<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xml:lang="ru"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">voprstat</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="ru">Вопросы статистики</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Voprosy Statistiki</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">2313-6383</issn><issn pub-type="epub">2658-5499</issn><publisher><publisher-name>The Federal State Budgetary Institution "Scientific Research Institute for Socio-Economic Statistics of the Federal State Statistics Service" (Statistics Research Institute of Rosstat)</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.34023/2313-6383-2021-28-2-54-66</article-id><article-id custom-type="elpub" pub-id-type="custom">voprstat-1271</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>ДЕМОГРАФИЧЕСКАЯ СТАТИСТИКА</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>DEMOGRAPHIC STATISTICS</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Тенденции прекращения первых брачно-партнерских союзов в России</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Trends in Dissolution of First Partnerships in Russia</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9524-7177</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Чурилова</surname><given-names>Е. В.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Churilova</surname><given-names>E. V.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Чурилова Елена Владимировна – канд. социол. наук, научный  сотрудник Международной лаборатории исследований  населения и здоровья</p><p>109028, г. Москва, Б. Трехсвятительский пер., д. 3</p></bio><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Elena V. Churilova – Cand. Sci. (Sociol.), Research Fellow,  International Laboratory for Population and Health</p><p>3, Bol’shoj Trehsvjatitel’skij Pereulok, Moscow, 109028</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">evchurilova@hse.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1653-4264</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Захаров</surname><given-names>С. В.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Zakharov</surname><given-names>S. V.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Захаров Сергей Владимирович – канд. экон. наук, заместитель  директора, Институт демографии</p><p>109028, г. Москва, Б. Трехсвятительский пер., д. 3</p></bio><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Sergei V. Zakharov – Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Deputy Director, Institute of  Demography</p><p>3, Bol’shoj Trehsvjatitel’skij Pereulok, Moscow, 109028</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">szakharov@hse.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff-1"><aff xml:lang="ru">Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики»<country>Россия</country></aff><aff xml:lang="en">National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE University)<country>Russian Federation</country></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2021</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>03</day><month>05</month><year>2021</year></pub-date><volume>28</volume><issue>2</issue><fpage>54</fpage><lpage>66</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright &amp;#x00A9; Чурилова Е.В., Захаров С.В., 2021</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2021</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Чурилова Е.В., Захаров С.В.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Churilova E.V., Zakharov S.V.</copyright-holder><license license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://voprstat.elpub.ru/jour/article/view/1271">https://voprstat.elpub.ru/jour/article/view/1271</self-uri><abstract><p>В статье изложены результаты исследования по одной из «острых» для нашего общества проблем – продолжающейся негативной тенденции роста прекращения первых брачно-партнерских союзов (по данным официальной статистики Россия занимает лидирующую позицию по показателям разводимости среди стран Европы). Показатели разводимости, рассчитанные на основе коэффициентов разводимости с учетом длительности расторгнутых браков для текущих лет, позволяют предположить, что 30–40% браков, зарегистрированных в 1970–1980 гг., и 50–60% браков, заключенных в последние два десятилетия, имеют шанс быть расторгнутыми.На основе материалов панельного выборочного исследования «Родители и Дети, Мужчины и Женщины в семье и обществе» анализируется стабильность первых союзов, сформированных в 1945–2010 гг., с учетом их типа: браков, начавшихся с официальной регистрации, браков, заключенных после сожительства и сожительств. Полученные результаты позволяют сделать вывод об увеличении итоговой доли расторгнутых первых браков с 14% в когортах, заключивших свои союзы в 1945–1954 гг., до 30% в брачных когортах 1980–1989 гг. Во всех послевоенных союзах и вплоть до сформировавшихся в конце 1980-х годов «прямые» официальные браки были более прочными, чем браки, заключенные после сожительства, однако эта закономерность уже не столь однозначно подтверждается для браков после сожительств, начавшихся в 1990-е годы.Авторами делается вывод о том, что средняя продолжительность расторгнутого официального брака и средний возраст женщины при распаде брачного союза снизились. Сожительства были и остаются наименее прочной формой союза со средней продолжительностью в 4–5 лет. Бездетные союзы прекращаются в два раза чаще и среди официальных браков, и среди сожительств. Кроме того, отмечается снижение среднего числа детей во всех типах распавшихся родительских союзов с детьми.По мнению авторов, сформулированному в заключении статьи, данные показывают, что век «прямого» брака без предварительного периода совместной жизни подходит к концу, что может положительно сказываться на стабильности российских браков, снижая шансы развестись по причине выявления несовместимости характеров и взглядов, особенно характерных для начальных этапов совместной жизни.