Data from the

NATIONAL VITAL STATISTICSSYSTEM

Remarriages

UnitedStates

Analysis of national trends in remarriage including data by previous

marital status and color, variation by State, remarriage ra’tes by age

and sex, selection by previous marital status, and selected characteristics of remarrying persons in 1969.

DHEW Publication No. (HRA) 74-1903

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Public Health Service

Series 21

Number 25

Health Resources Administration

National Center for Health Statistics

Rockville, Md. December 1973
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

(N.,t,,n>cd (:cnic, 10 It,,ilth S1.,(,,,],, 1).1t.1 Ir[,m ~hc n:ttlcmal vltd st.ttistics system,

scrlcs 21, n{,. 2.5) (1)1II;W I,tthli(.,(]t)n n,). (liRj!. ) 74-1!) 03)

supt. OI’1)11(,. 1)(1.. 111: 20.(;20$):” ?1/25.

1. R,mJrri.l+c [In]tud S[.IIC5 St.,(l,ti[s. 1, Kuhn, Russell P., j[)lnt author. II. T’itlc.

111.Scr]cs Utlitcd S[,I(C,. N,it,(>l].il Cc]ltc,r I,,r IIcdth St~tistic\. Vital and hcdth statis-

[1(s. Sc,rlcs 21 : 1).1[.I I]on] (I]t, n<~lJ(,II.Ii\ 1(.11sl<ttistlcs iystcrn. I)Jt.[ on n.it:dlty, mwriagc,

.lnd dl\<)r (c’, 11<,. 2,5, I\’. S,IILS: L’llltcd S~.Ltvs, I)cpt. [,] Hmlth, Educat](,n, md Welfare.

I)lIEW’ publl,,i[l,m 11,,. (I IRA) 7 1.1!) ()’1.

[{.121 I.;\:) 11(,. 25 [11131125] :101 .+? ’7 ’097:3 7:1-20:36:3

,!.. .4 ..,,. ,,”” ... -. ,.-” . .
NATIONAL CENTER FOR HEALTH STATISTICS

EDWARD B. PERRIN, Ph. D., Acting Director

PHILIP S. LAWRENCE, SC.D., Deputy Director

GAIL F. FISHER, Assistant Director for Health Statistics Development

WALT R. SIMMONS, M.A., Assistant Director for Research and Scientific Development

JOHN J. HANLON, M.D., Medical Advisor

JAMES E. KELLY, D. D. S., Dental Advisor

EDWARD E. MINTY, Executive Oj_icer

ALICE HAYWOOD, Information Officer

DIVISION OF VITAL STATISTICS

ROBERT A. ISRAEL, M.S., Director

JOHN E. PATTERSON, Assistant Director for Demographic Afiairs

ALICE M. HETZEL, Chief Mam”age and Divorce Statistics Branch

Vital and Health Statistics-Series 21-No. 25

DHEW Publication No. (HRA) 74-1903

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 73-20363
.

CONTENTS

Page

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Trends in Remarriage . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...”... . ..1

Estimated National Totals and Rates, 1965-1969 . . . . . . . . . . 1

Changing Distribution of the Population, 1940-1969 . . . . . . . . . 2

Rates by Previous Marital Status, 1960, 1963-1969. . . . . . . . . . 3

Variation by Color, 1960, 1965, and 1969 . . . . . . . . . . . . , 3

Variation by State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Ageand Remarriage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Age-Sex-Specific Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Median Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...6

Percent Distribution of Remarriages by Age at Marriage . . . . . . . . 7

Age Differences Between Partners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Selection by Previous Marital Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 ‘

The Period Between Divorce or Widowhood and Remarriage . . . . . . . 11

The Remarriage Ceremony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

Location and Resident Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Type of Ceremony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Month of Marriage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Listof Detailed Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

Appendix I. General Notes . . . . . .

Sources of Data . . . . . . . . .

Marriage Sample . . . . . . . . .

Estimating Procedures . . . . . . .

“Not Stated” Cases . . . . . . . .

Remarriage Estimates for United States

Sampling Errors . . . . . . . : .

Statistical Significance . . . . . . .

. . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. 24

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

...

Ill
SYMBOLS

Data not available ----------------------------------------

Category not applicable -------------------------------

Quantity zero ----------------------------------------------

Quantity more than O but less than 0.05 -----

Figure does not meet standards of

reliability or precision ------------------------------

---

. . .

0.0

*

.

iv
REMARRIAGES

Kristen M. Williams and Russell P. Kuhn, Division of Vital Statistics

INTRODUCTION

Persons who remarry differ in age and socioeconomic characteristics from those who marry

for the first time. These differences are lost in

data presented for all marriages. To illustrate

some of the major differences, data on remarriages have been assembled for this report. First

marriage statistics are included occasionally for

the purposes of comparison.

In 1969 nearly one-fourth of all persons marrying had been married at least once before. The

widowed and the divorced, who comprise the remarrying group, often differed statistically in specific characteristics. When available, data for

these two groups are presented separately.

As divorce rates rose during the sixties, the

tendency for divorced men and women to remarry

also increased. Far more divorced than widowed

persons are involved in remarriages and the upward trend reflects the trend for the divorced, not

the widowed.

The data on remarriages in this report were

tabulated ‘from probability y samples of records

from the States participating in the marriage-registration area (MRA) for a given year. Estimates

of remarriage totals and rates for the United States

were based on data from the MR4 and actual counts

of all marriages performed in the United States.

TRENDS IN RE$tlARRIAGE

Estimated National Totals

and Rates, 1965-1969

National totals of remarriages are not available for the years 1965 through 1969. However,

for this” report estimates for the United States

were prepared by applying the percent of all

marriages that were remarriages in the marriage-registration area to the national total of

marriages for each year. The MRA consisted of

38 States and the District of Columbia from 1965

through 1967. In 1968 Missouri was added, bringing the numbr of States in the MRA to 39. .

The estimated totals of remarriages for men

and women showed an increase every year from

1965 to 1969 (table A). The increase over the 5

years was 22 percent for Imth men and women,

with larger increases in 1968 and 1969 than in

1966 or 1967. The totals for men and women were

close in number, with the total for men exceeding

that for women by one to three thousand each year.

In order to”compare the increase in remarriages to changes in the population, remarriage

rates were computed per 1,000 widowed and divorced men or women in the population. The percent increase in the remarriage rate for the 5

years was less than the 22 percent increase in

the number of remarriages, since the population

of persons eligible to remarry also increased

during this period. For men the percent increase

in the rate was 14 and for women it was 11. The

remarriage rate for men increased each year

from 1965 to 1969, with the smallest increase

occurring in 1967. In that same year the remarriage rate for women declined 1 percent from the

rate for 1966, although for every other year there

was an increase.

Although national estimates of remarriages

for men and women are close in number, remarriage rates for men are more than 3 times

those for women. This is due to differences in

the population bases for men and women. Widowed

women far outnumber widowed men in the population and there are also more divorced women than

divorced men.

1
Table A. Estimated remarriages and remarriage rates of men and women: United States,

1965 to 1969

[For estimating procedure see appendix. Remarriage rates computed per 1,000 widowed and divorced men or women 14 years of age

and over]

Year

1969-----------------------------

1968----------.------------------

1967------.----------------------

1966-----------------------------

1965-----------------------------

Changing Distribution of the

Population, 1940-1969

Men

Estimated Remarriage

remarriages rate

499,000 130.9

467,000 125.8

439,000 123.1

426,000 123.0

410,000 115.2

An awareness of the changing distribution of

the population by marital status and age is important to an understanding ofthe increasing remarriage rate. Table 1 shows the marital status

distribution of the population from 1940 to 1969.

The distribution is shown both unstandardized and

standardized according to the age distribution of

the 1960 population. The standardized figures

allow the marital status distribution of the population to be examined with the age distribution held

constant.

From 1940 to 1969 there was a decline in the

proportion of the male population accounted for by

the widowed and divorced combined, for women

the decline was proportionally smaller. However,

when viewed separately the trend was different for

the widowed than for the divorced. For both sexes

the percent of divorced in the standardized distribution rose from 1940 to 1969, while the percent

of the widowed declined.

Rates by Previous Marital Status,

1960, 1963-1969

The population eligible to remarry is composed of two marital status groups— widowed and

divorced. Because the distribution of the population for the United States indicates differing trends

in the population bases for these two groups, it is

Women

Estimated Remarriage

remarriages rate

496,000 41.3

466,000 39.8

437,000 37.8

423,000 38.1

407,000 37.3

.

important to examine rates by previous marital

status. Remarriage rates by previous marital

status are not available for the United States but

are available for the MR4 for 1960 and 1963 to

1969. The rates shown in table 2 are based on

data from the States participating in the MRA for

each year. Although composition of the Mm

changed during the 10 years, these rates give some

indication of the increases in remarriages during

this period. The addition of New York City in 1965

with its very low rate of remarriage is the only

addition which seems to affect the trend data from

the MRA on remarriage.

Remarriage rates in the MRA for both men

and women rose from 1960 to 1969. For women

the increase Was from 32.7 per 1,000 widowed

and divorced women in 1960 ‘to 36.7 in 1969. Men

had a much larger increase, from 89.1 in 1960 to

117.9 in 1969, These increases were mainly due

to increases in the remarriage rate for the divorced.

