Two Decades of Same-Sex Marriage in Sweden: A Demographic Account of Developments in Marriage, Childbearing, and Divorce

Abstract

In this study, we provide demographic insight into the still relatively new family form of same-sex marriage. We focus on period trends in same-sex marriage formation and divorce during 1995-2012 in Sweden and the role of childbearing in same-sex unions. The period begins with the introduction of registered partnership for same-sex couples and also covers the introduction of formal same-sex marriage in 2009. We use register data for the complete population of Sweden to contrast patterns in male and female same-sex marriage formation and divorce. We show that female same-sex union formation increased rapidly over the period, while trends for male same-sex unions increased less. The introduction of same-sex marriage legislation in 2009 appears to have had little effect on the pace of formation of same-sex unions. In contrast, legal changes supporting parental rights in same-sex unions may have fueled the formation of female same-sex marriages as well as parenthood in such unions. Further, we show that divorce risks in the marital unions of two women are much higher than in other types of marriages. We find some convergence of divorce risks across union types at the end of our study period: male samesex unions have the same divorce risk levels as opposite-sex marriages, and the elevated risks of divorce in female same-sex unions appear to have stabilized at somewhat lower levels than those observed in the late 1990s.

The Demography of Families: A Review of Patterns and Change

“…Perhaps the most important observation is that to date there are no studies that directly compare dissolution rates among legally married same‐gender and different‐gender couples in the United States. A fairly consistent finding is that same‐gender couples (including both cohabitors and married couples), and in particular, female couples, have higher dissolution rates than different‐gender couples (e.g., Joyner, Manning, & Bogle, ; Kolk & Andersson, ; Lau, ; Wiik, Seierstad, & Noack, ). One reason is that despite the current legality of same‐gender marriage, same‐gender couples remain less likely than different‐gender couples to be married, and marriage is a more stable relationship type than cohabitation or dating (Joyner et al, ; Rosenfeld, ).…”

Religious Barriers to the Diffusion of Same-sex Civil Unions in Italy

“…Furthermore, Barbagli (2018) argued that in Scandinavian countries, unions between lesbian women have reached the same number as unions between gay men only when these countries have approved a law allowing child adoption. Kolk and Andersson (2020) proposed a similar explanation for the initial larger diffusion of same-sex marriage among gay men observed in Sweden after the introduction of the civil union law.…”

An explorative approach to the cross-section of international migration and sexual preference: same-sex couples in Germany

“…Furthermore, we had information about existing unions only, and not about couples who divorced or split up. As a consequence, we may have underestimated those unions, especially given that Kolk and Andersson (2020) showed that same-sex unions have a higher risk of divorce than opposite-sex unions. In this respect, same-sex unions were again found to be similar to mixed unions, which also have a higher risk of divorce than endogamous unions (Milewski and Kulu, 2014).…”

“…However, as a consequence of anti-discrimination efforts in the European Union, as well as of identity politics and increased recognition of minorities of all kinds, policies designed to protect the opposite-sex family model have, in recent years, been transformed into policies that respect all family and couple forms equally (Kollmann 2013, p. 11-15). The previous literature has shown that the number of same-sex couples registered in several European countries increased after legal conditions were liberalized (for Sweden and Norway Andersson et al 2006; for Sweden Kolk and Andersson, 2020; for Germany Lengerer and Bohr, 2019a). But it is important to note that despite this liberalization, which extended greater tolerance to younger cohorts in particular, LGBT people have continued to be exposed to a societal climate in which they experience stress and discrimination (Meyer, 2007).…”