discord is independent of their husbands’ reports of the same.


INTRODUCTION

Divorce is prevalent in many societies throughout the world (Goode 1993). Even in

settings where divorce has been relatively rare until the recent past, it is on the rise. Nepal is such

a setting, where marriage maintains great value amidst rapid social changes and amidst the

increasing prevalence of divorce. Nearly every young Nepali person marries, which

automatically exposes them to the possibility of experiencing marital dissolution. From Western

contexts we know that the economic consequences of divorce are particularly detrimental for

women (Holden and Smock 1991; Smock, Manning, and Gupta 1999). There is good reason to

expect these consequences to be even more detrimental for women in South Asian contexts

where there are fewer opportunities for their economic independence. Furthermore, the value of

marital unions is tied to the entire family—not just the wife and husband (Bennett 1983; Fricke

1986; Gilbert 1992; Ghimire et al. 2006)—extending the consequences of dissolutions to many

people. These factors combine to make the study of rising divorce in South Asia a high scientific

priority.

This paper investigates the factors that influence marital dissolution in a rural, agrarian

part of Nepal. The context provides the unique opportunity to explore whether the factors related

to divorce in Western settings are relevant even in a place where divorce is still very rare. Given

the drastically different social circumstances, I expand upon Western theoretical frameworks for

understanding divorce and investigate the additional factors that may influence divorce in this

rural South Asia setting. Next, I examine whether martial discord has an influence on divorce

that is independent of these relevant factors. Specifically, I investigate whether wives’ and their

husbands’ own reports of discord individually and independently influence the likelihood that

their marriage will dissolve, across multiple types of discord.

Detailed, couple-level measures of experiences both outside of the home and within

marriage are unusual, and even more unusual are independent reports of each spouses’

perceptions of and experiences with discord. The Chitwan Valley Family Study (CVFS) of rural

Nepal provides these rare measures, allowing the investigation of the influence of these factors

on couples’ subsequent 13 years of marital dissolution. In the following paragraphs, I outline the

theoretical framework that guides this investigation.


THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Because divorce has rarely been studied outside of Western settings, we must rely largely

on what we know from past research in the US and other Western settings in identifying

potential predictors of divorce in South Asia. While experiences such as education, work

experience, length of marriage and fertility within marriage are likely to play important roles in

marital longevity across settings, rural Nepal is a setting with particular cultural practices that

may also influence marital dissolution.

In this section, I describe the marital practices in this rural Nepalese setting. I then outline

the predictors of marital dissolution that Nepal is likely to share with Western contexts, and the

additional factors to take into consideration due to the marital practices specific to this setting. It

is important to consider the potential for these factors to influence marital dissolution as we turn

to the possible independent influence of marital discord. In this next section, I discuss how

different types of discord can lead to marital dissolution. Even more important, spouses’

individual perceptions of these different types of discord may lead to independent influences on

marital dissolution. The theoretical framework concludes with a discussion of why each

spouses’ perceptions are expected to affect couples’ likelihood of dissolving.

Marital Dissolution in Rural Nepal

In any given setting, married couples’ likelihood of dissolution is related to the meaning

and value of marriage among that population. In rural Nepal, the high value of marriage is

indicated in its universality and early occurrence. The age at first marriage between 1990 and

1996 was 17.6 for women and 21.9 for men, with over 98% of men and women married by their

early 30s (Yabiku 2005). Marriage is especially important for the gendered division of labor

within households, as women are responsible for certain tasks both in the field and in the home

(Allendorf 2007). Less than half of Nepali women in the CVFS had work experience outside of

the home before marriage (29% as of 2008), although more women work for wages during

marriage (44% of women who were married for at least 5 years in 2008).1 Work experience is

intertwined with religious and cultural practices. For example, wives of lower caste groups more

often work outside the home, out of necessity, than wives of upper caste groups (Acharya 1994;

Bennett 1983; Cameron 1998; Stash and Hannum 2001). As another way of maintaining the

1 These numbers represent women’s first marriages among those ever married as of 2008; 3654 women had ever been married in 2008, and 3344 had been married for at least 5 years.


prestigious status of their caste, these upper caste women are also under more strict rules of

obedience to their husbands and in-laws (Bennett 1983), although wives of all groups are at a

power disadvantage in the household (Allendorf 2007; Allendorf forthcoming; Jayaweera 1997).

Thus, marriage is an important, valued institution which involves well-defined norms and

customs.

Not surprising among a population that places a high value on marriage, marital

dissolution in this setting is very rare (Parry 2001). Just as with other aspects of social life in

Nepal, the practice of marital dissolution is based on Hindu customs. Hindu code historically has

not recognized marital dissolution, but many groups of Hindus have practiced dissolution

nonetheless (Holden 2008; Parry 2001). This practice has been more common among lower

caste, marginalized groups, while it has been extremely rare for the upper castes (Holden 2008).

In many circumstances, marital dissolution does not necessarily involve the legal system, and

often involves separation without a subsequent divorce (Parry 2001).

The unique customs and prevalence of marital dissolution require the consideration of

setting-specific theory in studying factors that may influence marital dissolution. Age at

marriage, length of marriage, spousal coresidence, and marital fertility are likely to depress

marital dissolution, as they do in Western settings (Bumpass and Sweet 1972; Becker, Landes,

and Michael 1977; Cherlin 1977; Hirschman and Teerawichitchainan 2003; Morgan, Lye and

Condran 1988; Morgan and Rindfuss 1985; South 2001; Thornton and Rodgers 1987; Waite,

Haggstrom and Kanouse 1985; Waite and Lillard 1991). However, wives’ nonfamily experiences

may exert a unique influence in this setting, where experiences and behaviors are highly

gendered and there has recently been rapid social change. For example, the influence of wives’

education is typically found to increase divorce in Western settings (Heuveline and Poch 2006;

Kalmijn, Graaf and Poortman 2004; Teachman 2002), but education may reduce the likelihood

of divorce in this setting. There is a common belief that wives’ education will facilitate a better

marriage, as conveyed by one 25 year old Nepali woman: “A couple should be educated. If a

wife is educated then she can understand her husband and there can be a good understanding

between them.”2 Wives’ work experience may also increase divorce, as this kind of experience

may lower the cost of divorce and increase wives’ autonomy (Oppenheimer 1994; Thornton

1985). 2 The quotes in this paper come from qualitative interviews conducted by the author in Chitwan, Nepal in the Fall of 2010.


Additional factors, unique to this setting, may influence marital dissolution. First, it is

typical for parents and other relatives to arrange the marriages of youth, although it is becoming

more common for young people to choose their own marriage partner (Ghimire et al. 2006;

Niraula 1995). Participation in spouse choice may increase couples’ likelihood of dissolving, as

this indicates autonomy and a value on independent decision-making. Second, Nepalese families

practice patrilocal residence. Thus, most women move into her husband’s natal home upon

marriage. Women who live a greater distance from their natal home have less access to the

support from their family and many of their friends (Dyson and Moore 1983). Without proximity

to their natal home and the social and economic support it can bring, women may be less likely

to consider divorce as an option (Hirschman and Teerawichitchainan 2003). Third, farmland

ownership is highly relevant in this economy that largely relies on subsistence agriculture

(Shivakoti, Axinn, Bhandari, and Chhetri 1999). Women in landless households tend to work

outside their home for compensation (Cameron 1998), eliminating some disincentive to divorce.

Furthermore, land ownership is an indicator of the household’s socioeconomic status, and a

woman may be less inclined to leave a household that has more wealth.

