Divorce Causes - Part 2 of 5

The Amount Spent on the Engagement Ring and The Wedding - From Fairy Tale to Nightmare

Bridal magazines, wedding planners and diamond merchants have continued to promote the idea that a lavish wedding and expensive engagement ring will lead to a fairy tale marriage. For example, De Beers, a leading seller of engagement rings, created the slogan “a diamond is forever.” This campaign, aimed at linking the purchase of an expensive diamond engagement ring to the hope of a long-lasting marriage, was one of the most successful ad campaigns ever created.

Similarly, "Bride" magazine has repeatedly suggested that a bigger, more lavish, more expensive wedding will lead to marital bliss. In reality, this notion is not based upon fact but rather upon the enormous profits realized by this ever burgeoning industry. In a recent survey, wedding industry revenues were projected to exceed $50 billion dollars in the United States. So what is the actual truth of this paradigm? Will spending more on your engagement ring and wedding actually translate into a happier and more long lasting marriage? The answer appears to be a resounding No!

In a recent study by two distinguished professors, Andrew Francis and Hugo Mialon, they concluded that the opposite is true. Based upon their research, the more that a couple spends on the engagement ring and the wedding the higher the probability of a future divorce.

Indeed, one need to look no further than royal and celebrity weddings which illustrate this very point. Prince Charles and Diana's wedding cost over $70 million dollars, significantly greater than the recent marriages of Prince William/Kate Mittleton and Prince Harry/Meagan Markle who spent a mere $34 and $45 million dollars respectively. As we know, Diana later discovered that her "Prince" was less than “Charming”.

Our American " reality royalty" have done likewise, often spending enormous amounts of money with disastrous results. Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries reportedly spent approximately $10 million on their wedding only to see it flame out a mere 72 days later. Kim's subsequent marriage to Kanye West cost another $2.8 million dollars - a marriage which recently and mercifully ended after months of vicious public fighting in the tabloids. So too, Tom Cruise's spent approximately $3 million dollars on his wedding to Katie Holmes which cratered 6 years later. Finally, Johnny Depp and Amber Heard spent millions and millions of dollars on their wedding, their unhappy 15 month marriage, their divorce settlement and their recent dueling defamation lawsuits.

Drilling down to the actual findings made by Francis and Mialon, they looked at various divorce factors including the cost of the engagement ring and the cost of the wedding. What they found is that for each jump in wedding price the divorce rate shot up. Couples who spent $1,000 or less on their wedding were 53 percent less likely to get divorced. Of course achieving this hedge against divorce (spending $1,000 or less on the wedding) is virtually impossible unless you hold the reception in your backyard and ask the guests not only to bring their own booze (BYOB) but also their own food (BYOF).

On the other end of the spectrum, if a couple spends $10,000 to $20,000 on their wedding, the marriage is 29 percent more likely to end in divorce. Once the couple goes over $20,000 they are 3.5 times more more likely to split. These numbers are particularly troubling today since the average cost of a wedding in the US is approximately $30,000.

Apart from the cost of the wedding, the amount paid for the engagement ring also has a significant influence on the likelihood of divorce. Spending less than $1,000 on the engagement ring (what is wrong with "paste jewelry") actually reduces the hazard of divorce. However, as the price of the ring goes up so does the likelihood of divorce. Spending more than $20,000 on that diamond ring increases the hazard of divorce by 3.5 times. Thus, Kris Humphries' purchase of a 20 carat, $2,000,000 engagement ring for Kim Kardashian was like a ticking time bomb, and perhaps partially responsible for blowing up their 72-day disaster of a marriage. Moreover, as explained in an earlier blog, this diamond ring later became the focal point of the post-divorce festivities over who was entitled to keep the ring.

The take-away from this research is that spending more on the engagement ring and the wedding does not enhance the odds that the marriage will survive and indeed actually increases the likelihood of divorce. This will come as a shock to those who have been planning their fairy tale wedding from early childhood and instead give support to those fiancees who say let's just keep it simple and go on a really nice honeymoon. Francis and Mialon would agree that such a strategy enhances the probability of a happy and long-lasting marriage.

Stay tuned for the next divorce factor in Part 3 of this 5 Part series.

