The "Piece of Paper" is meaningless in the face of "No Fault Divorce". 
Posted on 03/01/2006 7:09:06 AM PST by ZGuy
In the United States, living together instead of marrying has become the norm for couples -- half of young adults aged 20-40 are cohabiting instead of getting married. Cohabitation has increased nearly 1,000% since 1980, and the marriage rate has dropped more than 40% since 1960.
Some see substituting living together for marriage as an insignificant shift in family “structure.” Those who are better informed realize that the shift has disastrous ramifications for the individuals involved, as well as for society and public policy.
The faulty reasoning leading young adults to make such a poor choice must be exposed. Here are four myths surrounding the shift.
Myth No. 1: Living Together Is a Good Way to “Test the Water”
Many couples say that they want to live together to see if they are compatible, not realizing that cohabitation is more a preparation for divorce than a way to strengthen the likelihood of a successful marriage -- the divorce rates of women who cohabit are nearly 80% higher than those who do not. In fact, studies indicate that cohabiting couples have lower marital quality and increased risk of divorce. Further, cohabiting relationships tend to be fragile and relatively short in duration; less than half of cohabiting relationships last five or more years. Typically, they last about 18 months.
Myth No. 2: Couples Don’t Really Need That “Piece of Paper”
A major problem with cohabitation is that it is a tentative arrangement that lacks stability; no one can depend upon the relationship -- not the partners, not the children, not the community, nor the society. Such relationships contribute little to those inside and certainly little to those outside the arrangement. Sometimes couples choose to live together as a substitute for marriage, indicating that, in case the relationship goes sour, they can avoid the trouble, expense and emotional trauma of a divorce. With such a weak bond between the two parties, there is little likelihood that they will work through their problems or that they will maintain the relationship under pressure.
Myth No. 3: Cohabiting Relationships Usually Lead to Marriage
During the 1970s, about 60% of cohabiting couples married each other within three years, but this proportion has since declined to less than 40%. While women today still tend to expect that “cohabitation will lead to marriage,” numerous studies of college students have found that men typically cohabit simply because it is “convenient.” In fact, there is general agreement among scholars that living together before marriage puts women at a distinct disadvantage in terms of “power.” A college professor described a survey that he conducted over a period of years in his marriage classes. He asked guys who were living with a girl, point blank, “Are you going to marry the girl that you’re living with?” The overwhelming response, he reports, was “NO!” When he asked the girls if they were going to marry the guy they were living with, their response was, “Oh, yes; we love each other and we are learning how to be together.”
Myth No. 4: Cohabiting Relationships Are More Egalitarian Than Marriage
It is common knowledge that women and children suffer more poverty after a cohabiting relationship breaks up, but it’s not so well understood that there is typically an economic imbalance in favor of the man within such relationships, too. While couples who live together say that they plan to share expenses equally, more often than not the women support the men. Studies show that women typically contribute more than 70% of the income in a cohabiting relationship. Likewise, the women tend to do more of the cleaning, cooking and laundry. If they are students, as is often the case, and facing economic or time constraints that require a reduction in class load, it is almost invariably the woman, not the man, who drops a class.
So What’s the Conclusion?
A mass of sociological evidence shows that cohabitation is an inferior alternative to the married, intact, two-parent, husband-and-wife family. Increasingly, the myths of living together without marriage are like a mirror shattered by the force of the facts that expose the reality of cohabitation.
Dr. Crouse is senior fellow of Concerned Women for America’s Beverly LaHaye Institute.
Real reasons for living together out of marriage;
1) Woman can continue to collect alimony from previous husband.
2) Woman can collect State aid, medical and dental coverage for children.
3) If woman gets pregnant, can get State to pay for abortion if she wants it, or birth if she has it.
Its all about the nanny state taking care of unwed mothers. If she gets married, the couple is supposed to take responsibility for themselves. The system opposes marriage.
free milk
I don't disagree with the overall thrust of this article or with the last three points, but with regard to the first point that implies cohabiting makes divorce more likely I think that's bunk. What it reveals, in my view, is that the values of those who cohabit are already different from those who do not, and that these values predispose them to a greater likelihood of later divorce.
Why is everyone so eager to give up their individual single life PRIOR to getting married? I don't understand it.