The remarriage rate for the divorced showed

a distinct upward trend from 1960 to 1969. For divorced men the rate increased from 167.7 in 1960

to 220.8 in 1969. The rate increased from 1963 to

1965, declined for 2 years, and finally increased

again in 1968 and 1969 (figure 1). A noticeable increase in the remarriage rate also o“ccurred for

divorced women, from 122.1 in 1960 to 135.4 in

1969. As with men, this increase was not steady

but was interrupted in 1964 and 1967.

.

2
250

r

i

$J ‘O” -~ :

; 100—

~

z

0

i= '''''' ''J8J,,,",,,,,,, sst,,. c''''' ''?K':'::,:':~'"',, ',,',''`'s''"'``'``'''

;

5

100–

ij.

~

gw

t

Widowtd men /4

-- ,—--9---.. /

YEAR

Figure 1. Remarriage rates of widowed and divorced men and

women: Marriage-registration area, 1963-69

Unlike the trend for the divorced, the remarriage rate for the widowed remained fairly

constant. Although widowers remarried at a rate

of 39.3 in 1969 compared to 36.1 in 1960, the rate

fluctuated from year to year. As with widowers,

the remarriage rate for widows did not show an

increasing or decreasing trend from 1960 to 1969.

For each year shown in table 2, the remarriage rate for divorced men or women far exceeded

‘the rate for the widowed of either sex. In 1969

the remarriage rate for divorced women was 135

per 1,000 compared with 10 per 1,000 for the widowed. For men the comparison was 221 marriages

per 1,000 for the divorced and 39 per 1,000 for the

widowed.

Men had higher remarriage rates than women

in the MRA for each year. This relationship was

the same for both the widowed and the divorced.

For each year the remarriage rate for men was

almost 3 times the rate for women. Among the

divorced the rate for men was 1 1/3 to 1 2/3 as

high as the rate for women; for the widowed the

rate was almost 4 times as high: The differences

in magnitude between remarriage rates for widowed men and widowed women were due primarily

to the very large number of widowed women who

were part of the population base from which rates

for widowed women were computed. For the divorced the differences in rates by sex were due

both to the difference in magnitude of the population bases for men and women and to the greater

number of divorced men remarrying compared

to women.

Remarriage rates by marital status indicate

that while the rate of remarriage increased for

men and women in the sixties, the increase was

mainly due to the larger number of the divorced

remarrying. This increase was more pronounced

for men than for women.

Variation by Color, 1960, 1965, csrsd 1969

Although remarriage rates are not available

by color, the percent distribution of marriages by

previous marital status can be computed for white

and all other brides and grooms. These percents

indicate whether remarriages are increasing or

decreasing as a proportion of total marriages in

each color- sex group. The white brides and

grooms showed differing trends than all others,

according to data from the MRA in 1960, 1965, and

1969 (table B).

For white brides and grooms the percent

of marriages that were remarriages rose from

1960 to 1965 and again from 1965 to 1969. Remarriages constituted about one-fifth of all

marriages in 1960 and almost one-fourth in 1969.

Persons of all other races did not follow

this pattern. The proportion of marriages of all

other brides and grooms accounted for by remarriages declined from 1960 to 1965, then increased from 1965 to 1969. Remarriages constituted about the same proportion of marriages

for men in this group in 1969 as in 1960, and

they accounted for fewer of the marriages for

women. This was in contrast to the definite

increases observed for white men and women.

As a proportion of all marriages, remarriages of the divorced and the widowed showed

differing trends by color and sex. For white

brides and grooms divorced persons accounted

for increasing percentages of all marriages

from 1960 to 1965 and again from 1965 to 1969.

This was not true for all other brides and grooms,

3
Table B. Percent distribution of marriages by previous marital status of bride and of

groom, by color: Marriage-registration area, 1960, 1965,and 1969

Color and previous

marital status

White

All marriagesl --------------- --

Single ------------------------------ -

Previously married -------------------

Widowed ----------------------------

Divorced ---------------------------

All other

All marriagesl -----------------

Single ------------------------ -------

Previously married -------------------

Widowed ----------------------------

Divorced ---------------------------

1969

Bride

100.0

75.7

24.3

1::2

100.0

81.0

19.0

1:::

Groom

100.0

75.9

24.1

1:::

100.0

78.9

21.1

5.2

16.0

1965

Bride

100.0

79.0

21.0

12::

100.0

82.7

17.3

1;:!

Groom

100.0

78.8

21.2

1::;

100.0

81.2

18.8

1;::

1960

Bride

100.0

79.2

20.8

1:::

100.0

79.4

20.6

1::;

Groom

100.0

80.3

19.7

1:::

100.0

79.1

20.9

1:::

1

Includes only marriages for which color and previous marital status were stated.

although in spite of a dip in 1965, divorced

grooms accounted for relatively more of all

other marriages in 1969 than in 1960. During

these -years the percent of all marriages accounted for by the widowed remained about the

same for white brides but declined slightly for

white grooms and more decidedly for all other

brides and grooms.

For each year, 1960, 1965, and 1969, the

percent distribution of marriages by previous

marital status showed some consistent differences between white and all other brides and

grooms. The percent of brides and grooms who

had been married before was greater for white

than for all other brides and grooms. One exception was 1960 when this percent was greater

for all other grooms than for white grooms. Another consistent difference was that for every

year remarriages of the divorced accounted for

relatively more of the marriagesofwhitepersons

than of all others. In contrast the widowed accounted for relatively fewer of the marriages of

white than of all other brides and grooms. An

exception was 1969 when the widowed accounted

for more of the white brides than for all other

brides.

VARIATION

BY STATE

Although approximatelyl out of4 marriages

in the MRA in 1969 was a remarriage, this ratio

varied widely fTom State to State. Data on marriages by marriage order were available for 40

States in1969. These States were ranked according to the percent remarriages of brides were of

total marriages (table 3).

Idaho and Wyoming ranked first and second

with 42 percent and 38 percent of the marriages

in the State reportedas remarriages ofthebride,

.

.

4
respectively. These percents were considerably

above the national figure ofapproximately 25percent. Alaska was third followed by two Southern

States, Florida and Georgia. At the opposite extreme were the 39th and 40th States, Utah and

Wisconsin, with 14 and, 12 percent, respectively.

Many States in the Northeast Region had a low

percent of remarriages. The exception, New

Hampshire, ranked sixth with 30 percent of its

marriages reported as remarriages. The following seven Northeastern States had remarriage

percents of 20 or less and were among the last

13 of the 40 States— Connecticut, Pennsylvania,

Vermont, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island,

and Massachusetts.

Bearing on the variation in the number of remarriages between States are the differences between the marriage and divorce laws. Remarriages tend to occur shortly after the dissolution of

the last marriage, especially in the case of the

divorced who constitute the larger proportion of

those remarrying. Persons wishing to remarry

may migrate to a State where a divorce may be

obtained quickly and where there is no waiting

period before a divorced person can remarry.

An examination of the residency requirements in various States before a divorce can be

granted yields interesting results. The laws are

referred to as they existed in 1969 since the data

by State are for that year (table 3). The residency

requirement in Idaho was only 6 weeks and in

Wyoming it was only 2 months. Both Florida and

Georgia, two other States in the first five, had residency requirements of only 6 months. After the

first five States, the required residency was most

frequently 1 year. A few States with a percent of

remarriages close to the average for all States

have residency requiremems of 3 to 6 months,

but most have periods of 1 to 2 years.

Another State law which would affect remarriage concerns the interval of time after a

final divorce decree before a person can remarry. In the 10 States with the highest percent

of remarriages there were no waiting periods.

In 7 of the 10 States with the lowest percent of

remarriages there was a waiting period of 3

months to 1 year. In many States this law only

applies when the ground for divorce is adultery,

which would not have an effect on most divorces

because adultery is used infrequently as a ground.

AGE AND REMARRIAGE

Age-Sex-Specific Rates

Remarriage rates for both men and women

were highest at the younger ages. The rates for

men and women in the midage groups were lower

than the rates for the age groups 14 to 24 and 25

to 29, and higher than the rates for ages 65 and

over (table 4). The peak rate of remarriage for

women, 433 per 1,000, occurred in the youngest

age group, 14 to 24 years. Rates for women remarrying declined steadily with age. The same

decline existed for men, except that the peak rate

for men occurred in the age group 25 to 29 years

with the age group 14 to 24 years a close second.

The remarriage rate for men 14 to 24 years was

521 and the rate for men 24 to 29 years was 524.

A remarriage rate for men of 500 per 1,000 indicates that for every two widowed and divorced

men in the MM in 1969 one remarried during the

year.

The high remarriage rates for young previously married men and women were attributable

mainly to the large number of young divorced

persons remarrying. The peak remarriage rate

for divorced men and women occurred for the age

group 14 to 24 years. For women this rate was

478, and for men it was 495. The remarriage rates

for the divorced also declined with age, similar to

the pattern for all remarriages.