Marital Discord

Discord within marriage is a strong predictor of marital dissolution in Western contexts.

Not only do measures of discord collected through observational methods demonstrate this, but

measures collected by survey items also demonstrate it (Amato and Rogers 1997; DeMaris 2000;

Gottman 1994; Matthews, Wickrama, and Conger 1996). However, in a context in which divorce

is rare and stigmatized, we might not expect marital dissolution to be as sensitive to marital

discord. On the other hand, it is likely that these rare marital dissolutions occur for relatively

drastic reasons. For example, instead of dissolution occurring due to a general lack of emotional

fulfillment (Amato and Hohmann-Marriot 2007; Riessman 1990), marital dissolution may

require more frequent or drastic discord as perceived by at least one of the spouses.

Frequent marital discord can lead to a growing dissatisfaction for the partners involved,

which can cause them to consider alternatives to remaining married. For example, a person who

endures frequent marital discord may grow dissatisfied and begin to consider their prospects for

living independently. If they feel that those prospects are preferable to remaining in the marriage,

they may leave their spouse. Similarly, a person who grows dissatisfied with their marriage due


to frequent discord may seek alternative romantic relationships. Evidence from the US clearly

demonstrates people are more likely to leave their marriage if they have or perceive alternatives

to their current spouse (South and Lloyd 1995). Through these mechanisms, marital discord may

lead to marital dissolution.

Disagreements, criticisms, and abuse are three types of marital discord that each entail a

particular level of severity, which can influence marital outcomes. Disagreements and criticisms,

being verbal types of discord, may be less severe and have a lesser impact on dissolution than

physical abuse. Physical abuse may be a powerful reminder of an unhappy marriage and may

provide the victimized spouse with greater incentive to seek marital dissolution than verbal

discord. However, spouses experiencing physical abuse may face more obstacles in leaving the

marriage than spouses experiencing verbal discord. Wives, in particular, may fear heightened

physical repercussions in seeking an escape from an abusive husband (Anderson 2007;

Kirkwood 1993; Naved, Azim, Bhuiya, and Persson 2006; Strube and Barbour 1983), depressing

their likelihood of experiencing dissolution. On the other hand, a wife in this situation may

garner more support from her natal family in seeking to dissolve her marriage as a result of this

severe form of discord (Eldar-Avidan and Haj-Yahia 2000; Hirschman and Teerawichitchainan

2003; Kunz and Kunz 1995). So, discord is likely to increase couples’ odds of dissolution, but

there are also reasons to expect that wives who are hit by their husbands may be less likely to

experience marital dissolution.

The nature of the measurement of these three types of discord can play a role in how they

influence dissolution. In the CVFS data, used in the analyses below, disagreements are measured

as a more mutual type of discord, with each spouse potentially being involved in a similar way.

When reporting on the frequency of disagreements in a marriage, wives and husbands are

reporting on shared experiences. When reporting on criticisms and abuse, on the other hand, they

are reporting on their individual experiences with the role of victim. While spouses with shared

experiences of discord may have similar motivations to dissolve the marriage, spouses in the role

of victim may have motivations that are unique from the perpetrating spouse.

While this section has considered the influence of marital discord on marital dissolution

generally, the following section considers the potentially independent influence of each spouses’

perceptions of discord.


Wives’ and Husbands’ Experiences and Perceptions of Discord

Likely more important than the frequency of discord in marriages are the perceptions of

the spouses that endure that discord. The individual spouses in any marital union have their own,

individual perceptions of the experiences they share as a couple. These perceptions might be

congruent, or they might be distinct. In fact, even if there is one objective truth in these

experiences, each spouse may internalize these “truths” in different ways. For example, there is

evidence that wives and husbands hold distinct perceptions of how their marriage was formed

(Bernard 1982), the amount that each spouse contributes to the housework (Hochschild and

Machung 1989; Kluwer, Heesink, and Van de Vliert 1996; Smith, Gager, and Morgan 1998;

Wilkie, Ferree, and Ratcliff 1998), the intensity of discord (Amato and Rogers 1997; Benin and

Agostinelli 1988; Gottman 1994; Matthews, Wickrama, and Conger 1996), and—in the case of

marital dissolution—what caused their marriage to fail (Stewart et al. 1997). By extension, we

might expect wives and husbands to hold separate perceptions of discord in their marriage, and it

is these perceptions that are likely to be important influences on whether they choose to dissolve

their marriage.

These perceptions of discord held by the two spouses can have independent influences on

marital outcomes, even if they are very similar. For example, wives who perceive frequent

discord may be just as likely as their husbands who perceive a similar frequency of discord to

decide that dissolving their marriage would be desirable. On the other hand, a wife perceiving a

high frequency of discord may be more likely to endure the discord than her husband, since

women have fewer opportunities after a divorce (Strube and Barbour 1983). In the former case,

we would expect that both spouses’ perceptions of discord have an influence on the marital

outcome. In the latter case, we would expect that husbands’ perceptions of discord have more

influential impact on the outcome of the marriage.

Husbands in this setting are especially likely to influence marital outcomes. They tend to

hold a great deal of power in relationships, relative to their wives (Bennett 1983; Chapagain

2006). Research on couples in the US has found that husbands’ perceptions of unfairness and

disagreements are more predictive of dissolution than wives’ perceptions (Sanchez and Gager

2000). In Nepal, there are reasons to expect that the influence of husbands’ perceptions will be


even stronger than in the US, relative to wives’ perceptions. Men have liberties that women do

not, such as the means to own land and to remarry. Women face greater stigma in remarriage and

impaired economic prospects compared to men (Holden 2008), presenting a situation in which a

married woman is dependent on her husband for livelihood and has few or no other marital

options. Thus, husbands may face fewer obstacles than wives in seeking marital dissolution. If

this is the case, then we might expect husbands’ perceptions of discord to independently

influence couples’ likelihood of marital dissolution.

Although husbands in Nepal have greater power in marriage than wives, wives may have

greater incentive to seek dissolution from a discord-ridden marriage. Wives, unlike husbands, do

not have the option of remarrying before a dissolution. Although polygamy has been illegal in

Nepal since 1963, it is still practiced in many parts of the country (Deuba and Rana 2001). As a

result of this practice, a husband is able to bring a second spouse into the home as an alternative

to a discord-ridden marriage and an alternative to facing stigma due to divorce. However, in this

part of the country, polygamy in which the wife takes multiple husbands is nonexistent. Hence,

wives’ perceptions of discord may be expected to have a greater impact on marital dissolution

than husbands’ reports.

There are other reasons to expect that wives’ reports will have an independent influence.

Nepal has seen recent legal advances in women’s rights. For example, women have gained the

right to file for divorce and the right to request custody of their children (Guanle 2001; The

Women’s Foundation of Nepal). Women have also made some advances in the ability to be

independent post-divorce. For example, although it is not yet a common practice, women have

gained the right to inherit or own land (Acharya et al. 2007; Gilbert 1992; Allendorf 2007).

Additionally, the recent social changes, discussed above, have allowed women more access to

human capital via the spread of education. With these various advances, the obstacles to divorce

may be diminished and women may be motivated to dissolve their marriage in the case of

frequent discord. So, wives’ reports of marital discord can have an important influence on

marital dissolution, and this influence may be independent of their husbands’ reports.


