Cohabitation and Marriage
Lauren Pfeifer
Dr. Richard White
Christian Marriage
16 April 2014
Cohabitation and Marriage Cohabitation is an increasingly popular relationship reality in the United States. Many individuals seek a cohabiting relationship as preparation for marriage; however, studies have shown that this has adverse effects on relationship satisfaction and stability within marriage. Many factors have been theorized to contribute to this effect. No matter the cause of the correlation, celibacy prior to marriage is proven to defend a couple from the adverse effects of cohabitation. From 1965 to 1980, the percentage of couples entering first marriages who had previously cohabited increased from 11% to 44% (Thomson 259). According to a study, “some cohabitors believed that cohabitation would improve marital quality and stability by providing a more stringent test of the relationship than offered by traditional engagement” (Thomson 259). Despite the prevalence of this belief, studies have proven quite the opposite. Many explanations have been given for this phenomenon. One is that those who feel the need to cohabitate before marriage are less confident in their long term relationships than those who marry without a trial period (Thomson 259). Another possibility is that those who cohabitate place less value on marriage and will therefore recognize divorce as an option when difficulties are encountered. Finally, cohabitors are more likely to see
First, the author states that those married couples who directly married without cohabitation have a lower divorce rate than those having cohabitation before marriage. Warren intends to prove that marriage provides stable relationship between a couple and cohabitation undermines such a relationship. The premises Warren used to support his claim are a result from one study and David and Barbara’s review. The problem here is based on the evidence Warren provided; it is difficult to conclude that marriage can hold people together and cohabitation may destroy such stable relationship between a couple. One reason is the sample size used in the study is too small compared to the millions of people who cohabit. Hasty generalization makes this premise questionably lead to the conclusion. The other premise which is the review from David and Barbara is also not trustable because no detailed evidence is provided to
In this essay, “The Cohabitation Epidemic,” by Neil Clark Warren, is talking about why many people decide to live their lives in cohabitation instead of getting married right away. Older generations would look at cohabiting as being something bad or even immoral. In this century, this epidemic is something common and, notwithstanding, normal. Over the years, the U.S. Census Bureau has kept up with how this lifestyle has evolved. In 1970, they had 1 million people that were “unmarried-partner households,” and that number rose to 3.2 million in 1990. In the year 2000, they had 11 million people living in those situations.
Many couples find themselves cohabiting today because it is cheaper and more convenient while others take it as a step forward in their committed relationships. Regardless of reason cohabiting has become a union of choice. In recent years cohabitation has transformed from an act of deviance to a norm in many societies. We will be focusing on how time and social change determines cohabitation and divorce.
According to Dalton Conley, cohabitation is the “living together in an intimate relationship without formal, legal, or religious sanctioning”(Conley 458). From this, one can assume that cohabitation happens primarily between two people that are in a relationship. When looking at cohabitation within the United States, it has become more evident that it is slowly increasing in popularity. During the early ages, cohabitation was considered very scandalous and was frowned upon, but as the years progress, more and more couples start living together. Whether it is to experience the lifestyle they would have living together as if they were married or living together in order to save money, more and more people are living with their significant other.
With over one million American children suffering yearly from their parents getting a divorce, it is evident why couples desire to cohabit before marrying. Divorce has shown to have a terrible effect on children (Fagan and Rector, 56). For some children this can result in lifelong psychological problems. Children who use drugs and alcohol are more likely to have come from a background that involves parental conflicts, such as divorce. Since divorce increases the chances of the children effected to abuse drugs or alcohol, many couples have been taking an extra step of cohabiting before marrying to hopefully decrease their chances of divorcing. However, divorce rates have steadily increased with the rapid increase of cohabitation rates. These divorce rates have been increasing steadily because it is now easier than ever to obtain a “no-fault” divorce. Also, these rates have been increasing because women no longer have to depend on the men in their lives to support them. As mentioned before, women are just as strong in the work force as men.
These constraints lead some cohabiting couples to marry, even though they would not have married under other circumstances. On the basis of this framework, Stanley, Rhoades, et al. (2006) argued that couples who are engaged prior to cohabitation, compared with those who are not, should report fewer problems and greater relationship stability following marriage, given that they already have made a major commitment to their partners. Several studies have provided evidence consistent with this hypothesis (Brown, 2004; Rhoades, Stanley, & Markman, 2009).