Although the rates for the widowed were also

higher at younger ages, they were much lower than

the rates for the divorced for thk following broad

age groups:

I Bride I GrcmtQ

Age at remarriage

Wid - Di- Wid - Di -

owed vorced owed vorced

M-44 years ----------- 74.7 232.0 146.2

45-64 years ----------- 17.5

%:.;

45.6 83.1

65 years and over ----- 2.3 7.0 17.7 29:3

I I I I

The low rates for widows at the later ages were

due to the very large number of older widows.

Although not as many widowers as widows remarried in 1969, the rates were higher for men

since the number of available widowers was

5
600

r

AGE IN YEARS

Figure 2. Marriage rates of men and women by age and marriage

order: Marriage-registration area, 1969

smaller than the number of widows. Three factors, the shorter life expectancy of males, the

higher remarriage rates for men than for women, and the tradition of men marrying women

younger than themselves contribute to the imbalance of women over men in this category.

At all ages remarriage rates for men and

women were higher than the comparable first

marriage rates (figure 2). For women of all

ages remarrying in the MM the marriage rate

in 1969 was 36.7, less than half the rate for

first-marrying women. However, for women at

ages 14 through 24 the remarriage rate was more

than 4 times the first marriage rate. In this

same age group the rate of remarriage for men

was more than 7 times the rate for first marriages. The differences in rates by marriage order

continued for the older age groups as shown in the

following table:

I

I

Bride IGroom

Age at marriage First

mar -

Remar - F:a:: Remar -

riages riages riages riages

14-24 years -------

25-29 years -------

30-34 years -------

35-44 years -------

45-64 years -------

65 years and over100.8

146.9

76.3

35.8

9.9

0.9

432.9

291.6

206.3

100.6

24.9

2.5

73.0

188.5

102.6

47.1

13.8

2.7

521.1

523.8

359.6

245.9

102.0

19.0

Remarriage rates were higher for men than

women in both the widowed and the divorced categories and for every age, group. For all remarriages the gap between the rates for men and women increased with age. This was true for the

divorced and the widowed. Only in the age group

14 to 24 years was the difference in remarriage

rates for divorced men and divorced women

small.

Median Age

The median age at remarriage is considerably

higher than the median age at first marriage. In

1969 the difference was about 13 years for women

and nearly 16 years for men. For women the remarriage median falls in the middle thirties; for

men it falls in the late thirties. Within the remarrying group, differences are substantial between medians for the widowed and the divorced.

For both sexes in the MRA the median age for

the widowed who remarried in 1969 was over 20

years higher than that for the divorced (table C).

Median age also varied according to the previous marital status of both partners (figure 3 and

table 5). Within each group of brides (single, divorced, and widowed) median ages were highest

in the subgroup when the groom was widowed,

second highest when the groom was divorced, and

lowest when the groom was single. This was also

true for each marital status category of grooms.

Thus for any marital status category, such as

single grooms or widowed brides, the median age

was lowest when the partner was a single person,

highest when the partner was a widowed person,

and somewhere between these when the partner

was divorced.

The median age for grooms was higher than

the median age for brides for each pairing of mar-

.

.

●

6
Previous Marital Statua

of Bride and Groom

Single bride and

single groom

Single bride and

divorced groom

Single bride and

widowed groom

Divorced bride and

single groom

Divorced bride and

divorced groom

Divorced bride and

widowed groom

Widowed bride and

single groom

Widpwed bride and

dworced groom

Widowed bride and

widowed groom

MEDIAN AGE (YEARS)

o

Figure 3. Median age at marriage of bride and groom by previous martial status of each partnec Marriage-registration area, 1969

ital status categories, with one exception—when

single men married widowed women. For this

group in 1969 the median age for grooms was 2

years below the median age for brides. Of the

other pairings of marital status categories in

which the median age of the grooms exceeded

that of the brides, the difference between median

ages of brides and grooms was greatest in marriages of widowed men to single women, 12.8 years,

and least in marriages of single men to divorced

women, 0.3 years.

In

clined

the MIU median age at remarriage deconsiderably in the period from 1963 to

1969 (table C). Median ages for lxxh remarrying

brides and grooms dropped about 2 years over

this period. Hdwever, within those figures the

median age of the divorced decreased while the

median age of the widowed increased for both

brides and grooms.

Percent Distribution of Remarriages

by Age, at Marriage

The percent of all brides in an age group

that are marrying for tk first time falls off

rapidly after age group 20 to 24 years, while the

7
Table C. Median age of bride and groom by previous marital status: Marriage-registration area, 1963 to 1969

[Figures for widowed and divorced exclude data from Michigan and Ohio]

Median age of bride Median age of groom

Remarriages Remarriages Year All

marriages

First

marriages

20.6

20.6

20.5

20.3

20.4

20.4

20.3

All

marriages

First

marriages T 71= Widowed

Divorced

Divorced

I

38.2 59.0

38.3 57.9

39.1 57.6

39.2 57.9

39.6 57.8

39.7 58.0 I 39.8 58.0

33.8 51.3

33.8 50.6

35.0 50.1

35.2 50.2

35.5 50.1

35.6 50.3

35.6 49.7

1969-----

1968-----

1967-----

1966-----

1965-----

1964-----

1963-----

21.6

21.5

21.4

21.5

21.4

21.4

21.3

30.4

30.7

31.2

31.4

31.7

31.7

31.8

23.5

23.6

23.8

23.8

23.6

23.6

23.7

22.4

22.4

22.6

22.6

22.5

22.4

22.5

34.7

35.1

35.5

35.8

36.0

36.4

36.3

percentoffirstmarriagesdeclinesmore gfadu- from 43 to 67 percent. In the 30 to34 yearold

allyforgrooms (tableD).’Astheageofthebrides group,two-thirdsofthebrideshad beenmarried

passesfrom theIatetwentiestotheearlythirties, before,whereasonlyaboutone-halfofthegrooms

remarriagesas a percentofallmarriagesrise in thisage group had beenmarriedbefore.For

TableD. Percentdistributionof marriagesby previousmaritalstatusof brideand groom,by age

at marriage:Marriage-registration area,1969

Bride Groom

All ●

mar- Single

riages

100.0 76.9

100.0 98.0

100.0 89.5

100.0 57.3

100.0 33.4

100.0 19.4

100.0 11.9

100.0 9.3

Previouslymarried Previouslymarried Age at marriage All

mar-

:iages rotal Widowed

23.3 4.5

0.7 0.0

4.8 0.1

25.3 0.6

50.7 2.3

70.9 6.4

84.4 21.3

88.6 49.2

95.5 78.9

Divorced

18.7

Widowed

5.2

0.1

0.5

2.5

6.2

15.3

38.3

65.7

85.1

Single

m.-

vorced rotal

All ages---- 23.1 17.9 100.0 76.7

14-19years-------

20-24years-------

25-29years-------

30-34years-------

35-44years-------

45-54years-------

55-64years-------

65 yearsand

over-------------

2.0

10.5

42.7

66.6

80.6

88.1

90.7

95.3

1.9

9.9

40.2

60.4

65.2

49.8

25.0

10.1

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

99.3

95.2

74.7

49.3

29.1

15.6

11.4

4.5

0.6

4.7

24.7

48.4

64.5

63.1

39.4

16.6

8
men the percent previously married was 71 percent for the 35 to 44 year age group, and it continued to increase for later age groups.

The larger number of women than men remarrying at the younger ages reflects the younger

ages at which women have their initial marriages. Another consideration is that women who

marry at extremely young ages are more likely

than those who marry at a more mature age to

“have their marriage dissolved by divorce. These

early divorces increase the number of remarriage eligibles and serve to lower the age at which

remarriage could occur for women.

The proportion of marriages accounted for

by remarriages of the widowed gradually overtakes. the proportion accounted for by the divorced.

For both men and women married during 1969 in

the MIU, the widowed were a greater proportion

of those married than the divorced beginning with

the age group 55 to 64. However, the widowed as

a percent of all marriages was very small for

men until the age group 45 to 54.

Age Differences Between Partners

The age difference between the bride and

groom varies according to the marriage order

of each partner. Table E shows a percent distribution of age differences for four groups of

couples: those for whom it was a first marriage

for both bride and groom, a first marriage for

the bride and a remarriage for the groom, a remarriage’ for the bride and a first marriage for

the groom, and those for whom it was a remarriage for both bride and groom. These data are

from the MRA in 1969. The comparison between

the group comprised of first marriages of both

partners and the group comprised of remarriages

Table E. Percent distribution of marriages by the age difference between the bride and

grooq by marriage order of bride and groom: Marriage-registration area, 1969

Age difference between bride and groom

Number of couples -------------------

Total --------------------------- ----

Bride younger than groom --------------

20 years or more younger ------------------

15-19 years younger -----------------------

10-14 years younger -----------------------

5-9 years younger -------------------------

4 years younger ---------------- -----------

3 years younger ------------------------ ---

2 years younger ---------------------------

1 year yotiger --------------------------- -

Bride same age as groom ---------------

Bride older than groom-- --------------

1 year older .------------------------ -----

2 years older ......--------------------- --

3 years older ------------------------ -----

4 years older -------- -------- --.----- -----

5-9 years older ------------------------ ---

10 years or more older --------------------

First

marriage

of groom

1,137,460

100.0

71.6

0.2

0.4

1;:;

1::;

17.0

19.3

16.1

12.3

7.0

2.5

:::

0.8

0.2

Remar -

riage

of groom

119,668

100.0

89.5

:.;

15:4

33.2

;.:

.

