Slashdot Mirror


Facebook a Factor in a Third of UK Divorces

hypnosec writes with an excerpt from an IT Pro Portal article: "A recent survey conducted by a UK based divorce website disclosed that 33 percent of behavior divorce petitions filed cite Facebook as a cause for filing for divorce in 2011. In 2009 this figure was 20 per cent. 5000 people were surveyed by Divorce-Online, the UK divorce website, during 2009 and 2011 covering Facebook as a means to check behavior of spouse with the opposite sex and spouses using the social networking platform to comment about their exes post the separation. Three reasons that came out on the top for listing Facebook in divorce petition were inappropriate messages sent to the opposite sex, posting nasty comments about exes, and friends on Facebook reporting about spouse's behavior."

21 of 189 comments (clear)

  1. Facebook and divorce, it writes itself! by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Welcome, ladies and gentlemen! How many times can the same story be recycled over the course of two years?

    December 22, 2009 - Facebook's Other Top Trend of 2009: Divorce

    April 12, 2010 - Facebook to Blame for Divorce Boom

    June 28, 2010 - Facebook is divorce lawyers' new best friend

    January 19, 2011 - Divorce cases get the Facebook factor

    March 7, 2011 - Survey Shows Facebook an Increasing Factor in Divorce

    January 1, 2012 - Facebook flirting triggers divorces

    Slow news cycle? Nothing else to publish? Blame Facebook for divorce!

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."
    1. Re:Facebook and divorce, it writes itself! by mysidia · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Welcome, ladies and gentlemen! How many times can the same story be recycled over the course of two years?

      Before Facebook was created... was there analysis done to see if Telephones, The postal service, Credit cards/ATMs,Cars, Prostitution, Hotels and Mobile phones were factors in divorces?

      I suspect a lot of divorces ended due to cheating; and driving to a cheap Hotel to meet with someone...

      And yes... the car is an enabling technology, but it doesn't cause the behavior that leads to divorces; it's just a channel enabling communication (including destructive communication).

    2. Re:Facebook and divorce, it writes itself! by cavePrisoner · · Score: 4, Interesting

      To be fair, Facebook makes it easier to get caught. All you have to do is stay logged in once by accident. If the cheater gets caught with any of the ones you listed, it can usually be explained with business. Getting caught on Facebook is just straightforward.

      Also, facebook just looks bad sometimes, even when you haven't done anything wrong. I have an ex that likes all my posts. I haven't spoken to her in a year, but if I were married I can imagine that still creating some tension.

    3. Re:Facebook and divorce, it writes itself! by lewko · · Score: 4, Funny

      I would divorce my Wife if I found out she used MySpace.

      --
      Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
    4. Re:Facebook and divorce, it writes itself! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's not facebook, per se. It's the internet. The fact is, people are more likely to cheat if there is plenty of temptation. They always think they can get away with it and that it's worth it and it's easy to be swept away by a stranger. There's excitement. There's something new. And for the biggest part of the process, it's all in the safety of your own home. It's just "my friend online - don't get jealous". Then, eventually, it's the guy or girl you met in person. And fucked. It happend long before facebook. It happened on BBSes. The first time I got laid, I was sixteen and hooked up with a twenty one year old married chick whose husband was away at basic training. We were just friends. Then we met. And were just friends. And then we met a second time a few days later. And had sex. And it was just something we did while he was still away and justified to ourselves. And then she wanted to leave him and be with me. And months later, she left me to be with another dude she met online. And this was in the early to mid 1990s. On a BBS. Where there are only a few hundred people and they're all in local calling distance. This wasn't the only such experience I've had. And I've witnessed even more of this stuff occur since the early 90s -- friends who did the cheating. Friends who were cheated on. Friends who were the guy or girl that the cheater cheated with.

      Today, you have a billion people. Everywhere and anywhere. Not only via a dialup system in your home office, but via the phone in your pocket that you can use 24x7 when nobody even knows you are using it to communicate with people. And we have photos and video and chat.

      As far as I'm concerned, it is only in the most rarest exception that someone cheating with another person online isn't just a matter of time. Given enough exposure, enough temptation, and enough time - it'll happen. Period. And it has nothing to do with "facebook".

  2. Cited in, not cited as the cause of. by Headw1nd · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wow, this is some poor reporting. At first I thought the summary was to blame, but no, the articles themselves have it wrong. Facebook is being cited in 33% of all British divorces, but not as the cause. When they say cited, they mean just that: That something from Facebook was brought up in the courtroom. That could be, and in fact seems to frequently be something from well after the couple has separated, brought up as part of custody or property hearings.

    1. Re:Cited in, not cited as the cause of. by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is supposed to be one of those dumb watercooler stories. People who don't get the internet are supposed to roll their eyes at the big, bad internet making things worse. Cheesy morning radio shows read this stories like this.

