In the case of abortion and divorce, liberals expected their revolution to, if anything, stabilize the family — by reducing unwanted births and dissolving only marriages that had failed in all but name. But these expectations were naïve. As Janet Yellen and George Akerlof pointed out in a 1996 paper on the social impact of abortion and contraception, the power Roe v. Wade gave women over reproduction sometimes came at the expense of power in relationships. “By making the birth of the child the physical choice of the mother,†they noted, the sexual revolution “made marriage and child support a social choice of the father.†Recent Comments Grambs 16 days ago It is remarkable that yet again abortion, a medical procedure that can only happen to women, is portrayed as a contributor to the ruination... Brian 16 days ago And what exactly are the chances of conservatives embracing this hypothetical? Let's not try to pretend that liberals are the one's that... karenv 16 days ago A major change in family life, and marriage, occurred when it became financially necessary for both partners to work outside the home. That... See All Comments In this new landscape, “women who wanted children, who did not want an abortion for moral or religious reasons, or who were unreliable in their use of contraception†saw their partners’ incentives altered for the worse. The result was a world with plenty of unplanned pregnancies but fewer ensuing marriages, fewer involved fathers, more unstable homes. Meanwhile, no-fault divorce probably contributed to the unexpected “social contagion†effect of the divorce revolution, in which the example of a marital split undermines marriages across a social network.