H

4.2

6.2

2.2

::;

0.6

:::

Remarriage

of bride

First

marriage

of groom

117,659

100.0

50.1

0.4

M

1;.;

.

::;

10.2

10.0

39.9

8.1

;:;

1:::

5.4

Remar -

riage

of groom

259,596

100.0

70.7

3.2

1::;

23.5

6.2

6.7

6.5

6.8

6.6

22.7

4.4

3.7

3.2

2.3

H

9
of both partners showed marked differences, and

each of the two groups in which one partner was

marrying for the first time and the other was remarrying had a distinct pattern from the other

three groups.

The group of couples with both partners remarrying did not have proportionally as many

couples who were close in age as the group of

couples with both partners marrying for the first

time. The percents of couples with partners who

were both marrying for the first time where the

bride was 1, 2, 3, or 4 years younger, the same

age, or 1 year olde~ than the groom were greater

than the comparable percents for couples with

partners who were both remarrying. The total of

these six age-difference categories comprised 80

percent of all the marriages between two persons

who had never been married before, while for marriages between persons who were both remarrying

only 37 percent were in these age-difference

categories.

In addition to having proportionally more

couples with large age differences, the group, of

couples with both partners remarrying contained

a larger proportion of couples where the bride

was older than the groom compared with the

group of couples with both partners marrying

for the first time. The comparable percents were

23 and 12, respectively. For all the age-difference

categories where the bride was older than the

groom, with the exception of 1 year older, there

were proportionally more couples in the remarriages of both partners group than the first marriages of both partners group.

In marriages where the grmm had been

married before and the bride was marrying for

the first time, the bride was younger than the

groom for 90 percent of the couples. This percent

was larger than the corresponding percent for

any of the other three groups of marriage-order

pairings. Furthermore, the bride tended to be

considerably younger than the groom, with 60

percent of all marriages in this group having a

bride 5 or more years younger than the groom,

and 27 percent having a bride 10 or more years

younger than the groom. In comparison, within

the group of marriages between two persons

marrying for the first time, the bride was 5 or

more years younger than the groom in only 15

percent of the marriages and she was 10 or more

years younger than the groom in only 2 percent

of the marriages.

In contrast, the group in which the bride had

been married previously and the groom was marrying for the first time included a large percent

of couples where the bride was older than the

groom. The bride was older than the groom in

40 percent of all marriages in this group. The

percent in each subgroup from bride 1 year older

to bride 10 years or more older than the groom

was larger than the percent for any of the other

three groups of marriage-order pairings.

SELECTION BY PREVIOUS

MARITAL STATUS

Most persons marry those of like marital

status. In 1969 in the MRA over 90 percent of

the single men married single women and vice

versa (table F). About 54 percent of the divorced

men and 57 percent of the divorced women married divorced partners, and 54 percent of the widowers selected widows, although only 46 percent

of the widows selected widowers. The largest

percent of the marriages of persons in any marital status category were to those in the same

category, The second largest percent for the divorced was to single persons and the second largest percent for the widowed was to divorced

persons.

In 1969 marriages between two single persons comprised 72 percem of all marriages, remarriages in which both partners were divorced

comprised 9 percent, and remarriages between

widowed partners comprised only 2 percent (figure 4).

In discussing selection by previous marital

status, numbers of eligible persons in each marital status group according to age must be considered. Much of the selection by previous marital status can be accounted for by numbers of

eligibles. For example, young single persons

would be most likely to marry single rather than

divorced or widowed persons, because most unmarried persons within a few years of their age

have never been married and very few have been

widowed or divorced. However, for the remarried,

some of the selection does not seem to be solely

due to the distribution of the population.

Divorced men and women who remarried

tended to choose divorced partners. This fact

*

10
Table F. Percent,distribution of marriages of single, widowed, and divorced men and

women by marital status of partner and sex: Marriage-registration area excluding

Michigan and Ohio, 1969

. . .

Marital status of partner

Marital status and sex Total 1

Single

Single:

Men---------------- -------- --------------- 100.0 91.6

Women-------- -------- -------- ------------- 100.0 91.5

Widowed:

Men--------------------------------------- 100.0 16.3

Women------------------------------------- 100.0 18.2

Divorced:

Men------- ------- --------------------- ---- 100.0

Women-------- -------- -------- -------- ----- 100.0

35.9

35.7

I II

takes on greater significance when it is realized

that single persons comprised the largest proportion of eligibles in the age group 20-64, the

group containing most of the divorced persons

who remarried. For both men and women, over

50 percent of the remarriages of the divorced

were to divorced partners (table F) while less

than 20 percent of the unmarried population ages

20-64 was divorced (table G). Tlms for divorced

men and women there disappear tobe selection

in favor of adivorced person rather thana single

or widowed person.

For both men and women, the widowed who

remarried chose partners in the order of widowed, divorced, and single. The distribution of

the eligible populationat ages 25years and over,

a relevant population for the widowed, was, however, in the order of single, widowed, and divorced for men, and widowed, single, and divorced for women.

Among the eligible partners for widowed

women there were many more single than widowed or divorced men. The proportions of the

marriages of widowed women to widowed’ and

divorced men were far greater than the proportions of eligible men in those groups.

For widowed men, widowed womenwereby

far the largest eligible group. The proportionof

Widowed

1.1

0.8

53.9

46.3

9.9

7.5

Divorced

7.3

7.6

29.8

35.5

54.2

56.8

the marriages ofwidowed men to widowed women was less than, but close to, the proportionof

the female population in that category. Aswasthe

case for widowed women,more widowedmenmarried divorced partners than would be indicated by

the population distribution.

In other words when comparing the percent

distribution of marriages to that of the eligible

population, widowed women selected in the order

of widowed and divorced rather than single men,

and widowed men selected in the order of divorced and widowed rather than single women.

In summary, the distribution by marital status

of partners selected by persons remarrying departs from the distribution of the eligible population by marital status, largely in favor of the divorced.

THE PERIOD

BETWEEN DIVORCE OR

WIDOWHOOD AND REMARRIAGE

Most persons who remarry do so in a relatively short period of time after their previous

marriage is dissolved. The interval following the

death or divorce that ended their prior marriage

for brides and grooms remarrying in 1969 is

11
80

r

Single bride Oivorced bride Widomd bride

Single Oivorced Widowed Single Divorced Widowed Single Divorced

groom groom

Widowed

groom groom groom groom groom groom groom

MARITAL STATUS OF BRIDE ANO GROOM

Figure4. Percent distribution of marriages by previous martial status of bride and of groom: Marriage-registration area, 1969

Table G. Percent distribution of the unmarried population of men and women at ages

20-64 years and 25 years and over by marital status: Marriage-registration area excluding Michigan and Ohio, 1969

Age group and sex

20-64 years:

Men---------------------------------------

Women ------.- ------------------------ -----

2.5years and over:

Men ---------------- --------,---------------

Women -------------------------------------

Total

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Marital status

Single

81.2

51.8

56.8

25.2

Jidowed

25.4

60.3

Divorced

13.1

19.{!)

17.8

14.5

1,

I

12
Table H. Medians and quartiles of the interval”since last marriage ended forremarriages by previous marital status of

bride and of groom: total of 1S States

for the divorced; total of 9 States for

the widowed, 1969

Previous

marital

status

Divorced:l

Bri.de-----

Groom-----

Widowed:~

Bri.de-----

Groom-----

Interval in years

0.4 1.2

0.3 1.0

Ax

Third

quartile

3.2

2.9

;::

lCalifornia. Florida. Hawaii. Kansas,

Louisiana, Mofitana, New Hampshire, New

ytmk, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode

Island, Tennessee, Utah, Vermonc and Wfsconsin.

~California,Hawaii, Kansas, Montana,

New Hampshire Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,

Vermont,and Wisconsin.

availablefrom a limitednumber ofStates(table

H),

Widowed men remarriedmuch soonerthan

widowedwomen. I?orthenineStatesforwhichinformationwas available,median durationofwidowhood was 3.6 years forwidows, butonly 1.9

yearsforwidowers.Thefirstandthirdquartiles,

betweenwhich 50 percentofallthewidowedremarried,were 1.8years and7.0yearsforwidOWS, a periodof about5 years.For widowers

theywere 0.9and4.0,aperiodofabout3years.

For thosewho remarried,median duration

of divorcewas even shorterthanthatofwidowhood, but differencesbetweenthesefiguresby

sex were slight.In the 15 States,25 percentof

thepreviouslydivorcedbridesand grooms remarried within4 to 5 months afterdivorce,50

percentremarriedwithinslightlymore thanone

year,and 75 percentremarriedwithinapproximately3 years.

It appears from the limiteddataavailable

thatthe chancesfor remarriageareat amaximum shortlyafterthedissolutionoftheprevious

marriage.