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    2. Re:Cited in, not cited as the cause of. by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It doesn't even say that anything particularly interesting was cited from Facebook. Lawyers often pad these kinds of filings with just-to-be-safe evidence, and Facebook is probably an easy source of evidence for all sorts of mundane things that wouldn't necessarily even be challenged at all. "Bob is, as of our last knowledge, in possession of the couple's former Honda Civic [attach a printed out & dated Facebook photo of Bob washing his car]" and that kind of stuff.

  3. Not suprising... by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Its not that surprising. Human behavior hasn't really changed over the years however the information age has made it harder to hide affairs. 30 years ago an affair 1000 miles away while on a business trip would be incredibly easy to hide. Today? Not so much. We've gone from spouses spending little time in contact to constant 24/7 contact so it is no wonder that their spouse's flaws come to light. No longer is work an 8-9 hour void for 5 days a week with no contact to their spouse. No longer do long trips pose a problem thanks to cell phones.

    The more we are in contact with each other the more evident flaws are.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:Not suprising... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Having an affair is not a flaw. Snoring, forgetting to take out the trash, grabbing the remote too often, those are flaws. Things that you accept or overlook or compromise over. An affair, goes waaay beyond, when it comes to that, then you have nothing. No, you have less than that, you have lost years of your life to a stranger.

  4. Divorce App for Facebook.... hmm by bgibby9 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Shit, I'd better get into that first!

    --
    http://www.gibby.net.au
  5. News of the Day, Jan 2nd, 1812 by AlienIntelligence · · Score: 4, Funny

    Social sites such as bars cited as responsible for 33% of divorces,

    The top 3 reasons cited:
    Inappropriate comments to members of the opposite sex;
    Separated spouses saying nasty comments about each other;
    Friends reporting spouse’s behaviour.

    More news @ 11, or make that 12, the year, 2012, when NOTHING HAS CHANGED!

    -AI

    --
    For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion
  6. I think I now may go get a facebook page by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    If my chances of divorce are higher having Facebook, count me in.

  7. Re:People still haven't learned... by icebike · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Go read the story. You don't even have to have a Facebook account to get mentioned by third parties.
    Next thing you know your ex cites a Facebook posting by someone you dont even know.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  8. Re:wow, what did people do before facebook? by gmhowell · · Score: 5, Funny

    it must have been much more difficult to dig dirt when people wanted to divorce without saying they wanted out :)

    My ex dug through my slashdot comments.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  9. Kinda... but not really by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There are cases like mine where my FaceBook is never logged off and my wife can read it any time she wants. The reason is, there's nothing to hide. I've classically been "The Safe Guy" on FaceBook and at the office and elsewhere. Women will hang around me and even flirt a bit with me because they know that not only do I enjoy the attention, but that there's just no way that I'm going to be a risk to them. I'm also the guy who will bring them safely home at the end of the night if they drink to much.

    You make the presumption that it's an issue that it's easier for people to get caught. And yet, men acting inappropriately or stupidly probably only accounts for about half of the cases. Some guy adding his ex from high school or someone else that his wife is jealous of (and it works reversing the genders as well) probably accounts for a lot also. People are extremely insecure at times. All my ex-girlfriends which didn't turn out to be nut jobs (and even one or two that did) are on my friends list. I also have the captain of the high school cheer leading team and others which my wife could easily get jealous of if she didn't understand me well enough to know that friends are friends... wife is wife. You do some things with friends, you do some more things with wife :)

    Now, there's another big reason for it. Women or men who got married too quickly, found out that they screwed up... maybe getting married too young, got married for the money, got married just to throw a wedding (watch TLC sometime, Bridezilla, Left at the Alter, etc...) and once the dream wedding was over, there was no point to the marriage. All kinds of reasons people get married when they really shouldn't have and then FaceBook is a great way to come up with "evidence" against their spouse so they can get out of it without getting too burned.

    So, FaceBook is probably just something that magnifies problems for some people. Jealous and insecure people were able to lie to themselves beforehand and pretend like it's just their imagination and now they got some confirmation it wasn't. Guys who act like assholes behind their wive's backs get talked about. People who were looking for a way out to begin with can find things more easily. In short, Facebook is really nothing more than a tool.

