Second marriages founded on infidelity - against the norm for second marriages?

[SidLyon]

I saw this in today's news: Couples in second marriages are 'less likely to get divorced' because they benefit from experience of the first | Mail Online

 

The general premise seems to be that people learn from their mistakes in their first marriages, and so second marriages are happier and less likely to end in divorce.

 

On the other hand it seems to be going against the often cited statistic (at least here on LS) that second marriages are more likely to end in divorce.

 

Could it be that marriages founded on infidelity are less likely to succeed than other second marriages? Something else? Thoughts anyone, or other links to information?

 

______________________________________________________________

 

A great song about love and loss: Passenger~~Let her go~~ - YouTube

[KathyM]

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-intelligent-divorce/201202/the-high-failure-rate-second-and-third-marriages

 

The general concensus and most often cited statistics for divorce rate are 50% for first marriages, 67% for second marriages, and 73% for third marriages. Generally, it is believed that second marriages have a greater failure rate because they are often under more stress than first marriages, because of the issues involved with blending families. First marriages also usually involve having children together which results in a greater rate of staying married than married couples who don't have children together. Step families often experience issues of divided loyalties, and disciplining of children is also more difficult in step families, with the child not as willing to accept the new spouse as having a parenting role. Many people also do not learn from past mistakes and go on to repeat them in the second and subsequent marriages. I haven't read articles about how marriages that come out of infidelity are specifically affected, but I would think that the level of trust among those partners is already compromised. From the clients I have seen in counseling where their relationship started from infidelity, there were definitely trust issues that negatively affected their relationship with each other.

[Mint Sauce]

any theory on the "why" is at this point irrelevant given the contradictory raw statistics...

 

I'd love to see the actual peer-reviewed publications with sample description.

[jnel921]

This is my second M. My first ended in D and I decided to R with my second H.

 

My prior experience did play a part in my decision to stay, however so did the response of my current H. If he was not remorseful or if the A was longer than it was I can say D would have been my option.

 

Our marriage was not founded on infidelity. The original foundation was love and respect and the promise to be true life partners.

 

We are both marriage material, but life sometimes throws you a curveball and then it's up to you to decide if you let it hit you or if you will get out of the way.

 

BTW, my first H cheated 7 years into our M and my second H 10. So there is no timeframe or expectation. If the person is confronted with the temptation, depending on the state of the M and communications it could happen. Could I have predicted that? Of course not.

 

Infidelity should not deter people from wanting to marry again in fear of being hurt again.

[cocorico]

I saw this in today's news: Couples in second marriages are 'less likely to get divorced' because they benefit from experience of the first | Mail Online

 

The general premise seems to be that people learn from their mistakes in their first marriages, and so second marriages are happier and less likely to end in divorce.

 

This has been my experience, both in terms of what I have lived and what I have witnessed, but I think it depends on many individual factors, including:

 

• The extent to which previously married partners have learned from their previous Ms
  
• The degree to which the M is founded on solid communication, trust, and sound R skills of both parties
  
• Whether the new M receives support from the extended families, friends and other significant people on both sides
  
• How old any children are, and to,what extent families need to be "blended"
  
• The financial pressures the couple may be under
  
• The maturity (which may or may not be related to age) of the couple
  
• The compatibility / "fit" of the couple in relation to basic values
  

 

In some cases, I can see that a WS or even a BS carrying unresolved issues into a second M (to anyone, not only a fAP) may be at risk of repeating poor adaptations under pressure, risking the failure of the M. In other cases, where there has been introspection, counselling, and hard work to address mailadaptations, these "second timers" can stand a far better chance of R success than first timers who are naively unaware of what is involved in a M.

[jnel921]

If I got divoreced I would never get married again. I seriously doubt I would even date anyone. I also would NEVER EVER have any kind of relationship with someone who was in any type of relationship already. I would never want any responsibility or part in hurting someone that way.