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="en"><p>The article scrutinizes one of the most acute problems in Russian society – the continued high level of separations among first unions.According to the official statistics data, Russia has consistently held a leading position in terms of divorce rates among European countries.Recent estimates of period total divorce rates suggest that 30–40% of marriages contracted in the 1970-1980s and 50–60% of marriages contracted in the last two decades have a chance of being dissolved.The authors use materials from the panel part of the sample survey «Parents and children, men and women in the family and society» to examine the stability of first unions formed in 1945–2010 – either direct marriage, marriage after cohabitation or cohabitation in partnership cohorts. The results suggest an increase in the proportion of dissolved marriages from 14% in the marital cohorts of 1945–1954 to 30% in marital cohorts of 1980–1989. In these cohorts, «direct» marriages were more stable than marriages, which followed cohabitations. However, it is not so obvious for marriages preceded by cohabitations in the 1990s.Authors conclude that the average duration of a dissolved marriage and the average age of women at the time of the dissolution of the marriage have decreased. Cohabitation remains the least stable form of union with an average duration of 4–5 years. Childless unions break up 2 times more often both among marriages and cohabitations. There has been also a decrease in the average number of children in all types of broken unions with children.Based on results formulated at the final part of the article the authors suggest that the «direct» marriage without prior cohabitation become a less attractive form of union that might positively affect the stability of Russian marriages by reducing the probability of divorce due to such grounds of divorce as incompatibility in characters, views and beliefs, especially in the initial years of joint life.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>брак</kwd><kwd>сожительство</kwd><kwd>демографическая статистика</kwd><kwd>брачно-партнерские когорты</kwd><kwd>проект ЕЭК ООН «Поколения и Гендер»</kwd><kwd>развод</kwd><kwd>распад супружеских союзов</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>marriage</kwd><kwd>cohabitation</kwd><kwd>demographic statistics</kwd><kwd>partnership cohorts</kwd><kwd>UNECE Generation and Gender Project</kwd><kwd>divorce</kwd><kwd>union dissolution</kwd></kwd-group><funding-group xml:lang="ru"><funding-statement>В данной научной работе использованы результаты проекта, выполненного в рамках Программы фундаментальных исследований НИУ ВШЭ.</funding-statement></funding-group><funding-group xml:lang="en"><funding-statement>The study was implemented in the framework of the Basic Research Program at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE University).</funding-statement></funding-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="cit1"><label>1</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Council of Europe. Recent demographic developments in Europe. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing, 2006.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Council of Europe. Recent Demographic Developments in Europe. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing; 2006.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit2"><label>2</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Sobotka T., Toulemon L. Overview Chapter 4: Changing family and partnership behavior: Common trends and persistent diversity across Europe // Demographic Research. 2008. Vol. 19. P. 85–138.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Sobotka T., Toulemon L. Overview Chapter 4: Changing Family and Partnership Behavior: Common Trends and Persistent Diversity Across Europe. Demographic Research. 2008;(19):85-138.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit3"><label>3</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Goldstein J. The Leveling of Divorce in the United States // Demography. 1999. Vol. 36, No. 3. P. 409–414.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Goldstein J.R. The Leveling of Divorce in the United States. Demography. 1999;36(3):409-414.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit4"><label>4</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Hargens L.L. Incidence of first-marriage divorce among women in the 1979 panel of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth // Demographic Research. 2019. Vol. 40. P. 1529–1536.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Hargens L.L. Incidence of First-Marriage Divorce Among Women in the 1979 Panel of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. Demographic Research. 2019;(40):1529-1536.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit5"><label>5</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Население России 2015. Двадцать третий ежегодный демографический доклад. Отв. ред. С.В. Захаров. М.: Изд. дом Высшей школы экономики, 2017. 360 c.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Zakharov S.V. (ed.) Russia’s Population in 2015. 23rd Annual Demographic Report. Moscow: HSE Publishing House, 2017. 360 p. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit6"><label>6</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Бондарская Г.А. Анализ разводимости в реальных поколениях женщин // Социально-демографические исследования брака, семьи, рождаемости и репродуктивных установок. Ереван, 1983. С. 31–35.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Bondarskaya G.A. Analysis of Divorces in Women Cohorts. In: Socio-Demographic Analysis of Marriage, Family, Fertility, and Reproductive Orientations. Yerevan; 1983. P. 31–35. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit7"><label>7</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Волков А.Г. Семья – объект демографии. М: «Мысль», 1986. 271 с.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Volkov A.G. Family – Object of Demography. Moscow: Mysl’ Publ.; 1986. 