Remarriages and Subsequent DivorcesRemarriages and Subsequent Divorces by Barbara Foley Wilson, Division of Vital Statistics Introduction Most Americans marry, and if the marriage

Remarriages andSubsequentDivorcesUnited States

The trend in remarriages and subsequent

divorces during the 1970–83 period is

presented. Data drawn from records of

remarriage provide information on

geographic variation and month of

marriage. Demographic characteristics of

the spouses such as age, race, previous

marital status, interval since last marriage

ended, and educational attainment are

described. Information drawn from records

of redivorce provide information on ages

of spouses, number of children involved,

and duration of the remarriage.

Data From the National VitalStatistics System

Series 21, No. 45

DDHS Publication No. (PHS) 89-1923

U.S. Department of Health and Human

Services

Public Health Service

Centers for Disease Control

National Center for Health Statistics

Hyattsville, Md.

January 1989

Copyright information

All material appearing inthia report is in the public domain and may

be reproduced or copied without permission; citation as to source,

however, is appreciated.

Suggested citation

National Center for Health Statistics, B. F. Wilson. 19B9. Remarriages

and subsequent divorcas: United States. Vita/ and Hea/th Statistics.

Series 21, No. 45. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS) 89-1923. Public Health

Service. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in- Publication Date

Wilson, Barbara Foley.

Remarriages and subsequent divorces

(Vital &health statistics. Series 21, Data

from the national vitsl statistics system ;

no, 45) (DHHS publication ; no. (PHS) 89-1 923.)

Supt. of Dots. no.: HE 20.6209:21/45

bibliography p.

1. Remarriage—United States—Statistics.

2. Divorce—United Ststes—Statistics,

3. Marriage—United States—Statistics.

4. United States—Statistics, Vital.

L National Center for Health Statistics (U. S.)

Il. Title. Ill. Series: Vital and health

statistics. Series 21, Data from the national

vital statistics system ; no. 45. IV. Series:

DHHS publication ; no. (PHS) 89-1923. [DNLM:

1. Divorce—United States—statistics,

2. Marriage— United Statea—statistics.

[W2 A N148VU no.45]

HA21 1.A3 no. 45 304.6’3’0973021

[HQ1019.U6] [306.8’4’0973021]

IS8N 0-8406 -0399-1

s 88-600249


Manning Feinleib, M.D., Dr. P.H., Director

Robert A. Israel, Deputy Director

Jacob J. Feldman, Ph.D., Associate Director for ztnaly.sisand Epidemiology

Gail F. Fisher, Ph.D., Associate Director for Planning andExtramural Progranas

Peter L. Hurley, Associate Directorfor T’ltaland HealthStatistics System

Stephen E. Nieberding, Associate Director for Management

George A. Schnack, Associate Director for Data Processingand Services

Monroe G. Sirken, Ph.D., Associate Director for Researchand Methodology

Sandra S. Smith, Information OfJcer

Division of Vital Statistics

John E. Patterson, Director

James A. Weed, Ph. D., Depu(y Director

Robert L. Heuser, M.A., Acting ChieJ Man-iage andDivorce Statistics Branch

Joseph D. Farrell, Chie$ System and ProgrammingBranch

Mabel G. Smith, Chiej Sta[is[ical Resources Branch

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...........

Source ofdata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..........”...

Remarriages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..............”..Marriages by previous marital status , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .The ceremony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Month ofmarriage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Residenceofbride and groom , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -. .. . .. .

Remarriage rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Characteristics ofmen andwomen who remarry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Interval to remarriage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Educational attainment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Divorces ofremarried persons.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Age ofhusband andwife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Duration ofremarriages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Children ofdivorce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

List ofdetailed tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Appendix-Technical notes... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

List oftext figures1. Remarriage rates ofpreviously divorced men and women by age: Marriage-regktration area, 1983 . . . . . . . . . . .2. Percent distribution of marriages by age of bride, accordingto previous marital status: Marriage-registration

area, 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3. Cumulative percent of previously divorced and vvidowed brides and grooms who had remarried by specifiedinterval: Reporting States, 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

List of text tables

A.

B.

c.

D,

E.

F.

Percent distribution of marriages by previous marital status of bride and groom 38 reporting States, 1970and 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Percent distribution ofmarriagesby type ofceremony, according to previous marital statusof bride andgroorn37 reporting States and the District of Columbia, 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Percentdistribution ofmarriages bymonth ofmarriage, according topreviousmarital statusofbrideand groom:Marriage-registration area, 1983... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Percent ofbrides and groomswhowere residentsofthe State where theymarried, bypreviousmarital status:38reporting States, 1970 and 1983. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . .Percent distribution of marriages by previous marital statusof bride and groom: 38 reporting States and theDistrict of Columbia, 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Percent distribution ofmarriages byprevious marital status ofbride and groom, according to race ofbride andgroom: 33 reportingStates, 1983... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

2

4

55566

7

99

101214

16161616

18

19

27

8

10

13

5

5

6

6

9

11

...Ill

G.

H.

J.K.L.

M.

N.

o.

P.

Q.

R.

s.

Percent distribution of marriages by previous marital status of bride and groom, according to race of couple: 33reporting States, 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Percent of marriages by typeof ceremony, previous marital status, and race of bride and groom: 32 reportingStates, 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12Mean age at marriage byprevious marital status and race ofbride and groom: 33 reporting States, 1983. . . . . . 12Mean interval to remarriagebyprevious marital status ofbride and groom: Reporting States, 1970-83 . . . . . . . . 12Mean interval to remarriage by previous marital status and age of bride and groom at remarriage: ReportingStates, 1970 and 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Mean interval to remarriage by previous marital status and race of bride and groom: 23 reportingStates, 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Percent distribution of marriages by educational attainment ofbride and groom, according to previous maritalstatus: 20 reporting States, 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Meanyears ofschool completed bybride and groom byprevious marital status and ageat marriage: 20reportingStates, 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Mean years of school completed bybride and groom by race and previous marital status: 19 reporting States,1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15Mean ages atmarriage and divorce bynumber ofmarriage ofdivorcing wives and husbands: 30 reportingStatm,1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Mean duration of dissolving marriages by number of marriage and ageat marriage of wife and husband: 30reporting States, 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Percent distribtltion ofdissolving marriages bynllmber ofcllildren involved in divorce, according to number ofmarriage ofwife and husband: ~Oreport~ng S~ates,1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Lktofappendix figures

I. U.S. Standard License and Certificate of Marriage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IL U.S. Standard Certificate ofDivorce, Dissolution ofMarriage, or Annulment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Listofappendix tables

I. Years central files of marriage and divorce records were established and years areas were admitted to themarriage- and divorce-registration areas: 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

II. Sampling errorof estimated number ofmarriages expressed as percent ofarea total: Marriage-registration area,and each registration State, 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

HI. Sampling error of estimated number of divorces and annulments expressed as percent of area total: Divorce-registration area, and each registration State, 1983... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

IV. Areas that report specified items on marriage and divorce records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .v. Areas that report datelast marriage ended on marriage records: 1970-83 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SYMBOLS

--- Data not available

. . . Category nonapplicable

Quantity zero

0.0 Quantity more than zero but lessthan0.05

z Quantity more than zero but less than500where numbers zye roundedtothousands

17

28

29

30

31

323334

* Figure does not meet standardsofreliability or precision (25 percentormore relative standard error)

Remarriages andSubsequent Divorcesby Barbara Foley Wilson,Division of Vital Statistics

IntroductionMost Americans marry, and if the marriage ends in

divorce, more than three-fourths marry again (Schoen etal., 1985). For each year from 1963 to 1981 the annual totalof divorces climbed in the United States, passing the1 million mark in 1975; then the number declined in1982–83, increased in 198485, and declined in 1986, ac-cording to provisional statistics. The historic high set in1981 has not been exceeded. This report describes thetrends and characteristics in remarriages of previously di-vorced men and women during the period from 1970 to1983. During that 14-year period, 14.5 million couplesdivorced, leaving the spouses eligible to remarry. Data onfirst marriages and remarriages of widowed persons arepresented for comparison. This report presents informationthat is collected on certificates of marriage and divorce by

the individual States. Although these certificates must servelegal as well statistical purposes, there are several sociolog-ical and demographic items on the certificates that areanalyzed here. First, the descriptive statistics document howmany remarriages there were, where and when they oc-curred, and whether the ceremonies were civil or religious.Next, marriage rates specific for age and previous maritalstatus are presented. Then, the characteristics of the brideand groom are described-their residence, birthplace, age,race, and educational attainment. Also, interval to remar-riage is analyzed as it varies by sex, age, and race. Finally,data from the divorce file are used to study dissolutions ofremarriages—numbers, ages of spouses, duration of theunions, and numbers of children involved.

1

Highlights

During the 1970–83 period the annual totals of remar-riages of previously divorced men and women increased by82 percent. The estimated national number of previouslydivorced brides increased from 404,000 in 1970 to 736,000in 1983. The estimated number of previously divorcedgrooms increased from 423,000 in 1970 to 773,000 in 1983.In the 14-year period, 8.2 million previously divorcedwomen and 8.7 million previously divorced men remarried.In contrast, marriages of single and widowed persons de-clined. Currently about 1 out of 3 American brides andgrooms have been married before, LIp from 1 out of 4 in1970.

Analysis of marriage rates shows differences amongage, sex, and marital status groups. First, divorced men andwomen marry at higher rates than do single or widowedmen and women. Second, divorced men remarry at higherrates than divorced women at all ages 25 years and over.Finally, remarriage rates for both men and women declinewith increased age. For example, 1 out of every 4 divorcedmen and women who were 20–24 years of age remarriedduring 1983. The rates for each older age group declined,faster for women than for men. By age 65 years and over,less than 3 percent of divorced men and less than half of1 percent of divorced women remarried.

Remarriage rates for both divorced men and womendeclined during the 1970–83 period. Remarriage ratesdropped even though the number of remarriages was in-creasing because the pool of divorced persons available forremarriage was increasing faster than the number of remar-riages. In 1983 the remarriage rate for previously divorcedwomen was 91.6 per 1,000, 26 percent Iowcr than in 1970(123.3). The remarriage rate for previously divorced menwas 142.1 per 1,000 in 1983, 31 percent lower than in 1970(204.5). Thus, only 9 percent of divorced women and 14percent of divorced men remarried in 1983 compared with12 percent of divorced women and 20 percent of divorcedmen in 1970.

Age at marriage differed distinctly for different maritalstatus groups. In 1983 the average age of previously singlebrides was 23.5 years; that of previously divorced brides,33.7 years; and of previously widowed brides, 52.6 years.Average ages of previously single, clivorccd, and widowedgrooms were 25.5, 37.3, and 60.2 years, respectively. Thus,previously divorced brides were a dccacle older than singlebrides, and previously widowed briclcs were a score of yearsolder than previously divorced brides. Ages of grooms tend

to be more dispersed. Previously divorced grooms are adozen years older than single grooms, and previously wid-owed grooms are nearly a quarter century older thanpreviously divorced grooms.

Men are usually older than their brides and the agedifferences vary with previous marital histories. For mar-riages in 1983, if both bride and groom had been single, theage difference was 2.0 years. If the bride was single and thegroom divorced, the difference was 6.8 years. If both brideand groom were divorced, the difference was 3.9 years. Theonly combinations in which the brides were typically olderthan their grooms were in marriages of previously divorcedand widowed women to single grooms. Widowed brideswere 2.1 years older and divorced brides were 0.9 yearolder than their single grooms.

Black brides and grooms are more likely than whitebrides and grooms to be marrying for the first time. In 1983only 24 percent of black brides were previously divorcedcompared with 33 percent of white brides.

Whether single or divorced, black brides and groomsmarry later than white brides and grooms.

The interval between marriages in 1983 was 3.6 yearsfor brides and 3.0 years for grooms for all categories ofremarriages. However, divorced persons remarry soonerthan widowed persons; younger persons, whether widowedor divorced, marry sooner than older counterparts; andwhite men and women remarry sooner than black men andwomen. These relationships were the same in 1970 and1983, but the intervals to remarriage have increased.

Educational attainment of previously divorced Ibridesand grooms was lower than that of previously single Ibridesand grooms, and this difference was especially pronouncedfor women.

The average ages of divorcing men and women arebetween 30 and 45 years, regardless of the number ofmarriages they have had. The average age of women whodivorced in 1983 was 31.8 years if it was a first marriage,37.2 years if it was a second marriage, and 41.0 years if itwas a third or higher order marriage. These women hadmarried at 21.2, 30.4, and 36.2 years of age, respectively.The average age of men who divorced in 1983 was 34.1years if it was a first marriage, 40.5 years if it was a secondmarriage, and 44.6 years if it was a third or higher ordermarriage. Comparison of data from both the marriage anddivorce files shows that divorcing men and women wereyounger than average when they first married.

