Cool that they ruled that out, that was my knee-jerk assumption.
> Young people get the credit for fewer divorces because boomers have continued to divorce at unusually high rates, all the way into their 60s and 70s.
I can't help but think that Gen X and Millenials saw/heard what their mothers and grandmothers went through and have chosen to educate themselves and secure their lives before getting married and having children.
Under some basic assumptions, this could still be.
E.g. if couples that have been married longer are more likely to stay married, lower new marriage rate would result in proportionally more old marriages and hence lower divorce rate.
E.g. if people are less willing to marry, more of those who marry would be marrying for a "good" reason (i.e. because they're more sure they're compatible, or because they follow a religion where divorce is bad).
> They’re living together, and often raising kids together, but deciding not to tie the knot. And studies have shown these cohabiting relationships are less stable [0] than they used to be.
It seems part a word game because I doubt those looking at the statistics ever really cared much about marriages or divorces for what they represent on a purely legal level, but for their approximation of cohabitation and family status.
The life lesson here is that the things Boomers say are going to happen to other generations are actually going to happen to them instead. They said we were all getting divorced but that was them not us. They said that video games were going to rot our brains but in reality it was them and Fox News, not us and Nintendo. And on and on.
1: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/upshot/the-divorce-surge-...
and MSNBC, CNN, the NYT, and on and on.
That doesn't seem right at all,
If the decline in marriages in marriages result in more at risk marriages not happening, this could absolutely be a reflection of a decline in marriages