271 p. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit8"><label>8</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Кузнецов Л.Р. Разводимость: динамика, факторы, тенденции // Методология демографического прогноза / А.Г.Волков (Отв. ред.). М.: Наука, 1988. С. 88–99.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kuznetcov L.R. Divorces: Trends, Factors, Tendencies. In: Volkov A.G. (ed.) Methodology of Demographic Projection. Moscow: Nauka publ., 1988. Pp. 88–99. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit9"><label>9</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Тольц М.С. Некоторые обобщающие характеристики брачности, прекращения и длительности брака // Демографическое развитие семьи / Под. ред. А.Г. Волкова. М.: Статистика, 1979. С. 39–58.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Toltz M. Some General Indicators of Nuptiality, Diversity and Marriage Duration. In: Volkov A.G. (ed.) Demographic Development of Family. Moscow: Statistika Publ.; 1979. Pp. 39–58. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit10"><label>10</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Чуйко Л.В. Браки и разводы. М.: Статистика, 1975. 175 с.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Chuiko L.V. Marriages and Divorces. Moscow: Statistika Publ.; 1976. 175 p. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit11"><label>11</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Сысенко В.А. Устойчивость брака: Проблемы, факторы, условия. М.: Финансы и статистика, 1981. 199 с.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Sysenko V.A. Marital Stability: Problems, Factors, Conditions. Moscow: Finansy i Statistika Publ.; 1981. 199 p. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit12"><label>12</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Avdeev A., Monnier A. Marriage in Russia. A complex phenomenon poorly understood // Population. An English selection. 2000. Vol. 12. P. 7–50.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Avdeev A., Monnier A. Marriage in Russia. A Complex Phenomenon Poorly Understood. Population. An English selection. 2000;(12):7–50.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit13"><label>13</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Тольц М. Разводы и современный уровень рождаемости / Проблемы воспроизводства и занятости населения. М.: ИСИ АН СССР, 1984. C. 18–30.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Toltz M. Divorces and Modern Level of Fertility. In: Problems of Reproduction and Employment. Moscow: ISI AN SSSR; 1984. Pp.18–30. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit14"><label>14</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Антонов Г.В., Лактюхина Е.Г. Кризис института брака в современной России: реальность или вымысел?// Вопросы статистики. 2015. № 7. С. 21–31.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Antonov G., Laktukhina E. The Crisis of Marriage Institutions in Modern Russia: Reality or Fiction? Voprosy Statistiki. 2015;(7):21–31. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit15"><label>15</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Gałęzewska P. Repartnering dynamics and fertility in new partnerships in Europe and the United States. University of Southampton, School of Social Sciences, Doctoral Thesis, 2016. 272 pp.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Gałęzewska P. Repartnering Dynamics and Fertility in New Partnerships in Europe and the United States. Doctoral thesis. University of Southampton, School of Social Sciences; 2016. 272 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit16"><label>16</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Gałęzewska P., Perelli-Harris B., Berrington A. Cross-national differences in women’s repartnering behaviour in Europe: The role of individual demographic characteristics // Demographic Research. 2017. Vol. 37. P. 189–228.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Gałęzewska P., Perelli-Harris B., Berrington A. Cross-National Differences in Women’s Repartnering Behaviour in Europe: The Role of Individual Demographic Characteristics. Demographic Research. 2017; (37): 189–228.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit17"><label>17</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Philipov D., Jasilioniene A. Union formation and fertility in Bulgaria and Russia: A life table description of recent trends // Demographic Research. 2008. Vol. 19. P. 2057–2114.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Philipov D., Jasilioniene A. Union Formation and Fertility in Bulgaria and Russia: A Life Table Description of Recent Trends. Demographic Research. 2008;(19):2057–2114.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit18"><label>18</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Andersson G., Thomson E., Duntava A. Life-table representations of family dynamics in the 21st century // Demographic Research. 2017. Vol. 37. P. 1081–1230.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Andersson G., Thomson E., Duntava A. Life-Table Representations of Family Dynamics in the 21st Century. Demographic Research. 2017;(37):1081–1230.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit19"><label>19</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Захаров С.В., Малева Т.М., Синявская О.В. Программа «Поколения и гендер» в России: вопросы методологии // Родители и дети, мужчины и женщин в семье и обществе / Под науч. ред. Т.М. Малевой, О.В. Синявской; Независимый институт социальной политики. М.: НИСП, 2007.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Zakharov S.V., Maleva T.M., Sinyavskaya O.V. Program «Generation and Gender»: Methodological Questions. In: Maleva T.M., Sinyavskaya O.V. (eds). Pa-rents and Children, Men and Women in Family and Society. Moscow: Independent Institute for Social Policy; 2007. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit20"><label>20</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Coviello V., Boggess M. Cumulative incidence estimation in the presence of competing risks // The Stata Journal. 