Research varies on the consensus of cohabitation and it’s effects on marital successes or failures, but according to Wendy D. Manning and Jessica A. Cohen, premarital cohabitation is not linked to marital instability. (Manning & Cohen, 2012.) From 1970-1990, marriages that followed cohabitation had higher divorce rates than those that did not cohabit. From the 2000’s on, however, there has been a much smaller, or even neutral, risk of divorce for couples who cohabited prior to marriage. (Kuperberg, 2014). Studies have found that whether debating
Today, alternative long-term relationships are growing in times in heterosexual and LGBTQ relationships. Cohabitation is defined by “Recent Changes in Family Structure” as quote: “an intimate relationship that includes a common living place and which exists without the benefit of legal, cultural, or religious sanction.” Between 2005 and 2009 2/3 of relationships approximately were preceded by cohabitation (“Rise of Cohabitation” 2014.) This arrangement is less committed and therefore it takes longer to end, without much emotional devastation of a pricey divorces. Most marriages still begin with cohabitation. However, it is becoming less and less likely that cohabitation will end in a marriage. Marriage is still common in today’s culture, with approximately 60.25 million married couples in 2016 (“Number of married couples in the United States from 1960 to 2016 (in millions)” 2016.) This is evident why it is killing the nuclear family standard. People are having less desire to fully commit to a marriage in the first place. 1950 social standards would have never accepted an unmarried couple as a part of a normal life so only can a legal marriage constitutes the ideal set forth. Another, way to break the standard is remove some components.
Modern, contemporary society’s mindset on marriage has shifted considerably over the years. Some research has noted the increase in early sexual experiences, greater acceptance of cohabitation and the increase in narcissistic tendencies, are complicating and muddying the ideals of what marriage means to people today. Research done on this subject resulted in several studies that found that spouses who did not believe that marriage would last forever, were less likely to commit to the relationship financially and were more likely to have extramarital affairs.
Although divorce seems to be lower than ever our generation has a fear of committing. Due to this fear Cohabitation is the easiest way to be committed to someone without having to be “Stuck”. “younger adults, who usually cohabit as either a prelude or an alternative to first marriage (Smock, 2000). However, cohabitation is actually more common among the formerly married than the never married (Bumpass & Lu, 2000). When seeing this a part of the results I understood why this would be a statistic. Older adults (such as my mother) usually start to date after they get divorced. Yet, She and like many other adults tend to cohabitate then get married
Mark and Wendy’s relationship fell victim to a primary cultural alteration – cohabiting before marriage. In the past, couples did not live together prior to marriage, as it did not represent a cultural norm. Contrary to popular belief, “cohabitation does not make it more likely that a subsequent marriage will be successful; instead, such cohabitation increases a couple’s risk that they will later divorce” (Miller, 2012, p. 9). Cohabitation creates a false perception of content; couples believe by living together they will achieve a more intimate relationship with one another, while gradually retaining a desire for marriage. While the scenario did not state whether or not Mark and Wendy obtained marriage plans prior to cohabitating, this
A survey of 14000 adults states in ‘A Guide to Family Issues: The Marriage Advantage’ that marriage was a pertinent factor contributing to happiness and satisfaction with forty percent of the married individuals being happy as opposed to 25 percent of either single or cohabiting individuals. The same study shows that ninety eight percent of never married respondents wished to marry and out of those 88% believed that it should be a lifelong commitment. Even though, divorce rates are rising numerous researches show that young people aspire to have a lasting marriage.
In today’s society, adolescents have a positive opinion about cohabitation before marriage. The view of marriage as an institution has faded and cohabitation has taken a new part of this culture (Martin, Specter, Martin, & Martin, 2003). It has often been questioned whether or not premarital sexual activity causes marriages to be disrupted. According to Teachman, Premarital sex and cohabitation has not
Bruce Wydick argued that, “cohabitation may be narrowly defined as an intimate sexual union between two unmarried partners who share the same living quarter for a sustained period of time’’ (2). In other words, people who want to experience what being in a relationship truly is, tend to live under one roof and be more familiar with one-another. Couples are on the right path to set a committed relationship where the discussion about marriage is considered as the next step. However, many people doubt the fact as to live or not together with their future
Although marriage has been a central factor and gives meaning to human lives, the change in people’s lifestyles and behaviors through a long period of social development has resulted in alternate choices such as being single or nonmarital living. As a result, cohabitation has become more popular as a trendy life choice for young people. The majority of couples choose cohabitation as a precursor to marriage to gain a better understanding of each other. However, there are exceptions, such as where Thornton, Azinn, and Xie have noted: “In fact, the couple may simply slide or drift from single into the sharing of living quarters with little explicit discussion or decision-making. This sliding into cohabitation without