DATA

The Chitwan Valley Family Study (CVFS), conducted in rural Nepal, provides rare

couple-level data on spouses’ experiences and perceptions of marital discord. The data collection

began with the fielding of a baseline survey of 72-minute, face-to-face interviews in 1996. The

CVFS interviewed all household members, aged 15–59 and their spouses (even if outside this

age range or living elsewhere), of every household in 151 sampled neighborhoods. The data are

ideal for studying spouses’ perceptions of relationship dynamics, as baseline interviews were

conducted with 1633 married couples. Special care was taken to interview spouses

simultaneously in two different locations to enhance the independence of their responses. These

parallel and independent data from married couples allows for the unique ability to link

respondents’ reports of marital discord to reports made by their own spouses.

Following the 1996 baseline interview, monthly interviews were conducted with the

original respondents, as part of a household registry that began in 1997. These monthly

interviews collected information on family and life events such as marriage, fertility,

contraceptive use, separation due to marital discord, and divorce. For this registry, one member

of the household is interviewed each month and asked to report on the experiences of all

household members. I use reports of marital discord from the 1996 baseline interview to predict

marital dissolution with 13 years of data from the household registry.

The sample I analyze includes all women aged 14 to 31 in 1996, who were in their first

marriage, and whose husband was also interviewed in 1996 (n=683 couples). My analysis

follows the couples’ monthly hazard of marital dissolution for 162 months. I study couples in

which the wives were age 31 and under in 1996 because the experience of marital dissolution is

very rare and infrequent for women above this age range in the subsequent 162 months.3 Thus,

the rates of experiencing marital dissolution are higher for this group of couples, maximizing the

opportunity to examine the consequences of marital discord for dissolution. Even in restricting

the sample to those couples experiencing the highest rate of dissolution, the rate is low: 5% of

the 683 women experienced marital dissolution in the 162 months of observation. Such a low

rate of events might be expected to produce nonsignificant results in the associations between the

independent measures and marital dissolution.

3 Eight out of 504 women above age 31 experienced dissolution in the 162 months.


MEASURES

Dependent Variable

I operationalize the concept of marital dissolution by combining the events of marital separation and divorce. This is a common approach among authors who study this topic, as there often is a legal lag in the time from separation to divorce (Hirschman and Teerawichitchainan 2003; Morgan and Rindfuss 1985; Morgan, Lye, and Condran 1988; Martin and Bumpass 1989; Schoen 1992; South 2001). In Nepal, similar to the US, marital separation and divorce are two distinct concepts: separation is commonly understood by people in Nepal as “chhuttiyera baseko”, while divorce is understood as “sambandha bichhed”. Combining separation and divorce into a single type of event allows me to pinpoint the time that the marriage was first disrupted, instead of the time point at which the legal process was completed. This is especially important in a setting where couples often do not bother with the legal system, and where separation often occurs without divorce.

Following previous research on divorce in Asia (Hirschman and Teerawichitchainan 2003), I focus on dissolution of first marriages. Later marriages are especially non-institutionalized in this setting (Cherlin 1978; Holden 2008; Parry 2001). Additionally, Western literature demonstrates that remarriages are likely to have significantly different causes and are prone to a greater likelihood of dissolution than first marriages (Becker et al. 1977; Bramlett and Mosher 2002; Cherlin 1978), indicating that remarriage is selective of a different type of people than the universe of first marriages. Furthermore, first marriage in Nepal is an event that nearly everyone experiences (Yabiku 2002), while remarriage is very rare: only about 11% of ever married women ages 40 and older in 2008 had been married more than once.

The measure of dissolution comes from the household registry data, in which one member of the household reports on the divorce and separation experiences of all household members. I use 162 months of data on marital dissolution to operationalize the monthly hazard of marital dissolution in discrete time. The discrete time approach yields results similar to a continuous approach because the incidence of marital dissolution in any one month is quite low, but the discrete time approach allows the avoidance of making any parametric assumptions regarding the distribution of the underlying baseline hazard (Yamaguchi 1991). The measure of marital dissolution is coded as 0 for every month the woman is married and 1 for the first month in which the woman is separated or divorced, after which they cease to contribute to person-months of exposure to risk of marital dissolution. Widowhood is treated as a competing risk, so that women whose husbands die cease to contribute person-months to the hazard.


Table 1: Descriptive Statistics for First-Time Married Couples with Wives Ages 14-31 in 1996

Measure Mean Standard Deviation Minimum Maximum

Marital dissolution (proportion) 0.05 0.21 0.00 1.00 Frequency of Disagreements Wives’ report 1.80 0.70 1.00 4.00 Husbands’ report 1.80 0.73 1.00 4.00 Frequency of being Criticized Wives’ report 1.65 0.68 1.00 4.00 Husbands’ report 1.56 0.66 1.00 4.00 Ever Hit by Spouse Wives’ report 0.13 0.34 0.00 1.00 Husbands’ report 0.03 0.16 0.00 1.00 Nonfamily Experiences Wife’s educational Attainment 3.83 4.04 0.00 14.00 Wife ever worked for wages 0.43 0.50 0.00 1.00 Marriage Characteristics Wife’s age at marriage 16.85 2.47 9.00 28.00 Wife’s level of spouse choice 2.11 1.69 1.00 5.00 Husband’s level of spouse choice 2.97 1.78 0.00 5.00 Length of marriage (months) 93.22 55.61 1.00 253.00 Coresidence 0.71 0.45 0.00 1.00 Fertility Experiences Number of children born 2.08 1.44 0.00 7.00 Characteristics of Marital Home Household owns farmland (khet or bari) 0.80 0.40 0.00 1.00 Distance from wife’s natal home 2.82 0.58 1.00 4.00 Wife’s Demographics Brahmin/Chettri (upper caste) 0.48 0.50 0.00 1.00 Dalit (low caste) 0.12 0.32 0.00 1.00 Hill Indigenous 0.16 0.36 0.00 1.00 Terai Indigenous 0.24 0.43 0.00 1.00 Cohort age 14-23 in 1996 0.46 0.50 0.00 1.00 Cohort age 24-31 in 1996 0.54 0.50 0.00 1.00

Total couples in sample 683 Total experiencing marital dissolution 35


Independent Measures

Couple and individual experiences. I will first investigate the influence of nonfamily

experiences, marital characteristics, fertility experiences, characteristics of the marital home, and

wives’ demographics on marital dissolution. Nonfamily experiences includes wives’ education,

coded as the number of completed years of education as of 1996. In this setting, education is

expected to decrease marital dissolution via a greater tolerance for unhappy marriages, though

US research indicates that the opposite effect is also possible (Heuveline and Poch 2006;

Kalmijn, Graaf and Poortman 2004; Teachman 2002). I also include wives’ work as an indicator

of nonfamily experiences, coded as a dummy variable to indicate whether the wife ever worked

for pay as of 1996.

Marriage characteristics include wives’ age at marriage, the length of the marriage,

coresidence, and level of spouse choice. Age at marriage and length of marriage may reduce

dissolution through similar mechanisms of greater maturity at marriage (Morgan and Rindfuss

1985) and a reduced acquisition of new information about a partner that could lead to dissolution

(Morgan and Rindfuss 1985; Becker et al. 1977). Wife’s age at marriage is coded in years, and

length of marriage is coded in months since the month of marriage. Spousal coresidence can also

play an important role in marital relations in this context, where men often leave their families

temporarily to earn money in a separate location (Williams Forthcoming). Coresidence is coded

1 in the months that the wife is living with her husband and 0 in the months that they do not live

together. These monthly time-varying measures are each lagged by one month. Level of spouse

choice may increase the odds of dissolution via increased independent choice and a decreased

value on family norms. This variable is coded on a scale from 1 to 5, from having no choice of

their spouse (1) to having complete choice (5)4. Because spouses within the same marriage may

have experienced different levels of spouse choice, I investigate measures as reported by both the

wife and the husband.

