Aids....

[adreamer]

Well, I was sitting at FBO one day. One guy memtioned about AIDS(Aviation Induce Divorce Syndrome). He(work for NWA) said that he is married and has 2 ex- wifes already. According to what he said, it is uncommon among airline pilots. What percentage of airline pilots get divorce? just wondering

adreamer

[Goldmember]

...national average is now 53%...pretty sad...don't know for pilots.

[Doug Taylor]

I don't think the stastistic is broken down into profession.

I know a lot of guys that are divorced, but then I know quite a few guys that are with their first wives.

[fly22]

I even know guys who are on their second wife while still being with their first.

[FlyChicaga]

Originally Posted by fly22

I even know guys who are on their second wife while still being with their first.

You would!

[OldTownPilot]

My parents are still maried. 22 years or so now. Dads been in aviation for 30 years now. Heck, my parents even met at an airport.

When the family has been around aviation as long as they have known each other things tend to work out better (I think)

[Tim]

I think the divorce rate at any airline is high. It doesnt have to be just pilots. Shift work can be a marriage killer also. 2nd shift is probably the worse. It does take a special person to be married to an airilne employee...very understanding one.

[averyrm]

I've had a lot of people tell me that in aviation a ton of divorces happen. In fact I heard one guy say "Unless you're a bible-thumper or you don't have any balls you WILL get divorced from your first wife."

I recently got married, and IMHO it's all in who you marry and what you put into it. Most of the people I think getting these divorces would have split up either way. Granted I only have 1 month of experience with this but one piece of advice that seems to ring true is, "Being in aviation won't make a good marrage go bad, but it will hasten the end of a bad one."

So in answer to your question - I'd guess about the national average - 53% is a LOT.

[Kristie]

I think it's actually quite hard to compare because it depends on why/how a marriage goes sour...

take a look at doctor's & lawyer's...other traveling businessmen and so on.. they're constantly gone, having to deal with salary adjustments and about the same type of "strife" that aviation does...so with that, it's all probably relative.

but with 53+% as a national average? that's pretty darn bad overall!!

one thing to remember is that marriage is what you make of it and how you and your spouse deal with your problems - if communication goes, you really can't blame that on the industry.. that's a personal fault and it's typically communication that's the first to go, starting that downward trend....

[FlyChicaga]

I think the divorce rate percentage being so high is in relation to our current lack of communication skills, period. We can attribute this to TV, music, internet... etc etc etc

Problem comes up? I don't want to get upset, so let's ignore it. Enough problems happen? Screw this, divorce. We'll try again later. If you want to be in a decent relationship, you just need to be prepared that sometimes you'll disagree and get irritated, and you'll need to communicate to sort that out.

[frog_flyer]

my dads a lawyer (divorce lawyer ) and my parents have been happily married for 24 years. both my uncles (same profession) have been married to the same respective wife for more around 30.

my moms side is the same: no divorces

point of this is:
both sets of grandmas and grandpsa were married 'till death did they part'

studies demonstrate that children of divorce parents are MUCH MORE LIKELY to get divorced in their future than those who have parents that are still married.

53% is rediculous, take your vows seroiusly, and think through your decisions.
(i dont want to strike a nerve with anyone who has been through a divorce with that statement, I just feel that marriage has lost its meaning. and no im not talking about letting gays get married)

[seagull]

Well, guys, you also need to consider that about 85% of divorces in the U.S. are precipitated by women. Women seem to not be happy often. I think perhaps that women have a fantasy idea of marriage and all of it from early in life, and real life can't live up to the fairy tale. Maybe it's something else, but I know that women are the ones that do the filing, you take your stab at it. Now, I have done it both ways, but when I filed, was due to extreme circumstances, not just "wanting to be free"...

I think the current laws that allow many women to get full support with divorce doesn't help the situation, as they get their support and freedom. Great work if you can get it. Granted, there are sometimes men that benefit from this, but rarely, very rarely.

[greaper007]

My girlfriend and I have been togethor for 4 years now. We talk about marriage and I waver back and forth. However, the thing I keep coming to is whats the point? Marriage is such a religious convention, and I'm agnostic and she's atheist. We've been sleeping togethor since the first day we met. The only benefit I can see with marriage is the power of attorney type situation (ie she pulls the plug instead of my parents if I'm in a coma) and the ability to transfer funds to one another without the estate tax.

I think this is why so many marriages fail. There's no longer an enormous stigma attached to divorce. That coupled with the fact that most people tend to change enormously from their early to mid twenties. At 40 you guys aren't the same people anymore.

Seagull, the person that gets the most support is the one that made the least during the marriage. If you marry a doctor you'll get paid. I know that if I was married to my girlfriend right now and we got a divorce she'd have to pay me. I'd happily take it .

