Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Do the Privileged Always Win? Economic Consequences of Divorce by Income and Gender Groups

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The heterogeneous economic results of divorce have received limited attention. The current study analyzes such consequences from an intersectionality perspective, where heterogeneity is expressed not only in gender groups, but also in the locations of women and men on the earnings distribution scale. We also examine whether remarriage and welfare support have differing effects on income across these groups. The study uses a unique dataset in Israel that merges administrative data from the tax authorities (employment income and pensions) with the National Insurance Institute database (socio-demographic information and allowances). Applying two-level (“mixed”) panel models combined with quantile regressions, we investigate the post-divorce income of women and men by tertile, as well as in the top percentile of each gender group. Results show that the most vulnerable group among men is low income, while the most immune group of men is very high income. For women, however, differences between classes are small; across the board, women’s post-divorce income decreases by at least a third. Thus, while the effect of divorce on men’s income depends upon their earnings level, its effect on women’s income is negative even in the top percentile. Remarriage has a differential effect on income based on location on the income distribution scale only for men. The welfare policy effect on income is gendered: regardless of earnings group, allowances are negatively related to income for women and positively related for men.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. A minimum subsistence allowance provided to poor residents who cannot obtain sufficient income, based on means and employment tests (NII, 2020).

  2. A modest child support allowance afforded to divorced parents when support is not paid by the debtor (usually the father), provided the custodial parent passes a rigid means test. The NII assumes responsibility for collection of payment from the debtor (Herbst & Benjamin, 2012).

  3. As mentioned, Israel has a relatively high rate of large families and a high birth rate. It is therefore necessary to use an equivalence scale adapted to its special situation. The scale we used is based on the actual food expenditure of families of different sizes in Israel, and it is examined and validated repeatedly over time (Kaplan & Herbst, 2015).

  4. For simplicity’s sake, and since our N allows it, we used a different technique from the classic quantile regression (Koenker and Bassett 1978), estimating income at the conditional mean of each quantile rather than the conditional quantile of income.

  5. Our decision to use a quantile regression is also supported at the methodological level. As income distribution is highly skewed, use of an average, even after logit transformation, may disregard important information on differences between earnings groups. Using the mean income thus might not be a sufficient indicator representing the whole income distribution.

  6. Findings for the null models, that is, the unconditional growth models (Singer and Willett 2003), are presented in Appendices A (women) and B (men). As shown, in most cases, regardless of gender and earnings group, the proportion of variance in the model which is due to differences between individuals is between 50 and 60%.

References

  • Addo, F. R., & Lichter, D. T. (2013). Marriage, marital history, and black–white wealth differentials among older women. Journal of Marriage and Family, 75(2), 342–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzenstadt, M., & Gal, J. (2001). Appearances can be deceptive: Gender in the Israeli welfare state. Social Politics, 8(3), 293–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amato, P. R. (2010). Research on divorce: Continuing trends and new developments. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 650–666.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amato, P. R., & Anthony, C. J. (2014). Estimating the effects of parental divorce and death with fixed effects models. Journal of Marriage and Family, 76(2), 370–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andreß, H. J., Borgloh, B., Bröckel, M., Giesselmann, M., & Hummelsheim, D. (2006). The economic consequences of partnership dissolution: A comparative analysis of panel studies from Belgium, Germany, Great Britain, Italy and Sweden. European Sociological Review, 22(5), 533–560.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendelac, J. (2019). The social protection system in an international perspective: Israel and the OECD countries. Jerusalem: National Insurance Institute (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernardi, F., Chakhaia, L., & Leopold, L. (2017). “Sing me a song with social significance”: The (mis)use of statistical significance testing in European sociological research. European Sociological Review, 33(1), 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bianchi, S. M., Subaiya, L., & Kahn, J. R. (1999). The gender gap in the economic well-being of nonresident fathers and custodial mothers. Demography, 36(2), 195–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boertien, D. (2020). The conceptual and empirical challenges of estimating trends in union stability: Have unions become more stable in Britain? In D. Mortelman (Ed.), Divorce in Europe (pp. 17–36). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brady, D., & Burroway, R. (2012). Targeting, universalism, and single-mother poverty: A multilevel analysis across 18 affluent democracies. Demography, 49(2), 719–746.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cahaner, L., & Malach, G. (2019). The Haredi society yearbook 2019. Jerusalem: The Israel Democracy Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christopher, K., England, P., Smeeding, T. M., & Ross-Phillips, K. (2002). The gender gap poverty in modern nations: Single motherhood, the market, and the state. Sociological Perspectives, 45(3), 219–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chzhen, Y., & Bradshaw, J. (2012). Lone parents, poverty and policy in the European Union. Journal of European Social Policy, 22(5), 487–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Y. (2006). Developments in gender, ethnic and national earnings and educational gaps in Israel. In U. Ram & N. Berkovitz (Eds.), Inequality (pp. 339–347). Ben Gurion University Press. (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, P. H. (2006). From black power to hip hop: Racism, nationalism, and feminism. Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dagan-Buzaglo, N., & Hasson, Y. (2020). Gender pay gaps in Israel: Snapshot 2020. Tel Aviv: Adva Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Graaf, P. M., & Kalmijn, M. (2006). Change and stability in the social determinants of divorce: A comparison of marriage cohorts in The Netherlands. European Sociological Review, 22(5), 561–572.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Nallo, A. (2019). Gender gap in repartnering: The role of parental status and custodial arrangements. Journal of Marriage and Family, 81(1), 59–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Endeweld, M. (2018). On job mobility and earnings growth. Israel Economic Review, 16(2), 37–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Endeweld, M., Heller, O., Karadi, L., & Gottlieb, D. (2019). Poverty and social gaps - Annual report 2018. Jerusalem: National Insurance Institute (Hebrew). https://www.btl.gov.il/Publicatiōns/oni_report/Documents/oni2018.pdf.