Couples’ fertility experience is operationalized as their number of children, coded as a

time-varying covariate to indicate the total number of children (both sons and daughters) that the

couple had in each month, and lagged by one month. Marital fertility should decrease the

likelihood of dissolution, since children raise the cost of divorce (Waite and Lillard 1991). In

4 Refer to Ghimire et al. (2006) for complete description of this coding.


fact, fertility may have an especially strong influence in this setting, where joint custody is much

less common and children have a direct economic value for the many households that rely on

subsistence agriculture (Cain 1977; Karki 1988).

Characteristics of the marital home include a measure of the amount of farmland owned

by the marital household and the distance of the marital home from wives’ natal home. Amount

of farmland is coded as a dummy variable, so that a value of 1 indicates that the household owns

either khet or bari land—the two types of farmland, each used to for growing different types of

crops. Distance of the marital home from the wives’ natal home is coded on a scale of 1 to 4,

where a value of 1 indicates that the wife lives with her parents; 2 indicates that she lives in the

same village as her parents; 3 indicates that she can reach her parents’ house in one day; and 4

indicates that it takes her longer than one day to reach her parents’ house.

I also investigate demographic characteristics. First, ethnicity is extremely important in

all aspects of social life in this context. Ethnicity is complex, multi-faceted, and related to both

caste and religion in Nepal (for detailed descriptions of the different ethnic groups, see Bennett

1983; Cameron 1998; Fricke 1986; and Guneratne 2002). Upper Caste Hindus tend to be most

strict about following Hindu customs (Bennett 1983; Stash and Hannum 2001). For example,

upper caste girls are married at particularly young ages in order to ensure their purity for their

husband (Bennett 1983; Niraula and Morgan 1996). Thus, couples of these high caste groups

may endure especially intense pressure for their marriages to succeed and may perceive great

difficulty in remarrying. Other ethnic groups have less strict marital customs to adhere to (Fricke

1986; Cameron 1998) and, thus, face fewer obstacles in dissolving their marriages. Wives’

ethnicity is coded as four dummy variables: Brahmin/Chettri (or upper caste Hindus), Dalit (or

low caste Hindus), Hill Indingenous, and Terai Indigenous.5 6

Second, the rapid and recent social changes in this Nepalese context give younger cohorts

broader exposure to Western perspectives about marriage and divorce than older cohorts. With

divorce becoming more prevalent (Goode 1993; Thornton and Lin 1994), younger cohorts are

exposed to the option of divorce and may be exposed to more positive attitudes toward divorce.

Furthermore, younger cohorts of women are exposed to more education, as discussed above. 5 Because the number of women in the Newari ethnic group that fit the sample restrictions is very small (N=38), and very few experience dissolution (N=2), I do not include those of Newar ethnicity in the sample. 6 Note that while these ethnicity measures are based on wives’ ethnicity, nearly all couples in the sample have intra-caste marriages.


Greater education and exposure to Western perspectives can increase the spread of new ideas

about individual independence in the family (Axinn and Barber 2001; Ghimire et al. 2006).

Together these mechanisms may increase the susceptibility of younger cohorts to experiencing

marital dissolution. Wives’ age cohort is coded into two dummy variables, to indicate whether

the wife was between ages 14 and 23 in 1996 and whether the wife was ages 24 to 31 in 1996.7

Marital discord measures. Next, I will investigate the effects of reported disagreements,

criticisms, and abuse within their marriage with three different survey items. First, I use a

variable indicating spouses’ perceptions of the frequency of disagreements . This variable comes

from a survey item asking “How often do you have disagreements with your (husband/wife)?

Frequently, sometimes, seldom, or never?” Second, I use a variable indicating frequency of

being criticized. This measure comes from a survey item asking “How often does your

(husband/wife) criticize you? Frequently, sometimes, seldom, or never?” I code each of these

two measures so that a value of 1 indicates “never”, 2 indicates “seldom”, 3 indicates

“sometimes”, and 4 indicates “frequently.” Third, ever hit by spouse is measured with a survey

item that asks “Has your (husband/wife) ever hit you?” with response options “Yes” and “No.”

This variable is coded 0 for “no” and 1 for “yes.”

Table 2 displays the correlations of spouses’ reports within types of discord. Although

correlations for reports of criticisms and abuse are displayed, there is no reason to expect that

these measures should be strongly correlated: spouses are reporting on their own experiences.

Perceptions of disagreements, on the other hand, are based on spouses’ individual reports of the

same experience. However, the correlation between husbands and wives’ perceptions of

disagreements is low, at r=0.23. Not surprisingly, the correlations of reports of criticisms and

abuse are even lower, at r=0.15 and r=0.04, respectively, with the correlation of reports of abuse

being insignificant at p<.05. We might also expect the different types of discord to be strongly

correlated. While consistently significant and positive, these correlations are not exceptionally

high. The highest correlation exists between disagreements and criticisms, at just under r=0.50

within spouses.

7 Analyses were also performed on a sample that excluded spouses that were not currently living together in 1996. The influence of discord in these analyses are similar to those discussed below.


Table 2: Pearson’s Correlation Coefficients Across Spouses’ Reports of Different Types of Discord

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Disagreements 1. Wives’ perception of frequency 1.00 0.23*** 0.48*** 0.15*** 0.31*** 0.09* 2. Husbands’ perception of frequency 1.00 0.18*** 0.49*** 0.17*** 0.10* Criticisms 3. Wife criticized by husband 1.00 0.15*** 0.31*** 0.04 4. Husband criticized by wife 1.00 0.10* 0.13*** Abuse 5. Wife ever hit by husband 1.00 0.04 6. Husband ever hit by wife 1.00

*p<.05 **p<.01 ***p<.001

ANALYTIC METHOD

I use discrete-time multi-level event history analysis and logistic regression to model the

risk of marital dissolution, with person-months of exposure as the unit of analysis (Peterson

1993). The analysis is based on monthly measurement indicating whether the respondent

experienced marital dissolution. I use the following logistic regression equation:

Where p is the probability of marital dissolution, )1( p

p−

is the odds of marital dissolution,

a is a constant term, β is the effect of independent variables within neighborhoods (n), and X is

the value of these independent variables. Individuals (i) who are exposed to the risk of marital

dissolution are defined as females who are married to their first husband. I discuss the results as

odds ratios, which is the anti-log of the coefficient. These odds ratios can be interpreted as the

amount by which the odds are multiplied for each unit change in the respective independent

variable. If the odds ratio is greater than 1, the effect is positive and if the odds ratio is less than

1, the effect is negative. I employ one-tailed tests of significance in these analyses, with the

exception of the measures of education and physical abuse, which are the only measures for

which expectations are not necessarily unidirectional.

( )( )∑+=

− inin XBa

pp

1ln


RESULTS

Couple and Individual Experiences

Table 3 presents results from the analysis investigating the common predictors of divorce across contexts, and the unique factors expected to exert important influences in this context. Although the rate of marital dissolution is low among this sample, the influences of the independent measures on marital dissolution are large and significant. In fact, many of the same influences on divorce in Western contexts are also relevant in this rural Nepalese context. For example, wives’ educational attainment decreases marital dissolution, similar to some research in the US (Hirschman and Teerawichitchainan 2003; Martin and Bumpass 1989), and women’s work experience has the expected influence of increasing dissolution (Ruggles 1997; South 2001). In this setting, wives with greater educational attainment may have less tolerance for dissolution (Hirschman and Teerawichitchainan 2003). Wives who have experience with working for pay, on the other hand, may perceive greater access to financial independence and less need to remain married (Oppenheimer 1994).