2

Generally, the more times a divorcing person has beenmarried, the shorter the duration of the marriage. Averageduration for all divorcing couples in 1983 was 9.6 years, butfor once-married men and women the duration was 10.8years. In contrast, the duration for twice-married men andwomen was 7.0 years and for people married three timesthe average duration was 4.9 years for women and 5.1 yearsfor men. Furthermore, whether the marriage was a first,second, or third marriage, duration to divorce shortenedwith older age at marriage.

Fewer children are involved in dissolutions of remar-riages than of first marriages. On average, women endingfirst marriages had 1.06 children under 18 years, thoseending second marriages had 0.64 children, and thoseending third marriages had 0.36 children.These differencesare due at least in part to the fact that most children areborn into first marriages and may not be mentioned ondivorce records of subsequent marriages unless custodybecomes an issue. In addition, children are no longerreported once they are over 18 years of age.

3

Source of data

The data are based on samples of records from Statesthat participate in the marriage-registration area (MRA)and the divorce-registration area (DRA). These are Statesthat have central files of marriage and divorce records andsufficiently complete reporting of statistical items on theirrecords to warrant the collection, processing, and publica-tion of the data. The MRA included 39 States in 1970 and42 States in 1983. All these States with the exception ofIowa provided information on marriage order, that is,whether the marriage was the first or a remarriage of thebride and the groom. Much of the analysis in this report isdone on the 38 States that also reported whether theremarriage followed widowhood or divorce because this isan important distinction in terms of ages, likelihood ofdivorce, and other sociological variables. The DRA, whichis less complete than the MRA, included 28 States in 1970and 31 States in 1983. In 1983, 80 percent of all marriageswere performed in the MRA, and 49 percent of all divorces

were granted in the DRA. A more detailed description ofthe MRA and the DRA appears in the Technical nc)tes. Inaddition to data from the registration areas, total counts ofmarriages and divorces are obtained annually from allStates, and these national totals are used to make estimatesof remarriage for the United States as a whole. Copies ofthe U.S. Standard Certificates of Marriage and Divorce areshown in the Technical notes for reference. Because not allStates use certificates exactly like the U.S. Standard Certif-icate, tables are included which show the States that havethe items analyzed in this report.

Having less than all States report a particular item maymean that the statistics are not the same as they would befor the entire Nation, and this potential bias should be keptin mind. For each item, the number of reporting States isindicated in the text, and for trends over time, uniformgroups of States are used.

Remarriages

The eslimatccl annual national total of remarriages forpreviously divorced men and women increased almost everyyear from 1970 to 1983 (table 1). The number of previouslydivorced brides was 404,000 in 1970 and rose to 736,000 in1983. During that period more men than women remarriedsingle persons, but the percent increase in the number ofremarriages was the same for both sexes. The number ofpreviously divorced grooms increased 83 percent from4zI,000 to 773,000. In the 14-year period, 8.2 milIionpreviously divorced women and 8.7 million previously di-vorced men remarried. In contrast, the number of mar-riages to single people changed little, and remarriages ofwidowed men and women declined. These estimates of thenumber of marriages to previously single, divorced, andwidowed brides and grooms are based on the assumptionthat the distribution of marriages by previous marital statuswas the same in the United States as it was for a uniformgroup of 36 States that reported previous marital status ontheir rnarriagc records during the 1970–83 period. In 1983,67 pcrccnt of U.S. marriages occurred in this group of 36States.

Marriages by previous maritalstatus

Currently in the United States, 1 out of 3 of the bridesand grooms that marry each year have been married be-fore. Of these women, previously divorced brides were ninetimes more numerous than previously widowed brides. Forexample, in 1983, 66 percent of brides were previouslysingle, 30 percent were previously divorced, and 3 percentwere previously widowed (table A). For men, the propor-

tions were almost the same 65, 32, and 3 percent, respec-tively. In 1970 the proportion of marriages that wereremarriages was considerably lower than in 1983. Previ-ously divorced brides and grooms constituted only about 20percent of all brides and grooms in 1970. Both proportionsincreased by approximately half bchveen 1970 and 1983. Incontrast, the proportion of brides and grooms who werepreviously widowed shrank from 5 to 4 percent for bridesand from 5 to 3 percent for grooms.

There is considerable variation among States. In 1983,the proportion of brides who were previously divorcedranged among registration States from 22.1 percent in NewYork to 41.4 percent in Wyoming (table 2). For grooms itranged from 23.9 in Wisconsin to 42.3 in Georgia. The

Table A. Percent distribution of marriages by previous maritalstatus of bride and groom: 38 reporting States, 1970 and 1983

[Based on sample data. For list of reportfng States, see Technical notes]

Sex and previousmariial status 1SW3 1970

Percent distributkm

All brides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1CKJ.o Im.o

Single. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

66.4 76,330.1 18.5

Widowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5 5.1

All grooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IOQ.O 100.0

Single . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65.2 76.1Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31.6 19.4Widowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 4.5

proportion of brides who were previously widowed was lowin all States and ranged from 2.3 percent in Utah to 5.0 inMississippi, while the proportion for grooms ranged from1.4 percent in Alaska to 4.5 in Florida.

The ceremony

More than two-thirds of weddings take place in reli-gious settings, but the proportion is much lower for previ-ously divorced brides and grooms. In 1983, only 58 percentof previously divorced brides married in religious ceremo-nies compared with 76 percent of previously single bridesand 71 percent of previously widowed brides. The propor-tions are similar for previously divorced grooms (table B).This may be due in part to the opposition of some religious

Table B. Percent distribution of marriages by type of ceremony,according to previous marital status of bride and groom: 37reporting States and the District of Columbia, 1983

[Based on sample dale. For [1s:of reporllng States, see Technksl notes]

Sex and previousTYW of cerwnonv

marltaistatus Tctal Ctvll Rel@us

All brides . . . . . . . . . . .

Single . . . . . . . . . . . . .Divorced . . . . . . . . . . .Widowed . . . . . . . . . . .

All grooms . . . . . . . . . .


lal.o100.0103.0100.0

ImJ.o

100.0Irx).o100.0

Percent distrlxdion

29.2

?23.741.626.6

28.2

24.538.424.8

70.6

76.358.471.4

70.a

75.560.675.2

5

groups to divorce. In particular, the Roman CatholicChurch does not sanctify remarriages of previously di-vorced persons. Other studies have shown that fewer Cath-olics than Protestants marry (Mosher, Johnson, ancl Horn,1986); that having married, fewer Catholics than Protes-tants divorce (McCarthy, 1979; Pratt, Mosher, Bachrach,and Horn, 1984); and that having divorced, Catholics areslower and less likely to remarry (NCHS, 1980).

Month of marriage

Marriages have a typical seasonal pattern in the UnitedStates–lowest in winter and highest in summer (table C).The weddings of remarrying brides and grooms are lessseasonal than first marriages. Many first marriages areplanned for early summer and follow the conclusion of anacademic year, which is a frequently used time to changeresidence and occupation as well as marital status. Forpreviously widowed and divorced persons, other factorsapparently have much more relevance to planning a wed-ding. Moreover, previously divorced persons may prefer toremarry shortly after the dissolution of their previous mar-riage, and divorces have relatively little seasonal variation.

Residence of bride and groom

Among the many romantic myths surrounding nuptia]sis that of “running away to get married” or just slipping offto come back as “Mr. and Mrs.” presenting friends andfamily with an accomplished fact. Persistent as the myth is,the data show that the majorily of couples marry wherethey live, and if both do not live in the same State, then thewedding is more likely to take place in the bride’s home

State. There is little difference between remarriages andfirst marriages in this regard, but there used to be moredifference. In 1983 a smaller proportion of previouslydivorced (90 percent) than single brides (92 percent) wereresidents of the State where they married. For grooms, 88percent of previously divorced and 89 percent of previouslysingle grooms married in their home State. In 1970, only 82percent of previously divorced brides and 80 percent ofpreviously divorced grooms were married in their States ofresidence (table D). The convergence may have been due inpart to a move toward uniformity among States with regardto legislation about marriage, divorce, and remarriage thatoccurred during the 1970’s (Council of State Governments,1974). In the past, some States had statutes forbiddingremarriage after divorce until a certain amount of time hadelapsed; residents of these States would remarry elsewhereif they did not want to wait.

Table D. Percent of brides and grooms who were residents ofthe State where they married, by previous marital status: 38reporting States, 1970 and 1983

[Basedon sample data. For list of reporting Slates, see Technical notes]

Sex and previousmarital status 1983 1970

All brides . . . . . . . . . . .


All grooms . . . . . . . . . .


91.5

92.490.088.5

88.4

88.788.086.7

Percent

88.4

90.081.984.9

83.6

84.479.684,5

Table C. Percent distribution of marriages by month of marriage, according to previous marital status of bride and groom:Marriage-registration area, 1983

[Based on sample data. Michigan, Ohio, and South Carolina do not reporl whether spouses were previously widowed or divorced. Iowa does not report any categoryof previous marital status]

Previous marital status of—

Bride Groom

Month of marriage Srtg/e Divorced Widowed Sirrg/e Divorced Widowed

Percent distribution

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

January . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.7 6.1 7.0 4.8 5.9February . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1

7.16.6 6.6 5.2 6.4

March, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.66.4

6.7 6.8 5.8 6.6April, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.1

6.78.3 8.1 8.1 .9.1

May. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,78.4

8.9 8.0 9.7 9.0June . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

8.312,3 10.0 10.3 12.2 10.2

July . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,610.8

10.1 9,6 10.7 10.1August . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.9

9.59.1 8.8 10.9

September . . . . . . . . . . . .9.2 8.3

10.0 8.5 8.4 9.9October . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

8.99.4

8.48.3 9.1 9.3 8.7

November . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.6 7.86.7

8.0 6.7 7.7December . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.7

6.49.4 9.0 6.7 9.3 9.1

Remarriage rates

Age-specific rates of marriage for brides and grooms ofall marital statuses are published annually by the NationalCenter for Health Statistics. These rates establish certaintypical patterns of marriage in contemporary United States.

. Divorced men and women marry at higher rates thando single or widowed men and women.

● Remarriage rates for both men and women declinewith increased age.

● Divorced men remarry at higher rates than divorcedwomen for all age groups 25–29 years and over.

These relationships can be illustrated with 1983 data.First, the remarriage rate for divorced women was 91.6 per1,000 in 1983,44 percent higher than the first marriage rate(63.8), and nearly 14 times higher than the marriage ratefor widows (6.2) (table 3). The remarriage rate for divorcedmen, 142.1 pcr 1,000, was nearly three times the firstmarriage rate (51.8) and nearly five times the rate forwirlowcrs (30.7). Second, the decline in remarriage rateswith age for divorced men and women can bc seen infigure 1. At 20–24 years of age approximately one-quarter

of divorced women and men remarry. By age 65 years andover, less than 3 percent of divorced men and less than ahalf of 1 percent of divorced women remarry. Finally, thehigher rates of remarriage for men can also be seen infigure 1. At 20–24 years of age the rates for previouslydivorced men and women were virtually the same. Afterage 25 years the rates for women dropped faster than therates for men, creating ever-greater differences betweenthe sexes in the likelihood of remarriage. The difference inremarriage prospects resulted in 7,205,000 divorced womeneligible for remarriage in the population in 1983 comparedwith only 4,903,000 men.

The remarriage rates for both divorced men andwomen dropped during the 1970–83 period. In 1970 theremarriage rate for previously divorced women was 123.3per 1,000. It fell 26 percent by 1983 to 91.6 per 1,000. Fordivorced men the remarriage rate in 1983 was 142.1 per1,000, 31 percent lower than it had been in 1970. Remar-riage rates dropped, even though the number of remar-riages was increasing, because the pool of divorced personsavailable for remarriage was increasing faster than thenumber of remarriages.

7

300

200

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

9

a

7

6

5

4

3

2

0

20-24 25-29 30-34 35–39 40–44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65 years

years years yeara years ya ars years yea rs years years and over

Age

Figure 1. Remarriage rates of previously divorced men and women by age: Marriage-registretion area, 1983

Characteristics of menand women whoremarry

Age

Ages of bride and groom are analyzed for the group of38 States that reported previous marital status in J 9S3.Brides and grooms in each previous marital status tend tobe of certain typical ages. A large majority (71 percent) ofsingle brides marry before 25 years of age. Previouslydivorced brides are concentrated in age groups 25-44 years(74 percent), and most previously widowed brides (69percent) are 45 years of age and over (figure 2). In 19S3mean ages of brides were 23.5, 33.7, and 52.6 years forsingle, divorced, and widowed women, respectively.

Men are 2-8 years older at marriage than women are,depending on previous marital status. Mean ages of men atmarriage were 25.5, 37.3, and 60.2 years for single, di-vorced, and widowed grooms, respectively. Thus, previouslydivorced brides and grooms tend to be a decade or moreolder at marriage than single brides and grooms, andpreviously widowed brides and grooms are at least 20 yearsolder than that.

