005 Williams Hall • Bowling Green State University • Bowling Green, OH 43403
hp://ncfmr.bgsu.edu • 419.372.4910 • [email protected]
The overall U.S. divorce rate has remained essentially unchanged over the past 20 years. In 1990, 19
people divorced for every 1,000 marrieds versus 18 per 1,000 in 2010. This stability over time belies
considerable variation by age group. A recent study indicates that the divorce rate among those ages
50 and older doubled since 1990 (Brown & Lin, 2012), which suggests that the risk of divorce declined
among younger adults. Combining data from the 1990 U.S. Vital Statistics and the 2010 American
Community Survey, this prole documents the change in the divorce rate between 1990 and 2010 by
10-year age groups.
Divorce Rates
In general, the risk of divorce declines with age. The rate of the decline across different age groups is
steeper in 1990 than in 2010. The range of the divorce rates across age groups is wider in 1990 than
in 2000.
•The divorce rate for adults under age 35 has decreased since 1990.
○ The decline was greatest among those ages 15-24, for whom the divorce rate dropped by 33%
from 47 to 32 per 1,000.
•For adults over age 35, the divorce rate has increased, and this growth is most dramatic for the
oldest age groups.
○ Among those ages 55-64, the risk of divorce has more than doubled (5 to 11 per 1,000). For those
65 and older, the rate of divorce has nearly tripled (2 to 5 per 1,000).
Figure 1. Divorce Rates by 10-Year Age Groups
Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, VitalStats, 1990 and U.S. Census
Bureau, American Community Survey, 2010
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+
1990 2010
NCFMR
Family Proles
FP-12-05
Family Proles
examine topics
related to NCFMR’s
core research
themes. Data are
presented at both
the naonal and
state levels using
new data sources.
Wrien for both
researchers and
broad communies,
these proles
summarize the
latest stascs on
U.S. families.
Age Variation in the Divorce Rate, 1990-2010
Susan L. Brown, I-Fen Lin, & Krista K. Payne
2
Suggested Citaon:
Brown, S. L.,
Lin, I.-F., & Payne, K.
K. (2012).
Age Variaon in the
Divorce Rate, 1990-
2010 (FP-12-05).
Naonal Center for
Family & Marriage
Research.
Retrieved from
hp://www.bgsu.
edu/content/
dam/BGSU/
college-of-arts-and-
sciences/NCFMR/
documents/FP/FP-
12-05.pdf
Divorce Rates by Gender
The trends in the divorce rate are similar for men and women. For both groups, the divorce rate
declines with age. The range of the divorce rates across age groups is narrower now than in 1990.
•For men and women, the divorce rate has decreased among adults under age 35.
○ The decrease was most evident for the youngest group, ages 15-24, for whom the divorce
rate declined by 38% (from 49 to 30 per 1,000) and 30% (46 to 32 per 1,000) for men and
women, respectively.
•For men and women ages 35 and older, the divorce rate has risen. The rise is largest among
older adults (ages 55-64 and 65 plus).
○ The increase in the risk of divorce for older adults is much greater for women than men. For
women ages 55-64, the divorce rate nearly tripled (4 to 11 per 1,000). For women ages 65
and older, the rate almost quadrupled (1.4 to 5.4 per 1,000). By comparison, the divorce rate
among men ages 55-64 nearly doubled (6 to 11 per 1,000), and the rate for men ages 65 and
older doubled (2 to 4 per 1,000) since 1990.
Figure 2. Divorce Rates by 10-Year Age Groups,
Men Only
Figure 3. Divorce Rates by 10-Year Age Groups,
Women Only
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+
1990 2010
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+
1990 2010
Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, VitalStats, 1990 and U.S. Census Bureau,
American Community Survey, 2010
NCFMR
Family Proles
FP-12-05
This project is
supported with
assistance from
Bowling Green
State University.
From 2007 to 2013,
support was also
provided by the
U.S. Department
of Health and
Human Services,
Oce of the
Assistant Secretary
for Planning
and Evaluaon.
The opinions
and conclusions
expressed herein
are solely those
of the author(s)
and should not
be construed as
represenng the
opinions or policy
of any agency of
the state or federal
government.