Furthermore, couples with more children are less likely to dissolve, just as in the US (Waite, Haggstrom and Kanouse 1985). In this Nepalese setting, too, children raise the cost of divorce. In fact, people’s attitudes in both settings are especially negative toward divorce when children are involved (Waite and Lillard 1991; Thornton and Young-Demarco 2001). For example, one Nepali woman stated that: “The condition of the children would be very bad. It would be very good if they could live with their parents. When their parents get divorced the children miss one of their parents: either their mother or their father. They lose 50% love and care of their parents.” Additionally, there is evidence that length of marriage—a strong predictor of divorce in Western contexts (Becker, Landes, and Michael 1977; Morgan and Rindfuss 1985; South 2001)—depresses dissolution in this setting: when excluding the effect of fertility from the model (not shown), couples of longer marital duration are revealed to have lower odds of dissolution. There are also a few additional factors, beyond the common influences in Western contexts, that are revealed to influence dissolution (Table 3). Characteristics of the marital home have a strong influence in this context, with both farmland ownership and distance from wives’ natal home decreasing couples’ odds of dissolution, as expected. Wives living in households with farmland are less likely to have worked in on the farmland of others’ for pay and have less incentive to dissolve their marriage. Additionally, wives who do desire to dissolve their marriage may reap greater social support from friends and family if they live closer to their natal home.


Yet, although upper caste Hindus were expected to be the least likely to dissolve their marriages, relative to other ethnic groups, this is not the case. Instead, couples in which the wife identifies as Terai Indigenous ethnicity are significantly less likely to dissolve relative to couples in which the wife identifies as upper caste Hindu. However, age cohort operates as expected, with couples in which wives belong to the younger cohort being much more likely to experience marital dissolution relative to couples in which wives belong to the older cohort. Younger women have had more exposure to Western perspectives about divorce, making them more aware and accepting of the option of marital dissolution.

Table 3: Hazard Estimates of Marital Dissolution: Odds Ratios from Logistic Regression

These results are based on 162 months of data. Multi-level models, by neighborhood. Brahmin/Chettri and Newar are reference categories for caste. T-ratios are shown in parentheses. † indicates two-tailed test, otherwise one-tailed tests are used. *p<.05 **p<.01 ***p<.001

Nonfamily Experiences

Wife’s educational Attainment † 0.88*** (-3.40)

Wife ever worked for wages 1.86* (2.18)

Marriage Characteristics

Wife’s age at marriage 0.92* (-1.99)

Wife’s level of spouse choice 1.14* (1.79)

Husband’s level of spouse choice 1.01 (0.08)

Length of marriage (months) 1.00 (-0.09)

Coresidence 0.16*** (-8.41)

Fertility Experiences

Number of children born 0.52*** (-5.48)

Characteristics of Marital Home

Household owns farmland (khet or bari) 0.56* (-1.83)

Distance from wife’s natal home 0.61*** (-3.21)

Wife’s Demographics

Dalit (low caste) 0.75 (-0.64)

Hill Indigenous 0.77 (-0.78)

Terai Indigenous 0.11*** (-3.72)

Cohort ages 14-23 in 1996 1.33 (0.77)

N (person-months) 99126 N (persons experiencing marital dissolution) 35


Marital Discord

Now we turn to marital discord and the investigation of whether spouses’ reports of

marital discord have an influence on marital dissolution. I have uncovered important influences

on marital dissolution in Table 3, and I now investigate whether marital discord, as reported by

both spouses, has an influence independent of those important factors. Table 4 displays the

results from logistic regression analyzing the influence of disagreements on the odds of marital

dissolution. Model 1 reveals that wives’ perceptions of the frequency of disagreements in their

marriage are strongly associated with marital dissolution. For each unit increase in wives’

perceived frequency, the odds that the marriage will dissolve increases by 73%. Model 2 reveals

a similar influence of husbands’ perceived frequency of disagreements: every unit increase in

perceived frequency increases the odds of marital dissolution by 60%. Moreover, as revealed in

Model 3, both wives’ and husbands’ perceptions maintain important independent influences. Net

of their husbands’ perceptions, wives’ perceptions of disagreements increases the odds of marital

dissolution by 59%, while husbands’ perceptions increase the odds by 49%, net of their wives’

perceptions. So, each spouses’ perceptions of disagreements in their marriage has an influence,

in the expected direction, on their likelihood of dissolution. Furthermore, the influences of each

spouses’ perceptions maintain strong influences independent of one another.

Table 5 displays results of wives’ and husbands’ reports of having been criticized or hit

by their spouse. As shown in Model 1, couples in which wives report being more frequently

criticized by their husbands are 73% more likely to dissolve for every unit increase in frequency.

However, husbands’ reports of being criticized do not have a significant influence on couples’

odds of dissolution, as indicated in Model 2. These findings hold in Model 3, where both

spouses’ reports are accounted for: wives’ reports of being criticized by husbands maintain a

strong influence in increasing dissolution, net of husbands’ reports of being criticized. Whereas

both spouses’ perceptions of disagreements have important influences on dissolution, husbands’

reports of being criticized by their wife do not have an independent influence on dissolution.

Couples in which wives report more frequent criticisms from their husbands, however, are

significantly more likely to dissolve.


Table 4: Hazard Estimates of Marital Dissolution: Odds Ratios from Logistic Regression of Spouses’ Perceptions of Disagreements


Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Disagreements

Wives’ perception of frequency 1.73*** (3.91)

1.59*** (3.14)

Husbands’ perception of frequency 1.60*** (3.22)

1.49** (2.87)



0.89*** (-2.78)

0.90** (-2.63)


1.59 (1.52)

1.55 (1.51)


Wife’s age at marriage 1.15* (1.98)

0.91* (-0.91)

0.91* (-2.12)


1.16* (1.89)

1.17* (2.17)

Husband’s level of spouse choice 1.00 (-0.05)

1.03 (0.33)

1.00 (0.01)


1.00 (0.08)

1.00 (0.00)


0.16*** (-7.74)

0.15*** (-8.47)



0.51*** (-5.14)

0.52*** (-5.25)


Household owns farmland (khet or bari) 0.64 (-1.39)

0.51* (2.00)

0.59 (-1.58)

Distance from wife’s natal home 0.63** (-3.04)

0.63** (-2.83)

0.63** (-2.95)



0.88 (-0.28)

0.80 (-0.50)


0.78 (-0.67)

0.77 (-0.76)


0.12*** (-3.32)

0.09*** (-3.78)

Cohort ages 14-23 in 1996 1.40 (0.93)

1.10 (0.23)

1.24 (0.56)

N (person-months) 99126 99126 99126 N (persons experiencing marital dissolution) 35 35 35


Table 5: Hazard Estimates of Marital Dissolution: Odds Ratios from Logistic Regression of Spouses’ Reports of Being Criticized or Abused


Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Criticisms

Wife criticized by husband 1.73*** (3.70)

1.69*** (3.43)

Husband criticized by wife 1.25 (1.54)

1.11 (0.07)

Abuse

Wife ever hit by husband † 2.99*** (3.58)

2.97*** (3.37)

Husband ever hit by wife † 2.32 (1.63)

2.31 (1.62)



0.88*** (-3.30)

0.88*** (-3.25)

0.91** (-2,39)

