MENUMENU
  • EDITORIAL COMMITTEE
    • Alaka BasuAlaka Basu
      Alaka M. Basu is Professor, Development Sociology, Cornell University, and a member of the Guttmacher-Lancet Commission on Sexual and Reproductive Rights and Health
      Alessandro RosinaAlessandro Rosina
      Professor of Demography and Director, Center for Applied Statistics in Business and Economics, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore
      Andrea BrandoliniAndrea Brandolini
      Head of Statistical Analysis Directorate, Bank of Italy
      Bruno MasquelierBruno Masquelier
      Professor of Demography, University of Louvain, Belgium
      Cheikh MbackéCheikh Mbacké
      Associate Professor, Sociology department, Laval University
      Cinzia ContiCinzia Conti
      Researcher at Istat, Head of Unit on Foreign Presence and Social Dynamics
      Corrado BonifaziCorrado Bonifazi
      Director of the Institute for Research on Population and Social Policies, National Research Council, Rome Italy
      Ernestina CoastErnestina Coast
      Associate Professor of Population Studies, London School of Economics
      Wang FengFeng Wang
      Professor of Sociology at the University of California, Irvine, USA, and Professor at Fudan University, Shanghai, China fwang(at)uci.edu
      Francesco BillariFrancesco Billari
      Professor of Sociology and Demography, Department of Social and Political Sciences, Bocconi University. • Personal webpage • francesco.billari(at)unibocconi.it
      Gilles PisonGilles Pison
      Professor at Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle and Director of Research at the French National Institute for Demographic Studies (INED) (Paris)
      Gustavo De SantisGustavo De Santis
      Professor of Demography, University of Florence, Italy
      Jacques VallinJacques Vallin
      Emeritus Research Director at INED, Paris; Honorary President of IUSSP
      John KnodelJohn Knodel
      Research Professor Emeritus, Population Studies Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan (USA) and International staff, College of Populations Studies, Chulalongkorn University (Thailand)
      Letizia MencariniLetizia Mencarini
      Associate professor of Demography, Bocconi University - Dondena Centre for Research on Social Dynamics and Public Policy & Collegio Carlo Alberto; P.I. ERC P.I. ERC project n. 313617 (2013-2018) SWELLFER http://swellfer.wordpress.com
      Letizia TanturriLetizia Tanturri
      Associate Professor of Demography - Department of Statistical Sciences - University of Padova • Personal webpage ml.tanturri(at)unipd.it
      Massimo livi BacciMassimo livi Bacci
      Emeritus Professor of Demography, University of Florence, Italy
      Monica Das GuptaMonica Das Gupta
      Research Professor of Sociology, University of Maryland, USA
      OUR AUTHORS
      Paula Miranda-RibeiroPaula Miranda-Ribeiro
      Professor, Demography Department and Cedeplar, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brazil.
      Peter McDonaldPeter McDonald
      Professor of Demography in the Australian National University. Honorary President of IUSSP and winner of the Irene B. Taeuber Award
      Roberto ImpicciatoreRoberto Impicciatore
      Università di Bologna.
      Salvatore StrozzaSalvatore Strozza
      Professor of Demography, University Federico II, Naples (Italy)
      Stefano MolinaStefano Molina
      Senior Program Officer, Giovanni Agnelli Foundation, Italy
      our authors
  • N-IUSSP
    • N-IUSSP is a new IUSSP news magazine, which will disseminate scientific findings from demographic research carried out all over the world. The practical implications of current trends, the risks and potentialities of emerging situations, the pros and cons of specific laws are discussed in rigorous but plain language.

      Everybody is free to reproduce our articles, for free, provided the original source is cited.