In recent years, ages at remarriage have been increas-ing (table 4). For example, mean age at remarriage ofpreviously divorced brides varied between 32.5 and 32.9years throughout the 1970’s, and then started upward,reaching 33.7 years by 1983, higher than it has been since itwas first published in 1963. For grooms, ages at remarriagehave shown similar increases. The mean age of previouslydivorced grooms rose from 36.1 years in 1977 to 37.3 yearsin 1983. Ages of previously widowed brides and grooms,however, have not shown such a clear trend.

Among States, mean ages of previously divorced bridesranged over a 3-year spread between 32.1 years in Louisi-ana and Wyoming to 35.2 years in New Jersey (table 5). Forgrooms, mean ages ranged 3.3 years from 35.8 years inNorth Carolina, Utah, and Wyoming to 39.1 years inHawaii. The variation among States of mean ages at remar-riage is greater for widowed than for divorced persons,ranging 10.8 years (from 46.0 years in Alaska to 56.8 yearsin Florida) for widowed brides and 8.4 years (from 55.8years in Alaska to 64.2 years in Florida) for previouslywidowed grooms.

The majority of brides marry grooms with the samemarital status. In 1983, 55 percent of all brides and groomswere boih single, 19 percent were both divorced, and 2percent were both widowed. Less than one-fourth of mar-riages united brides and grooms with a different previousmarital status (table E).

Table E. Percent distribution of marriages by previous maritalstatus of bride and groom: 38 reporting States and the District ofColumbia, 1983

[Based on sample data. For Iisl of reporting States, see Technical notes]

Previous marital status of groom

Previous marital Allstatus of bride grooms Single Divorced Wtiowed


All brides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 65.2 31.6 3.2

jingle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66.4 54.8Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11.2 0.430.1 10.0 18.9 1.3

Wtiowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5 0,5 1.5 1.5

The frequency with which men and women marryspouses of the same marital status is due in part to theirchoosing spouses of a similar age. Conversely, those with anage that is atypical for their status may choose a spouse ofsimilar age but different marital status. For example, themean age of previously divorced brides was 33.7 years in1983, but those who married single men were considerablyyounger than average, 29.6 years, while those who marriedpreviously divorced men were 34.9 years, and those whomarried widowed men were quite a bit older, 47.0 years.Similarly, divorced men were 37.3 years of age overall, butthose who married single women were younger, 33.2 years;those who married divorced women were 38.8 years; andthose who married widows were 49.4 years of age, onaverage. Remarrying widows showed the same patterns:Widows who married single men were 39.9 years, thosewho married divorced men were 47.7 years, and those whomarried widowed men were 61.8 years (table 6).

Traditionally a groom is older than his bride, a fact thattends to be typical of remarriages as well as of first mar-riages (table 6). The only combinations of previous maritalstatus for which grooms are younger than their brides arethe categories of divorced and widowed brides with previ-ously single grooms. In 19S3 widowed brides who marriedsingle grooms were 39.9 years of age, 2.1 years older thantheir own grooms who were 37.8 years. Previously divorcedbrides were 29.6 years of age, 0.9 year older than theirpreviously single grooms who were 28.7 years of age. Forall other combinations of previous marital status, groomswere older than their brides, and in most cases the agedifferences were greater than those for marriages of twosingle people.

9

30

r

20

t%eviousty widowed brides

fo

o

30r

20

Previously divorced bride

10

g~

Ifo

50

40

30

20

10

0

r

! Previously single brides

L 1, I I I I

Under lB- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55. 60-18 19 24 29 34 39

6544 49 54 59 64 and

Over

Age at marriage in years

—Figure 2. Percent distribution of merriages by age of bride, according to previous marital status: Marriage-registration area, 1983

Race

Race, as well as previous marital status, is reported onmarriage records of 33 Slates. Racial differences in theproportion of remarriages for these Stales are shown intable F. Black brides are more Iikely than white brides to bemarrying for the first time, while black brides are less likelyto be previously divorced. For both races, the proportion ofbrides that were previously widowed was low: 4 percent ofwhite and 3 percent of black brides had been widowed. Thedistributions for grooms were similar to those for brides.

Table G shows the combined marital status of couplesaccording to their racial combination. White couples aremore likely to both be remarrying after divorce (22 per-cent) than all other racial pairings. Couples in which bothpartners are of races other than black or white are muchmore likely (69 percent) to be both single than blackcoupb {60 percent) or white couples (52 percent), and lesslikely to both be divorced. Couples in racially mixed mar-riages are more likely to be of different previous maritalstatus (30-33 percent) than couples that are not raciallymixed (20-27 percent).

10

Table F. Percent distribution of marriages by previous marital status of bride and groom, according to race of bride and groom:33 reporting States, 1983

[Based on sample data. For list of reporting States, see Technical notes]

Bride Groom

Other OtherPrevious marital status White Black races White Black races


Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Single . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63.1 73.1 72.3 82.5 70.1 75.4Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Widowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

33.1 23.5 25.4 34.2 26.5 2273.8 3.4 2.3 3.3 3.4 1.9

Table G. Percent distribution of marriages by previous marital status of bride and groom, according to race of couple: 33 reportingStates, 1983


Race of couple andPrevious marital status of groom

previous marital status of bride Total Single DNorosd wtiot4eKl

Whitecouple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SingleDivorced::::::::::::::: :::::::::::Widowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Blackcouple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Single . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Widowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Boihbride andgroom ofotherraces. . . . . . . .


Whltebride andblackgroom. . . . . . . . . . . . .


White bridaand groom ofother races . . . . . . .

SingleDivorced::::::::::::::: :::::::::::Widowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Black brideand white groom.. . . . . . . . . . . .


Bride ofother rscesand white groom. . . . . . . .

Single, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Widowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

100.0

63.133.1

3.8

100.073.223.4

3.4

100.078.019.52.5

100.066.132.4

1.6

100.0

66.230.6

1.3

100.072.626.0

1.4

100.0

64.133.6

2.3

62.5

52.010.10.4

70.4

59.99.60.9

78.2

69.16.30.8

65.3

50.813.50.9

70.4

53.416.50.4

66.7

56.411.60.5

64.9

48.914.91.1


34.1

10.621.6

1.7

26.2

IZ412.3

1.4

19.9

6.510.3

1.1

31.9

14.317.10.5

27.5

13.913.00.6

28.7

14.713.50.5

33.3

14.417.91.0

3.3

0.31.31.7

3.4

0.91.51.0

1.9

0.40.90.6

2.6

0.91.60.1

2.1

0.61.00.2

26

1.40.70.5

1.7

0.80.60.1

Differences in family structure of black and whiteAmericans have been clocumentcd by many researchers(McCarthy, 1978; Espenshacle, 1985; and Thornton, 1978).BlackAmericans arc more likely than others tohavethcirmarriages clisruptccl and less likely to remarry following amarital breakup. Furthermore, first marriages of blackwomen aremorc likely than marriages ofwhitewomcntoend in separation. 13achrach and Horn found that 36per-cent of dissolved first marriages of black women ended inseparation only, compared with llpercent ofdissolvcd first

marriages of white women (NCHS, 1985). Using 1976survey data, one analyst calculated that the probability ofremarriage within 5 years of divorce was 0.731 for whitewomen and 0.485 for black women (NCHS, 1980). TheIowerpercentof blackbrideswho were previouslydivorcedis consistent with ahigher proportion ofblack women whoare separated and are not legally free to remarry.

Although religious ceremonies for previously divorcedwomenareless frequent than forwidowedor singlewomen(table H), the differences are much smaller for black than

11

Table H. Percent of marriages by type of ceremony, previous marital status, and race of bride and groom: 32 reporting States, 1983


Race of bride Race of groom

Type of ceremony and Other Other

previous marital status Wtrite Black races WfrHe Black races

civil Percent

Single . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.3 34.0 45.8 - 22.1Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

35.442.8 38.0

47.258.8 40.8

Widowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,836.4

30.555.6

55.1 25.1 30.7 41.0

Religious

Single . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78.7 66.0 54.2 77.9Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57,2

64.6

widowe d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

62.052.8

41.2 59.271.2

63.669.5

44.444.9 74,9 69.3 59.0

for white women. Unlike white women, almost as many (62percent) previously divorced black brides marry in religioussettirtg sasdopreviousl ysingleblackbrides (66 percent).

In general, black persons marry later than do whitepersons. In1983 black brides andgrooms wcre2.Oandl.8years older, respectively, than wllitebrides and groomsatfirst marriage, and 2,2 and 1.6 years oklcr at remarriageafter divorce. Onthcothe rhand,remarryin gblackwidowsand widowers were younger, 3.6 and 3.1years younger,than their white counterparts (table J).

Table J. Mean age at marriage by previous marital status andrace of bride andgroom:33 reporting States, 1983

[Based on sample data. For list of reporling States, see Technical notes. Formean age of brides and grooms of all races Marriage-registration area, seeTable 4]

Previous marital status

Sex and race Total Single Divorced Widowed

Bride Years

White . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27.4 22.9 33.2 53.1Black . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.2 24.9 35.4 49.5Otherraces . . . . . . . . . . 27.6 24.9 33.7 43.3

Groom

White . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30.2 24.9 36.9 60.7Black . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30.9 26.7 38.5 57.6Otherraces . . . . . . . . . . 29.9 27.0 37.4 56.3

interval to remarriage

The remarriage rates discussed in an earlier sectionestablished that divorced men and women, regardless ofage, remarry at higher rates than widowed men and women.The result is that more divorced than widowed personsultimately remarry. Using period rates for 1980,Robert Schoen has calculated that 78 percent of divorcedwomen compared with 8 percent of widowed women everremarry. The differences for mcn are sma]]er but sti]]substantial. Schoen calculated that 83 percent of divorcedmen and 21 percent of widowed men remarry (Schocn etal., 1985).

Data for 1983 from vital statistics show that widowedand divorced persons who do remarry differ in the Icng[h oftime before remarriage. Divorced mcn and women remarrysooner than do widowers and widows, and men in either

category marry sooner than wornen. For previously di-vorced men, the mean interval to remarriage was 3.0 yearscompared with 3.3 years for women. The ,difference wasgreater for previously widowed persons: The mean intervalfor men was 3.5 years compared with 6.1 years for women.

Although. the mean interval to remarriage for divorcedmen is less than for widowed men, the same proportion, 65percent, were being remarried within 3 years after theirprevious marriage had ended (figure 3). For previouslydivorced grooms remarrying in 1983, nearly 25 percentmarried within 6 months, 35 percent within a year, and 65percent within 3 years of the date when their last marriageended. For men who had been widowed, 7 percent remar-ried within 6 months, 24 percent w“thin a year, and 65percent were remarrying within 3 years of the date theirprevious wife died. Unlike remarriages of men, widowedwomen do not “catch Lip” to divorced women in the intervalto remarriage; 61 percent of divorced women were remar-ried within 3 years of the date their last marriage endedcompared with only 37 percent of widowed brides.

Between 1970 and 1983, interval to remarriage length-ened for previously divorced and widowed women and men,but the change was greater for the previously divorced(table K).

Table K. Mean interval t~ remarriage by previous marital statusof bride and groom: Reporting States, 1970-1983

[Based on sample data. For list of reporting States, see Technical notes.

Previous marital status of—

Bride Groom

Year Divorced Wtiowed Divorced Wiklowed

1983 . . . . . . . . . . .1982 . . . . . . . . . . .1981 . . . . . . . . . . .1980 . . . . . . . . . . .1979 . . . . . . . . . . .1978 . . . . . . . . . . .1977 . . . . . . . . . . .1976 . . . . . . . . . . .1975 . . . . . . . . . . .1974 . . . . . . . . . . .1973 . . . . . . . . . . .1972 . . . . . . . . . . .1971 . . . . . . . . . . .1970 . . . . . . . . . . .

3.33.13.02.92.92.82.72.62.52.52.62.52.62.5

6.16.16.06.06.05.75.65.65.65.55.55.75.55.5

Years

3.02.62.72.62.52.52.32.32.32.22.22.22.32.2

3.53.43.53.53.53.33.43.33.23.33.23.43.33.2

12

100. -

80

60

40 -

20 -

---

---- Previously d~orced groom

— Previously divorced bride

IUUMIIISIIIIIIPreviously widowed groom

0 --- Previously widowed bride

o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Interval to remarriage in years

Figure 3. Cumulative percent of previously divorced and widowed bridas and grooms who had ramarried by specified intervak ReportingStates, 1983

As men and women age, interval between marriageslengthens, almost without exception. In 1983 the intervalbetween marriages of previously divorced women was 0.8year for brides 18-19 years of age and increased forsuccessive age groups until, for previously divorced brides

Table L. Mean interval to remarriage by previous marital statusand age of bride and groom at remarriage: Reporting States,1970 and 1983


Previous marital statusBride Groom

and age at marrlsge 1983 1970 1983 1970

Oivorced

Alleges . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12-17 years . . . . . . . . . . . .16-19 years . . . . . . . . . . . .20-24 years . . . . . . . . . . . .25-29 years . . . . . . . . . . . .30-34 years . . . . . . . . . . . .3H4years . . . . . . . . . . . .45-54 years . . . . . . . . . . . .55-64 years . . . . . . . . . . . .65years andover. . . . . . . .

