Are Women Really more Independent when their Husband Dies?
I saw this article about men being 30% more likely to die if their wife dies:
Male widows are more likely to die shortly after losing their wife than vice versa, new research suggests
Researchers from the Rochester Institute of Technology in America found that grieving husbands were 30 per cent more likely to die after being recently widowed, compared with their normal risk of mortality.
Women, however, did not have any increased risk of dying – perhaps due to them being more independent and prepared, the researchers suggested.
Note how the article shows the men in a negative light–they are unprepared–the women easily soldier on. However, note what the researcher finds when a woman loses a child:
He also uncovered a strong connection between the death of a child and the mortality of the mother, regardless of the cause of death, gender of the child, marital status, family size, income or education level of the mother.
If a woman lost a child, her chances of dying increased by as much as 133 per cent, he found.
Looking at results from more than 69,000 mothers aged between 20 and 50 over nine years, Professor Espinosa found those who had lost a child were three times more likely to die in the two years afterwards.
Naturally, a mother losing a child is a public health problem to be addressed:
The evidence of a heightened mortality rate for the mother, particularly in the first two years of the child’s passing, is especially relevant to public health policy and the timing of interventions that aim to improve the adverse health outcomes mothers experience after the death of a child.
So, my question is, if women are so independent, why are they more likely to die after a child dies? Doesn’t this study rather indicate that they don’t care as much if their husband dies and that their children are more important to them? Men often complain that once kids come along, they are tossed to the side like a pair of old socks. Maybe there is some truth in this. Or maybe men care more about their wives on average than the other way around.
Well there are two very simple explanations for why those two scenarios could be true that have nothing to do with “independence.”
First, women live longer than men, on average, and are generally married to men who are older than them. That means that at any given time the man is closer to death than the woman. In the less common case where the woman pre-deceases her husband, he’s not likely to be facing a very long life expectancy anyway. He’s statistically likely to die fairly soon anyway if his wife has just died of old age or age related sickness.
Secondly, there is a strong corrolation between things that kill infants and things that kill their mothers. I’ll bet we are dealing with one of those “very small numbers” statistical problems as well. I’ll bet that it isn’t all that common for a woman between 20 and 50 to die at any given time. If we compare that fairly small number of women who die unexpectedly between 20 and 50 to those women who have a child die while mom is between 20 and 50, that number would still be rather small, but aparently 3 times larger than the extremely small number who die unexpectedly. I think that could be accounted for by things that kill both children and parents, plus the rare cases where women died as a result of depression/suicide/poor health maintenance after the loss.
Basically I think that the whole study is probably BS. It shows that easily explained statistical phenomena can be spun into a health crisis that demands an immediate infusion of government money. Too bad I can’t convince them that I have a firearm deficiency and that might lead to depression and poor health outcomes.
I would like to know what happened to the word “widower”.
Warning, delving into un-PC, pre-1960s women’s lib concepts of human behavior. (Also, current, non-liberal Christian beliefs regarding human behavior.)
Let us look at the relationships involved. A woman finds purpose in caring and providing for her child. Coincidentally, a man who is not self centered, also finds purpose in providing for and caring for his wife. I’ll let you draw the inferred conclusions.
Stabat Mater
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kViqKdtfWCE&feature=related
What I find more interesting is the thought that Dr. H started but didn’t finish: Women encountering increased mortality after the loss of a child is presumably a public health problem, requiring the expenditure of billions of taxpayer dollars and the granting of new privileges and entitlements. However, men encountering increased mortality after the loss of a wife is just because men are stupid, and not a public health concern.
If men had longer lifespans than women it would be a national health issue.
“Men often complain that once kids come along, they are tossed to the side like a pair of old socks. Maybe there is some truth in this. Or maybe men care more about their wives on average than the other way around.”
Actually, both are true and related. Going through the birthing and mothering process are so atypical of what men go through, that the only likely comparison is a long term wife.
Sorry, birthing and mothering are drastic changes to your relationship. And while I love all 3 of my kids (now adults), my primary relationship on this earth is with my wife.
And knowing her for 36 years, I can safely say that her primary relationship on this earth is her children.
I’m not necessarily complaining, just being factual.
BTW: And if a woman’s mortality risk increases by 133%, while a widower’s mortality risk increases by 33%; Just who is the stronger, better prepared gender?
their children are more important to them
Dr. H, you’ve hit it on the head. Women frequently tie too much of their being into their children, to the expense of their marriage, their career, and really, their children. When they lose a child, especially an only child, they have lost a significant reason to continue living.
In a way, a husband is treated as a gift-giver; the wife has been given a gift by the husband, but the gift is HERS. The husband will feel a huge loss on the death of a child, but wives often think they don’t feel enough, so resent the man for not showing enough signs of grief.
The incidence of divorce after the loss of a child is not well studied; some have suggested it is much higher, but I can’t find any real evidence of that. On a gut level, I think it’s higher than the national average, but I have no idea how much higher.
In a way, a man is inured to the loss of a child by the loss of the wife when the child comes along. There is some level of resentment that the child has stolen the wife’s adoration; the wife becomes a mother first, and a wife second. The man has become a secondary part of the family, especially now that we are told by sociologists and the media that our contribution to the family is breadwinner and comic relief.
I think the incidence of men’s deaths soon after their wife’s passing will decrease significantly after the baby boomers are gone. They were the last to see any social pressure against divorce, and when divorce is always an option for a woman, a marriage is necessarily more of a business transaction and less of a lifelong commitment.
