Customer Reviews
Makes you think 
2007-04-02
The author clearly demonstrates (to her own surprise) that divorce is always and permanently harmful to children. She still thinks that couples sometimes need to divorce, but her studies demonstrate that children from divorced parents will always be handicapped by the divorce, sometimes in surprising ways.
Some of the reviewers are angered over this because for whatever reason they have had to come to terms with a divorce- either their own or their parents. Divorce is like chopping off a hand of your child. Yes, sometimes it is the only option or the best option, but your child is still permanently damaged. Your child can compensate and lead a good and happy life, but it will never be the same as if you had not chopped off her hand.
It does no one any good to deny the consequences of divorce. Sometimes it must still happen, but it always and permanently damages the children. It doesn't help to deny the truth because you don't want people to feel guilty.
Not what I expected 
2007-02-25
This book was given to me by a friend about a year after my divorce in 2003. A little background about myself and my username: I am indeed a "mister mom" working full time while raising my son by myself, and as a male who is a full-time single parent, I am obviously in the minority. I am also an evangelical Christian. As such, I am not a proponent of divorce and in many cases I believe it represents the selfishness of one or both parents and every effort should be made to salvage the marriage rather than just trade it in for a new one. This is even more important when there are children involved. In my case, however, my spouse had a mental illness (borderline personality disorder) and I believe the divorce was probably the best resolution of what was a very bad situation. It was her decision to leave. However, I was still very saddened that my son is not growing up with the benefit of a conventional, nuclear family, or with a larger female influence in his life. In today's "PC" climate we're led to believe that one loving parent, or two parents of the same gender, can do just as good a job as the conventional male/female parent model that has been in place for millenia. I strongly disagree. Nor do I agree with those who think that divorce itself is somewhat benign, and the problem lies more with the way parents handle it than in the divorce itself. Certain things are traumatic for children, regardless of how civil the parents try to be about it. Even though my son seems well-adjusted, I know there are wounds - some of which may not surface until he is much older. I believe that countless studies support my conclusions. As such, I am deeply skeptical of most "divorce" books because they seek to put a happy face on a situation that rarely has an upside, and are often little more than adults trying to put a positive spin on something the kids inherently know is a bad thing at the core of their being.
So it was with some hesitation that I opened this book that was written by Ms. Wallerstein, a former lecturer at UC Berkeley. I assumed first of all that someone who lectured at the mecca of American liberalism would probably be very critical of the traditional family and extol the virtues of no-fault divorce by insisting that if the parents were happy, then the kids would be happy too. I further assumed that the "unexpected" part of the legacy in this book would be that children of divorce end up turning out just about the same as children of conventional families. In other words, that with all the hype about how "bad" divorce was, the study would "surprisingly" find that divorce wasn't all that bad for kids afterall.
To put it simply: I was completely wrong in my assumptions. The "unexpected" part of the book was indeed unexpected - that kids were much more profoundly negatively affected by divorce than we've been led to believe by those who want to treat single families as the new "norm" and suggest that it is merely one in a variety of equally valid parenting alternatives.
Essentially what we have here is a group of individuals that Wallerstein has followed from their own childhoods into their adulthood - to see how they have fared with their own parents' divorces 25 years later.
Elsewhere I have seen the book criticized because it used such a small sample size (only 7 children are detailed in the book). But I think this fails to recognize that Wallerstein actually used a much larger sample size (60 families) and chose to detail only a handful in this book because she felt their stories were "typical."
What Wallerstein found was that the legacy of divorce is more negative than expected - not better - and that in spite of all the lip service paid by courts and advocacy groups, decisions are rarely made with the best interests of children in mind. Wallerstein is especially critical of the idea of "sharing" children back and forth because children are left with the sense that while their parents may have homes, as children they are merely like a set of car keys, passed back and forth, and end up feeling as though they have no place that is distinctly their own. There ends up being no continuity and most decision are made for the convenience of the parents, not the children.