  • Fang, Z. (2017). Panel quantile regressions and the subjective well-being in urban China: Evidence from RUMiC data. Social Indicators Research, 132, 11–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gal, J. (2010). Is there an extended family of Mediterranean welfare states? Journal of European Social Policy, 20(4), 283–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gałęzewska, P., Perelli-Harris, B., & Berrington, A. (2017). Cross-national differences in women’s repartnering behaviour in Europe: The role of individual demographic characteristics. Demographic Research, 37, 189–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, L. (1994). Pitied but not entitled: Single mothers and the history of welfare 1890–1935. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harkness, S. (2018). The economic consequences of becoming a lone mother. In L. Bernardi & D. Mortelmans (Eds.), Lone parenthood in the life course (pp. 213–267). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Härkönen, J., Bernardi, F., & Boertien, D. (2017). Family dynamics and child outcomes: An overview of research and open questions. European Journal of Population, 33(2), 163–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Härkönen, J., & Dronkers, J. (2006). Stability and change in the educational gradient of divorce: A comparison of seventeen countries. European Sociological Review, 22(5), 501–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helman, S. (2011). “Let us help them to raise their children into good citizens”: The Lone-Parent Families Act and the wages of care-giving in Israel. Social Politics, 18(1), 52–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbst, A. (2013). Welfare mom as warrior mom: Discourse in the 2003 single mothers' protest in Israel. Journal of Social Policy, 42, 129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbst, A., & Benjamin, O. (2012). It was a Zionist act: Nationalism, citizenship and welfare policy in Israeli feminist mobilization. Women’s Studies International Forum, 35, 29–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbst, A., & Kaplan, A. (2016). Mothers' postdivorce earnings in the context of welfare policy change. International Journal of Social Welfare, 25(3), 222–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbst-Debby, A., Endeweld, M., & Kaplan, A. (2021). Differentiated routes to vulnerability: Marital status, children, gender and poverty. Advances in Life Course Research, 100418.

  • Herzberg-Druker, E., & Stier, H. (2019). Family matters: The contribution of households’ educational and employment composition to income inequality. Social Science Research, 82, 221–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschmann, N. J. (2001). A question of freedom, a question of rights? Women and welfare. In N. J. Hirschmann & U. Liebert (Eds.), Women and welfare: Theory and practice in the united Europe (pp. 84–107). Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogendoorn, B., Leopold, T., & Bol, T. (2020). Divorce and diverging poverty rates: A risk-and-vulnerability approach. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(3), 1089–1109. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hooks, B. (1986). Sisterhood: Political solidarity between women. Feminist Review, 23, 125–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hübgen, S. (2018). “Only a husband away from poverty”? Lone mothers’ poverty risks in a European comparison. In L. Bernardi & D. Mortelmans (Eds.), Lone parenthood in the life course (pp. 167–190). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • ICBS—Israel Central Bureau of Statistics (2000). Jubilee publications. Work and wages. Publication number 10 (Hebrew). https://old.cbs.gov.il/yovel50/img_10.pdf.