You may find it interesting that in Brazil the relationship between husband and wife supercedes the parent-child relationship. Children grow up seeing their fathers and mothers pay much more attention to each other than to the children. It’s not neglect at all, just that spousal relationships are considered precious and something that must be cultivated. Culture plays a large role in this. Compare how children are raised (with specific emphasis on boys versus girls) in Brazil, the US and Japan. Wow. Three profoundly different paradigms.
Zorro,
The Marital bond should supersede the parent-child bond; after all, it’s a bond you choose, not one that’s a gift of fate. Besides, a good parent should always be thinking about how to make their kid independent, and consequently should be preparing themselves for the diminished bond with their child sometime in the relatively near future.
Easy, societal stigma-free divorce, though, diminished the marital bond. Reduced importance of religion and its awareness of gender roles reduced it further. I think boys who grow up without fathers have problems not so much because a father isn’t there, but because mothers “spousify” them–they become “the man of the house” and get too much power without enough responsibility.
I was five years older than Joyce. When she died in ’08 I did not die soon after. I only wish I had.
“Professor Espinosa used data records from married people born between 1910 and 1930 to examine when partners died in relation to one another.”
um… I’d say that generation is somewhat different than currently.
And Mike43 make a very important additional point about where the focus is.
Importantly women are often ASSUMING that their husband will die before them, and so there is some preparation going on there… OTOH I’ve know many men that simply don’t see the value of continuing this life without their mate…
It’s not a question of strength or coping, it’s a choice.
A lot of marriages (certainly not all, but enough) – whether anyone wants to acknowledge this or not – are kind of glorified prostitution. Guy wants sex and a dopey woman at home, woman wants money but doesn’t like that icky “work” stuff. Perfect. They fit together like peas in a pod.
But the man then loses something he wants when dopey blow-up doll dies.
The woman gains what she wants: Total control over the money (her inheritance, payout of the life insurance etc.) without stupid telling her what to do.
Of course she’s going to be a lot happier.
Yup.
Bingo.
Men use jobs to get things they want. Money, house, medical care, security. Women use men. Yes, men are to women as jobs are to men.
Most women pretty much hate men.
I agree but with one caveat.
Women only hate beta males and lower and resent having to consort with them.
All women crave submission to a dominant alpha male. Women LOVE them.
That’s absolutely how things are.
I agree with Smoking Robot: Men get their money through work; women get their money through men.
I can’t source this but I was taught in counseling that the number one predictor of a failed marriage is the death of a child.
If you listen to married men talk about their wives, they all say she’s the best thing that ever happened to me.
If you listen to married women talk about their husbands, all they ever do is complain.
There is a disconnection there, somewhere.
Of course women are more attached to their children than to their husbands. Childbirth is a traumatic experience. If it doesn’t kill you, it will change you forever.
But marriage? That doesn’t change women. Of course she wants to get married. Look at all the benefits she gets–half of all income and assets, the house, guaranteed child support regardless of who the biological father is.
You’re damn right she wants to get married. She wants money, she wants child support, and she wants the absolute right to change her mind for any reason, for no reason. It’s a sad comedy or tragedy, depending on how you look at it.
I keep going back to when I was a Boy Scout. We went camping. Then there was that stupid episode of the Brady Bunch when Marsha demanded to be a Boy Scout. Every girl in America found that show to be empowering, as stupid as it was.
Then they changed the Boy Scouts to the Explorers, so girls could go on camping trips.
Hey, it’s a hike. These girls couldn’t even make it for a mile. They all took off their packs, sat down and started complaining. Then they all started pouring canteen water on their foreheads.
I’m like, WTF are doing? If you’re tired, I understand, but don’t take your pack off. Just lean up against a tree. And whatever you do, don’t waste fresh water. There is no fresh water in the wilderness. “But I’m tired! I’m hot!” Oh my God.
I have to carry a 50 lb pack. When I get to the campsite, which is ten miles away, I have to set up a tent, build a fire and cook food. So do you. You wanted to be a Boy Scout, or at least that’s what you said.
Whining, complaining, wasting water doesn’t cut it in the wilderness.
I’m out there to survive. I always carry two canteens, and I certainly don’t waste water by pouring it on my head, no matter how tired I get. Food you can find anwhere, but drinkable water? No.
This is my experience with the modern American girl. She wants to be a Boy Scout, but she doesn’t know how. She can’t survive in the wilderness.
And now she doesn’t like it. I really don’t care.
Do you know why men die before their wives?
They want to.
If I had to put up with the crap I see my married friends do dying would seem ok.
“If a woman lost a child, her chances of dying increased by as much as 133 per cent, he found.” My chance of dying is 100%. My wife’s chance is also 100%, As in, we’re all going to die some day. I’m guessing what was meant was “within some specific time frame. My first wife died young 16 years ago. Her mom died 3 years ago, and I expected my f-i-l to go within 3 months. Didn’t, and hasn’t.
Helen — most provocative piece. I thought about your final musings in respect to my own marriage. My husband definitely cares more about me than I do about myself. I care more about him than I do about myself. Ergo, the marriage works because natural vanity is self-effaced.
And while I have no way of gauging absolutely whether he cares more for me than I do for him, I am pretty sure that his memories of our marriage are more vivid and sentimental than mine. From this one might postulate that he would be a very sad widower, indeed.
Your husband cares more about you than you care about yourself.
But you still care more about yourself than you care about him.