0.88*** (-3.16)

0.91* (-2.25)


1.73* (1.93)

1.64* (1.69)

1.92* (1.95)

1.81* (2.01)

1.88* (2.12)


Wife’s age at marriage 0.91* (-2.13)

0.92* (-1.84)

0.91* (-2.05)

0.92* (1.95)

0.92* (-1.79)

0.92* (-1.75)


1.15* (1.93)

1.14* (1.74)

1.15* (2.00)

1.09 (1.04)

1.10 (1.23)

Husband’s level of spouse choice 1.02 (0.28)

0.99 (-0.20)

1.01 (0.16)

1.01 (0.20)

1.02 (0.27)

1.03 (0.37)


1.00 (-0.10)

1.00 (-0.06)

1.00 (-0.11)

1.00 (-0.18)

1.00 (-0.20)


0.16*** (-8.46)

0.16*** (-8.34)

0.15*** (-8.69)

0.16*** (-7.87)

0.15*** (-8.14)



0.52*** (-5.51)

0.52*** (-5.24)

0.52*** (-5.37)

0.52*** (-5.04)

0.53*** (-4.96)


Household owns farmland (khet or bari) 0.61 (-1.50)

0.56* (-1.79)

0.60 (-1.51)

0.59 (-1.61)

0.53* (-1.93)

0.55* (-1.74)

Distance from wife’s natal home 0.68** (-2.35)

0.62*** (-3.10)

0.68** (-2.35)

0.63** (-2.91)

0.62** (-2.94)

0.64** (-2.68)



0.83 (-0.43)

0.88 (-0.28)

0.66 (-0.94)

0.81 (-0.46)

0.70 (-0.77)


0.83 (-0.56)

0.88 (-0.36)

0.82 (-0.57)

0.89 (-0.33)

0.95 (-0.14)


0.11*** (-3.60)

0.10*** (-3.84)

0.13*** (-3.35)

0.12*** (-3.39)

0.15** (-3.07)

Cohort ages 14-23 in 1996 1.25 (0.59)

1.31 (0.71)

1.24 (0.56)

1.16 (0.39)

1.30 (0.67)

1.15 (0.34)

N (person-months) 99126 99126 99126 99126 99126 99126 N (persons experiencing marital dissolution) 35 35 35 35 35 35


Table 5 reveals similar results for physical abuse: wives’ reports of ever having been hit have a very strong influence on marital dissolution, although husbands’ reports of the same do not have a significant influence (Models 4 and 5). Holding husbands’ reports constant, wives’ reports maintain this very strong influence: couples in which wives’ have ever been hit are nearly three times more likely to experience marital dissolution. Just as is the case with criticisms, physical abuse as reported by wives, but not their husbands, significantly increases couples’ of dissolution.8

CONCLUSION

This paper has investigated the factors influencing marital dissolution in the rural, agrarian setting of southern Nepal, where marital dissolution is still a rare phenomenon. Particularly, I focus on marital discord as a factor influencing dissolution. I find that marital discord across three types increases couples’ likelihood of marital dissolution, and this influence is independent of the influences of other relevant factors. Both husbands’ and wives’ reports of discord have important influences on couples’ odds of dissolving. In this setting, where divorce is rare, the factors that influence marital dissolution in contexts where divorce has long been common are also important. For example, education, wives’ work experience, and number of children operate similarly in this context as they do in Western contexts (Hirschman and Teerawichitchainan 2003; Martin and Bumpass 1989; Morgan, Lye and Condran 1988; Ruggles 1997; South 2001; Waite and Lillard 1991). This paper has also revealed some additional, setting-specific influences on marital dissolution: farmland ownership of the marital home, distance of the marital home from wives’ natal home, and ethnicity. Upper caste Hindus have historically practiced relatively stricter marital customs, leading to the expectation that this high value placed on marriage would put couples of this ethnic group at a relatively lower odds of dissolution. However, each ethnic group was empirically revealed to have a lower likelihood of marital dissolution than upper caste Hindus. It may be that the significant political changes that took place in Nepal in the 1990s (Williams et al. Forthcoming), in addition to the rapid social changes (Ghimire et al. 2006; Axinn and Yabiku 2001), have led these upper caste groups to loosen their strict customs. This interesting and unexpected finding requires further investigation.

8 In a model estimating the influence of both spouses’ reports of verbal discord, not shown here, husbands’ perceptions of disagreements and wives’ reports of criticisms maintain significant influences. When adding spouses’ reports of abuse to the model, only husbands’ reports of disagreements maintain a significant influence across types of discord.


Even while accounting for these strong influences on marital dissolution, spouses’ reports

of marital discord have independent influences on marital dissolution. The finding that spouses’

perceptions have distinct influences on a variety of outcomes, including divorce, is not new

(Allendorf 2007; Amato and Rogers 1997; Glass and Fujimoto 1994; Gottman 1994; Wilkie,

Ferree, and Ratcliff 1998). However, this investigation reveals that Nepalese wives’ perceptions

of discord may in fact have greater influence than US wives’ perceptions of discord. While

husbands’ perceptions of disagreements seem to be the driver of marital dissolution in the US

(Sanchez and Gager 2000), both wives’ and husbands’ perceptions of disagreements have a

powerful influence on dissolution in this South Asia context.

In fact, Nepalese wives’ reports across three types of discord have an important influence

that is independent of their own husbands’ reports. Due to the limited liberties available to

women—as compared to men—it is especially encouraging to find that the significance of

wives’ reports is not eliminated when accounting for their husbands’ reports. Women in discord-

ridden marriages are in particularly precarious situations because they can face financial hardship

in dissolving their marriage (Holden and Smock 1991; Smock et al.1999), but remaining married

can have its own negative consequences for their emotional and, sometimes, physical well-being

(Naved et al. 2006; Finchman, Beach, Gordon and Osborne 1997). Women are more likely than

men to be victims of physical abuse, both in this sample and more globally (Johnson and Ferraro

2000), so the obstacles to marital dissolution for wives (compared to husbands) can be especially

significant. Given the difficulty for women in becoming self-sufficient and independent, it was

expected that many women would endure a discord-ridden marriage (Yount and Li 2009).

However, the findings in this paper reveal that women in these precarious situations are in fact

more likely to experience marital dissolution than women who report lower levels of discord in

their marriage. Women may be developing more routes to independence via the rapidly changing

legal and social context (Holden 2008; Gilbert 1992), allowing them more ability to escape

discord-ridden marriages.

Husbands’ reports of discord also exert a significant influence in the indicator of

disagreements. This strong influence of husbands’ perceptions is not unlike findings from the US

(Sanchez and Gager 2000). As expected, husbands appear to have a great deal of influence on

dissolving discord-ridden marriages, though not across as many types of discord as wives.


While this paper has revealed important factors influencing marital discord in rural

Nepal, there are also some limitations to this investigation. First, the data do not reveal which

spouse initiated the marital dissolutions that we observe. For example, it may be the case that a

wife reports that she is frequently criticized, but her husband may ultimately choose to end the

marriage as a result of frustrations related to his criticisms of his wife. Second, there are many

types of discord that can be measured, beyond the three types provided in the CVFS data

(DeMaris 2000; Gottman 1979; Porter and O’Leary 1980). Yet, these three types have important

influences on marriage in this context, suggesting that it would be valuable for future surveys in

South Asian contexts to incorporate these and other types. Despite these limitations, this paper

contributes significant new findings regarding divorce in a non-Western context.