Widowed

Alleges . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12-17 years. . . . . . . . . . . .lf3-19years . . . . . . . . . . . .20-24 years . . . . . . . . . . . .25-29 years . . . . . . . . . . . .30-34 years . . . . . . . . . . . .35-44 years . . . . . . . . . . . .45-54 years . . . . . . . . . . . .5S64years . . . . . . . . . . . .65years andover. . . . . . . .

3.3 25

1.0 0.50.8 0.61.5 1.12.5 1.63.2 2.44.0 3.25.5 5.17.6 8.6

10.4 11.7

6.1

0.91.62.13.24.05.36.26.87.9

Years

3.0

1.91.21.32.12.93.23.74.96.3

5.5 3.5

1.0 *

1.0 1.41.5 1.62.5 2.03.3 3.64.7 3.15.3 3.86.6 3.59.0 3.6

2.2

0.51.00.91.41.92.43.34.17.1

3.2*●

1,52.02.32.73.23.03.9

65 years of age and over, the interval was 10.4 years(table L).

For grooms, interval also Iengfhened for each succes-sive age group after 20 years, but, as stated before, intervalswere shorter for men than for women. Previously divorcedgrooms 20-24 years of age in 1983 were married 1.3 yearsafter their last marriage ended. Average interval for eachsuccessive+ age group increased until 65 years and overwhen it was 6.3 years. Between 1970 and 1983 interval toremarriage lengthened for both brides and grooms, bothpreviously divorced and widowed, and for most age groups.

In 1983, 23 States reported both race and interval toremarriage. Intervals between marriages were longer forblack than for white men and women (table M), regardlessof whether they had been widowed or divorced. The racialdifferentials were greater for widowed than for divorcedpersons.

Table M. Mean interval to remarriage by previous markai statusand race of bride and groom: 23 reporting States, 1983

[Based on sample date. For list of reporting States, see Technical notes]

Previous maritalstatus and race Bride Gtuom

Divorced Years

Whit e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 2.9Black. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 3.4Other races . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 3.5

Widowed

White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.0 3.3Black . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.7 5.4Other reces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2 9.1

13

Educational attainment

In 1983,20 States had both educational attainment andprevious marital status on marriage records. The data(tables 7 and N) reflect the historical trend toward in-creased education that has occurred in 20th century Amer-ica. Older brides and grooms, who were more likely to bewidowed, went to school when the general level of educa-tion was lower than it is currently. For example, 23 percentof previously widowed grooms completed their formal ed-ucations with elementary school compared with only5 percent of divorced and 3 percent of single grooms. Forwomen, 15 percent of widowed brides had only elementaryeducations compared with 4 percent of previously divorcedand 2 percent of previously single brides.

There is another educational difference that cannot beexplained by that historical change in levels of education.A]though the percent distributions of previously divorcedand previously single grooms by educational attainment arevery similar, the distribution for previously divorced bridesdiffers from that for previously single brides. Previouslydivorced brides are concentrated in categories of less eclu-cation. Whereas similar proportions of prcvious]y singleand previously divorced grooms and prcvioudy singlebrides had finished 4 years or more of college (23, 21, and21 percent, respcctivcly), only 13 percent of previouslydivorced brides had done so.

The distributions are summarized by figures for meaneducation, which are shown in Table O. In 1983,previouslysingle brides and grooms had 13.5 years and previouslydivorced grooms had 13.4 years of cclucation comparedwith only 13.0 years for prcvious]y divorced brides. Thus,there was a greater difference bctwccn previously singleand divorced brides than previously single and divorcedgrooms.

For all age groups under 45 years, previously divorcedbrides and grooms have ICSSeducation than previouslysingle SPOLISCS (table O). The ]owcr education of prcvious]ydivorced persons may WC1lreflect the rekitivcly higllcrinstability of the first marriages of worncn and mcn withlower education. SL~cha conclusion can be supported by acomparison of vital statistics from marriage and divorce

Table O. Mean years of school completed by bride and groom byprevious marital statua and age at marriage: 20 reporting States,1983

[Based on sample data. For list of reporting Slates, see Technical notes]


Sex and age at marriage Total Single Divorced Widowed

Bride Years

Alleges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.3 13.5 13.0

12–17years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.7 10.7 10.518-19 yeare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.3 12.3 11.42Ck24years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.5 13.7 12.225-29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.0 14.6 13.030-34 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.9 14.8 13.535-44 yeare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.3 14.1 13.345-54 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.5 11.9 12.755-84 yeare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.8 10.6 12.165years And over . . . . . . . . . . 11.5 11.9 11.1

Groom

All ages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.4 13.5 13.4

12-17 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.7 10.7 9.8l&19years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.9 12.0 11.220-24 yeare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.1 13.2 12.225-29 yeare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.9 14.3 13.030-34 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.2 14.8 13.735-44 yeare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.8 14.3 13.845-54 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.1 12.4 13.35E-84years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.5 10.8 12.865years Andover . . . . . . . . . . 11.0 9.7 10.9

;,.12.1’

11.011.112.112.913.312.512.211.711.6

12.1

**

12.513.213.513.812.612.411.1

registration areas. Men and women dissolving first mar-riages had less education on the average than all brides andgrooms at first marriage.

Lower educational attainment of women and men atremarriage than at first marriage for the age groups under45 years of age reflects two separate processes. First,because the likelihood of divorce is associated with youngerages at marriage and fewer economic resources, divor,ce ismore likely for married people with less education. Second,having divorced, fewer people with higher education re-marry, especially women (Spanier and Glick, 1980).

For previously divorced brides there were virtually nodifferences among races in educational attainment. This isin contrast to first marriages in which white brides lhavemore education (13.5 years) than black brides (13.1 years)(table P). For both racial groups women in remarriages had

Table N. Percent distribution of marriages by educational attainment of bride and groom, according to previous marital status:20 reporting States, 1983[Based on sample data. For list of reporting States, see Technical notes]

Years of school completed

Sex and previous 0-8 9-11 12 1s15 16 17 yearsmarttal status Total years years years years years and over


All brides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 3,1 13.5 42.2 23.2 12.3 5.6

Single . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 2,2 12.6 40.2 24.3Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0

14.8

Widowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3.6

5.615.0 46.8 21.6 7.6

100.0 15.35.3

18.1 40.6 15.9 6.3 3.6

All grooms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 4.2 12.0 40.9 21.1 13.3 6.5

Single . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 2.7 11.8 41.7 21.3Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0

14.55.2

8.012.2 40.3 21.3

Widowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.011.3

22.89.7

13.5 31.2 13.9 9.8 8.8

14

Table P. Mean years of school completed by bride and groom byrace and previous marital status: 19 reporting States, 1983

[Basedon sample data. For list of reporting States, see Technical notes]

Sex and race

Bride

White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Black . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Other races . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Groom

White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Black . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Otherraces . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Tota~ Single Divorced Widowed

Years

13.2 13.5 12.8 12.113.0 13.1 12.8 10.813.4 13.6 12.9 11.9

13.4 13.5 13.2 12.012.7 12.9 12.4 9.213.8 13.7 13.5 11.0

1Inc!udesnotstated.

lower echcational attainment than women in first mar-riages. Other data have shown that for white women higlqreducational attainment is a consistently powcrfulprcclictorof below-average remarriage probabilities (Molt andMoore, 1983).

Among men, black grooms had the lowest cclucation inall previous marital statuses. They also had lower educationthan black brides for all previous marital statuses. This wasthe opposite of the relative educational level of divorcdwhite brides and grooms or single and divorced brides andgrooms of other races where men had more education thanwomen.

Table 8 provides a different approach to analysis ofeducational differences for categories of brides or grooms.It shows the difference for each couple aeeording to theprevious marital status of bride or groom. Because mostmen and women marry spouses with the same maritalstatus, most of the information is consistent with datadiscussed earlier. That is, grooms who were previouslysingle or divorced have more education than their bridesand previously widowed grooms have less. However, be-cause not all brides and grooms had the same maritalhistory as their spouses, there are some differences bymarital history category. Previously divorced brides, as wasdetailed above, have less education than single brides, butthe educational differences between them and their hus-bands is slightly greater than betsveen single brides andtheir husbands. By remarrying, they are apparently benefit-

ing from whatever economic and social advantages may beassociated with higher education for men. Results of astudy that compared the occupational status of first andsecond husbands indicate that about one-half of the womenwere upwardly mobile through their seeond marriages,while only one-fifth were downwardly mobile; the remain-der were unchanged (Mueller and Pope, 1978).

Table 8 also shows that the difference in educationallevel of brides and their spouses is greatest for young bridesand diminishes with increased age of bride until, at oldestages, brides have more education than their grooms.

15

Divorces of remarriedpersons

There have been more than a million divorces in theUnited States every year since 1975. Information onwhether these were dissolving first marriages or remar-riages is available from 30 States in the divorce-registrationarea, and this shows that approximately one-quarter ofdivorces are dissolutions of remarriage. While the vastmajority of these are redivorces, that is dissolutions ofmarriages that followed divorces, a small proportion (6percent for men and 9 percent for women) of the dissolvingremarriages are dissolutions of marriages that followedwidowhood.

Age of husband and wife

Table Q shows the average ages at marriage anddivorce according to the number of times the divorcinghusbands and wives have married. The age and number ofthe marriage were reported in approximately S3 percent ofthe records in this group of 30 States.

Twice-married women who divorced in 1983 averaged37.2 years of age. Clearly they were selected from theyoungest of remarrying women because their average ageat second marriage (30.4) is younger than the average ageof women at first divorce (31.8). This pattern is repeatedfor women married three times who were 36.2 years of ageat marriage, younger than the average age of women endingsecond marriages (37.2 years). This same pattern is seenfor divorcing husbands.

Duration of remarriages

Among couples divorced in 1983 were some who hadbeen married less than a year and others married morethan 60 years. Generally, the more times a divorcing personhas been married, the briefer the duration of the marriage,

For once-married men and women, the mean duration was10.8 years, for twice-married men and women it was 7.0years, and for those married three times it was 4.9 years forwomen and 5.1 years for men (table R). This relationshipholds true regardless of age at marriage even thoughduration also decreases with increased age at marriage. Itmay be that some selection factor is at work and that peoplewho divorce repeatedly are likely to regard divorce as anacceptable solution to an unpleasant marriage and resort toit with increasing promptness.

Children of divorce

Much of the public’s interest in divorce relates to itseffect on children. Analysis of divorce records shows thatthe more times the divorcing husband or wife has beenmarried, the smaller the average number of children perdecree. This is consistent with findings from the National

Table R. Mean duration of dissolving marriages by number ofmarriage and age at marriage of wife and husband: 30 reportingStates, 1983


Number of dissolving marriage of–

Wife Husband

Age at marriage Ist 2d 3d Ist 2d 3d

Alleges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.8 7.0

Under 20years . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.3 9.120-24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.7 7.525-29 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.0 7.130-34 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.4 6.635-39 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.5 6.040-44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.7 5.945 years And over . . . . . . . . . . 6.3 5.4Not stated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.9 7.7

Years

4.9 10.8

8.7 10.85.7 11.35.5 10.24.7 9.14.6 6.74.5 8.24.1 6.25.7 11.4

7.0 5.1

9.0 *8.0 7.27.7 5.86.7 5,46.5 4.86.6 4.95.4 4.57.8 5.7

Table Q. Mean ages at marriage and divorce by number of marriage of divorcing wives and husbands: 30 reporting States, 1983

[Based on sample data. For list of repotting Stales, see Technical notesl

Number of dssolvlng marriage

1st 2d 3d or higher

Sex Marriage Divorce Marriage Dworce Marriage Divorce

Age In years

Divorcing waves..........,,. . . . . . . . . 21.2 31,8 30.4 37.2Divorcing husbands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23.4

36.2 41,034.1 33.5 40.5 39.5 44.6

16

Survey of Family Growth that most children are bornduring first marriages (Bachrach, 1986). These childrenusually are not listed in records of a redivorce unless somechange is made in their custody or care. Moreover, some ofthe children of a first marriage will no longer be under18years of age when their parents are dissolving a secondmarriage, and therefore will not be reported. Table S showsthe percent distribution of dissolving marriages by thenumber of children reported. In dissolution of remarriagesof women, 61 percent of second and 77 percent of thirdmarriages involved no children under 1S years of age. Thiscompares with only 39 percent of women in first marriages.In dissolutions of remarriages of men, 59 percent of secondand 73 percent of third marriages involved no childrencompared with only 40 percent of divorces of once-marriedmen.