 

Never say never until you live through it. I doubt we were put on this earth to be hurt and die a lonely life.

 

We all need companionship and we should be hopeful that Love exists.

[waterwoman]

Never say never until you live through it. I doubt we were put on this earth to be hurt and die a lonely life.

 

We all need companionship and we should be hopeful that Love exists.

 

Well that makes me a weirdo then! I would love to live alone. Only reason I want to stay with H is because I love him and we've knocked the hard edges off each other - wouldn't want to do that with anyone else. So beleive me, if H magically disappeared off the face of the earth it would take a very special person indeed (who was willing to deal with my little long-standing quirks) to tempt me back into the marital fold. In fact I can see my little house already - it would be old and ramshackle and in the middle of nowhere and I'd have cats, chickens and bees, grow herbs and veg, and brew wicked beer [grin] The children would be welcome of course but it would be MY home. In fact I find myself eyeing up broomsticks.......

[dichotomy]

I can only offer my own personal take. I am in a second marriage. If something were to happen I will not get married again, but would be fine in other types of relationships with women. This despite the fact that I am aware (or rather told all the time) that I am "prime marriage material".

 

First marriages, particularity ones that end badly (adultery, betrayal, abuse, addictions, money, etc.) as both of ours firsts did - can leave scars, damage, baggage. Unless both parties are willing to really spend the time to heal, get therapy, and work on getting healthy from their first marriages -and be honest about it - you will drag unfinished issues into the new second marriage. Step kids can be a part of this, but for me - I knew that and accepted that challenge and never complained about it.

Edited April 30, 2013 by dichotomy

[Artie Lang]

sorry to say, but a marriage founded on infidelity smells of inauthenticity to me.

 

just my $0.02.

Edited May 1, 2013 by Artie Lang

[Silly_Girl]

I saw this in today's news: Couples in second marriages are 'less likely to get divorced' because they benefit from experience of the first | Mail Online

 

The general premise seems to be that people learn from their mistakes in their first marriages, and so second marriages are happier and less likely to end in divorce.

 

On the other hand it seems to be going against the often cited statistic (at least here on LS) that second marriages are more likely to end in divorce.

 

Could it be that marriages founded on infidelity are less likely to succeed than other second marriages? Something else? Thoughts anyone, or other links to information?

 

______________________________________________________________

 

 

I have no stats sorry.

 

I can absolutely believe that where infidelity is concerned or other marital issues, that the marriage has a good chance of being healthier. Most people learn from mistakes to a greater or lesser degree. The words 'older' and 'wiser' are frequent bedfellows for good reason. Experiences help us to better shape the future.

 

The first divorce might have seen the couple in counselling so perhaps they've learned some improved communication skills. Perhaps the whole process helped them to be more self-aware about potential partners and they simply made a much better choice second time around. Being more mature in general is likely to promote stability as individuals and a couple.

 

So it's all good.

 

However... I have definitely seen couples cling to their second marriage because they are frightened to 'fail again'. Perhaps the first divorce hurt so much or left them broke or just so damned hard they simply can't face it. So they hunker down and are in it at all costs.

[Decorative]

The actual numbers on divorce invalidate the premise of the OP.

 

The US census is another source for stats on marriages, and they actually push the divorce rates a little higher than even KathyM stated for subsequent marriages, especially second marriages with children.

 

I think the article has some nice conjecture, but doesn't get it right.

 

And I kinda wish fact checkers would have run things through before things like that get published.

[cocorico]

The actual numbers on divorce invalidate the premise of the OP.

 

The US census is another source for stats on marriages, and they actually push the divorce rates a little higher than even KathyM stated for subsequent marriages, especially second marriages with children.

 

I think the article has some nice conjecture, but doesn't get it right.

 

And I kinda wish fact checkers would have run things through before things like that get published.

 

The source of the stats in the OP is the Office of National Statistics in the UK.