South Asian families are likely to face growing instances of marital dissolution. The rapid

social changes that much of South Asia has been undergoing (Ghimire et al. 2006; Axinn and

Yabiku 2001; Hirschman and Teerawichitchainan 2003; Thornton and Lin 1994) provide women

with tools to build a career, and with exposure to the idea that they do not have to be subordinate

to men. The obstacles to dissolution that women have faced in the past, and still face in the

present, may be breaking down. In fact, empirical evidence demonstrates that people change

their behavior as the social setting undergoes changes (Axinn and Barber 2001; Axinn and

Yabiku 2001; Ghimire et al. 2006; Williams 2009). So, there is reason to expect more couples to

choose to dissolve their marriages, and women may increasingly make this decision, themselves.


REFERENCES Acharya, Meena. 1994. “The Statistical Profile on Nepalese Women”. Kathmandu Institute for

Integrated Development Studies. Acharya, Meena, Pushpa Ghimire, Padma Mathema, Birabhadra Acharya, Chapala Koirala,

Neera Shrestha, and Bhabani Sapkota. 2007. “Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women.” Nepal. UNFPA.

Allendorf, Keera. 2007. “Do Women’s Land Rights Promote Empowerment and Child Health in Nepal?” World Development 35(11):1975-1988.

-----. Forthcoming. “Going Nuclear? Family Structure and Young Women’s Health in India.” Demography.

Amato, Paul R. and Bryndl Hohmann-Marriot. 2007. “A Comparison of Low-Distress Marriages that End in Divorce.” Journal of Marriage and Family 69(3):621-638.

Amato, Paul R. and Stacy J. Rogers. 1997. “A Longitudinal Study of Marital Problems and Subsequent Divorce.” Journal of Marriage and Family 59(3):612-624.

Anderson, Kristin L. 2007. “Who Gets Out? Gender as Structure and the Dissolution of Violent Heterosexual Relationships.” Gender and Society 21(2):173-201.

Axinn, William G. and Jennifer S. Barber. 2001. “Mass Education and Fertility Transition.” American Sociological Review 66(4):481-505.

Axinn, William G. and Scott T. Yabiku. 2001. “Social Change, the Social Organization of Families, and Fertility Limitation.” American Journal of Sociology 106(5):1219-1261.

Becker, Gary S., Elisabeth M. Landes, and Robert T. Michael. (1977). "An Economic Analysis of Marital Instability." Journal of Political Economy, 85:1141-1187.

Benin, Mary Holland and Joan Agostinelli. 1988. “Husbands’ and Wives’ Satisfaction with the Division of Labor.” Journal of Marriage and Family 50(2):349-361.

Bennett, Lynn. 1983. Dangerous Wives and Sacred Sisters: Social and Symbolic Roles of High-Caste Women in Nepal. Columbia University Press. New York, NY.

Bernard, Jessie. 1982. The Future of Marriage. New Haven, Ct: Yale University Press. Bramlett, Matthew D., & William D. Mosher, W. 2002. “Cohabitation, Marriage, Divorce, and

Remarriage in the United States.” Vital Health Statistics, Series 23, No. 22. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

Bumpass, Larry L. and James A. Sweet. 1972. “Differentials in Marital Stability: 1970.” American Sociological Review 37(6):754-766.

Cain, Mead T. 1977. “The Economic Activities of Children in a Village in Bangladesh.” Population and Development Review 3(3):201-227.

Cameron, Mary M. 1998. On the Edge of Auspicious: Gender and Caste in Nepal. Chapagain, Matrika. 2006. “Conjugal Power Relations and Couples’ Participation in

Reproductive Health Decision-Making: Exploring the Links in Nepal.” Gender Technology and Development 10:159-189.

Cherlin, A. 1977. “The Effect of Children on Marital Dissolution.” Demography 14(3):265-272. -----. 1978. "Remarriage as an Incomplete Institution." American Journal of Sociology 84(3):

634-650.


DeMaris, Alfred. 2000. “Till Discord Do Us Part: The Role of Physical and Verbal Conflict in Union Disruption.” Journal of Marriage and Family 62(3):683-692.

Deuba, Arzu R. and Pinky S. Rana. 2001. “Psycho-Social Impacts of Violence Against Women and Girls with Special Focus on Rape, Incest, and Polygamy.” Kathmandu, Nepal. Saathi and SNV.

Dyson, Tim and Mick Moore. 1983. “On Kinship Structure, Female Autonomy, and Demographic Behavior in India.” Population and Development Review 9(1):35-60.

Eldar-Avidan, Dorit and Muhammad M. Haj-Yahia. 2000. “The Experience of Formerly Battered Women with Divorce.” Journal of Divorce and Remarriage 32(3/4):19-40.

Finchman, Frank D., Steven R.H. Beach, Gordon T. Harold, and Lori N. Osborne. 1997. “Marital Satisfaction and Depression: Different Causal Relationships for Men and Women?” Psychological Science 8(5):351-357.

Fricke, Thomas E. 1986. Himalayan Households: Tamang Demography and Domestic Processes. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Research Press.

Gilbert, Kate. 1992. “Women and Family Law in Modern Nepal: Statutory Rights and Social Implications.” New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 24:729-758.

Ghimire, Dirgha, J., William G. Axinn, Scott A. Yabiku, and Arland Thornton. 2006. "Social Change, Premarital Non-family Experience and Spouse Choice in an Arranged Marriage Society." American Journal of Sociology 111(4):1181-1219.

Glass, Jennifer and Tetsushi Fujimoto. 1994. “Housework, Paid Work, and Depression Among Husbands and Wives.” Journal of Health and Social Behavior 35(2):179-191.

Goode, William. J. 1993. World Changes in Divorce Patterns. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Gottman, John Mordechai. 1979. Marital Interaction: Experimental Investigations. New York: Academic Press.

-----. 1994. What Predicts Divorce? The Relationship Between Marital Processes and Marital Outcomes. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Guanle, Shiva. 2001. “Splitting Up.” Nepali Times. Retrieved September 2011 from <http://www.nepalitimes.com/issue/2001/01/19/Nation/8614>

Guneratne, Arjun. 2002. Many Tongues, One People: The Making of Tharu Identity in Nepal. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Heuveline, Patrick and Bunnak Poch. 2006. “Do Marriages Forget Their Past? Marital Stability in Post-Khmer Rouge Cambodia.” Demography 43(1):99-125.

Hirschman, Charles and Bussarawan Teerawichitchainan. 2003. “Cultural and Socioeconomic Influences on Divorce during Modernization: Southeast Asia, 1940s to 1960s.” Population and Development Review 29(2):215-253.

Hochschild, Arlie and Annie Machung. 1989. The Second Shift. New York: Avon Books. Holden, Livia. 2008. Hindu Divorce: A Legal Anthropology. London: Ashgate Publishing

Limited. Holden, Karen C. and Pamela J. Smock. 1991. "The Economic Costs of Marital Dissolution:

Why do Women Bear a Disproportionate Cost?" Annual Review of Sociology 17: 51-78.


Jayaweera, Swarna. 1997. “Women, Education and Empowerment in Asia.” Gender and Education 9(4):411-424.

Johnson, Michael P. and Kathleen J. Ferraro. 2000. “Research on Domestic Violence in the 1990s: Making Distinctions.” Journal of Marriage and Family 62(4):948-963.

Kalmijn, Matthijs, De Graaf, Paul M., & Poortman, Anne-Rigt. 2004. “Interactions between cultural and economic determinants of divorce in the Netherlands.” Journal of Marriage and the Family, 66(1): 75-89.