Table S also shows the average number of childreninvolved in 1983 divorces according to number of themarriage of husband and wife. Two averages are shown;one for all wives and husbands, including the 46 percent

Table S. Percent distribution of dissolving marriages by numberof children involved in divorce, according to number of marriageof wife and husband: 30 reporting States, 1983


Number of marria.qe

Number of children TotaI Ist 2d 3d or h@her

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6ormore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Allvfives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VViVeswith children. . . . . . . . . .

Husband

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...!.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34:::::::::::::::::::::5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6ormore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

All husbands . . . . . . . . . . . . .Husbands with children. . . . . . .

100.046.025.620.0

6.21.60.40.2

0.941.73

100.046.025.620.0

6.21.60.40.2

0.941.73


100.0 100.039.3 61.027.9 21.223,2 12.5

7.2 3.91.8 1.10.4 0.20,2 0.1

Mean

1.06 0.641.75 1.65

100.077.313.5

6.22.00.70.10.1

0.361.60


100.0 100.039.9 59.427.4 22.323.1 13.1

7.3 3.61.8 1.10.4 0.30.2 0.1

Mean

1.06 0.661.76 1.63

100.072.816.27.62.40.80.20.1

0.431.59

that are childless, and the other for mothers and fathersonly. The average number of children per decree was 1.06for both women and men in first marriages. The average forwomen and men dissolving second marriages was 0.64 and0.66 children, respectively. Most of the difference was dueto many more divorces that involved no children under18 years for the remarried couples, as shown by the averagenumber of children for parents. Mothers ending secondmarriages had only a tenth of a child less (1.65) thanmothers ending first marriages (1.75). The variability innumber of children according to father’s marriage orderwas slightly greater than for mother’s marriage order.Fathers dissolving second marriages had an average of 1.63children compared with 1.76 children for fathers dissolvingfirst marriages.

The relationships between parenthood, divorce, remar-riage, and subsequent childbearing have been analyzed inmany studies supported by the National Institute of ChildHealth and Human Development. These studies haveshown that childless couples divorced more than parents(Koo, Suchindran, and Griffith, 1984), that couples withmany children divorce more than those with small families(Thornton, 1977), and that couples with children under6 years of age were less likely to divorce than others(Cherlin, 1977). It has also been shown that the fewerchildren a woman has, the more likely she is to remarry.However, a majority of women begin remarriage withchildren from previous marriages and a substantial numberbegin marriage with children from both spouses’ previousmarriages. Research on fertility in remarriages shows thatthe age of the youngest child, but not the number ofchildren, from previous marriages has an effect on whetheranother child is born to the remarried couple. Mothers oftwo children or more are as likely to have another child asare those who have only one child or are still childless,supporting the view that a new child is important to confirmthe new marriage. However, if the woman is in her latertwenties, especially if she is married to an older man, or ifher youngest children are already in school, she is less likelyto have children in the new marriage. Together, thesestudies establish that having children may impede but doesnot preclude divorce, remarriage, or childbearing in thenewly reconstituted family.

More information on children in remarried couplehouseholds can be found in Bumpass (1984), Cherlin andMcCarthy (1985), and Hofferth (1985), and an analysis ofchildren involved in divorce is more completely treated in aforthcoming. publication, “Children of divorcing couples”(NCHS, in preparation).

17

References

Bachrach, C. A. 1986. Unpublished data from the National Suxveyof Family Growth, Cycle III.

Bumpass, L. 1984. Children and marital disruption: A replicationand update. Dei?lography 21:71-82.

Cher]in, A. 1977. The effect of children on marital dissolution.DeJ?togmphy 14:265-72.

Cherlin, A. and J. McCarthy. 1985. Remarried couple households:Data from the June 1980 Current Population Survey. 1 Mm-.Fare.47:23-30.

Council of State Governments. 1974. The Book of the States,197475. Lexington, Ky.

Espenshade, T. J. 1985. Marriage trends in America: Estimates,implications, and underlying causes. Pop. Develop. Rev.11(2): 193-245.

Hoffcrth, S. L. 1985. Updating children’s life course. J. Mar. Favn.47:93-115.

Koo, H. P., C. M. Suchindran, and J. D. Griffith. 1984. The effectsof children on divorce and remarriage: A multivariate analysis oflife table probabilities. Pop. S/ud.38:451–71.

McCarthy, J. 1978. A comparison of the probability of thedissolution of first and second marriages. DcI?Iogrophy15(3):345-60.

McCarthy, J. 1979. Religious commitment, affiliation, and mar-riage dissolution, In The Religious Dimetls;on: New Directions inQuontitntive Research, edited by R. Wuthnow, pp.179–97.New York Academic Press, Inc.

Mosher, W. D., D.P. Johnson, and M. C. Horn. 1986. Religionand fertility in the United States: The importance of marriagepatterns and Hispanic origin. DcJ)rogJt@y 23(3):367-79.

Mott, F. L., and S. F. Moore. 1983. The tempo of remarriageamong young American women. J. Mar. Fare. 45:427–36.

Mueller, C. W., and H. Pope. 1978. Divorce and female remar-riage mobility: Data on marriage matches after divorce fclr whitewomen. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the AmericanSociological Association. San Francisco.

National Center for Health Statistics, W. R. Grady. 1980. Remar-riages of women 15-44 years of age whose first marriage ended indivorce: United States, 1976. Advmtce Data From Wal and HealthStatistics.No. 58. DHEW Pub. No. (PHS) 80-1250. Public HealthService. Hyattsville, Md.

National Center for Health Statistics, C. A. Bachrach andM. C. Horn. 1985. Marriage and firxt intercourse, marital dissolu-tion, and remarriage: United States, 1982. Advance Data FromWal and HeaMz Statistics. No. 107. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS)85-1250. Public Health Service. Hyattsville, Md.

National Center for Health Statistics, K. A. London. In prepara-tion. Children of divorce.

Pratt, W. F., W. D. Mosher, C. A. Bachrach, and M. C. Horn.1984. Understanding U.S. fertility: Findings from the NationalSurvey of Family Growth, Cycle III. Population Bulletin 39(5):16.Washington: Population Reference Bureau, Inc.

Schoen, R., W. Urton, K. Woodrow, and J. Baj, 1985. Marriageand divorce in twentieth century American cohorts. DemograpIty22(1):101-14.

Spanier, G. B., and P. C. Glick. 1980. Paths to remarriage. 1Divorce 3(3):283–98.

Thornton, A. 1977. Children and marital stability. J. Mar. Fare.39:531-40.

Thornton, A. 1978. Marital dissolution, remarriage, and child-bearing. Demogral>lty15(3):361-80.

18

List of detailed tables

1. Estimated number of marriages by previous maritalstatus of bride and groom. United States, 1970-83 . .. . .

2. Number of marriages and percent distribution by previ-ous markal status of bride and groom 38 reportingStates and the District of Columbi% 1983 . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3. Maniage rates by previous marital status and ageof women and mem Marriage-registration area,197M3 . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4. Mean age of bride and groom by previous maritalstatux Marriage-registration are% 1970-83 . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .

5. Mean age at marriage by previous marital status ofbride and groom: 38 reporting States and the District ofColumbia, 1983 . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .

6. Mean age at marriage of bride and groom and age20 difference between spouses, by previous marital status

38 reporting States and the District of Columbia,1983 . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2s

20 7. Number of marriages by previous marital status andeducational attainment of bride and groom: 20 report-ing States, 1983 . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 25

21 8. Mean years of school completed by bride and groomand difference in education by previous marital status

24 and age at marriage 20 reporting States, 1983 . .. . . . . . . . 26

24

19

Table 1. Estimated number of marriages by previous marital status of bride and groom: United States, 1970-83

[Based on sample data. Previous marital status estimated using percent distribution from uniform group of 36 reporting States. Due to rounding, estimates by previousmarital status may not add to annual total]

Previous marital status of-

Bride Groom

Year Total Single Divorced W7dowed Single Divorcert Widowed

Number in thousands

1970-83 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,958 22,404 8,191 1,366 21,974 8,749 1,234

1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,446 1,624 736 66 1,595 773 781962 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,456 1,638 734 84 1,801 774 791981 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,422 1,616 719 87 1,572 770 801980 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,390 1,621 681 68 1,585 724 811979 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,331 1,583 650 88 1,539 702 911978 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,282 1,557 634 91 1,513 687 821977 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,176 1,488 597 94 1,449 645 851976 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,155 1,491 569 97 1,450 618 861975 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,153 1,507 547 101 1,477 583 931974 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,230 1,601 520 109 1,576 560 941973 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,264 1,670 507 107 1.649 541 961972 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,282 1,707 468 107 1,689 50U 941971 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,190 1,658 425 107 1,643 449 961970 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,159 1,643 404 110 1,636 423 99

Table 2. Number of marriages and percent distribution by previous marital status of bride and groom: 38 reporting States and theDistrict of Columbia, 1983

[Based on sample data]

Previous marital status of bride Previous marital status of groom

Area Marriages Total Single Divorced Widowed Tota[ Sing/e Divorced Widowed

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .DlstrictofColumbla. . . . . . . . . . . .Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Kansas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . .New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NorthCarollna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Rhodelsland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

WastVlrglnia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number

1,631,495

47,4406,553

152,42036,150

26,9155,5795,338

116,964

72,82014,05013,430

103,734

54,04025,89537,52043,180

12,47947,12048,86036,320

26,89053,258

6,09213.703

10,97261,840

159,32152,130

23,28592,140

8,0538,002

56,30016,4255,595

61,790

15,93040,760

6,202


100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0

66.4

58.356.971.560.9

71.766.376.058.6

54.963.354.669.0

62.561.561.566.3

64.787.475.268.1

57.761.864.671.3

63.674.275.064.5

60.873.573.868.8

56.669.467.364.1

65.674.554.9

30.1 3.5

37.5 4.240.6 2.425.4 3.038.1 3.0

25.4 2.928.6 3.221.5 2.538.6 4.8

40.9 4.133.7 2.941.2 4.227.6 3.2

33,7 3.835.0 3.433.8 4.730.4 3.3

32.0 3.329.1 3.5224 2.427.9 4.0

37.3 5.034.2 4.0320 3.424.9 3.6

33.1 3.323.2 2.6221 2.931.7 3.6

35.3 3.923.4 3.123.5 2.727.0 4.2

38.8 4.428.3 2.328.4 3.332.5 3.5

30.9 3.6222 3.341.4 3.6

100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0100.0

100.0100.0100.0

65.1

58.059.069.162.3

68.868.370.358.1

54.663.356.067.6

61.662.460.265.0

63,664.772.965.6

59.060.964.671.6

62.672.372.765.2

60.971.971.367.8

54.969.165.663.4

64.972.856.9

31.6

38.338.627.735.3

28.330.726.939.4

42.333.640.429.2

34.934.536.031.7

33.332.224.330.7

37.135.732.225.3

34.324.624.531.7

36.025.226.229.0

41.628.232.033.6

32.623.940.3

3.2

3.71.43.12.4

2,92.92.84.5

3.13.03.63.0

3.33.13.73.4

3.13.12.83.5

3.93.43.03.1

3.13.12.63.1

3.12.92.53.2

3.52.72.43.0

2.63.32.8

20

Illrn1

[1:

Ill

Illw1

11

~Ill

1119IllgIll

IllwIllsIll

Ill’+Ill=Ill

IIlqIll:Ill

1-+

b.N

;Zzs

IllmIll+1

11

’-

Ill’+IIINIll

11

10

.IIINIll

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

,..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..*

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

.2.

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

.-.

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

.:!J

..

..

..

..

..

..

21

Ill’+111~IllIll?

Ill&Ill

wtiLom

“

111%

111~IllIllwIll&illIllwIll&111

Ill%IllmIll-

IIIQ111~Ill

Ill%

Ill:Ill

U-J

C.i

1-

22

-....

Itlr111~Illill@

?ItimIllIll?IllmIllIII-Ill@IllIllhIll@Ill111~.Iltm111

1119Ill:Ill

r<-%

l=?lll

l=.

mm

lmlllt~

SJG

IEI

III

11l-.

111:ill111~.Ill:III1110.III%IllII

IQ?

III=!11

11l-?

111~Ill

WUi

m

In*O

Om

r-mm

Ui

g“~cd

0dc+

wm

-to.

mm

mN

mt-m

mw

minm

0m

“m”b

.odw

dm”m

-m-oti

wabm

~ow

s-m-m

bm

NN

Nv

CU

N..

-

oo.m

dN

~*T

-

m.qp

rN-

m-.

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..,..

..

..

..

..

..

..

.g

..

..0

$$0

%%

2-g-rg$$;

r-0“mcs

qm.

mm

mw

”*u-)-

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

.g

..

..

0~

~z

imoscu

%%

%

$$;

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

.

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..

..-

k...

..

..

..