 

The sources cited in the second post, and this post, refer to US statistics

 

I suspect that the fact that different countries, hence different statistics, are the source of the two contending views explains the difference, rather than the inability of Brits to draw congruent conclusions from different numbers.

[2.50 a gallon]

Forget the stats, they are a crock and not to be believed.

 

I know for a fact in the state that I live in that divorce is above 70% with first marriages.

 

I am retired first wave baby boomer, all of my high school, college or other friends are divorced.

 

Every time I make contact with another lost friend, they are always divorced.

 

And as for second marriages, they seem to last about 50% of the time, and the odd thing is, those that I know involved infidelity are usually the ones that last

[Decorative]

Forget the stats, they are a crock and not to be believed.

 

I know for a fact in the state that I live in that divorce is above 70% with first marriages.

 

I am retired first wave baby boomer, all of my high school, college or other friends are divorced.

 

Every time I make contact with another lost friend, they are always divorced.

 

And as for second marriages, they seem to last about 50% of the time, and the odd thing is, those that I know involved infidelity are usually the ones that last

 

 

So people lie on the census reports?

 

About things that are public records?

 

Huh.

 

Then how do you know 70%? LOL why is yours a special stat? LOL

Edited May 1, 2013 by Decorative

[2.50 a gallon]

My family has sister and mother have worked in the county courts system for over a half a century. My soon to retire sister's long time boyfriend is now retired from the same system. Amongst his duties was the keeping of statics and coordinating them with the state

[2.50 a gallon]

Better yet take my family. Out of 6 siblings between my parents only one of them divorced.

 

But of my generation, of a dozen cousins on one side and ten on the other side, there are only three who have not gone thru a divorce, and one of them never married. Of the great grand children of which my mother has two, one is divorced and the other just married. And of the other grand children within the two families, again 3 out of 5 have failed marriages, and then add in the half dozen who have yet to marry

[Decorative]

Here's the thing: anecdotes do not data make.

 

Data is what makes facts.

 

The data shows a higher divorce rate in second marriages, and higher still in third marriages, with accompanying jumps in those base rates when children are involved.

 

That's just the way the story is. Anecdotes aside, family history aside- that's the reality.

[MissBee]

Well that makes me a weirdo then! I would love to live alone. Only reason I want to stay with H is because I love him and we've knocked the hard edges off each other - wouldn't want to do that with anyone else. So beleive me, if H magically disappeared off the face of the earth it would take a very special person indeed (who was willing to deal with my little long-standing quirks) to tempt me back into the marital fold. In fact I can see my little house already - it would be old and ramshackle and in the middle of nowhere and I'd have cats, chickens and bees, grow herbs and veg, and brew wicked beer [grin] The children would be welcome of course but it would be MY home. In fact I find myself eyeing up broomsticks.......

 

 

Cute!

[soccerrprp]

I know for a fact in the state that I live in that divorce is above 70% with first marriages.

 

What state is this?

[Object_a]

Just a tip for the USA majority here, The Daily Mail is basically the New York Post except it likes to think it's not trashy. Take anything you read there with a huge pinch of salt. There is a long-running joke here in the UK about "what does the Daily Mail thinks causes cancer this week?" because they regularly print sensationalist articles that totally misrepresent scientific studies, only to completely contradict the previous story a few days later.

 

I wouldn't put too much weight in the statistics anyway since raw numbers don't tell you anything about how and why those figures came to exist. Any explanation you come up with can only be a post-hoc rationalisation. It's not possible to be 'scientific' when it comes to human relationships, and that's probably a good thing!

[waterwoman]

Just a tip for the USA majority here, The Daily Mail is basically the New York Post except it likes to think it's not trashy. Take anything you read there with a huge pinch of salt. There is a long-running joke here in the UK about "what does the Daily Mail thinks causes cancer this week?" because they regularly print sensationalist articles that totally misrepresent scientific studies, only to completely contradict the previous story a few days later.

 

 

So true!!! Anyone says to me' I read it in the mail' my cynicism chip lights up.