THE REMARRIAGE

CEREMONY

Location and Resident Status

The locationofa marriageceremony andthe

residentstatusof theparticipantsvariedwith

marriageorder,accordingtodatafrom theMRA

in 1969.Among bothbridesand grooms, residentsof the Statewhere themarriagewas performed were more numerous at firstmarriage

than at remarriage.Remarrying coupleswere

more likelyto have theirceremony away from

theirhome State.

The percentof residentbrideswas higher

than the percentof residentgrooms for both

firstmarriages and remarriages,butthe differencewas more pronouncedfor firstmarriages(tableJ).Thisreflectsa socialnorm for

the UnitedStatesthatthe bridemarry nearher

home. In the caseofremarriagethisnorm does

notappeartobe followedas closely.

The groupinwhichresidentgroomsmarried

residentbrides,whichwas thelargestgroupfor

both firstniarriagesand remarriages,was a

slightlysmallerproportionof all remarriages

thanofallfirstmarriages.k COIItraSt, thegroup

in whichnonresidentbridesmarriednonresident

grooms was a@ost twiceas greata proportion

ofremarriagesas itwas offirstmarriages.Much

of thismigrationof personsremarryingisundoubtedlydue to the divorcedwho traveltoanotherStatetoobtaina divorceandthenremarry

there.

The differencesin residentstatusbetween

firstmarriages and remarriagesappearstobe

due more to the greaterproportionofnonresidentbridesthannonresidentgrooms. The total

proportionof firstmarriages involvinga nonresidentbride was 9.9,while the totalproportionof remarriagesinvolvinga nonresident

bride was 16.8.The comparable percentsfor

nonresidentgrooms were 15.6

agesand 18.4forremarriages.

for firstmarri13
Table J. Percent distribution of marriages by resident status of bride and groom in

State where married, by marriage order: Marriage-registration area, 1969

I II I

I ][ Resident bride INonresident bride

Marriage order Total

Resident

groom

All marriages --------------- 100.0

+

81.6

First marriages:

Bride --------------------------- 100.0 82.3

Groom --------------------------- 100.0 82.3

Remarriages:

Brid<--------------------------- 100.0 78.8

Groom ---------------- --n----- --- 100.0 78.9

I II

Type of Ceremony

Couples whoareremarrying are morelikely

to have a civilceremony than couples who are

marrying for the first time. Data on marriages

by type of ceremony are not available from the

MRA in 1969, but they are available for 1965. In

1965 the proportion of brides and grooms who

married in a civil ceremony in the MRA was

Iowest among those who were entering their first

marriage and highest among those who had been

previously divorced. About 2 out ofevery5remarriages were solemnized with a civil ceremony as compared to only 1 out of every 5first

marriages (table K).

The proportion of remarriages by civil officiant varied according tosex, previous marital

status, and age. Women who remarried in1965

were more likely to have a civil ceremony than

men who remarried that year. This was true for

both the widowed and the divorced.

The proportion of remarriages bycivilcerernony was larger among persons who had been

divorced than among those who hadbeen widowed.

One explanation of this difference is that while

remarriages, whether as a result of divorce orof

the death of a spouse, are permitted by the civil

laws of every State, feelings against divorce and

remarriage still exist. In some religions it is

difficult for a divorced person to be married by

a church official.

Nonresi - ~e5,_dent

dent

groom

groom

+

J-7.8 2.1

7.7 2.1

::: ;:!

Yonresi-.

dent

groom

9.2—

7.8

8.0

14.2

13.7

Table K. Percent distribution of marriages by type of ceremony performed,

by previous marital status of bride and

groom: Marriage-registration area, 1965

[Data for Kentucky and Ohio excluded; figures for widowed

and divorced ako exclude data from Michigan]

Previous marital

status

All marriages:

Bride ----------

Groom ----------

First marriages:

Bride ----------

Groom----------

All remarriages:

Bride ----------

Groom ----------

Widowed:

Bride ----------

Groom ----------

Divorced:

Bride ----------

Groom ----------

All

mar -

iages

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

=

Type of

ceremony

Civil

24.5

24.5

19.4

20.0

42.5

40.1

30.7

26.5

46.3

43.8

——

!li -

.Ous

75(,5

75,5

80<,6

80.0

574,5

59<,9

;:”;

!)

53.7

56,,2

——

14
After the age group 25 to 29 years for women

and the age group 35 to 44 years for men the likelihood of a civil ceremony for a couple who was remarrying declined for each older age group (table

6). The percent of civil ceremonies in the remarrying group decreased with age to 26 percent

for brides and 30 percent for grooms 65 years of

age and over.

This decline was primarily true of the widowed, not the divorced. A decrease in the percent

of civil ceremonies for widowed brides and grooms

occurred for each successive age group, except

for the 35 to 44 year age group when there was

an increase above the percent for ages 25 to

34 for both brides and grooms, and for grooms

65 years and over there was an increase over the

55-64 year age group. In contrast, for divorced

men the percent of civil marriages fluctuated

between 41 percent and 47 percent for all age

,groups with the exception of those aged 65 and

older when it rose to 52 percent. The fluctuation

for divorced women was between 45 and 48 percent, except for ages 65 and over when the percent of civil ceremonies was only 30 percent.

Month of Marriage

The seasonality of remarriages with relatively small month-to-month fluctuations differs

from that of first marriages with its sharper

monthly swings (figure 5). This more pronounced

peaking of first marriages in certain months is

reflected in the marriage statistics as a whole.

For example, June has usually been the most popular month for marriages in the MRA. However,

o

the larger number of marriages in June tends to

reflect the popularity of that month among firstmarrying couples who constitute a large majority

of the brides and grooms. In contrast, the peak

month of remarriages in 1969 was August for

both brides and grooms. Compared to first marriages, remarriages tended to be proportionally

more frequent in the first and last quarter of the

year (table 7). Remarriages were more evenly

distributed over the twelve months than first mar- .

riages.

I 15r

FoLJFMAMJJ A.SOND

MONTH OF MARRIAGE

I

Figure 5. Percent distribution of first marriagesand remarriages of brides by month of marriage: Marriage-registration

area, 1969

00

15
LIST OF DETAILED TABLES

Table 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Percent

ardized

distributionofthe population 14 years and wer by marital status,standfor age, and unstandardized:United States, 1940 to 1969----------------

Marriage rates by previous marital status of bride and groom: Marriage-registration area, 1960, 1963 to 1969--------------------------------------------------

Percent distributionof marriages by ma@age order of bride: Each marriage registration State, ranked in order of percent of remarriages,1969----------------

Marriage rates by previous marital status and age of bride and groom: Marriageregistrationarea, 1969-------------------------------------------------------

Median age at marriage of bride and groom, by previous marital status of each

partner: Marriage-registrationarea, 1969---------------------------------------

Percent distributionof remarriagesby type of ceremony performed, by previous

marital status and age of bride and groom: Marriage-registrationarea, 1965-----

Percent distributionof marriages by month of marriage, by marriage order of

bride and groom: Marriage-registrationarea, 1969.........--------------.-------

Page

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

16
Table 1. Percent distribution of the population 14 years and over by marital status, standardized for

age, and unstandardized:United States, 1940 to 1969

Year

Standardized for agel

1969--------------------------

1965--------------------------

1960--------------------------

1955--------------------------

1950--------------------------

1947--------------------------

1940--------........----------

Unstandardized

1969--------------------------

1965--------------------------

1960--------------------------

1955--------------------------

1950--------------------------

1947--------------------------

1940--------------------------

Male

Total

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Single

23.7

24.1

25.3

25.4

26.2

27.2

30.7

27.4

26.6

25.3

24.0

26.2

28.2

34.8

Marrfed

70.6

70.4

69.1

68.4

67.4

66.5

62.6

67.0

67.9

69.1

69.9

68.0

66.2

59.7

Widowed

3.2

3.2

3.7

4.4

4.7

4.8

5.4

3.3

3.3

3.7

4.3

4.2

4.1

4.2

Divorced

2.4

2.3

1.9

1.8

1.7

1.5

1.3

2.3

2.2

1.9

1.8

1.7

1.6

1.2

Total Single

100.0 19.2

100.0 18.8

100.0 19.0

100.0 19.1

100.0 20.0

100.0 21.4

100.0 24.2

100.0 21.8

100.0 20.7

100.0 19.0

100.0 18.2

100.0 19.6

100.0 22.0

LOO.0 27.6

Female

Mar -

ried

65.3

66.0

65.6

65.2

63.9

62.5

59.3

62.3

63.9

65.6

66.8

66.1

64.2

59.5

Widowed

12.0

12.2

12.8

13.5

14.0

14.1

14.8

12.5

12.5

12.8

12.8

12.2

11.6

11.3

Divorced

3.5

3.0

2.6

2.2

2.1

2.0

1.6

3.3

2.9

2.6

2.3

2.2

2.1

1.6

‘Standardizedon the basis of the age distribution in 1960.

Sourcea:1940.1965,!tWrital Status and Fd-lY Status:

P-20, No. 159, January 25, 1967. 1969,

March 1966,” Current Population Reports, Series

~!~rital Status and Family Status: mrch 1969,” Current Population Reports, Series P-20, NO. 198, March 25, 1970.