....*

23

Table 4. Mean age of bride and groom by previous marital status: Marriage-registration area, 1970-83

[Based on sample date. Beginning in 1977 figures for Iowa are Included only in All marriages]

Prevk7us marital status of—

Brhde Groom

All AllYear marriages Single Divorced Widowed marriages Single Divorced Wktowed

Years

1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27.6 23.5 33.7 52.6 30.3 25.5 37.31982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27.3 23,3

60.233.4 52.6 30.0 25.3 37.0

1981 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27.0 23,059.9

33.0 52.2 29.8 25.0 36.61960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26.7 22.7

59.532.8 52.2 29.4 24.6 36.5

1979 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26.759.6

22.5 32.6 53.4 29.5 24.6 36.4i978 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26.3 22.3

60.032.6 51.4 29.1 24.4 36.2

1977 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26.2 22.258,4

32.5 51.8 29.0 24.31976 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26.1

36.122.1

56.932.5 51.8 26.9 24.1

1975 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36.2

25.9 21.956.6

32.7 51.2 26.7 24.01974 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

36.325.6 21.7

58.232.5 51.0 26.3 23.6

1973 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36.3

25.5 21.758.2

32.6 51.0 26.1 23.81972 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

36.425.2 21.6

56.132.9 50.7 27.9 23.7 36.5

1971 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,156.0

21.6 32.6 50.6 27.8 23.71970 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.1

36.621.6

57.732.8 50.3 27.8 23.8 36.7 57.7

Table 5. Mean age at marriage by previous marital statusof bride and groom: 38 reporting States and thel)istrict of Columbia, ”1983

[Based on sample data]

State of marr/aae

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Alabama- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .California . . . .. ~ . . . . . . . . . . . .Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .DistrictofColumbia. . . . . . . . . . .Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mlssksippl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Mlssourl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Montana. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewHampshir e . . . . . . . . . . . . .New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Rhode Island . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Virgins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

WestVlrglnla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Previous marital status of–

Bride

Single Divorced Widowed

23.5

21.923.424.223.6

24.723.727.123.5

22.624.921.623.9

22.222.421.822.5

22.924.324.623.1

22.022.622.722.7

23.924.925.322.7

23.323.924.222.3

22,221.923.923.3

21.723.422.2

33.7

32.332.534.633.1

35.033.836.034.4

33.034.834.233,6

32.532.432.432.1

33.634.634.733.6

32.633.333,132.6

34.535.235,032.6

34.133.834.133.3

33.032.634.233.3

32.433.532.1

52.6

52.446.054.449.7

53.151.351.256.6

50.950.151.552.1

55.055.750.450.4

52.451.551.352.1

53.254.150.355.0

53.952.252.449.6

55.053.551.453.0

49.351.450.650.0

51.652.847.3

Groom

Sing/e Divorced Widowed

Years

25.5 37.3 60.2

24.2 36.1 59.625.9 36.3 55.826.1 38.1 60.425.7 36.9 56.4

26.6 38.0 59.025.5 37.1 56.928.5 39.6 59.225.8 36.4 64.2

24.6 37.0 60.426.9 39.1 60.624.3 37.9 59.625.8 37.1 59.2

24.1 36.1 5&524.5 36.0 60.223.8 36.3 60.924.3 36.2 57.4

25.1 37.0 60.826.2 36.0 56.526.6 36.3 60.125.1 37.0 60.6

24.4 37.0 61.624.3 36.5 60.924.9 36.6 58.524.7 36.1 62.1

26.0 38.0 60.326.9 38.0 56.027.2 36.6 59.624.5 35.6 60.3

25.6 37.8 63.325.8 37.3 59.526.1 37.8 59.224.7 37.1 61.3

24.1 36.5 59.723.8 35.6 59.025.9 38.2 59.325.3 37.0 56.5

24.2 36.2 60.525.3 36.8 60.225.0 35.8 55.9

24

Table 6. Mean age at marriage of bride and groom and age difference between spouses, by previous marital status: 38 reporting Statesand the District of Columbia, 1983

[Based on sample data For list of reporting States, see Technlcsl notes]

Previousrrrariial AllPreviousmarifaIstatusof groom

statusof brhie grooms Single DIVOroed widowed

Age of bride in years

All brides . . . . . . . . .

Single . . . . . . . . . . .Divorced . . . . . . . . .Widowed . . . . . . . . .

27.6

23.533.7526

24.0

22.829.639.9

32.5 52.7

37.547.061.8

26.434.947.7

Age of groom in years

37.3

33.238.849.4

All brides . . . . . . . . .

Single . . . . . . . . . . .Divorced . . . . . . . . .Widowed . . . . . . . . .

30.3

26.436.155.2

25.5

24.828.737.8

60.2

48.855.866.9

Age dflerence in yewsl

4.8All brides . . . . . . . . .

Single . . . . . . . . . . .Divorced . . . . . . . . .Widowed. . . . . . . . .

27

292526

1.5

2.0-0.9-2.1

7.5

11.38.95.2

6.83.91.6

‘Age of groommhwsage of bride.

Table 7. Number of marriages by previous marital status and educational attainment of bride and groom: 20 reporting States, 1983

[Based on sample data. For list of reporting States, sea Technical no!es]

Years ofschml completed

Sex and previous M 9-11 12 1s15 16 17yeafsmaritalstatus Total

Notyears yeats years yeats years and over stated

Brides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278,836 153,458740,843 20,712

9,7607,2603,470

222

27,621

11,764

81,278 80,095

Single . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

widowe d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Notstated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

175,266 106,18293,415 43,160

9,194 3,597$361 519

488,382219,523

25,2057,733

55,13629,876

4,090434

64,4&315,224

1,427164

25,34710,648

85162

52,22819,9402,5765,351

Grooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 740,643

480,346230,177

23,1557,165

79,133 270,469 139,121

1?8,993 91,36584,273 44,509

6,469 2,876734 371

88,027

62,24623,671

2,0216!2

56,310 60,162

Single . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Widowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Notstated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

50,65325,498

2,793189

34,15020,230

1,629101

51,17521,061

2,4495,477

4;716204

25

Table 8. Mean years of school completed by bride and groom and difference hr education by previous marital status and age atmarriage: 20 reporting States, 1983

[Baaed on sample defa. Differences were calculated and roundad separately. For list of reporting States, see Technicai notes]

Bride

Education Education Differenceof groom of spouse h education

Previous maritet statusand age et marriage

Education Educaflon Dir7erenceof bride of spouse In education

All marbl statuses

Alleges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12-17 yeare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .lr3-19years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2C-24yeara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25-29 yeara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30-34 yeaffi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35-44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45-54 yeara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5&64years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Singie

Aliases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12-17 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16-19 yeara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20-24 yeara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25-29 yeara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3&34years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35-44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43-54 yeara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55-64 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65years andover . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Previously divorced

Ailages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12-17yeat3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16-19years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20-24yeara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25-29yeara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30-34years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35+4yeare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45-54yeara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55-64yeara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85yearsandover . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Previously widowed

Alleges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12-17yeara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18-19years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20-24years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25-29yeara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30-34yeara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35-44yeara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45-54years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55-64year3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65yeareandover . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Yeara

13.3

10.712.313.514.013.913.312.511.811.5

13.4

11.712.513.614.114.013.512.711.611.0

0.1 13.4 13.3 0.1

1.00.20.00.10.10.20.1

-0.2-0.6

10.711.913.113.914.213.813.112.511.0

11.011.913.113.813.813.513.012.611.6

-0.20.00.00.20.40.30.10.0

-0.7

13.5

10.712.313.714.614.614.111.910.611.9

13.5 0.1 13.5 13.4 0.1

11.712.513.714.514.614.011.910.711.2

1.00.20.0

4.1-0.2-0.2

0.00.1

-0.7

10.712.013.214.314.814.312.410.89.7

11.011.913.214.014.313.912.311.210.6

-0.20.00.00.20.50.40.1

-0.4-0.9

13.0

10.511.412.213.013.513.312.712.111.1

13.3

12.012.112.713.4~3.813.512.912.010.5

0.3 13.4 13.2 0.2

1.40.60.50.40.30.30.2

-0.1-0.6

9.811.212.213.013.713.813.312.810.9

12.311.612.413.013.413.413.112.711.2

–2.3-0.5-0.2

0.00.30.30.20.2

-0.4

12.1 12.0 -0.1 12.1 12.4 -0.4

11.011.112.112.913.312.512.211.711.6

12.212.012.313.213.312.712.111.411.1

1.20.90.30.30.00.10.0

-0.2-0.5

●

13.312.513.213.513.812.612.411.1

13.514.112.513.113,113.612.812.611.6

*-1.3

0.10.10.30.2

-0.2-0.2-0.7

26

AppendixTechnical notes

Registration areas

Registration areas for the collection of marriage anddivorce statistics were established in 1957 and in 1958,respectively. The registration areas include States withadequate programs for cdecting marriage and divorcestatistics. Criteria for participation in the registration areasare as follows:

. A central file of marriage or divorce records.

. A statistical report conforming closely in content to theU.S. Standard License and Certificate of Marriage(figure I) or the U.S. Standard Certificate of Divorce,Dissolution of Marriage, or Annulment (figure II).

. Regular reporting to the State office by all local areasin which marriages or divorces are recorded.

● Tests for completeness and accuracy of marriage ordivorce registration carried out in cooperation with theNational Center for Health Statistics (NCHS).

k 1970 the marriage-registration area (MRA) in-cluded 39 States and the District of Columbia while thedivorce-registration area (DRA) inc]uded 28 States. By1983 the MRA had grown to 42 States and the District ofColumbia and the DRA to 31 States. Table I shows theStates and the years they were admitted to the registrationareas. In 1983 the MRA accounted for 77 percent of allmarriages in the United States, and the DRA accounted forabout 50 percent of the divorces.

In 1970 and 1980 efforts were made to obtain nationalmarriage data to use with the detailed population basesavailable from the decennial censuses. In 1970 marriagerecords were sampled for eight States not in the MRA:Arkansas, Colorado, Minnesota, Nevada, Norih Dakota,South Carolina, Texas, and Washington. With the additionof these States, marriage data by age and State of residencefor the bride and groom are available for the entire UnitedStates with the exception of three States without centralfiles of marriage records (Arizona, NCW Mexico, andOklahoma). In 1980 marriage records were sampled forArkansas, Nevada, North Dakota, Texas, and Washington;Colorado, Minnesota, and South Carolina had joined theMRA between 1970 and 1980.

Sources of data

The marriage and divorce statistics presented in thisreport were derived primarily from data CO1lCCICCIannually

by NCHS and published in VitalStatistics of the UnitedStates, Volume HI, Marriage and Divorce. They are basedon information from two sources (1) Complete counts ofevents obtained from all States and (2) samples of marriageand divorce certificates from the MRA and the DRA.Statistical information obtained by NCHS from the certifi-cates of States that constitute the MRA and the DRAincludes data on the characteristics of marriages and di-vorces and of the persons involved in them, such as dateand place of marriage, age, race, and number of previousmarriages.

Marriage and divorce statistics for the United States,for the registration areas, and for individual States aretabulated by place of occurrence and include marriages ofnonresidents. Marriages or divorces of members of theArmed Forces or of other U.S. nationals that occur outsideof the United States are excluded. “United States” refers tothe 50 States and the District of Columbia. The term“divorce” as used in this report includes absolute divorces,annulments, and decrees of marriage dissolution, whichrecently replaced divorces in several States. Various typesof limited divorce are excluded. The words “divorce” and“dissolution of marriage” are used interchangeably.

Nonlicensed marriages inCalifornia

In California nonlicensed marriages are performedunder section 4213 of the California Civil code, whichallows unmarried couples who have been living together tobe marriccl confidentially without obtaining a marriage li-cense or health certificate. In March 1972 this section wasamended to require county clerks (who keep sealed recordsfor these marriages) to report periodically the total numberto the California State Department of Health Services.These records may not be opened for inspection without acourt order. Since reporting began, nonlicensed marriageshave increased rapidly from 2,857 in 1973 to 68,260 in1983. Beginning in 1978 these marriages are included inthe national and geographic totals.

Sampling

Marriage and divorce records were sampled at differ-ent rates to give a minimal sample of approximately 2,500records for each State, producing a 4-percent relative vari-ance on a 1 percent estimate. All records were sampled

27

Form ApprovedOMB No. 68R 19’D3.

TVPEon ;INT u.S. STANDARD

PERMANENT LICENSE WJMO, *INK

LICENSE AND CERTIFICATE OF MARRIAGE .. . .. .... . .. .. .FDN GROOM-NAME ,,.5T

—-,!3.,.

INSTRU:11ONSI_As, AGE

HAN0800K 1. 2.

usuALREs106NcE STREET AND NUMOER CITY. TOWN OR LOCATION

-s4. Sb.

colJNrY STATE BIRTHPLACE (Std. c. {’)-,,. CC.,l.”,, OAT E OF 0! RTH t.W. D.?. Y,.,

3d. 4. 5.