  • ICBS – Israel Central Bureau of Statistics (2019). Statistical abstract of Israel (Hebrew). https://www.cbs.gov.il/he/publications/Pages/2019/%D7%A9%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%9F-%D7%A1%D7%98%D7%98%D7%99%D7%A1%D7%98%D7%99-%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%9C-2019-%D7%9E%D7%A1%D7%A4%D7%A8-70.aspx.

  • Ivanova, K., Kalmijn, M., & Uunk, W. (2013). The effect of children on men’s and women’s chances of repartnering in a European context. European Journal of Population, 29, 417–444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, M., Mortelmans, D., & Snoeckx, L. (2009). Repartnering and (re)employment: Strategies to cope with the economic consequences of partnership dissolution. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71(5), 1271–1293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A., & Herbst, A. (2015). Stratified patterns of divorce: Earnings, education, and gender. Demographic Research, 32, 949–982.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A., Endeweld, M., & Herbst-Debby, A. (2020b). The more the merrier? The effect of children on divorce in a pronatalist society. In Divorce in Europe (pp. 123–143). Cham: Springer.

  • Kaplan, A., Sabbah-Karkabi, M., & Herzog, H. (2020a). “When I Iron My Son’s Shirt, I Feel My Maternal Role”: Making Women’s Invisible Work Visible. Journal of Family Issues, 41(9), 1525–1545.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasir, N., & Tsachor-Shai, A. (2017). Poverty and the economic situation of Haredi society. Jerusalem: The Haredi Institute for Public Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koenker, R., & Bassett, G. (1978). Regression quantiles. Econometrica, 46(1), 33–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korpi, W., Ferrarini, T., & Englund, S. (2013). Women’s opportunities under different family policy constellations: Gender, class, and inequality tradeoffs in western countries re-examined. Social Politics, 20(1), 1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korpi, W., & Palme, J. (1998). The paradox of redistribution and strategies of equality: Welfare state institutions, inequality, and poverty in the western countries. American Sociological Review, 63(5), 661–687.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, K. Z., Myhra, L. L., Zuiker, V. S., & Bauer, J. W. (2016). Comparison of poverty and income disparity of single mothers and fathers across three decades: 1990–2010. Gender Issues, 33, 22–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraus, V., & Yonay, Y. P. (2018). Facing barriers: Palestinian women in a Jewish-dominated labor market. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kristal, T. (2014). Israel’s political economy and rising income inequality, 1970–2010. Israeli Sociology, 15, 1–30. (Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladd-Taylor, M. (1994). Mother-work: Women, child welfare and the state, 1890–1930. University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leopold, T. (2018). Gender differences in the consequences of divorce: A study of multiple outcomes. Demography, 55, 769–797.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandel, H. (2012). Winners and losers: The consequences of welfare state policies for gender wage inequality. European Sociological Review, 28(2), 241–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandel, H., & Birgier, D. P. (2016). The gender revolution in Israel: Progress and stagnation. In N. Khattab, S. Miaari, & H. Stier (Eds.), Socioeconomic inequality in Israel: A theoretical and empirical analysis (pp. 153–184). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manting, D., & Bouman, A. M. (2006). Short- and long-term economic consequences of the dissolution of marital and consensual unions: The example of the Netherlands. European Sociological Review, 22(4), 413–429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matysiak, A., Styrc, M., & Vignoli, D. (2014). The educational gradient in marital disruption: A meta-analysis of European longitudinal research findings. Population Studies, 68(2), 197–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30(3), 1771–1800.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLanahan, S. (2004). Diverging destinies: How children are faring under the second demographic transition. Demography, 41(4), 607–627.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLanahan, S., & Jacobsen, W. (2015). Diverging destinies revisited. In P. R. Amato, A. Booth, S. M. McHale, & J. Van Hook (Eds.), Families in an era of increasing inequality: Diverging destinies (pp. 3–24). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • McManus, P. A., & Diprete, T. A. (2001). Losers and winners: The financial consequences of separation and divorce for men. American Sociological Review, 66(2), 246–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, R. B., & Wright, D. W. (1995). Detecting and correcting attrition bias in longitudinal family research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57(4), 921–929.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mingfeng, L., Lucas, H. C., & Shmueli, G. (2013). Too big to fail: Large samples and the p-value problem. Information Systems Research, 24(4), 906–917.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morissens, A. (2018). The role of universal and targeted family benefits in reducing poverty in single-parent families in different employment situations. In R. Nieuwenhuis & L. C. Maldonado (Eds.), The triple bind of single-parent families: Resources, employment and policies to improve wellbeing (pp. 359–381). Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mortelmans, D., & Defever, C. (2018). Income trajectories of lone parents after divorce: A view with Belgian register data. In L. Bernardi & D. Mortelmans (Eds.), Lone parenthood in the life course (pp. 213–236). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mortelmans, D., Van den Berg, L., & Thielemans, G. (2020). Coping strategies of migrant ex-partners. Does work, family, or a new partner help you through the dark times? In D. Mortelmans (Ed.), Divorce in Europe. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • NII—National Insurance Institute (2020). https://www.btl.gov.il/benefits/Income_support/Pages/zacautnew.aspx.