17
Table 2. Marriage rates by previous marital status of bride and groom: Marriage-registration area, 1960, 1963 to 1969

[Rates per 1,000 population 14 years and over in specified age groups]

Year

Bride

1969--------------------------.------

1968---------------------------------

1967---------------------------------

1966---------------------------------

1965---------------------------------

1964---------------------------------

1963------.--------------------------

1960---------------------------------

Groom

1969---------------------------------

1968---------------------------------

1967---------------------------------

1966---------------------------------

1965---------------------------------

1964---------------------------------

1963---------------------------------

1960---------------------------------

lExcludesdata in Michigan and Ohio.

All

marriages

67.4

66.9

64.0

63.9

63.6

63.4

61.7

64.1

81.9

81.0

77.4

76.3

74.7

73.2

72.5

75.0

First

marriages

87.9

88.0

85.2

85.0

84.4

83.4

82.0

87.5

73.8

73.8

71.0

69.4

68.2

67.2

66.6

70.7

Total Widowed1

36.7

35.5

34.2

34.2

33.7

34.3

33.0

32.7

117.9

111.6

107.9

110.1

103.8

98.5

97.1

89.1

10.3

9.9

10.1

10.0

10.2

10.6

10.2

10.4

39.3

38.1

37.4

38.8

37.2

35.7

38.4

36.1

135.4

132.8

129.8

130.0

129.7

125.8

133.5

122.1

220.8

209.5

206.8

210.8

215.3

197.2

1:77.0

167.7

.

18
Table 3. Percent distribution of marriages by marriage order of bride: Each marriage

registration State, ranked in order of percent of remarriages, 1969

State

Idaho.-----------------------------------------

:ya~g -----------------------------------------

------------------------.----------------

Florida----------------------------------------

Georgia----------------------------------------

New Hampshire----------------------------------

Tennessee--------------------------------------

Indiana----------------------------------------

South Dakota-----------------------------------

Missouri---------------------------------------

Illinois---------------------------------------

Mississippi------------------------------------

Virginia---------------------------------------

Alabama----------------------------------------

Kansas-----------------------------------------

Michigan---------------------------------------

Maine------------------------------------------

Ohio-------------------------------------------

California-------------------------------------

Maryland---------------------------------------

Nebraska ---------------------------------------

Oregon -----------------------------------------

Montana ----------------------------------------

Kentucky ---------------------------------------

Hawaii -----------------------------------------

West Virginia----------------------------------

Louisiana--------------------------------------

Connecticut------------------------------------

Pennsylvania-----------------------------------

Delaware---------------------------------------

Vermont----------------------------------------

North Carolina----------.----------------------

Iowa-------------------------------------------

New Jersey-------------------------------------

New York---------------------------------------

Rhode Island-----------------------------------

District of Columbia---------------------------

Massachusetts----------------------------------

Utah-------------------------------------------

Wisconsin--------------------------------------

Rank

1

2

2

5

6

:

1:

11

:;

:2

16

17

18

19

19

21

%

24

25

26

;:

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

;:

40

All

mar -

riages

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Remar -

riage

of bride

41.9

38.4

37.1

35.7

34.5

29.9

29.6

28.8

28.3

27.1

27.0

26.6

24.8

24.7

24.6

23.9

23.8

23.6

23.5

23.5

22.3

22.2

22.0

21.8

20.9

20.5

20.1

19.8

18.3

18.0

17.7

17.6

16.8

16.1

16.0

15.8

15.3

14.7

14.1

12.3

First

marriage

of bride

58.1

61.6

62.9

64.3

65.5

70.1

70.4

71.2

71.7

72.9

73.0

73.4

75.2

75.3

75.4

76.1

76.2

76.4

76.5

76.5

77.7

77.8

78.0

78.2

79.1

79.5

79.9

80.2

81.7

82.0

82.3

82.4

83.2

83.9

84.0

84.2

84.7

85.3

85.9

87.7

..#

19
Table 4. Marriage rates by previous marital status and age of bride and groom: Marriage-registration area, 1969

[Rates per 1,000 population in specified groups]

.

Age

Total----

14-17 years----

18-19 years----

20-24 years----

25-29 years----

30-34 years----

35-44 years----

45-64 years----

65 years and

over----------

All

marriages

Bride

67.4

26.1

165.4

249.5

189.0

132.9

74.9

21.5

2.4

Groom

81.9

3.7

76.9

201.7

227.7

163.1

111.1

53.9

14.9

First

marriages

Bride

87.9

25.4

159.4

234.6

146.9

76.3

35.8

9.9

0.9

Groom

73.8

3.6

75*3

192.5

188.5

102.6

47.1

13.8

2.7

Remarriages

Bride

36.7

432.9

291.6

206.3

100.6

24.9

2.5

Groom

11709

521.1

523.8

359.6

245.9

102.0

19.0

.

.

‘Widowedl Divorcedl

Bride

10.3

1

74.7

17.5

2.3

=!= Groom Bride

39.3 135.4

\

1

477.6

146.2

I

190.6

83.1 45.6

17.7 7.0

Groom

220.8

I

494.9

I

351.9

113.2

29.3

lExcludes data in Michigan and Ohio.

20
Table 5. Median age at marriage of bride and groom, by previous marital status of each

partner: Marriage-registrationarea, 1969

[Figures for widowed and divorced exclude data for Michigan and Ohio]

Previous marital status

All brides:

All grooms-----------------------------------------------------

Single grooms--------------------------------------------------

Widowed grooms-------------------------------------------------

Divorced grooms.-------.--------.------------------------------

Single brides:

All grooms-----------------------------------------------------

Single grooms--------------------------------------------------

Widowed groom -------------------------------------------------

Divorced grooms------------------------------------------------

Widowed brides:

All grooms-----------------------------------------------------

Single grooms--------------------------------------------------

Widowed grooms-------------------------------------------------

Divorced grooms------------.-----------------------------------

Divorced brides:

All grooms---------------------------------------.-------------

Single grooms-------------------------.--------.---------------

Widowed grooms-------------------------------------------------

Divorced grooms------------------------------------------------

Median age

Bride

21.6

21.1

51.9

29.3

20.6

20.4

35.0

23.3

51.3

38.7

58.3

46.4

30.4

26.3

45.0

33.1

Groom

23.5

22.4

::.;

.

22.9

22.2

47.8

29.2

54.2

36.7

63.8

47.7

33.6

26.6

53.0

37.3

.
Table 6. Percent distribution of remarriages by type of ceremony performed, by previous

and age of bride and groom: Marriage-registration area, 1965

[Data for Kentucky and Ohio excluded;figuresforwidowed and divorced also excludedatafromMichigan]

—

Previous marital status and age

All remarriages

Bride:----------------------- -’----------------------- ---------

Under 20 years ---------------------------------- --------------------

20-24 years ---------------------------------------------------------

25-29 years ----------------------- ----------------------------------

30-34 years --------------------- ----------------------------- -------

35-44 years ----------------------------- ----------------------------

45-54 years ---------------------- -------------------------------- ---

55-64 years --------------------- ------------------------------------

65 years and over ----------------------------- ----------------------

Groom ------------------ ---------------------------------------

Under 20 years ---------------------------------- --------------------

20-24 years --------------------- ------------------------------------

25-29 years ------------------------------------ ---------------------

30-34 years ---------------------------- -----------------------------

35-44 years ------------------------- --------------------------------

45-54 years ----------------------- ----------------------------------

55-64 years ----------------------- ----------------------------------

65 years and over ---------------------------------- -----------------

Widowed

Bride --------------------- ------------------------------------

Under 25 years --------------------- ------------------------ ---------

25-34 years --------------------- --------------a --------- ------------

35-44 years----,-------------------- ---------------------------------

45-54 years ------------------- --------------------------------------

55-64 years --------------------- ------------------------- -----------

65 years and over ----------------------- ----------------------------

Groom ------------------- -------------------------- ------------

Under 25 years ----------------------------- ------------------------ -

25-34 years ------------------ ------------------------------ ---------

35-44 years --------------------- -------------------------- ----------

45-54 years -------------------- --------------------------- ----------

55-64 years ------------------------- ----------------------- ---------

65 years and over ----------------------------------- ----------------

Under

20-24

25-29

30-34

35-44

45-54

~~-64

Divorced

Bride-- --------------- ------------ --------- -------------------

20 years ------------------ ------------------------ ------------

years ------------------- --------------------------------- -----

years ------------------- ----------------------- ---------------

years ---------------------- ------------------------- ----------

years ------------------ ----------------------------------- ----

years -------------------- -------------------------- -----------

years:------------------ ---------------------------------- ----

b> years and over ----------------------- --------------------- -------

Groom ------------------- -------------------------------- ------

Under 20 years ------------------ ------------------------------------

20-24 years ------------------------ ---------------------------------

25-29 years ---------- ----------------- ----------------- -------------

30-34 years ----------------------- ------------------------------ ----

35-44 years--------------------------------------------------------

45-54 years ----------------------------- ------------------------ ----

55>64 years---------------------------------------------------------

65 years and over---------------------------------------------------

Total

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100,0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.O

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

marital status

Type of ceremony

Civil

42.5

46.5

45.0

45.9

45.5

44.8

38.7

32.6

25.6

40.1

38.1

40.2

40.7

42.8

43.6

;$.:

29:9

30.7

39.7

33.6

34.1

30.7

27.5

25.8

26.5

32.6

27.7

30.3

28.0

23.8

25.8

46.3

47.4

45.7

46.2

46.9

47.6

44.6

46.1

30.0

43.8

44.9

40.5

40.6

43.4

44.7

46.6

44.8

52.0

Religious

57.5

53.5

55.0

54.1

54.5

55.2

61.3

;:.:

.

59.9

69.3

60.3

66.4

65.9

69.3

72.5

74.2

73.5

(55.:

69;7

72.0

76.2

74.2

53.7

52.6

54.3

53.8

53.1

52.4

55.4

53.9

70.0

56.2

55.1

59.5

59.4

56.6

55.3

53.4

55.2

48.0

22
Table 7. Percent distribution of marriages by month of marriage, by marriage order of

bride and groom: Marriage-registrationarea, 1969

Month of marriage

Total marriages--------------

January---------------------------

February---------------------------

March-----------------------------

ApriP-----------------------------

May--------------------------------

June-------------------------------

July-------------------------------

August-----------------------------

September--------------------------

October----------------------------

November---------------------------

Decamber---------------------------

Bride

All

marriages

100.0

5.6

6.3

6.6

6.9

8;5

12.8

8.4

12.3

8.3

7.6

8.3

8.5

First

marriages

100.0

5.5

6.1

6.3

6.7

8.3

13.7

8.3

12.9

8.7

7.4

8.0

8.2

Remarriages

100.0

6.0

6.8

7.5

7*5

8.9

9.9

8.7

10.5

7.1

8.3

9.2

9.5

. .

Groom

All

marriages

100.0

5.6

6.3

6.6

6.9

8.5

12.8

8.4

12.3

8.3

7.6

8.3

8.5

First

marriages

100.0

5.5

6.2

6.3

6.7

8.4

13.6

8.3

12.9

8.6

7.3

8.0

8.2

Remarriages

100.0

5.9

6.5

7.4

7.5

8.8

10.0

8.8

10.5

7.5

8.5

9.1

9.6

23
APPENDIX I

GENERAL NOTES

The analysisofremarriagestatistics inthisreport

is basedprimarilyon frequenciespublishedin Vital

statistics of the United Stutes, volume 111.1969. Data

forearlieryearsusedforcomparisonwere takenfrom

appropriateannualvolumes of thispublication.Each

annualvolume includesa completediscussionof the

technicalaspectsof the marriage data itcontains.

Sources of Data

Marriagestatisticsfor theUnitedStatesandfor

themarriage-registration area are limitedto events

occurringduringthe year and registeredwithinthe

specifiedarea.TabulationsforStatesandotherareas

are by placeof occurrence.Eventsoccurringtononresidentsare included;marriagesof members oftbe

Armed Forces or otherU.S.nationalsthatoccuroutsideof the UnitedStatesare excluded.UnitedStates

refersto the50 Statesand theDistrictofColumbia.

Alaskahas been includedintheU.S.tabulationssince

1959 and Hawaiisince1960.Figuresforcharacteristicsof marriagesare basedon datatabulatedfrom

probabilitysamplesofrecordsselectedintheNational

Centerfor HealthStatisticsfrom copiesofmarriage

forms sent in by Statesparticipatingin the MM.

!n1969theMRA included39 StatesandtheDistrict

of Columbia.The Virginislandsand PuertoRicoare

a partof

The MRA

theMRA butareexcludedfrom thisreport.

includesStateswithcentralfilesof marriagecertificatesand sufficientlycompleteand accuratereportingofdemographicitemson theirrecord

towarrantcollection, processing,andpublicationinthe

officialU.S.annualreports.MarriagesintheMRA representabout 77 percentof thenationaltotalin1969.

Marriage Sample

Recordsfrom theMRA were sampledatfivedifferentrateswhichdependedon theannualtotalsfor

eachStateas indicatedinthetablebelow.

Estimating Procedures

Frequenciesbasedon themarriagesampleswere

estimatedintwo steps.

1.

Marriage sample - sampling rates and sample size:

Each samplecasewas assigneda weightwhich

was the reciprocaloftheprobability(orsamplingrate)used to select the case. Thus if a

marriage record was selected from a State with

a probability of 1/10, the record had a weight of

10.

Marriage-registrationarea, 1969

Stratum and area

Stratum 1: Alaska, Delaware, Vermont, and Wyoming

Stratum 2: District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine,

Montana, New Hampshire,Rhode Island,

South Dakota, and Utah

Stratmn 3: Connecticut,Idaho, Iowa, Kansas,

Louisiana,Mississf.ppi,Nebraska,

Oregon and West Virginia

Stratum 4: Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky,

Maryland, Massachusetts,Missouri, New

Jersey, North Carolina, Tennesse,

Virginia, and Wisconsin

Stratum 5: California,Georgia, Illinois,Mf.chigan,

New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania

Sampling rate

All records

1/2

1/5

Number of

sample

records

15,891

37,258

38,154

59,295

39,321

24
I

2. Frequencies were estimated by summing the

weights of the records instead of tabulating the

number of sample cases. Thus each frequency

distribution such as age at marriage of remarrying. brides is a tabulation of the total of

weighted sample cases included in each age category.

Rates for census years are based on the population

enumerated as of April 1. All other rates are based on

estimates of the population present in the area as of

July 1, including Armed Forces stationed in the area

but excluding Armed Forces abroad. The estimates were

prepared by the U.S. Bureau of the Census.

“Not Stafedl” Cases

!INot stated! ! cases arise chiefly frOITI ~ck of responses to items on reporting forms and from variations

in, items requested on forms usedin the MRA. The numbers of not stated cases for each MRA State and characteristic may be found in Vital SWiatics of the United

States, Volume III, of the appropriate year. In table D

of this .qeport the “not stated” cases for previous marital status were distributed before computing the percent

distribution.

Remarriage Estimates

for United States

Estimates of the number of remarriages in the

United States for each year, 1965 to 1%9, were prepared using the percent of all marriages that were remarriages in the MRA. The MRA consisted of 39 States

and the District of Columbia in 1968 and 1%9, and 38

States and the District of Columbia in 1965, 1966, and

1967. The addition of Missouri in 1968 affected the percent of remarriages very slightly. The percent of remarriages obtained for each year was multiplied times

the unrounded marriage total for the United States in

that year. Rates were computed from these estimated

numbers per 1,000 divorced and widowed persons in the

United States. The estimated total remarriages shown in

table A are rounded to the nearest 1,000.

Sampling Errors

Estimates computed from sample data vary somewhat about the value that would be obtained from a complete census of the same population. The standard error

is a measure of this sampling variability. On the average,

estimates will differ from the corresponding census

valpe by less than a standard error about 68 percent of.

the time. Approximate standard errors of estimates

shown in this report may be obtained from tables I and

11of this appendix.

Table 1. Standard errors of estimatedmarriage

frequencies: Marriage-registration area, 1969

[Marriages ro.n&d to the nearest 500]

Percent of

to;:lt~err&ges

100 ● o

1.0 or 99.0

2.0 or 98.0

3.0 or 97.0

4.0 or 96.0

5.0 or 95.0

7.0 or 93.0

10.0 or 90.0

15.0 or 85.0

20.0 or 80.0

25.0 or 75.0

30.0 or 70.0

40.0 ar 60.0

50.0

Number of marriages

1,660,500

16,500 or 1,644,000

33,000 or 1,627,500

50,000 or 1,610,500

66,500 or 1,594,000

83,000 or 1,577,500

116,000 or 1,544,500

166,000 or 1,494,500

249,000 or 1,411,500

332,000 or 1,328,500

415,000 Or 1,245,500

498,000 or 1,162,500

664,000 or 996,500

830,250

Seandard

error

457

643

783

900

1,001

1,172

1,378

1,640

1,837

1,989

2,104

2,250

2,296

Since the magnitude of a sampling error of an estimated rate depends orsboth the frequency and the population on which the rate is computed, two or more identical

rates may have different sampling errors. Marriage frequericies and estimates for the unmarried resident population by age, marital status, and sex for the MRA used

in computing rates included in this report appear in

Vitii statistics of the United Statet?, Volume 111,of the

specified years.

k is useful to note that the population data often

may be extracted from rates and frequencies. If f is

an estimated frequency and ~ is the corresponding rate,

then the size of the Pc@ation involved is f/r.

Rates which appear in this report may be one of

three types, each of which involves a different method

for computing the corresponding error.

1. The” standard error of an estimated proportion

of a known total can be computed by dividing the

standard error for the estimated frequency by

the known total.

As an illustration, table D shows that an

estimated 23.1 percent of all brides married in

1%9 in the MM had been previously married.

The corresponding number of marriages of the

previously married is 383,576. Table I indicates

that the sampling error of the number 383,576

must lie ~omewher~. Eaween the sampling error

for 20 percent and 25-percent, or between 1,837

2s
Table II. Standard errors of estimated marriage rates (per 1,000 population) by number of marria es and size of base

population, and standard errors of the population: Marriage-registration area, 1989

Percent

lf total

mrriages

in the

.b 25 50

Population in 1, 000s

Number of marriages

T

100 200 300 500 L, 000 ?, 500 5,000 10,000 15,000

1.0 133.3 ;;.;

2.0 . . . .

::: ::: :::

5.0 . . . . . .

1::: ::: :::

15.0 . . . . . .

20.0 . . . . . .

25.0 . . . . . .

30.0 . . . . . .

40.0 . . . . . .

50.0 . . . . . .

60.0 . . . . . .

70.0 . . . . . .

75.0 . . . . . .

80.0 . . . . . .

85.0 . . . . . .

90.0 . . . . . .

95.0 . . . . . .

99.0 . . . . . .

0.64

1.1

1.6

;:!

::;

6.9

$;

18:1

22.5

27.0

31.5

33.7

35.9

38.1

. . .

. . .

. . .

0.10

0.14

0.18

0.21

0.24

0.30

0.39

0.52

0.66

0.79

oi9;

1:4

1.7

2.0

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.5

;:!

41,000

0.05

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.10

0.12

0.15

0.19

0.22

0.24

0.27

0.32

0.36

0.41

0.45

0.47

0.49

0.51

0.53

0.55

0.56

34,000

0.03

0.04

0.05

0:06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.11

0.13

0.14

0.15

0.16

0.17

0.18

0.18

0.18

0.17

0.17

0.17

0.16

0.16

21,000

16,500 ---------------

33,000 ---------------

50,000 ---------------

g:, g:: ---------------

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11; ,000 --------------

166,000 --------------

249,000 --------------

332,000 --------------

415,000 --------------

498,000 --------------

664,000 --------------

830,250 --------------

996,500 --------------

1,162,500------------

1,245,500 ------------

1,328,500 ------------

1,411,500------------

1,494,500 ------------

1,577,500 ------------

1,644,000------------

15.5

30.4

45.7

60.5

3.3

:::

12.2

15.1

21.0

29.9

44.6

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

16,000

$::

4.3

2:;

1?::

20.2

26.8

33.4

40.1

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

0.21

0.32

0.43

0.53

0.62

0.82

1.1

H

2.5

:::

4.9

:::

7.2

7.7

::;

;.;

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

3..

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

1 1 1

Standard errors of

the population ----------------- 5,000 7,000

+

20,000 27,000 36,000

and 1,989. By interpolating, a sampling error of .9X = standard error of x

1,931 is obt~ned, which &yvidedby-the ;otal number of MRA marriages (1,660,500) yields .0012

or 0.1 percent. By adding and subtracting 0.1

from 23.1 we obtain the interval 23.0 to 23.2.

The chances are about 68 out of 100 that the actual percentage falls within this interval.

Sy = standard error of y

For example, if we desire the standard error

of the proportion of remarriages in which the

bride was divorced (77.5 percent) then from

table D:

To obtain a more exact sampling error for

a given marriage frequency the formula used

for computing table I can be applied:

Sx G 4,592+ (a)

Where p is the percentage of interest and q =1- p

x = 297,230 y = 383,576

From table I, we can interpolate to get

.$x & 1,754 SY + 1,931

Applying formula (b), SP + .0024. The standard

error of the percent is .24.

Applying this formula to the above example, the

sampling error of 383,576 marriages is found to

be 1,935, a slightly more accurate figure than

1,931. However, the sampling error of the percent would still be 0.1.

3. The sampling error of a ratio can be approximated when the numerator and the denominator are estimates of different parameters

based on probability samples using the following

formula:

>

.1

sXlq= —JS:+:2S: ()

Y Y

2. Proportions with an estimated base, and with

counts in the numerator also included in the

(c)

denominator, have standard error:

Where x = the estimated frequency of a particular characteristic of the population

(b)

of interest

Y = the estimated size of the population at risk

s, = the standard error of x

Where p = XIY is the proportion Sv = the standard error of y

26
It should be noted that formula (C)gives the sampling error of a proportion. To obtain a sampling

error of a rate per 1,000, SX,ymust be multiplied

by 1,000.

The sampling errors of many such rates

are given in table II. For example, the sampling

error of the remarriage rate for previously divorced men in the MR4 can be approximated.

This rate in 1969 was 220.8 (table 2) and the base

population was 1,213,000. The total number of

remarriages for this population is (1,213,000)

(220.8/1,000) = 267,830. From table II an approximate sampling error for tbe rate can be

obtained by using the numbers closest to the

numbers in the example. The number of marriages used in the table would be 249,000, and

the population would be 1,000,000. F,or these two

numbers an approximate sampling error of 6.9

is obtained from the table.

A more exact sampling error can be computed using formula (c) given above.

x = 267,830 y = 1,213,000

Calculated from formula (a) for marriage frequencies

SxA 1,688

Interpolating from the row of standard errors of

the population given in table II

Sv & 28,278

The resulting Sx,yis .0053. The standard error

of the rate per 1,000 is 5.3.

Statistical Significance

To determine if two proportions P, and P2 (or

two percentages of rates converted into proportions) are

significantly different statistically, the following expression can be used:

P, - P2

.-

(d)

If this quotient is greater than 2, the probability is less

than .05 that the difference between the two proportions

is due to chance. For example, the remarriage rate for

brides 25 to 29 years is 291.6 and the remarriage rate

for brides 30 to 34 is 2!36.3 (table 4). Formula (d) can

be used to test whether these two rates are significantly

different statistically.

Converting the rates to proportions

P, =.2916 P2 = .2063

C)btaining the frequencies for these age groups from the

annual volume for 1969

~, = 71,148 X2 = 4%296

Dividing the frequencies by the proportions to obtain the

population bases

y, = 243,992 Y2 = 238,953

Interpolating from tables I and H to obtain standard

errors of frequencies

5X, & 928 SX2k 777

Svl & 14,320 Sy,a 14,169

Applying formula (c)

Spl =.0175 SP2=.0127

The quotient obtained by applying formula (d) is 3.947.

Therefore, the two rates can be assumed to be significantly different statistically.

000

-2 U. S. GOVERNMENT PI?DJTRJGOFFICE :1974 543-8 S0/38

27
VITAL AND HEALTH STATISTICS PUBLICATION SERt ES

Originally Public Health Service Publication No. 1000

Series 1. programs and collection procedures. — Reports which describe the general programs of the National

Center for Health Statistics and its offices and divisions, data collection methods used, definitions,

and other material necessary for understanding the data.

Series 2. Data emluation and methods research. — Studies of new statistical methodology including: experimental tests of new survey methods, studies of vital statistics collection methods, new analytical

techniques, objective evaluations of reliability of collected data, contributions to statistical theory.

Series 3. Analytical studies. —Reports presenting analytical or interpretive studies basedon vital and health

statistics, carrying the analysis further than the expository types of reports in the other series.

Series 4. Documents and committee repo~ts. — Final reports of major committees concerned wit$ vital and

health statistics, and documents such as recommended model vital registration laws and revised

birth and death certificates,

Series 10. Dab from the Health Intevview Swvev.— Statistics on illness, accidental injuries, disability, use

of hpspital, medical, dental, and other services, and other health-related topics, based on data

collected in a continuing national household interview survey.

Series 11. Data from the Health Examination Swvey. —Data from direct examination, testing, and measurement of national samples of the civilian, noninstitutional population provide the basis for two types

of reports: (1) estimates of the medically defined prevalence of specific diseases in the United

Statea and the distributions of the population with respect to physical, physiological, and psychological characteristics; and (2) analysis of relationships among the various measurements without

reference to an explicit finite universe of persons.

Series 12. Data from the Ins titutional Population Surveys. —Statistics relating to the health characteristics of

persons in institutions, and their medical, nursing, and personal care received, based on national

samples of establishments providing these services and samples of the residents or patients.

Series 13. Datu fi’om the Hospital Discharge Swvey. –Statistics relating to discliarged patients in short-stay

hospitals, based on a sample of patient records in a national sample of hospitals.

Series 14, Data on health resources: manpower and facilities. —Statistics on the numbers, geographic distribution, and characteristics of health resources including physicians, dentists, nurses, other health

occupations, hospitals, nursing homes, and outpatient facilities.

Series 20. Data on movtality. —Various statistics on mortality other than as included in regular annual or

montnl y reports —special analyses by cause of death, age, and other demographic variables, also

geographic and time series analyses.

Sevies 21. Data on natality, marriage, and divorce. —Various statistics on nata~ity, marriage, and divorce

other than as included in regular annual or monthly reports-special analyses by demographic

variables, also geographic and time series analyses, studies of fertility.

Series 22. Data porn the National Natality and Movtality Suvveys. — Statistics on chai-acteristics of births

and deaths not available from the vital records, based on sample surveys stemming from these

records, including such topics as mortality by socioeconomic class, hospital experience in the

last year of life, medical care during pregnancy, health insurance coverage, etc.

For a list of titles of reports published in these series, write to: Office of Information

National Center for Health Statistics

Public Health Service, HRA

Rockville, Md. 20852
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE

Health Resources Administration

5600 Fishers Lane

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID

o

*

Rockvillc, Maryland 20852

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEW

US.MAIL

OFFICIAL BUSINESS HEW 390

Penah y for Private Use $300

THIRD CLASS

BLK. RT.