Published online by Cambridge University Press: 31 July 2008
The common belief that childlessness is positively associated with instability of marriage derives from official statistics which appear to show higher divorce rates for childless than for fertile couples. The official findings are a procedural artifact, however, and the relationship shown is certainly exaggerated and possibly spurious.
The appropriate strategy in determining whether divorcees are relatively infertile is to find a population with disrupted marriages and measure its fertility experience. In doing so it is necessary to take note of the definition of fertility, the remarriage factor, and (most importantly) the duration of marriage. The official statistics use the conception of legal duration of marriage. Since this ignores separation before divorce, its use exaggerates the infertility of divorcees, as does failure to exclude remarriages. De facto duration of marriage (wedding to separation) is a superior statement of opportunity to conceive, and calculations on this basis eliminate or even reverse the fertility differential between divorcing and stable couples. Local figures are used to illustrate this effect, and the finding is supported by evidence from a sample of marriages ending in legal proceedings lesser than divorce. It is concluded that the alleged relationship between childlessness and instability of marriage is probably either non-existent or the reverse of that normally assumed, and that in any case measurement of the net overall effect of childlessness does not provide a helpful datum. An alternative strategy of research is suggested, which would seek patterns of effect rather than net overall effect, taking heed of relevant variables, and also considering all forms of marital breakdown including marriages in which cohabitation continues only with disharmony.