If you are looking for a "feel good" book that will justify that divorce was done "for the sake of the kids" this isn't your book. It simply lets the data speak for itself: children do not fare better under divorce. Yes, they can turn out OK - and that is certainly the objective with my own son - but it takes considerable work because the lack of two parents in and of itself is a huge handicap for children. Indeed, divorce is much harder than the death of a parent because the child is forced to deal with parents who cannot love one another and remain committed, and it affects their own views of marriage, commitment, and love. Many times these problems do not surface until the grown children enter into their own relationships or marriages.
I found the book fascinating, scholarly, and meticulously researched and documented. The fact that it does not draw upon any particular religious beliefs or traditions for its conclusions and does not engage in moralizing should make the message that much stronger.
If you are considering a divorce "for the sake of the children" you would be wise to read this book first. If you are already divorced, you will likewise find this book helpful as you structure visitation and other aspects of shared parenting responsibilities.
Flawed study with flawed conclusions. There are better alternatives. 
2007-02-20
This book is a poisonous but convincingly well written attack on divorce. It's conclusions --- that divorce pretty much always destroys the children --- kept me in a bad marriage many years longer than necessary, and it's conclusions are flawed.
First of all, this is a very small study of people who volunteered to be included, so the families under consideration are far from representative of the population as a whole. (The participants were offered free counseling, so you could argue that Dr. Wallerstein was selecting for the least functional divorces.) Moreover, there's no control group, so it's unclear which of the problems that Wallerstein discusses are actually caused by the divorce and which or are commonplace in society as a whole. (Other studies point to the latter.) She simply assumes that everything bad was caused by the divorce.
This book, however, is an effective indictment of the too-common arrangement, where the mother gets the kids and the father is banished to a four-day-a-month visiting schedule---an arrangement that's almost guaranteed to be bad for the kids. Most of the divorces she discusses work that way. There are other alternatives, however, that are much less destructive, and Wallerstein's book discusses none of these.
I strongly recommend that you read Mavis Heatherington's "For Better or For Worse: Divorce Reconsidered" and Constance Ahrons' "The Good Divorce: Keeping Your Family Together When Your Marriage Comes Apart," either instead of, or at least as a complement to Wallerstein's book. These books are based on much larger studies, done properly in the sense of looking at a large, randomly selected, group of subjects with control groups in place. They come to very different conclusions than Wallerstein.
An absolute must for anyone touched by divorce. 2007-01-18
I believed that at 46, my healing from my parents divorce when I was 11 was finally resolving. I have 3 brothers that haven't even begun to heal, they continue in the "land of denial" and it was my hope that reading this book would provide me insight into a way to help my brothers begin their healing. What a surprise. My beliefs on divorce have changed. Things I was certain of were either misunderstood or outright wrong. I've never considered any one source a certainty on any subject, yet this book is based on the "only" long-term study ever performed and, therefore, is the definitive book on this subject.
If each person who reads this book, takes one step towards changing/bettering the current methods of America's court system in how it handles living and visitation arrangements for children of divorce, we may actually be able to positively alter the course of America's next generation of children of divorce.
I will be buying four copies of this book (probably on tape or CD), one for each brother and, since I obtained my copy through the library, one for me.
It makes useful points 
2007-01-18
On one hand, this book makes useful points and divorce and its impact on children and offers better alternatives.
The problem with it is that most of the evidence is anecdotal. I don't think a lot of the problems the people in the book had were due to divorce, but to the way their parents handled the divorce.
Many of them either leaned on their children too much for support or they went from giving their children attention and affection to ignoring them in favour of work and other mates.
A lot of the problems could have been lessened with more care. Especially in the case of the fellow who had a congenital heart defect. He needed attention and help, he didn't need to be shunted off to the side.
I'm also reading about attachment issues and how they can impact a person from the time they are a baby to an adult.
If a person has to divorce, they should ask themselves if it is the right thing to do and if all other options have been exausted. Forcing people to stay together in a stagnating marriage seems a bit cruel to me, like in the case of the intact family she used as an example.
Also, I do not agree with her stating that children don't notice the tention and fighting in their family. They do. Children notice more than people give them credit for.
Like so many experts she paints with too broad a brush. She uses too many generalizations. It lessens the impact of her argument.