[fly22]

In a lot of states you recieve the power of attorney just by living with someone for a certain amount of time. Common law marriage. Usually its 5-7years and she could still clean you out for everything you are worth.

[seagull]

Greaper,

That is only true to a limited extent for two reasons:

1. Very rarely do women marry men who do not earn more than they do;

2. The judges have discretion, and the predisposition of most judges in the U.S. is that if you are male, you need to work, so no support. Judges are human, and just as most people in our culture look down on a male that doesn't work (but not so on a female who is being supported by her S.O.), judges are also biased.

Even in my own family, which is relatively very progressive, I had family members asking me how I could take care of two babies by myself, when they didn't ask the same of female family members that ended up with custody. Like it or not, there is a lot of bias against males in the system. The current sentiment is, rightfully, against bias in employment based on gender, but is perfectly happy to say that women are the better child caregivers, etc. Can't have it both ways.

[Kristie]

Originally Posted by greaper007

My girlfriend and I have been togethor for 4 years now. We talk about marriage and I waver back and forth. However, the thing I keep coming to is whats the point? Marriage is such a religious convention, and I'm agnostic and she's atheist. We've been sleeping togethor since the first day we met. The only benefit I can see with marriage is the power of attorney type situation (ie she pulls the plug instead of my parents if I'm in a coma) and the ability to transfer funds to one another without the estate tax.

I think this is why so many marriages fail. There's no longer an enormous stigma attached to divorce. That coupled with the fact that most people tend to change enormously from their early to mid twenties. At 40 you guys aren't the same people anymore.

Seagull, the person that gets the most support is the one that made the least during the marriage. If you marry a doctor you'll get paid. I know that if I was married to my girlfriend right now and we got a divorce she'd have to pay me. I'd happily take it .

don't forget the kids and spouse card! those also are great reasons to get hitched...to the right person.

[greaper007]

Kristi, I just don't think it's neccessary to be married in order to have kids. Also I pretty much have a spouse right now. I see where you're coming from, I just don't see how marriage is so different from being in a monogamous long term relationship.

Seagull, I don't want to attack you, but.... a lot of your theories seem pretty armchair. For instance my Dad always bi^&hes about having to pay alimony. However, my Mom raised my sisters and I while my Dad was out flying. My mom would have liked to go to Med School, and she probably could have, but my Dad refused to watch us on his days off. My Mom gave up her career asperations in order for us to have a good childhood. I think that entitles her to half the wealth and a few years of alimony to get on her feet. My father definitly couldn't have made as much if my Mom didn't take care of the household.

For the past four years I've been dating someone that has more education (she's about 2 months away from her PHD) and makes more money than me. I don't think women have as much of a problem dating a man with less earning power. Rather, I think most men shy away from strong successful women. Even though it causes long drawn out arguments that I often lose, I enjoy being with a very intelligent strong woman. It's a real turn on for me. Most of my friends don't get it though.

[seagull]

Greaper,

You miss several points here.

1. I did not say that I never thought alimony or child support was not justified, only that it is biased strongly towards women, EVEN in the cases where a man DOES earn less. The courts tend to tell the man "get back to work", even if he happened to be the one doing the "stay at home" thing.

2. Women DO tend to choose men that earn more than they do. I don't think this is a bad thing, and it is backed solidly by statistics around the world, all cultures. I very strongly take exception to your assertion that this is because men are somehow afraid of higher earning women. Totally false b.s. right out of something that NOW would write. (for a better persepctive, check out www.iwf.org sometime).

The reasons for the choices are very simple. Women naturally want someone who can provide a "nest" for them to have a family, and that is deep in the reptilian part of the brain. That tends to be someone that is in a secure position. Men tend to want younger women. The age difference alone explains the wage difference, actually.

There is nothing wrong with what people want. Most guys could care less what a woman earns, most women (not all, most) do care what a man earns.

[greaper007]

Seagull, I understand that you were in a difficult situation. I just don't think that it is accurate to imply that your experiences are the norm. Though I would agree that traditionally your experiences hold true. The gap is really closing on that one. More women graduate from college now than men. After that, in graduate schools women are an overwhelming majority. I had a professor in college that told us he had to allow a few less qualified men into a graduate program in a sort of reverse affirmative action. Women are quickly becoming the breadwinners in households with post-graduate educations.

As far as nesting is concerned. Again in upper ses circles the problem now seems to be that women are having problems concieving because they have put their careers first and ran out of childbearing years. In my partners profession (psychology) it's really looked down upon to leave your career to have children. It's seen as a sort of Stepford wife sort of thing.