2004. Vol. 4. No. 2. P. 103–112.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Coviello V., Boggess M. Cumulative Incidence Estimation in the Presence of Competing Risks. The Stata Journal. 2004;4(2):103–112.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit21"><label>21</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Kreyenfeld M.R., Bastin S. Blurred memory, deliberate misreporting, or «true tales»? How different survey methods affect respondents’ reports of partnership status at first birth. Working Paper WP-2013-017, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kreyenfeld M. R., Bastin S. Blurred Memory, Deliberate Misreporting, or «True Tales»? How Different Survey Methods Affect Respondents’ Reports of Partnership Status at First Birth. Working Paper WP-2013-017. Rostock: Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research; 2013.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit22"><label>22</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Wagner M. On increasing divorce risks // D. Mortelmans (ed.) Divorce in Europe New Insights in Trends, Causes and Consequences of Relation Break-ups. Springer Open, 2020. P. 37–61.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Wagner M. On Increasing Divorce Risks. In: Mortelmans D. (ed.) Divorce in Europe. New Insights in Trends, Causes and Consequences of Relation Break-ups. Springer Open; 2020. P. 37–61.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit23"><label>23</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Тольц М.С., Антонова О.И., Андреев Е.М. Рождаемость и трансформация института семьи в современной России // Вопросы статистики. 2005. № 7. С. 51–60.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Tol’ts M.S., Antonova O.I., Andreev E.M. Birth Rate and the Family Institution Transformation in the Modern Russia. Voprosy Statistiki. 2005;(7):51–60. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit24"><label>24</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Бирюкова С.С., Тындик А.О. Регистрация брака и рождение ребенка в биографии россиян: анализ данных текущей статистики // Демографическое обозрение. 2014. № 3. С. 33–64.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Biryukova S.S., Tyndik A.O. Getting Married and Having a Child in Russia: An Analysis of Individual Biographies Basing on Vital Statistics Data. Demographic Review. 2014;1(3):33–64. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit25"><label>25</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Чурилова Е.В., чумарина В.Ж. Внебрачные рождения и добрачные зачатия в России: осознанное решение родителей? // Вопросы статистики. 2014. № 7. С.43–49.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Churilova E.V., Chumarina V.Zh. Nonmarital Fertility and Premarital Conceptions in Russia: Parents’ Deliberate Decision? Voprosy Statistiki. 2014;(7):43–49. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit26"><label>26</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Jasilioniene A. Premarital conception and divorce risk in Russia in light of the GGS data MPIDR. Working Paper WP-2007-025, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Jasilioniene A. Premarital Conception and Divorce Risk in Russia in Light of the GGS Data MPIDR. Working Paper WP-2007-025. Rostock: Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research; 2007.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit27"><label>27</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Митрофанова Е.С. Браки, партнерства и рождаемость поколений россиян // Демоскоп Weekly. 2011. № 477–478.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Mitrofanova E.S. Marriages, Partnerships and Fertility of Russian Generations. Demoscope-Weekly. 2011;(477–478). (In Russ).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit28"><label>28</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Чернова Ж.В. Специфика гендерных отношений молодых взрослых // Социологические исследования. 2012. № 7. С. 118–127.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Chernova Zh.V. Speficity of Gender Relationship Among Young Adults. Sociological Studies. 2012;(7):118–127. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit29"><label>29</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Артамонова А.В., Митрофанова Е.С. Сожительства в России: промежуточное звено или легитимный институт // Мониторинг общественного мнения: Экономические и социальные перемены. 2016. № 1. С. 126–146.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Artamonova A.V., Mitrofanova E.S. Cohabitation in Russia: «Tria» Union or an Independent Social Institution. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes. 2016;(1):126–146. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit30"><label>30</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Beaujouan É. Second-union fertility in France: partners’ age and other factors // Population (English Edition). 2011. Vol. 66. No. 2. P. 239–274.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Beaujouan É. Second-Union Fertility in France: Partners’ Age and Other Factors. Population (English Edition). 2011;66(2):239–274.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit31"><label>31</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Захаров С.В., Чурилова Е.В., Агаджанян В.С. Рождаемость в повторных союзах в России: позволяет ли вступление в новый супружеский союз достичь идеала двухдетной семьи? // Демографическое обозрение. 2016. T. 3. № 1. С. 35–51.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Zakharov S.V., Churilova E.V., Agadjanian V.S. Fertility in Higher-Order Marital Unions in Russia: Does a New Partnership Allow for the Realization of the Two-Child Ideal? Demographic Review. 2016;3(1):35–51. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list><fn-group><fn fn-type="conflict"><p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article>