But, a lot of the advice she gives to the system could be used to make divorce easier on parents and children. Divorce isn't going away anytime soon, but, with responsibility and care perhaps it can be easier on children. It is hard for children to adapt to changes. I suggest looking at the advice she offers, but question her methods and conclusions.
Useful but incomplete 2008-07-16
Are these results really unexpected? Do parents really think that children are not affected by divorce? Or do they justify that they are better off then they would have been if their parents stayed in an unhappy/unhealthy marriage? Or does any of it matter? Will this book keep parents together? Maybe, but probably not.
Every adult is shaped by their childhood, but I wholeheartedly disagree with this author's stance that children are forever victims of their childhood and their parent's divorce. There comes a point in everyone's life, usually before the age of 18, that their life begins to be shaped by their own choices and not what their parents did to them. The studies are very limited and therefore the results and conclusions are flawed and incomplete.
The interviews of the children she references are well documented but she left out so many groups of children of divorce and studied only cases where the children were devastated by their parents divorce. Even that can be argued though, because they were devastated more by the way their parents had failed to protect them after the divorce. Parents parented differently after the divorce and it is unusually more inattentive parenting then before. (because the parent is rebuilding their own life, they often have to work more or go back to school, or are devastated emotionally and don't have anything left to give to the children) I must note here that most of these children took similar paths as children raised in single parent homes where no divorce had ever occurred or they had not been involved with both parents. This leads me to believe that it is not necessarily a result of the divorce but of the parenting, or lack there of. Children with involved, attentive parents (even single parents) are going to do better in life than those without.
The author fails to interview children who have 2, equally involved, cooperative, supportive parents who remain in close geographical distance to each other and raise the children `together' until they are grown. She also fails to interview children who were relieved and freed by their parents divorce. Not that either of these situations is the ideal but they sure weren't given any consideration in the `Unexpected Legacy...25 year landmark study.' The author was quick to conclude that every bump in the road of life was due the divorce of their parents. There is nothing to say that the lives of these children would be dramatically different had their parents stayed together. If you are looking to blame something or someone else for your problems then this book will give you that reason if you hadn't already thought of it yourself.
Children of all backgrounds face a verity of different challenges. This could be poverty, the death of a parent, the deployment of a parent, mental or physical illness of a parent, obesity, alcoholism or drug addictions, unemployment, depression, imprisonment, incompetence, and the list goes on. If you chose to be impaired by your childhood circumstances and not rise above the difficulty then that is where you will stay.
All in all, the book was easy to read and contained useful information. It kept my interest even though it lacked many other perspectives. It was written with good intent and delivered a strong message that divorce damages children. It makes divorce appear an unattractive alternative (as it should be in most cases) but did not condemn it in all cases either. At no point did this book make reference to religion or how faith or beliefs alter thoughts and actions. I liked the longevity of the study but it was in long intervals that these children were interviewed. (5 or more years apart until the 25th year)
I do not think this book warrants the title. The results are hardly unexpected and the study was far from what I would expect of a `landmark' study. I give it a 5, however, because I think the information in it should be considered by parents who are considering divorce, though this should not be your only reference. There was so much missing form this study, yet there is enough here that it is worth the read.
The book might be more effective if it were required reading before a wedding. More thought might go into the preplanning and spouse selection if you had a greater understanding of the possible outcomes of your choices. But who would stop to read a book like this in the midst of buying a dress, ordering flowers and sending out wedding invitations?