There's a solution to all of this though. Pre-nuptual agreements. Even though we all go into a marriage super happy and thinking it will last forever, that's often not the case. As a society I think it's time to start looking at marriage as what it acctuallly is, a legal document. Even though marriage has religion intertwined in much of it's history, I would argue that marriage is now nothing but a legal partnership. Much like entering into business with someone (that you want to have sex with ). Religion is just injected for sentimental reasons. That's why I never really understood the opposition to gay marriage. It's just a legal partnership.

Now, as a legal partnership why in the hell wouldn't someone have a pre-nup. I wouldn't enter into a business with someone if it was possible for them to take half of my wealth. Why would someone do it in a marriage.

[Chris_Ford]

Originally Posted by greaper007

I would argue that marriage is now nothing but a legal partnership. Much like entering into business with someone (that you want to have sex with ).

Isn't the sex the business you're trying to enter?

[seagull]

You need to do a little more research, because, as it stands now, a prenup does not really help you. All it can do is protect assets you have BEFORE the marriage. Guess what, that's the law in most States now anyway. Prenups have no bearing on spousal support in any event.

The real issue is that there is a bias that favors women in the court system, both for child custody and financial support. While the law in itself is not actually biased, it allows for enough judicial discretion that bias is what occurs, regardless of the gender of the judge.

I have a lot more direct experience on BOTH ends of this issue than most, incidentally!

As for the females graduating more, yes, that was an inevitable result of the bias that was placed into the primary education system starting in the late 70s. Despite that, the majority of women who CAN choose to be with a more affluent partner, do choose to do so. However, that number (at least amongst college grads) is decreasing, and will continue to do so. It will raise interesting issues in the future as more men end up staying home with the kids due to economic reasons as a result -- another reason to eliminate the court's bias NOW.

[Kristie]

Originally Posted by greaper007

Kristi, I just don't think it's neccessary to be married in order to have kids. Also I pretty much have a spouse right now. I see where you're coming from, I just don't see how marriage is so different from being in a monogamous long term relationship.

don't put words in my mouth...I never said it was necessary (at least not in today's generation)... but it is important to remember that a "family" bond is needed around kids whether it's 1 parent or 2 and married parents are usually the parents that works hardest to maintain that "family" bond - Divorced parents have a much more difficult time of doing that - IMO.

and yeah, you may already have a quote on quote spouse right now, but in the eyes of the law.. she's just a girl living with you or you with her...there's no security on either end.. and my thing about the spouse card was in relation to "if you get into the airlines, she won't be able to fly free unless shes a spouse".. same goes with healthcare and all the other benefits.

I have to agree with seagull some too because most women do give up their careers to raise the kids, even though the husbands/men say "they'll help" a lot of them pour their blood, sweat and tears into their careers and let the women take care of "homelife"...someone has to take care of the kids, it's normally the woman and that's where the security of marriage comes into play. unless, of course, you plan on paying your girlfriend a bi-weekly paycheck, retirement & healthcare benefits for raising the kids??

I mean, if your talking about making the marriage/family thing a *business*.. then it should all be that way shouldn't it?

granted, she may keep her full time job or go part time... but for the most part, she's (the working mom) isn't going to be working 100% on her career because she has a family to raise at home (depending on how much dad gets involved) - ie: it's normally the woman that has to "give it up" for the kids/family.. even in today's day and age. I see it all the time...

if your both happier with not getting married, then by all means, don't get married...

[Theotokos]

People give up too easy. People marry for better or FOR WORSE. Not just when things are going good. There's the problem. People today marry "for better, not for worse, till another lover does them part". That and they do not really love each other, which even if you have no religious belief whatsoever, is a stupid notion--don't marry a person you don't love them. I think most of the people who divorce in the aviation world a) either just do not think it is worth it b) did not really love each other.

[EatSleepFly]

Originally Posted by Theotokos

People give up too easy. People marry for better or FOR WORSE. Not just when things are going good. There's the problem. People today marry "for better, not for worse, till another lover does them part". That and they do not really love each other, which even if you have no religious belief whatsoever, is a stupid notion--don't marry a person you don't love them. I think most of the people who divorce in the aviation world a) either just do not think it is worth it b) did not really love each other.

That's a rather naieve statement.

[Sprint100]

Originally Posted by Theotokos

People give up too easy. People marry for better or FOR WORSE. Not just when things are going good. There's the problem. People today marry "for better, not for worse, till another lover does them part". That and they do not really love each other, which even if you have no religious belief whatsoever, is a stupid notion--don't marry a person you don't love them. I think most of the people who divorce in the aviation world a) either just do not think it is worth it b) did not really love each other.

Alot of what you say is true, but I find the main thing to be these days is that they THINK they love someone and it is merely confused with mere infatuation. For example, I've heard many tims people say we get along I love (insert name here), that's not love. That's nothing but "you've been treated wrong all your life and this person treats you right" that ain't love.
The real sickening thing is that people say the marriage vows and have NO idea what any of them mean. For worse = when your spouse has a cold.