IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v46y1998i8p1077-1085.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender differences in marital support following a shared life event

Author

Listed:
  • Edwards, Angela C.
  • Nazroo, James Y.
  • Brown, George W.

Abstract

Previous work has established that women with good marriages are less at risk of depression of clinical severity following a crisis than women in poor quality relationships. Evidence for such protectiveness is less clear for men. The paper examines the relationship between marital quality, onset of depression, and gender following a severely threatening life event. The results show that good quality of marriage related to lower rates of depression for both men and women, although the overall rate for women was higher. For women with a good marital relationship, but for whom support from partner was not forthcoming at the time of the crisis (i.e. the person was "let down"), risk was increased, confirming a result from a study in Islington. The current study shows that the same set of findings holds for men. Gender differences did emerge when the subjective need for support within the marital relationship is taken into account, with women expressing greater need. However, such a desire for support was not necessarily translated into support-seeking behaviour as in a poor relationship turning to a partner was frequently inopportune. Women were also more likely to seek support outside the marriage; as in the earlier Islington research this was related to a lower risk of depression for those in a poor relationship. An unexpected finding was that men who received support outside marriage had an increased risk of depression.

Suggested Citation

  • Edwards, Angela C. & Nazroo, James Y. & Brown, George W., 1998. "Gender differences in marital support following a shared life event," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1077-1085, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:46:y:1998:i:8:p:1077-1085
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(97)10039-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:46:y:1998:i:8:p:1077-1085. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.