This book focuses on the negative results of growing up with divorced parents and although I don't think a book on divorce should have a positive overtone to it, I don't think that this study was broad enough to be objective. Almost all parents should try harder than they do to salvage the marriage, not just for the sake of the children but for the fact that you made a promise. Kids and adults alike realize that someone didn't do what they said they would and it's hard to put trust in a person who doesn't keep their word. Even though most children will always love and remain loyal to both parents they will make judgments in their life about who was wrong or right in their parents marriage/divorce and usually, in the long run, the relationship with the parent they see as morally wrong will suffer. Ultimately, the parent-child relationship will change after the divorce, no matter what the circumstances, and it's almost never a change for the better.
very good 2008-03-12
this book provides an excellent examination of some of the ways in which divorce affects children whose parents have divorced. it provides outstanding longitudinal data over, is it 25 years, for many people. the text goes into great detail on the authors' observations and descriptions of individuals' developmental struggles. it is acknowledged by the authors that development can be challenging for all children, whether parents are happily married, whether they are bitterly married, or they divorce. most of the text discusses perhaps half dozen of the dozens of children included in the study. while a fascinating qualitative text, i yearn for more hard data comparing all children, those whose parents remained married, and those whose parent divorced. i also wish that the text would have elaborated upon, or even mentioned, the other dozens of children not discussed. the authors cite that economic struggles plague many families of divorce. the effects of economics on problems developed by the children, while difficult to isolate, should have, at least, been mentioned. overall, the conclusions reached are logical, consistent with the findings throughout the text, and (perhaps most importantly :)) they are consistent with my beliefs. overall, this is an excellent qualitative book that describes the authors' impressions of the effects of divorce on select children.
Unexpected Legacy of Divorce . . . 
2007-12-28
What a great book! I love that the study was done over 25 years and that children of divorce were measured against functional and dysfunctional intact families. I totally recommend this read. It is an immense help to read of others who understand what a child of divorce experiences, especially when people who haven't experienced it can't seem to put themselves in the shoes of those who have.
As for the business side, the book came in decent timee, but I do not remember ordering a used, but rather a new, book. I read one or two other reviews that mentioned this particular book seller (not Amazon, but rather BORDEBOOK) did not coordinate their available product to the order particulars in regards to CONDITION of the book.
If you are going to buy from BORDEBOOK, I recommend that you buy those items whose condition you will not care too much about. If you are particular about product condition, you will either have to order from someplace else, or just learn to overlook the condition of what you receive. The book was valuable enough to me to lump the condition. I will probably buy a second copy, just not from BORDEBOOK.
The Unexpected Legacy of Divorce 2007-12-26
This is the best research and factual information regarding the effects of Divorce on children who are natural psychological victims of their parents'Divorce. Unfortunately, well meaning parents are fairly helpless to alleviate the problems Divorce creates for their children. Many books talk about Divorce in a different light in terms of the effects, this book clearly states the consequences to children, many of which I have seen in my 30years plus as a psychotherapist in Denver, Colorado. Divorce creates many negative effects for children that remain with them for all of their lives.
Hello? Divorce Ain't Good for Kids! 2007-11-27
This is an invaluable study, simultaneously profound and deeply disturbing. Researchers/authors Wallerstein, Lewis, and Blakeslee describe a quarter century societal shift of monumental proportions. By the year 2000, 25% of adults under the age of 44 were children of divorce. By and large, however, society had chosen to ignore the elephant in the room of the long term impact of divorce on children. Instead, we comforted ourselves with "myths":
* "The first holds that if parents are happier the children will be happier, too....many adults who are trapped in very unhappy marriages would be surprised to learn that their children are relatively content. They don't care if Mom and Dad sleep in different beds as long as the family is together....Children in postdivorce families do not, on the whole, look happier, healthier, or more well adjusted even if one or both parents are happier....children from divorced and remarried families are more aggressive toward their parents and teachers. They experience more depression....more learning difficulties...more problems with peers....two to three times more likely to be referred for psychological help at school....More of them end up in mental health clinics and hospital settings. There is earlier sexual activity, more children born out of wedlock, less marriage, and more divorce. Numerous studies show that adult children of divorce have more psychological problems than those raised in intact marriages....the myth that children always benefit from divorce that makes parents happier...continues to exert subtle, unconscious influences" (p. xxiii)
* "A second myth is based on the premise that divorce is a temporary crisis that exerts its most harmful effects on parents and children at the time of the breakup. Adult children of divorce are telling us loud and clear that their parent' anger at the time of the breakup is not what matters most. Unless there was violence or abuse or unremitting high conflict, they have dim memories of what transpired during this supposedly critical period" (p. xxv).