      You are invited to contribute to this new publication: please check our guidelines and submit your 1000 word contribution to contact@niussp.org

The role of non-resident family in migration after separation
Migration après une rupture conjugale : l’importance de la famille vivant à proximité

Amy Spring, Clara H. Mulder, Michael J. Thomas, Thomas J. Cooke

Amy Spring, Clara H. Mulder, Michael J. Thomas, Thomas J. Cooke find that the presence of non-resident family plays an important role in separated people’s decisions to migrate within the United States. Having family living nearby reduces their likelihood of migration. Having parents in the area where they grew up increases their likelihood of returning to that area.

Separation and divorce are often followed by one or more moves. Many are short-distance moves (residential mobility), but some of them cover longer distances (migration). Long-distance movement may have costs and benefits for separated people. While it may open up new labor-market, social-support, and re-partnering opportunities, it may also disrupt local social networks and, if children are involved, limit opportunities for contact with the non-resident parent. The geographic location of family networks may be crucial in determining whether a separated person stays or moves away.

Using data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) for the United States, we investigate how migration of separated people is related to the residential locations of parents, siblings, and children – at both the current location and the location of a potential return move (Spring et al., 2021). Our data cover the period of 1983-2013, with time intervals of one year (1983-97) or two years (1997-2013) between survey interviews. We define moves over 50 kilometers as migration, and return migration as a return to the county where the person grew up, among those who live away from that county. There are just over 3,000 counties in the United States.

Migration by marital status

We find that separated people migrate – both to return and to move elsewhere – twice as frequently as married people (Table 1), but only slightly more frequently than never-married people. However, never-married people are younger on average than separated people, and migration is generally more common at younger than older ages. So the high migration level found for separated people is indeed remarkable, but understandable given the turbulence associated with separation. Among separated and never-married people, return migration accounts for around a quarter of all migration, compared with just 13% among married people.

Migration and proximity of family members

We find a large difference in predicted probabilities of migration between those who live close to family members (within 50 kilometers) and those who do not (Figure 1).

Such differences are found regardless of marital status, or the type of relatives living close by, be it non-resident parents, siblings or children. The magnitude of the differences between having and not having family close by is consistently largest for separated people, suggesting that they may particularly value the support or companionship of family members. Earlier research using Swedish data has also found large differences in migration probabilities by proximity to parents and siblings, including among couples (Mulder and Malmberg, 2014) and separated people (Mulder and Malmberg, 2011). For those living close to (but not with) their children, involvement in their upbringing is likely a key factor behind their lower probability of migration compared to separated people without children nearby. Similar dynamics may also explain why separated people who have residential children under age 18 are much less likely to migrate than those who do not. They may need to stay living near another involved parent as part of an informal or formal custody agreement. They may also wish to avoid the disruptive effects of migration on their children’s lives.

For return migration to the county where a respondent grew up, those whose parents live in that county are much more likely to return (Figure 2). Differences in the probabilities of return migration are much smaller when siblings live in the county. The presence of parents also matters more for the return migration of separated people than for married and never-married people.

Conclusion

In the United States, separated people who live near parents and siblings are less likely to migrate. Children (resident and non-resident) also play an important role in limiting their migration. At the same time, those whose parents live in the county where they grew up are much more likely to return to that county than those whose parents live elsewhere. The strong effect of having parents in the home county on the probability of return migration is unique to separated people. It is not observed for married or never-married individuals. The findings indicate the importance of geographical proximity of family members for performing parenting roles and seeking support or companionship from parents following separation.

References

Mulder, C. H., & Malmberg, G. (2011). Moving related to separation: Who moves and to what distance. Environment and Planning A, 43(11), 2589-2607. doi:10.1068/a43609

Mulder, C. H., & Malmberg, G. (2014). Local ties and family migration. Environment and Planning A, 46(9), 2195-2211. doi:10.1068/a130160p

Spring, A., Mulder, C. H., Thomas, M. J., & Cooke, T. J. (2021). Migration after union dissolution in the United States: The role of non-resident family. Social Science Research. (in press) doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2021.102539

image_pdfimage_print

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

Close