    Now, for the real solution to this problem.
    DON'T GET MARRIED. Marriage is a religious commitment between two people before an audience and some god of some type. In most religions, it's expected to be for life. If you and your girl are two people who are the types to not "stick together through thick and thin" then getting married in the first place is a lie. In modern times where a woman is able to put food on her own table, buy her own cloths and if necessary put a roof over her own head, there's absolutely no good reason for marriage other than religious belief. If you have kids together and are worried about the issue of custody if one of the parent die, there are civil unions and contractual agreements for that. You don't have to get legally married to have a wedding party. You don't have to get legally married to get some guy in a funny costume or hat ask you if you love each other. Legal marriage is an institution which says "I'll make a promise to this lady because I love her and I don't want her to ever worry about where her next meal is coming from. I legally take the responsibility of this woman and promise that since she is incapable of taking care of herself if need be, this will take care of that." and to a woman it says "I'm too weak to care for myself and I need some legal protection that makes it so he can't just run off to be with someone else without some form of legal and financial repercussion. So even if he does ditch me for someone who's willing to do things I'm not, he'll owe me for life". Civil union allows all the things like "If the decision comes whether to take me off of life support, I want this person to choose", but so does a living will.

    Just remember, marriage is designed to protect the weaker gender. Oh... marriage is also the core of the entire divorce attorney business.

    1. Re:Kinda... but not really by neyla · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Almost agree. Minor nitpick: The religious angle isn't of importance. There's been long-term formalised bonds between husband and wife across a wide spectrum of different religions and cultures, enough so that I'd argue that the concept of "marriage", along with "funeral", "name-giving-ceremony" and "coming-of-age-ceremony" are near-universal in human culture.

      Marriage is a formal announcement of a couples intention to stay together long-term. With this announcement comes certain duties, and certain priviledges. If you're cynical about it, you could say that you should marry if the benefits outweigh the drawbacks - I did, but religion wasn't a relevant part of that question (we're both atheists)

    2. Re:Kinda... but not really by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm an atheist and I really am not sure about my wife. I think she wants to believe, but I don't make it very easy to hehe.

      To me, the marriage itself is irrelevant. Actually, not entirely, I live in a country other than my own and the marriage initially made that possible. But that's not the reason we got married. Marriage was very important to her and her family... who are Christians.

      There are no duties or privileges that are not applicable within a responsible relationship that requires marriage to make so. Also, a formal announcement and a legal binding are two entirely different things. In fact, I'm a strong believer that people should be able to get legally bound in every way that marriage suggests no matter what their sex, religion or even how many there are. I think if four old ladies are living in a house together and they are all that each other has in the world, they should be able to get "legally married" so that from every perspective which the government is concerned, they are as codependent as a married couple. If one decides to leave, they can choose to hire a lawyer or sit before a mediator to decide what that person should take away from the relationship.

      It's so sad and pathetic that we live in a world where marriage and divorce is a concern of the government. What's even more humorous is that the people who are most adamant regarding marriage and the government are the ones who are also most vocal about wanting the government to be smaller and have a lesser impact on their lives.

    3. Re:Kinda... but not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yeah, anthropologists have posted here before. The human race as we now know it never started being in lifelong monogamous relationships until the same time as modern agriculture started. Before that it was serial monogamy ~5 years together, just long enough for kids to fend for themselves, then off to a new relationship. Once there was something to tax, the governing bodies of the world stepped in and encouraged people to stay in relationships and have lots of kids so there would be more people to tax. Tax benefits to marriage in every society... Religions just like to incorporate everything into themselves so they can act like they are in charge.

    4. Re:Kinda... but not really by marga · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I find your comment completely misogynist and dumb.

      Even if marriage WAS designed to protect women in the past, it doesn't mean that it cannot get a new significance with new times.

      I agree that a lot of people get married for the wrong reasons. And that it'd be better if they didn't. I feel that you are mistaken in almost everything else you say, though.

      Your statements are suprisingly dumb for a +5 comment... "I'll make a promise to this lady because I love her and I don't want her to ever worry about where her next meal is coming from" ... "I'm too weak to care for myself and I need some legal protection that makes it so he can't just run off to be with someone else without some form of legal and financial repercussion." ...

      Marriage goes both ways. You fail to see that a man can also need the support of a woman. If a man is disabled for any reason (be it physical or psychological) then having a wife will mean having a person by his side to support him no matter what.

      For me, marriage means: "I'm committed to you, I'll stand by your side, in the good times and the bad times, I'll respect you and care for you until death do us apart".

      [I'm a married woman, I earn the same as my husband, I didn't marry him so he wouldn't run off, nor did I marry him so he would support me economically]

      --
      Margarita Manterola.
    5. Re:Kinda... but not really by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even in many countries today a man caught being unfaithful is punished with a fine while a woman being unfaithful is punished with death. This isn't mysogynistic, this is reality.

      That's a really, really disturbing thing to read from someone 'civilized' enough to sit and a keyboard and type.

      Can't it be reality AND mysogynistic? Must you be 'culturally sensitive' to the people stoning the woman to death? Really?