FATHER-NAME BIRTHPLACE (S,.,. .,10..’” MOTMER-MA!OEN NAME BIRTHPLACE (S,.1. w f.r<un.W.”,, Co.”lm,

1, 7b.

MA1 DE N NAME fff d!tf.?.m,, AGE

-18* #b, 9,

uSUAL FIESIDENCE-STRE ETANO NUMOER

——

CITY, TOWN OR LOCATION

Ion.!,,lob

COUNTY’ 6TA1 E 8, RTMPLACE ,s,,” orlmvll. ,e”.ay) OA?S OF BIRTH (Mo.. h?. Y,,,

10d. 11, 12

FATHER-NAME E,RTIWLACE (~:l?lorek” MOTHER-MAIDEN NAME BIRTHPLACE ,SW. .r fo=knCO. ”,,y)

14, 14b.

WE HEREBY CERTIFVTHATTHE INFORMATION ?ROVIOf D IS CORRECT TO THE BESTOF OUR XMOWLEOGE AND BELIEF AND THAT WE ARE FREE TO MARRY UNDER THE LAWSOF THIS STATE.

GROOM’S SIGNATURE 8R1oE’S S! GMAIURE

1,6PTHIS LIcENSE Authorizes THE MAR131AGE IH lIIIS STATE DFTHE PARTIES NAMED ABOVE BY ANY ?EilSON OULY AUTHORIZED

TO PERFOFIMAM&RFitAGE CEREMONY UNDER THE LAwS OF THE STATE OF

5UBSCRIEED TO AND SUIVN TO BE FO:e:,ME ON SIGNATURE OF ISSUING OFFICEF7 TITLE OF ISSUING OFFICER

,,, E I’F,,

Month Da” v.”, WHERE MaRFl, EO-C(TY1 “rtblv that the a%=

COUNTV

Iu,r.sd p“x,ll, .,,.18,. .n,,,,ti . . lBb, 18,

pERSONPER60R MING CkREMONY

. .—

TITLE TYPE OF CERIMONY(Rc,i, (e., of cktt, w.dl,)

lsd. ,WJ.a,...) F 18*, ISf.

WITNESS TO CEREMONY

. .

\wITNEss To CEREMCUY

19,. ,.s,,,,oIL.,,, ➤ 19b, (sI,.., u*) >

LmAL OCFICIAL MAKING RETURN 10 5TATE HEALTH Dtw.mTMEN7 OATc RECEIVED BY LOCAL OF fICIAL <w. , t,.,, Y..,

20,, (w,”.,”., ) F 20b.

INFORMATION FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSESONLY

—

RACE-GROOM NUMBER OF THIS MARRIAGE IF PREVIOUSLY MARRIED, LAST MARRIAGE ENDED EDUCiT1ON (s.”..11, OFI!;-hl,h.Sl tic com,l,tcdl

s,..11, k,,, M,,,. Black se.df, W i, 1,$ =0.4 .tc.) BY DEATH, DIVORCE.

1

RACE-S.,• E NUMBCfl OF THIS MARRIAGE IF PREVIOUSLY UAnnlED. LAST MARRIAGE ENDED EDUCATION ,we!h ..1, .1,...1,.-J. CO-WI< tcdl —

b’w,lf, (. g . WWI., Bl,G& S.-.lrY (F,mt. rocond. .m.l BY DEATH, OIVORCE.A.n,,,c.. I.=dlsn. .,, 1 OISSOLUT,ON OR

IANNULMENT (S,..,1,,I t

IHRA-164Rev. u78 \ 25. 1s. 271, !77h, n.

I

Figure 1. U.S. Standard License and Certificate of Marriage

28

Form Approved

TYPE U.S. STANDARD QFJB No. 6St R 1904

Ou y-T CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE,PENMANENT COUITT IDENTIFICATION

INK (co.” 1,0,mum,.,, DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE OR ANNULMENT ~,ATE,,,,~v~BCaFoR

INSTRCLIITIONSHuSBAND-NAME F,R57 MIODLE LAST

...14ANDBOOK 1-.

USUAL RESIDENCE-STREET ADDRESS - CITY. TOWN OR LOCATION

2*, 2b.

COUNTY STAT E BIRTHPLACE 1S,.,< or tor,ti” C.”” IFYJ OATE OF BIRTH run.. D.,, Yr.J

2’4. 3, 4.,,cs, MIDDLE us? MAIDEN NAME

5*. 5b.USUAL RESIDENCE-STREET ADDRESS CITY, TOWN OR LKAT10i4

m.

COUNTY6b.

STATE 01n7HPL4c E ,s,.,. .r ,Omti. . . . ..W) DATE OF EIRTH ,Ma. D.,. Y,.,

6C Ed, 7. 8.PLACE OF THIS MARRIAGE-CITY COUNTV STATC W W, ,. u 8A., “.-. <0””$-YJ DATE OF THIS MARRIAGE DATE COUPLE SEPAFiATED

(n.. .-,. Yr.) <me.. IJcY. Vr J

91. 19b. 9r, 9d. ID.NUMBER Cf CUILOREN EvER BORN ALIVE OF THIS M4RnlAGE CHILDREN UNDER IS IN THIS FAMILY (s”<,*, PETMONER-HUSBAND, WIFE. BOTH. oTHER [S,tclf,){S.w.! f,)

11,. 1lb. 12.AJTJRNEY FOR PETITIONER-NAME (7,.. or ●H.,, ADDRESS S, F.IE, OR R.F.O. tio. CITY 0. ‘row lTATG z,?

13b.

1c+”if” that the m,r, hg, Month 0,” v,,. TYPE OF DECREE-DIVORCE. D1530LU7KVi OR ANNULMENTor thl ,Lm”, n,nld p,rm”,

DATE OF EN7RV (Ma. ~,. s,.)rsDrcfl,)

lq,. w,i d,,tnlwd o“: 14b. 16C.

COUNTY OF DECREE TITLE OF COURT

14d. 14e,51J3NATURE OF cER7ti FYIN0 OFF,CIAL TITLE OF OFFICIAL

RACE-HUSBAND NUMUCR OF THIS MARRIAOE

S%CIIY h n.. WI@ Black, S,.dr, IF,”,, ncmd. .,,.1Am,,kJn lrd*n. ,,,.)

16.

RACE-WIFE NUMBER OF THIS MARRIAGE

S,<,11, 1, s.. Whm*. Bltck. S#.erm (F,.*. world, ,Ic.1Anmr@n Ind,an. ate.)

HRA-165Rev. 1/78

INFORMATION FOR S7ATIST1 CAL PURPOSES 0NL%

IF PR&VIOUSLV MARRIED HDWMA?4Y ENDED BY

DEATH? I DIVORCE, DISSOLUTIONIORANNULMENTP1

17.. ! 17b

IF PREVIOUSLY MARRIED HO+’JMAt.JYENDED BY

DEATH? I DIvORCE. DISSOLUTION10R ANNULMENT?II

211 !21b.

EDUCATION (Sv.af, .“1, A (,.<., ,-I. .0”.s1, ,.0

E lmn,.(w2y 1 C.YIMG+I (1.40,5+)1

1s. !

EDUCATIC+4 ,Sp,.,f, 0“,, h,,hc., ,Wd, ..m*I? ted,

Elmnrw7$72p&w It

cdlm*[1.4 w 5+1

1

22.I

igure Il. U.S. Stendard Certificate of Divorce, Dissolution of Marriage or Annulment

29

Table L Years central files of marriage and divorce records were established and years areas were admitted to the marriage- anddivorce-registration areas: 1983

~he marriage-reglslratlon area was established January 1, 1957, and the divorcs-registration area, January 1, 1958]

Marriages Divorces

Admitted AdmittedCentral files to the marriage- Centra/ fi/es io the divorce-

Area established registration area established re.giatration area

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DistrictofColumbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hawa~. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Illinois. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kansas, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NewHampsplre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NewMexlco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NewYork (excluding NewYorkCily) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NewYorkCfly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .North Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ohio. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RhodeIsland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Texan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Utah. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vir9mia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .West Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Wlsconsm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Wyommg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PuertoRico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vlrginlslands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

19081913

(’)1917

1905196818971913

1811192719521898

1947196219591880

1913195819371892

1914184118671958

1926194819431909

196818581848

(’)

1880164719621925

1949

(’)19071906

1852195019051945

1966191918571853

1968192119071941

19311953

19571957

(2)(9

1957197919571957

1961195719571957

1957196419611957

1957195919571957

19571961i 9571971

1957196619571957

(919571957

(?)

195719651964

(’)

1957

,9$

1957

1957197119571957

(9195719571957

(?196519571957

19571957

19081949

(’)1923

1962196819471935

1602192719521951

19471962

(’)1914

1951195619421692

1914186218971970

1926194819431909

196818611795

(’)

19631963 }19561949

1949(’)

19251943

1962196219051945

1966195316961918

1966196719071941

19311953

19581958

(?(?(9(9

19681981

m(?

19581958

19561966,$;

19591969

(2)(~)

195919791961

(2)

(?196119561958

(~)1979

(’)(2)

1969

(2)

(2)

1962

(2)19581958

1963197119581958

19819661958

(2)(2)

19581956

m1958

1Not yet established.2Not yet admitted.8California WaS admitted to the divorce-registration area in 1968 butceased to participatein 1978.

30

for States with fewer than 2,500 records and for New YorkCity marriages. All records were also used for States in theVital Statistics Cooperative Program (VSCP). States partic-ipating in the VSCP supplied State-coded data on computertape. Beginning in 1972 with Florida, the number of Statesthat supplied marriage records through the VSCP grew tonine in 1975 with the addition of Maine, Missouri,Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York Rhode Island,

,South Carolina, and Vermont. Virginia was added in 1976,and Illinois and Montana brought the total to 12 States forthe 1977-1983 period. State-coded data tapes of divorcerecords were used starting in 1975 for six states—Missouri,

Nebraska, New York, Rhode Island, South Carolina, andVermont. Virginia was added in 1976 and Illinois in 1977,bringing the total to eight States for the 1977-83 period.

Estimates computed from the samples (except wherethe sample included aU records) are subject to samplingerror. Because all cases in the samples were selected withknown probabilities, the sampling error can be calculatedfor each estimate. Tables II and III show sampling errorsfor the MRA and the DRA in 1983. These are the amountsthat, when added to and subtracted from the estimates, givethe ranges for the quantity being estimated, in approxi-mately 68 in 100 similarly selected samples.

Table Il. Sampling error of estimated number of marriages expressed as percent of area total: Marriage-registration area, and eachregistration State, 1983

[Figures for Alask~ Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Illinofs, Maine, Missouri, Montana Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, South CarolinaVermont,and Vlrglnia have no sampling errors because all reoords were tsbulaled]

AllSernpllrrgarrvr of estimatedtiquanq-f expressed as pemarrtdares total

Area marriages 1 or 99 2or98 3 or 97 4or96 5or9.5 7or93 10or&M 150r65 2Qor80 250r75 50

Marri.sge-registration area . . . . . 1,690,791

Alabama. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47,440Alaska. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Callfomial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15~R

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36,150Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,915Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,579

Distriol of Columbia . . . . . . . . . 5,33sFlorida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118,984Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72,820Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,050Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,430Illinois. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103,734

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54,040Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,770Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,695Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,520Louis!ana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,180Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12#479

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47,120Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . 48,860Mkhlgan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78,940Mkrnesola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36,320Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,6SU

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,258Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,092Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,703New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,972New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,640

New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159,321North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . 52,130Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,900Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,265Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92,140

Rhode lslanct . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,053South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,6S6South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,002Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56,300Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,425

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,595Vlrglnia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,790West Virginia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,930Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,780Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,202

413

65. . .169

5733

. . .

. . .

. . .118

1223. . .

10149325662

. . .

6666

1225749

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .106

. . .68

13730

132

. . .

. . .9

10327

. . .

. . .2560

6

6s1

92. . .

238so46

. . .

. . .

. . .166

1732. . .

14269456167

. . .

9293

1718069

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .152

. . .eo

19343

185

. . .

. . .13

14536

. . .

. . .358511

709

112. . .

2909756. . .

. . .

. . .202

2040. . .

1738455

1%. . .

112113

9764

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .165

. . .117235

52226

. . .

. . .15

17746

. . .

. . .43

10313

814

126. . .

33411264

. . .

. . .

. . .233

2345

. . .

1989663

114122. . .

12313024011297

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .212

. . .134270

60259

. . .

. . .18

20353

. . .

. . .49

11915

eos

143. . .

37112471

. . .

. . .

. . .259

2650

. . .

22110770

126136. . .

144144267124107

. . .

. . .

. . .

.,.236

. . .149200

67288

. . .

. . .20

22659

. . .

. . .55

13217

1,060

167. . .

434145

63. . .

. . .. . .

3033059

. . .

25612582

148159. . .

lee169312146126

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .276

. . .175352

78337

. . .