Divorce Causes - Part 1 of 5

"Does It Matter How Long You Are Engaged?" Yup !

“ Length of the Courtship”

Social Scientists, Psychiatrists, Psychologists, Anthropologists, Dating Coaches and Divorce Attorneys have all tried to determine and assign weight to the various factors which lead to a divorce. However, instead of a list of divorce causing circumstances, it probably makes more sense to think of this construct as a set of “risk factors” or “correlations.” The more risk factors, the higher are the chances of divorce.

We are familiar with most of the usual suspects – infidelity, money problems, addictions, domestic violence, children or the lack thereof, incompatibility, boredom and meddling in-laws. However, there are some divorce related circumstances that will surprise you.

For example, what about the length of the courtship or period of engagement? Is there a relationship between how long the parties go out together before the marriage and the likelihood of a divorce? Is “love at first sight” a romantic notion or an invitation to disaster? Is it true as some pessimists observe that the way to ruin a perfectly good relationship is to get married?

It certainly seems that there is relationship between the length of the courtship and the probability of divorce. If nothing else our inherent common sense tells us that whirlwind romances are fraught with peril.

As recently reported in various news outlets, Trey Bell, age 20, and his wife, Clara Bell, age 18, wed after two weeks of dating in a romantic beach-side ceremony in Florida. Following the nuptials, the happy bride called her parents to tell them that she was now married and would soon introduce them to her husband. The bride’s parents had not even known about Trey, much less meet him. Will this relationship survive and for how long? Time will tell but according to various studies the odds are not in their favor.

As an example, look at the recent marriage of Cuffe Biden Owens (the President’s nephew) and Meghan King (a cast member of Real Housewives of Orange County). They met on a dating app and talked for about five hours before meeting the next day for the first time. King explained that they spent the next few weeks together and then decided to marry.

However, their marriage lasted all of two months and is due to be annulled, according to Meghan. When last seen, Meghan was hiking naked in the Joshua Tree National Park in California, as depicted in the various selfies she took of her hike and posted on-line. No word yet on what Cuffe has been doing in his leisure moments.

Apart from a whirlwind engagement, dating for too long can also increase the likelihood of a divorce. Some pundits have opined that engagements that go on for longer than 27 months are more than likely doomed as well . All other things being equal, an engagement period of between 12 and 27 months seems to increase the likelihood of a successful marriage.

Of course, for every rule there are exceptions. A British couple recently got married after a 60 year period of engagement. Alex Hamilton, age 90, married Jane Hamilton, age 89, in a small church in Scotland. Jane used an electric scooter to make her way down the aisle. The wedding was attended by their various children from prior marriages, as well as the two children the betrothed couple had during their engagement and their 11 grandchildren. Jane had legally changed her name to "Hamilton" years before so there was no need to change her monogrammed towels, passports, or driver's licenses in the aftermath of the wedding.

In case you are wondering, the newly-wed "Hamiltons" do not hold the Guinness World Record for the longest engagement. That distinction belongs to Octavio Guilan and Adriana Matinez, respectively age 82, a couple from Mexico who wed after a 67 year period of engagement.

Given their respective ages and the significant period of time that they have lived together it is highly unlikely that the "Hamiltons" and "Guilans" will divorce any time soon.

Stay tuned, for more divorce related correlations which will be discussed in future blogs. Look for Divorce Causes - Part 2 of 5.

Risk Factors and Correlations Which Can Increase the Chances of a Divorce

Everyone wants to know. Will this marriage survive? What are the root causes of a divorce? Is there a single factor or circumstance which inextricably leads to divorce? The answer appears to be "No."

Instead of a list of absolute divorce causing circumstances, it probably makes more sense to think of this construct as a set of “risk factors” or “correlations.” The greater the number of risk factors, the higher are the chances of divorce.

We are familiar with most of the usual suspects – infidelity, money problems, addictions, domestic violence, children or the lack thereof, incompatibility, boredom and meddling in-laws. However, there are some divorce related circumstances that will surprise you.

Over the course of the next several weeks I will identify and discuss some of these correlations in a five- part series of blogs. Some you will know or can guess a number of these divorce risks. But others are surprising if not deadly to a healthy marriage. Stay tuned for Part 1 of this 5 Part Series..