Karki, Yagya B. 1988. “Sex Preference and the Value of Sons and Daughters in Nepal.” Studies in Family Planning 19(3):169-178.

Kirkwood, Catherine. 1993. Leaving Abusive Partners: From the Scars of Survival to the Wisdom for Change. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Kluwer, Esther S, José A. Heesink, and Evert Van de Vliert. 1996. “Marital Conflict about the Division of Household Labor and Paid Work.” Journal of Marriage and Family 58(4):958-969.

Kunz and Kunz 1995. “Social Support During the Process of Divorce: It Does Make a Difference.” Journal of Divorce and Remarriage 24(3/4):111-119.

Martin, Teresa Castro and Larry L. Bumpass. 1989. “Recent Trends in Marital Disruption.” Demography 26(1):37-51.

Matthews, Lisa S., K.A.S. Wickrama, and Rand D. Conger. 1996. “Predicting Marital Instability from Spouse and Observer Reports of Marital Interaction.”Journal of Marriage and Family 58(3):641-655.

Morgan, Philip S., Diane N. Lye, and Gretchen A. Condran. 1988. “Sons, Daughters, and the Risk of Marital Disruption.” American Journal of Sociology 94(1): 110-129.

Morgan, Philip S. and Ronald R. Rindfuss. 1985. “Marital Disruption: Structural and Temporal Dimensions.” American Journal of Sociology 90(5):1055-1077.

Naved, Ruchira Tabassum, Safia Azim, Abbas Bhuiya, and Lars Ake Persson. 2006. “Physical Violence by Husbands: magnitude, Disclosure, and Help-Seeking Behavior of Women in Bangladesh.” Social Science and Medicine 62:2917-2929.

Niraula, Bhau B. 1995. “Old Age Security and Inheritance in Nepal: Motives versus Means.” Journal of Biosocial Science 27(1):71-78.

Niraula, Bhanu B and S. Philip Morgan. 1996. “Marriage Formation, Post-Marital Conflict with Natal Kin and Autonomy of Women: Evidence from Two Nepali Settings.” Population Studies 50(1):35-50.

Oppenheimer, Valerie Kincade. 1994. “Women’s Rising Employment and the Future of Family Instability in Industrial Societies.” Population and Development Review 20(2):293-342.

Parry, Jonathan P. 2001. “Ankalu’s Errant Wife: Sex, marriage, and Industry in Contemporary Chhattisgarh. Modern Asian Studies 35(4):783-820.

Peterson, Trond. 1993. “Recent Advances in Longitudinal Methodology.” Annual Review of Sociology 19:425-454.

Porter, Beatrice and K. Daniel O’Leary. 1980. “Marital Discord and Childhood Behavior Problems.” Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 8(3):287-295.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2781024

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2781024


Riessman, Catherine Kohler. 1990. “Divorce Talk: Women and Men Make Sense of Personal Relationships.” New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.

Ruggles, S. 1997. “The rise of divorce and separation in the United States, 1880-1990”. Demography, 34(4): 455-466.

Sanchez, Laura and Constance T. Gager. 2000. “Hard Living, Perceived Entitlement to a Great Marriage, and Marital Dissolution.” Journal of Marriage and Family 62(3):708-722.

Schoen, Robert. 1992. “First Unions and the Stability of First Marriages.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 54(2):281-284.

Shivakoti, Ganesh P., William G. Axinn, Prem Bhandari and Netra B. Chhetri. 1999. "The Impact of Community Context on Land Use in an Agricultural Society." Population and Environment 20(3):191-213.

Smith, Herbert L., Constance T. Gager, and S. Philip Morgan. 1998. “Identifying Underlying Dimensions in Spouses’ Evaluations of Fairness in the Division of Household Labor.” Social Science Research 27(3):305-327.

Smock, Pamela J., Wendy D. Manning, and Sanjiv Gupta. 1999. “The Effect of Marriage and Divorce on Women’s Economic Well-Being.” American Sociological Review 64(6):794-812.

South, Scott. 2001. “The Geographic Context of Divorce: Do Neighborhoods Matter?” Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(3):755-766.

South, Scott J. and Kim M. Lloyd. 1995. “Spousal Alternatives and Marital Dissolution.” American Sociological Review 60(1):21-35.

Stash, Sharon and Emily Hannum. 2001. “Who Goes to School? Educational Stratification by Gender, Caste, and Ethnicity in Nepal.” Comparative Education Review 45(3):354-378.

Stewart, Abigail J., Anne P. Copeland, Nia Lane Chester, Janet E. Malley, and Nicole B. Barenbaum. 1997. Separating together: How divorce transforms families. New York: Guilford Press.

Strube, Michael J. and Linda Barbour. 1983. “The Decision to Leave and Abusive Relationship: Economic Dependence and Psychological Commitment.” Journal of Marriage and Family 45(4):785-793.

Teachman, Jay D. 2002. “Stability Across Cohorts in Divorce Risk Factors.” Demography 39(2):331-351

The Women’s Foundation of Nepal. “Divorce.” Retrieved on July 22, 2011 from <http://www.womenepal.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=45&Itemid=45>

Thornton, Arland. 1985. “Changing Attitudes Toward Separation and Divorce: Causes and Consequences.” American Journal of Sociology 90(4):856-872.

Thornton, Arland and Hui-Shen Lin. 1994. Social Change and the Family in Taiwan, edited by Arland Thornton and Hui-Sheng Lin. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Thornton, Arland and Linda Young-DeMarco. 2001. “Four Decades of Trends in Attitudes toward Family Issues in the United States: The 1960s through the 1990s.” Journal of Marriage and Family 63(4):1009-1037

http://perl.psc.isr.umich.edu/papers/theimpact.pdf

http://perl.psc.isr.umich.edu/papers/theimpact.pdf

http://www.womenepal.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=45&Itemid=45

http://www.womenepal.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=45&Itemid=45


Thornton, Arland and Willard L. Rodgers. 1987. “The Influence of Individual and Historical Time on Marital Dissolution.” Demography 24(1):1-22.

Waite, Linda J., Gus W. Haggstrom, and David E. Kanouse. 1985. “Consequences of Parenthood for the Marital Stability of Young Adults.” American Sociological Review 50(6): 850-857.

Waite, Linda J., and Lee A. Lillard. 1991. “Children and Marital Disruption.” American Journal of Sociology 96(4):930-953.

Wilkie, Jane, Myra Marx Ferree, and Kathryn Strother Ratcliff. 1998. “Gender and Fairness: Marital Satisfaction in Two-Earner Couples.” Journal of Marriage and Family 60(3):577-594.

Williams, Nathalie E. 2009. “Education, Gender, and Migration.” Social Science Research 38:883-896.

Williams, Nathalie E., Dirgha J. Ghimire, William G. Axinn, Elyse A. Jennings, and Meeta S. Pradhan. Forthcoming. “A Micro-Level Event-Centered Approach to Investigating Armed Conflict and Population Responses” Demography.

Yabiku, Scott T. 2002. "Social Organization and Marriage Timing in Nepal." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Department of Sociology. The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

——. 2005. “The Effect of Non-Family Experiences on Age at Marriage in a Setting of Rapid Social Change.” Population Studies 59(3):339-354.

Yamaguchi, Kazuo. 1991. Event History Analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Yount, Kathryn M. and Li Li. 2009. “Women’s Justification of Domestic Violence in Egypt.”

Journal of Marriage and Family 71(December):1125-1140.

Documents

Marital Discord and Subsequent Divorce - Population Studies Center