. . .23

26569

. . .

. . .64

16520

1,246

198. . .

51117198

. . .

. . .

. . .356

3669. . .

30414796

174187. . .

198le9267171148

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .325

. . .205414

92397

. . .

. . .27

31182

. . .

. . .76

18224

1,463

23s. . .

608203117. . .

. . .

. . .424

4283. . .

361176115

z. . .

235236437204176

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .387

. . .245492109472

. . .

. . .32

37097

. . .

. . .30

21628

1,661

262. . .

6s1228131. . .

. . .

. . .475

4793

. . .

405196129232249. . .

263265490228197

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .433

. . .274551122523

. . .

. . .36

415109

. . .

. . .101242

31

1,798

283. . .

737247142. . .

. . .

. . .514

51100. . .

436213139251270. . .

285267530247213

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .469

. . .297597133573

. . .

. . .39

449118

. . .

. . .109262

34

2,077

327. . .651285164. . .

. . .. . .

59359

116. . .

506245181290312. . .

323331612285246

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .542

. . .342689153661

. . .

. . .45

519138

. . .

. . .1?6303

39

l~wIiw ~rrom ~mwt~ m.wdi~ nonlicensed marritges; see Technical @es.

31

Table Ill. Sampling error of estimated number of divorces and annulments expreaaed as percent of area total: Divorce-registraticmarea,and each registration State, 1983[Figures for Alaska, Delaware, Illinois, Miesourl, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, South Caroline, South Dakota, Vermont, Virginia, and Wyominghave no sampling errors because all records were tabulated]

Alldivorces Sampling error of estimated frequency, expressed as percent of area total

andArea annulments 1 or 99 2 or 98 3 or 97 4 or 96 5 or 95 7or 93 10or 90 15 or 85 20 or 80 25 or 75 50

Divorce-registration area

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . .Delaware, . . . . . . . . . . . . .Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Hawati . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Idaho, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . .Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Missouri. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .Montana. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NewHampshire . . . . . . . . . . . .New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . .Rhode Island . . . . . . . . . . . . .South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . .South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . .Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Utah. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Wginla. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Wbconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

572,949

25,3003,925

12,0983,060

32,8704,584

6,23250,35010,56612,28017,095

16,09518,53038,06025,904

4,672

6,2344,806

64,15454,12016,185

40,2203,525

13,6012,554

28,930

8,4742,575

25,43716,5103,983

171

47

11

557

8.

102226

262758

. . .7

. . .

. . .

. .101

25

60. . .. . .. . .52

9.. . .26

. . .

241

67. . .15

. . .77

9

11. .143136

363882. . .

9

. .

. . .

. . .14236

84. . .. . .. . .73

13. . .. . .36. . .

294

81.,.19

. . .9412

13. . .183844

44

1:. . .11

. . .

. . .

. . .17343

102. . .. . .. . .68

16. . .. .44

. . .

337

93.

21. .108

13

15. . .204351

5053

114. . .13

. . .

. . .

. . .19950

116. . .. . .. . .102

18. . .. . .50. . .

Numberordivorces

375

104. . .24. . .

i 2015

17. . .224857

5659

127. . .14

. . .

. . .

. . .221

55

131. . .. . ..,.113

20. . .. . .58

. . .

439

121. . .26. .141

17

20. . .265666

6669

149. . .17

. . .

. . .

. . .259

65

153. . .. . .. . .132

24. . .. . .66. . .

516

143. . .33. .

16520

23. . .316678

7781

175. . .20

. . .

. . .

. . .304

76

160. . .. . .. . .

155

26. . .. . .77. . .

614

170. . .39. . .

19724

28. . .377993

9297

209. .

24

. . .

. . .

. . .362

91

214. . .. . .. . .185

33. . .,..92

. . .

688

190. . .44. . .

22027

31. . .4188

104

103109234. . .26

. . .

. . .

. . .406102

240. . .. . .. . .

207

37. . .. .

103. . .

745

208. . .47. .

23929

34. . .4595

112

111148253. . .29

.,.

. . .

. . .439110

260. . .. . .. . .

224

40. . .. . .111. . .

860

238. . .55. . .

27534

39. . .51

110130

128138292

.33

. . .

. . .

. . .507127

300. . .. . .. . .

259

46

. . .128

Demographic characteristics

Certificates vary among the Statesin the informationthatiscollected. Formarriages, itemson ageat marriageordate of birth were included by every MRA State and theDistrict of Columbia. However, information on previousmarital status, type of ceremony, race, education, andinterval to remarriage was not reported by some States.Tables IV and V show which States reported previousmarital status and the other items shown in the tables ofthis report. A1though 38 States and the District of Colum-bia reported previous marital status of bride and groom in1983, only 36 States did so for the entire 1970-83 period. Itis this group of 36 States that is used to make Dationalestimates by applying the percent distributions by previousmarital status and sexfrom theseStatesto thetotalcount ofmarriages for the United States.

For divorces, date ofmarriage and nurnberofehildrenwere included on thecertificates ofeveryDRA State .TableIV shows which States reported the number of the mar-riage being dissolved and the duration of the marriage.

Because of the differences in the reporting areas fromtable to table, there maybe slight differences between someof the totals shown.

Rates, percents, means, andmedians

Marriage rates for 1970 and 1980 are based on thecomplete count of persons enumerated as of April 1 ofthose years. All other rates are basedon estimates of theresident population as of July 1 that were prepared by theU.S. Bureau of the Census. Percents, means, and medianswere computed excluding cases with information not stated.

32

Table IV. Areas that report specifiad items on marriage and divorce records

Marriages rasords Divorce records

Uniform Previous

Prevkw3 group of Prevkxrs marifal s!atus, PreviousMarriage Plevkws Prevbus marital status Rates for Previous manlal stetus, /nterval to Prevkws marifal status,

reglatratbn marital marflal and type nathmal manlal status, race, and lype remarriage, marital status, race, Numberstatus, status, both of ceremony, estimates, and race, of ceremony, and race, and education, and educatbn, of this

parthxp%?, W&4 1983 1970 and 1883 1883 1970-83 1983 1983 1983 1883 1983 marriage

(Tables (Tables (Tables (Tablesc,3, E, 2,5, (Tables (Tables N, O, 7, Q, R,

Area and 4) and 6) A and D) (Table B) (l_able 1) F, G, and J) (Table H)’ (Table M) and 8) (Table P) and S)

Total number of reporting areas. . . .

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .DlstrktofCoIumbla. . . . . . . . . . . .Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Hawall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Idaho. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Kansee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Louisiana. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Massachusetts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Missouri. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,Montana. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NawHampshke . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NawJersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .North Carolina. , . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Rhodelsland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SouthCarollna. ,, . . . . . . . . . . . .South Dakota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ltlah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..o..WestVirglnla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

43

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

39

xxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxx

xxxxxxxxx

xxx

xxxxxxxx

38

xxxxx

38

xxxxxxxxxxxxx

x

xxxx

xxxxxxxxx

xxx

xxxxxxxx

38

xxx

xx

xxxxxx

xxxxxx

xxxxxxxx

xxx

xxxxxxxx

33

xxx

xx

xxxxxx

xxxx

32

xx

23 20 19 30

xx

x

x xxx

xxxxxx

x

xx

xxx

2X

xxx

xxxxxx

xxxxxx

xxxxxxxxx

xxx

xxxxxxxx

xxxx

x

x

x

xx

xxxx

xx

x

xx

x

xxx

xxxxx

xxxxxx

x

xxx

xxxxxxxx

xxxxxxx

x

xxx

xxxxxxxx

xxxxxx

xxxxx

xxxxx

xxxx

xx x x

xxxxx

xxx x x

xxxx

xxxx

xxxx

xxxx

xx

xx

xx

xx

$ Table V. Areas thatrepoti date lastmarriage ended onmarriage records l97W3

Area IWO-83 1979 1978 1977 1978 1975 1974 1973 1972 i971 1970

Totel number of repotting areas . . .

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Californi a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Florkta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Illlnots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I@=as. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Mlnneso!a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Mlseisslppl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Missouri. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Montana. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NewHampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NewYork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NotlhCarollna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pennsylvania. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Rhodelslend . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SouthCerolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

26 27

xxxxxxx

25

xx

22

xx

23

xx

21 21 21 21 20 18

xxxxxx

x x x x x x

xxxx

xxxx

xxxxxxx

xxxxxxx

xxxxxxx

xxxxxxx

xxxxxxx

xxxx

xxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxx

xx

xx

xx

x x x x x x x

xxxxxxxxx

xx

xx

xx x x x x x

xxxxxx

xxxxxx

x xxxxxx

xxxxxx

xxx

xxx

xxxx

xxx

xxxxxx

xxxxxx

xx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxx

xxxxxx

xxxxxx

xxxxxx

xxx

xx

xx

xx

xx

xx

xx

xx

xx

Vital and Health Statisticsseries descriptions

SERIES 1.

SERIES 2.

SERIES 3.

SERIES 4.

SERIES 5.

SERIES 10.

SERIES 11,

SERIES 12.

SERIES 13.

Programs and Collection Procedures—Reports describing

the general programs of the National Center for Health

Statistics and its offices and dwisions and the data col-

lection methods used. They also include defmmons and

other material necessaw for understanding the data.

Data Evaluation and Methods Research—Studies of new

statistical methodology including experimental teata of

new suwey methods, studies of vital statistics collection

methods, new analytical techniques, objectwe evaluations

of reliability of collected data, and contributions to

statistical theory. Studies also include comparison of

U.S. methodology with those of other countries.

Analytical and Epidemiological Studies-Reports pre-

senting analytical or interpretive atudiea based on vital

and health statistics, cartying the analysts further than

the expository types of reports in the other series.

Documents and Committee Raporta-Final reports of

major committees concerned with vital and health sta-

tistics and documents such aa recommended model vital

registration laws and revised birth and death certificates.

Comparative International Vital and Haalth Statistics

Reports-Analytical and descriptive reports comparing

U.S. vital and health statistics with those of other countries.

Data From the National Health Interviaw Survey-Statis-

tics on illness, accidental injuries, disability, use of hos-

pital, medical, dental, and other services, and other

health-related toplca, all based on data collected in the

continuing national household interview suwey.

Data From the National Health Examination Survey and

the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey—

Data from direct examination, testing, and measurement

of national samplea of the civilian noninatitutlona lized

population provide tha basis for (1) estimates of the

medically defined prevalence of specific diseases in the

United States and the distributions of the population

with respect to physical, physiological, and paycho-

Iogical characteristics and (2) analysis of relationships

among the various measurements without reference to

an explicit finite universe of persons.

Data From the Institutionalized Population Surveys-Dis-

continued in 1975. Reports from thesa suweya are in-

cluded in Series 13.

Data on Health Resources Utilization—Statwtics on the

utilization of health manpower and facilities providing

long-term cara, ambulatory care, hospital care, and family

planning services.

SERIES 14.

SERIES 15.

SERIES 20.

SERIES 21.

SERIES 22.

SERIES 23.

Data on Health Resourcas: Manpower and Facilities—

Statistics on the numbers, geographic distribution, and

characteristics of health resources including physicians,

dentists, nurses, other health occupations, hoapitala,

nursing homes, and outpatient facilities.

Data From Spatial Sunreya-Statistics on health and

health-related topics collected in special suweys that

are not a part of the continuing data systems of the

National Center for Health Statistic.

Data on Mortality-Various statistics on mortality other

than as included in regular annual or monthly raports.

Spatial analyses by cause of death, age, and other demo-

graphic variables; geographic and time series analyses;

and statistics on characteristics of deatha not available

from the vital records based on sample surveys of those

records.

Data on Natality, Marriage, and Divorca-Varioua sta-

tistics on natality, marriage, and divorce other than as

included in regular annual or monthly reporta. Special

analysas by demographic variables; geographic and time

series analyses; studies of fertility; and statistics on

characteristics of births not available from the vital

racords based on sample suweys of those records.

Data From the National Mortality and Natality Surveys—

Discontinued in 1975. Reports from these sample surveys

based on vital records are included in Series 20 and 21,

respectively.

Data From the National Survey of Family Growth—

Statistics on fertility, family formation and dissolution,

family planning, and related maternal and infant health

topics derived from a periodic suwey of a nationwide

probability sample of women 15-44 years of aga.

For answera to questions about this report or for a Iiat of titles of

reports published in these series, contact

Scientific and Technical Information Branch


Centers for Disease Control

Public Health Sewice

Hyattsville, Md. 20782

301-436-8500

US. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ANDHUMAN SERVICES

Public Health SerwceCenters for Disease ControlNational Center for Health Statistics3700 East-West HighwayHyattswlle, Matyland 20782

OFFICIAL BUSINESSPENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300

BULK RATEPOSTAGE & FEES PAID

PHS/NCHSPERMIT No, G-281

DHHS Publtcat!on No. (PHS) 89–1923, Series 21, No. 45