Abstract
High divorce rates have become a fact of life and divorce has become more acceptable and less stigmatized in most developed, Western societies (Amato, 2014). In Singapore, a highly developed and Westernized city-state in Asia, the crude divorce rate rose from 0.8 in 1980 to 1.9 in 2003 and remained stable at around 1.9 since 2005. Not only do the divorce rates remain low in Singapore relative to the United States, Australia, and other Western countries, but divorce is also perceived as disruptive and undesirable to a certain degree in both public and private domains.
Against this backdrop, Sharon Quah sets out to present a powerful counternarrative to the perception of divorce as an individualistic and harmful act that destroys individual lives and families and threatens the solidarity of society in Singapore. Quah develops the concept of a ‘divorce biography’ to reveal the diversity and complexity of 35 Singaporean divorcees’ experiences and highlight the interplay of individual agency, relationality, and context in their postdivorce trajectories.
Quah’s framework of divorce biography has four components: (1) the divorced individual exercises choice and autonomy to design a divorce biography; (2) personal communities play an important role in the construction of a divorce biography; (3) the pursuit of productivity is part of a divorce biography; and (4) divorce biographies are diverse and complex. In building her analytical framework, Quah engages with theoretical discussions on individualization and transformation of intimacy as well as the literature on the increasing diversity of relationship practices and personal communities.
The first component, the element of choice and autonomy, reflects the rise of individuality and reflexivity and the pursuit of self-fulfillment in personal life and relationships. Divorce has become ‘a more readily available, possible, and seemingly rational and sometimes, necessary option for married individuals’ (p. 17). In crafting a divorce biography, divorcees make choices every day to navigate their postdivorce lives and relationships, with no normative guidelines to rely upon. Throughout the processes before, during, and after the divorce (see Chapters 4, 5, and 6), Quah’s respondents demonstrated choice and autonomy in constructing their divorce biographies.
Quah’s idea of the divorce biography, however, goes beyond the assertion of individuality that is central to the conceptualization of ‘do-it-yourself biography’ by Beck and Beck-Gernsheim. She argues that divorcees’ postdivorce paths and relationships have a close relation to their personal relationships. Divorcees construct their postdivorce personal communities of family, friends, and others based on varying levels of choice and commitment. From their personal communities, they not only derive ‘a sense of belonging, emotional intimacy, companionship, and support,’ but also draw meaning to ‘make sense of their divorce experiences and work out their post-divorce narratives and identities’ (p. 27). By successfully demonstrating the important role personal communities play in the respondents’ divorce biographies (see Chapters 4, 5, and 6), Quah refutes the common portrait of divorce as selfish, individualistic, and inconsiderate of the community.
Another common perception of divorce assumes that divorce signifies the destruction of individual lives and personal relationships. Quah argues that though divorce is not devoid of undesirable risks and challenges, it can also be productive and constructive. Under the influence of individualization, individuals persistently pursue self-fulfillment and achievement to avoid personal meaninglessness. The pursuit of self-fulfillment is central to the maintenance of a modern marriage, and does not cease after the marriage terminates. Critics of individualization theory point out that individualization is reserved for the privileged upper and middle class who could afford pursuing self-fulfillment and self-actualization by choice. Quah broadens the notion of self-fulfillment to include not just self-actualization but also the capacity to overcome adversity and attain self-responsibility and independence. She argues that divorcees, irrespective of their socioeconomic statuses and cultural backgrounds, seek survival, productivity, and self-fulfillment in the process of individualizing their divorce biographies. The productive aspects of divorce are evident in the detailed analysis of the respondents’ reasons for divorce and the decision-making process of divorce (Chapter 4), how the respondents cope with the consequences of divorce (Chapter 5), and how they manage their postdivorce personal relationships (Chapter 6).
The fourth component of Quah’s divorce biography framework focuses on the diversity and complexity of divorce biographies. The construction of a divorce biography is a dynamic process influenced by the interplay of individual autonomy, personal communities, and the social and policy context. Hence divorce biographies are nonstandardized, unpredictable, and ongoing.
Quah skillfully delineates the ideological, sociocultural, and policy contexts of Singapore in Chapter 3. The author shows great insight when she points out that Singapore ‘straddles the complexity of relying on a selective discourse of individualistic ideals remedied by communitarian values’ (p. 35). In this chapter, Quah provides an excellent discussion on how the interventionist state of Singapore governs marriage and family life, promotes the ideal family model of a legally married heterosexual couple with children, and provides little public support for divorcees and their dependants.
The author has clearly shown how divorcees cope with accommodation problems by turning to their biological kin for help in the face of high accommodation costs in the open property market and Singapore’s public housing policies favoring married couples and dual-parent families (see Chapter 5). However, the empirical analyses of how other aspects of the policy and social contexts shape the diversity and complexity of divorce biographies are weak. The author has not paid sufficient attention to the role of Singapore’s strict divorce laws (those governing non-Muslim divorces) in influencing divorcees’ experiences. Such regulations may have limited the availability and accessibility of divorce as a way out of an unhappy marriage, and may have made the process of divorce more stressful and agonizing. The author discusses the dual legal system governing non-Muslim and Muslim divorces and the different cultural backgrounds of the three dominant racial groups (Chinese, Malay, and Indian). It would have been helpful to expand the discussion on the many divorce biographies by incorporating how different legal regulations and traditional values affect the experiences of divorcees of different ethnicities. The author also needs to place the argument about divorce biographies in the larger context of social class. Compared with middle-class individuals, working-class and poor married individuals may face greater barriers to leave an unrewarding or abusive marriage and more challenges to pursue productivity and manage personal relationships after the divorce.
Despite these limitations, the book makes four significant contributions. First, it contributes to the literature on individualization and personal communities and challenges long-held claims about the negative impact of individualism on the community. Second, the book offers a useful analytical framework for understanding the diverse processes of divorce and the complex experiences of divorcees. Through the concept of divorce biography, how individuals exercise their autonomy to end an unfulfilling or even abusive marriage, draw on the support and resources of personal communities to overcome challenges of divorce, and rebuild their sense of self and life is revealed. Third, the book contributes to our knowledge about the role of the state in shaping individuals’ family lives and experiences. By situating the study in the context of Singapore, the author has shown the enormous challenges posed by the state to divorcees and their dependants in accessing housing and other types of public support for families and children. Fourth, the book engages with the prevalent moralistic assumptions made about divorce and divorcees and gives voice to the intricate experiences of divorcees and the positive impact the divorce had on them.
The ‘Methodological Appendix’ is commendable for the author’s detailed description of the data collection process and the reasoning behind it, her sensitivity to research ethics, and the thoroughness of her self-reflection as a researcher. This part of the book could be recommended as reading materials for an undergraduate or graduate course on qualitative research methods.
Overall, this clearly elucidated and well-rounded book is suitable for those who are teaching or researching divorce, or more broadly, nonnormative family practices, or families and personal relationships in general. For policymakers whose presumptions and decisions will have a huge impact on individuals’ family lives and the opportunities and constraints they face in life-changing moments, the nuanced and diverse experiences of divorcees revealed in the book should invite scrutiny of existing policies and programs in relation to public housing and social support for families and children. For members of the public who still believe divorce is all bad, divorcees are selfish and inconsiderate, and divorce should be prohibited or avoided at all costs, Perspectives on Marital Dissolution should inspire some self-critical reflection, and this can only be welcomed.