  • OECD, (2017). Starting strong 2017: Key OECD indicators on early childhood education and care. Paris: Author.

  • OECD (2020). Employment rate. https://data.oecd.org/emp/employment-rate.htm.

  • Orloff, A. (1996). Gender in the welfare state. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 51–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pasteels, I., & Mortelmans, D. (2017). The socioeconomic determinants of repartnering after divorce or separation in Belgium. Demographic Research, 36, 1785–1812.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raley, R. K., & Bumpass, L. (2003). The topography of the divorce plateau: Levels and trends in union stability in the United States after 1980. Demographic Research, 8, 245–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raley, R. K., & Sweeney, M. M. (2020). Divorce, repartnering, and stepfamilies: A decade in review. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82, 81–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raz-Yurovich, L. (2013). Divorce penalty or divorce premium? A longitudinal analysis of the consequences of divorce for men’s and women’s economic activity. European Sociological Review, 29(2), 373–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenhek, Z. (2007). Dynamics of inclusion and exclusion in the Israeli welfare state: Building a state and a political economy. In H. Herzog, T. Kochavi, & S. Zelenker (Eds.), Generations, spaces, and identities (pp. 349–317). Jerusalem: Van Leer Institute and United Kibbutz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semyonov, M., Raijman, R., & Maskileyson, D. (2015). Ethnicity and labor market incorporation of post-1990 immigrants in Israel. Population Research and Policy Review, 34(3), 331–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis: Modeling change and event occurrence. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, C., & Davidson, J. (2009). Recent trends in child maintenance schemes in 14 countries. Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 23(1), 25–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stier, H. (2010). The end of the sole provider era: Families with two providers. In V. Muhlbauer & L. Kulik (Eds.), Working families: Parents in the labor market in Israel, social, economic and legal perspectives (pp. 17–45). Rishon LeZion: Peles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swirski, S., Konor-Atias, E., & Lieberman, A. (2020). Israel: A social report. Retrieved May 14, 2021, from https://adva.org/en/social-report-2020/.

  • Vandecasteele, L. (2010). Poverty trajectories after risky life course events in different European welfare regimes. European Societies, 12(2), 257–278.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Insurance Institute, Jerusalem, Israel

    Miri Endeweld

  2. Interdisciplinary Gender Studies Program, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel

    Anat Herbst-Debby

  3. School of Government and Society, The Academic College of Tel Aviv-Yaffo, Tel Aviv-Yaffo, Israel

    Amit Kaplan

Authors
  1. Miri Endeweld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anat Herbst-Debby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amit Kaplan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anat Herbst-Debby.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix A

See Table 6

Table 6 Null random intercept model (unconditional growth models) with time variables: Women
Full size table

Appendix B

See Table 7

Table 7 Null random intercept model (unconditional growth models) with time variables: Men
Full size table

Appendix C

See Table 8

Table 8 Multilevel model of change for income trajectories before and after divorce (women and men combined; standard error in parentheses)
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Endeweld, M., Herbst-Debby, A. & Kaplan, A. Do the Privileged Always Win? Economic Consequences of Divorce by Income and Gender Groups. Soc Indic Res 159, 77–100 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-021-02733-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-021-02733-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation