Divorce in Singapore and the MSF study
Tags: Sociology, Divorce, Singapore, Marriage, Child Development

The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) released the “first-ever local study” to understand the long-term impact on children from divorced families. The Study on the Intergenerational Effects of Divorce on Children in Singapore concluded that children suffer along-term damages on “economic and marriage outcomes” from their parents’ divorce well into adulthood at 35 years of age. The authors call this the “divorce penalty”.

The “divorce penalty”. Source: MSF study of ~9,000 Singapore Citizens with divorced parents, out of a wider population of ~100,000 born between 1979 and 1981

This government research echoes locally what sociologists elsewhere have known for a while (in US, UK, China, and many other countries): that marital stability has effects across generations. It is also welcome in reaffirming recognition for co-parenting after a divorce. Notwithstanding, the study has a narrow definition of what success in Singapore means, and might overweight the impact of divorce in explaining children’s outcomes. We must reconsider if divorce itself is the cause, or actually an effect of other structures like inequality or competition. This will help guide the next steps on how much more help children in divorce scenarios need, or what we can do to support co-parenting in the midst of a separation.

What is success in Singapore?

The most obvious critique is that the study uses an outdated, narrow definition of what constitutes success in Singapore. Specifically, its authors judge a child’s success based on just 5 metrics: (1) Proportion who obtained a university degree (2) Income (3) CPF balance (4) Proportion who got married (5) Proportion who got divorced. This is the government’s idea of policy success, and not personal success. Look no further than how the authors classify someone’s decision to not marry by age 35 as a “disadvantage” or “penalty”.

It is quite possible — and indeed increasingly likely — that people who are not married or have low savings could be successful. The study also notably omits emotional/mental wellbeing and feelings of overall satisfaction/happiness, which sociological studies frequently consider. Consider a single and satisfied food hawker or entrepreneur who invested his life savings in his store or business. And, as someone who does not meet all of the MSF’s 5 metrics, I don’t think I am any less successful (or happy) than my peers who do. Conversely, a divorced person could be happy from building their careers or raising a child, or even at least relieved that a toxic or abusive marriage is legally over.

Because of the way the study was constructed, the authors were likely unable to measure life satisfaction. Perhaps they might consider this as potential input for a future study. Until then, one might be even forgiven for thinking that personal happiness is an important component of “advantage” or “success” in Singapore.

Divorce is not the only factor

Even on its own definitions of success, the study commits a surprising design flaw — it does not control for parents’ own “successes”. Why is this important? Because a parent who obtains a university degree, or has higher savings (eg in housing assets), or is married is itself a strong predictor for a child to achieve those same types of success. The civil service notes that Singapore’s inter-generational mobility is on the decline.

Rather than measuring how a child has “succeeded” in absolute terms, the study should more accurately measure the relative difference between child and parent outcomes, i.e. whether or not a child’s prospects were improved or worsened by divorce (or no effect).

More broadly, a parent’s divorce is just one factor in the universe of reasons whether children “succeed” or “fail”. Even the Straits Times picked up on this, citing other underlying casual factors that cause both the divorce and the child’s “lower academic and other achievements”. Divorce may exacerbate existing problems, but it is not necessarily the cause. The original report says that it does not “strictly inform us of the causal impact of divorce”, but it does so in a small note compared to a clear overall emphasis on the “divorce penalty”, to the exclusion of so many other factors.

Why do people divorce?

Then there is the issue with the starting assumptions of the study— divorce is the input, while the “divorce penalty” inflicted on the child is the output. The implicit conclusion, whether intentional or not, is that divorce itself is a societal ill that should be stamped out.

Let’s take off our policy hat for a second and empathise as humans. A stable marriage is necessarily a happy one, or an indication of success per se. It sounds trite to say, but it must be said: someone who decides to divorce their spouse often does so for personally valid reasons. Especially in a society where divorce remains taboo, people do not undertake divorce lightly.

The overwhelming reason for divorce in Singapore is “unreasonable behaviour”. There is negotiation, there is deliberation —all leading up to that fateful decision that separation, with all its attendant societal pressures and financial pitfalls, is the right path forward for the person’s own wellbeing. There are also darker situations where spousal abuse or marital rape happens, where marital separation is the ethical solution.

No couple undergoing a divorce is committing any social ill. They are living through a natural and sometimes necessary conclusion of a relationship. And, like any other relationship, separation is one outcome that cannot be solved by mere policy.

What should we do about parents in a divorce?

Should we equip parents with tools to build healthier relationships? Yes. But let’s remember that parents are humans too. A modern marriage means many things, but underneath its legal, religious, or societal trappings, it is still a human relationship vulnerable to break.

Reducing divorce rates should also not mean inducing a couple to stay together. The personal and social trauma of a divorce is sufficient. One example was HDB’s longstanding policy barring divorcees from buying subsidised flats for three-years, removed belatedly in a 2018 HDB decision.

Before scapegoating divorce as a scapegoat for children’s difficulties, we might first reflect on whether other bigger structures and systems have increasingly fostered the conditions ripe for marital unhappiness. A wider ecosystem of a high-stress society in schooling, career, and parenthood can severely strain both the parents’ relationship quality and children’s wellbeing. Rising income inequality may place additional pressure on low-earning households, compounded by declining mobility. These large factors help explain why marriage rates have fallen but divorce rates increased.

Singapore’s rate of divorce has increased, albeit from a lower base. The wider backdrop of other neighbouring or developed countries is one of flat or declining rates. Source: Our World In Data

What should we do about children in a divorce?

Should we tackle children’s emotional, educational, and welfare needs after their parents’ divorce? Certainly, and it is right that the government expands these children support services, but it must go further than the single separation event.

To thrive, children in a divorce need an ecosystem of unconditional support. These include case support for individual interventions and broader training for the whole kampung (village) of people who support a child’s growth: teachers, childcare providers, and other community support figures like religious leaders.

In the longer term, the government might consider more constructive research, including parent-child contact time post divorce or longitudinal studies that measure divorce and its impacts over time. This can help produce constructive recommendations that proactively help, rather than unfairly label, Singaporean children in divorce situations.

For now, until this society stops judging or government stops penalising the decision of parents to separate, no child is safe from recrimination.

-

MSF study: https://go.gov.sg/intergenstudydivorce