Beyond borders and vows: A systematic review of international migration and marital dissolution

This systematic literature review (SLR) synthesizes research on marital dissolution among international migrant workers and maps dominant theoretical lenses, study contexts, and methodological patterns using the TCM (Theory–Context–Methodology) framework. Following PRISMA-guided procedures, we searched Scopus and EBSCO for studies published between 2015 and 2025 using the keywords “international migrant worker” and “marital dissolution”. After screening 130 records (Scopus=78; EBSCO=52), 74 studies met the inclusion criteria (Scopus=53; EBSCO=21). Publications accelerated after 2020 and peaked in 2024 (n=14), indicating growing scholarly attention to divorce and marital instability in transnational households. Empirical evidence is concentrated in migrant-sending settings in Southeast Asia and selected destination contexts (e.g., Europe and the Asia-Pacific), while major migrant-sending countries remain comparatively underrepresented. Methodologically, qualitative designs dominate (about 51%) and typically rely on interviews and thematic analysis, whereas quantitative studies (about 37%) use surveys and regression modeling; comparatively few studies integrate mixed methods or longitudinal designs. Most contributions appear in Q1 outlets (55/74), reflecting strong interdisciplinary engagement across migration studies, psychology, public health, and social policy. Substantively, the literature clusters around three interconnected themes: migrant health and mental health, gendered family dynamics, and labor/economic migration, with recurrent emphasis on discrimination and gaps in social protection as amplifiers of household stress. Across contexts, the reviewed studies link marital dissolution to interacting mechanisms—economic strain and remittance conflict, prolonged separation, acculturative stress, gendered power renegotiation, and policy-mediated vulnerabilities—rather than physical distance alone. However, the scarcity of longitudinal and explicitly causal approaches constrains inference about pathways and timing. We conclude that this synthesis provides a consolidated evidence base for designing family-centred support and social protection policies, and that advancing policy-relevant evidence will require longitudinal, mixed-methods, multilevel, and cross-national comparative studies that test mediating psychological and economic mechanisms and incorporate family-systems and resilience perspectives.