Dont pay a fortunes for one day.
What really gets me, when smart articles like this come out, is the intellectual dishonesty of liberals that wraps the label "religious inspired intolerance" around any argument against the "liberal" things they try to defend. Even an atheist can read the study and conclude that "cohabitation" does not trump marriage, at any time in the "relationship".
only if she's lactating
Huh? You mean men actually think "I'm not getting married until I know my divorce settlement will be fair?" Talk about a defeatest attitude...Who the hell would want to marry that person?
Janice must not know any married men.
People are not, by nature, solitary beings.
Which, if they had married before moving in, would mean divorce. Kinda hurts that point.
The Law of Unintended Consequences rears it's ugly head again.
Not by nature, no.
But living with a woman
will make you that way . . .
The other thing they leave out is this: you get more jaded every time you do it. I hate to admit it, but I've shacked up with six different partners in my 40 years (definitely not proud of it.) And every time, leaving is easier. Eventually you just feel too calloused to ever really bond with anyone. I doubt I'll ever marry (again)... it's just something I bungled early in life and that's it. You don't start fresh every time. Some things are fragile, and they can be ruined.
Hmmmmmmmmm.........I guess I'm an anomoly. My husband and I celebrated our 9th Wedding Anniverary last week, we'll be together 18 years come June, and our child is only 7.
Boy, you're right on with your comments. Wonder why these didn't make it into the survey.
"But living with a woman
will make you that way . . ."
Maybe your woman. Not mine. I can't imagine life without here, after 14 years. Speak for yourself only.
Not entirely true. I have lived with my partner for over 16 years and I have friends who have lived with them just as long or longer. No problems - we just don't want to get married. Feelings are mutual about marriage on both sides. Most of my so-called married friends who had never lived with their partners before marriage are either divorced or are on that path. It depends on the relationship and the compatablity of the couple themselves.
The mindset that shacks up is the same mindset that doesn't rule out leaving.
The mindset that wants to marry has a goal of staying and being committed. It's not the living together to 'see if it works' that results in longevity.....it's the determination to stick it out.
"Its all about the nanny state taking care of unwed mothers. If she gets married, the couple is supposed to take responsibility for themselves. The system opposes marriage"
the article also suggests that it is moocher type guys who prefer this lifestyle.
My husband and I lived together before we married and we've been married now for 12 years. Not all fall into these broad percentages.
Amen. I'm tired of comments stating marriage is no good. Marriage is just like life, it has its good times and bad times and requires an honest effort from both the man and the woman.
Until our courts make divorce a more equitable process, there won't be much incentive for men to marry, except to exploit women for sex or money. When simply saying "I do" means you give away half of everything you've worked for, any relationship takes on economic overtones whether you want it to or not. If you live together instead of marrying, at least you keep the state out of your bank accounts when the deal goes bad.
I agree that part 1 is bunk, but I think there's one factor they're neglecting to mention or ignorantly leaving out: this involves couples that cohabit IN LIEU of marriage.
I've lived with a girlfriend under the guise that we would have separate rooms and just see how we live together. The first few months involved sleeping in the same bed and lots of sex. The next few months involved a lot of weirdness. The last few months were just like we were friends and nothing more. It drained out of us, the novelty of living together, and we kinda realized that it was better to part ways.
If you live together as an alternative to marriage, I can definitely see how that would cause eventual "divorce." If it's innocent cohabiting to have another person helping to pay the bills, and there are no kids in the equation, I don't see a problem. If anything, it seems counterintuitive to say that cohabitation leads to divorce, but who am I to say their study is bunk. Hell, they keep saying a majority of Floridians want Rudy and McCain to run for pres... they don't ask me, cuz I'd never say that!
Congratulations.
You forgot #5. Cheaper on income taxes then being married!
opps, I mean #4
"I don't disagree with the overall thrust of this article or with the last three points, but with regard to the first point that implies cohabiting makes divorce more likely I think that's bunk. What it reveals, in my view, is that the values of those who cohabit are already different from those who do not, and that these values predispose them to a greater likelihood of later divorce"
I read an article a long time ago about why living together is not helpful towards establishing a marriage-worthy relationship.
The couple takes inventory of their "stuff".
Because they are not totally sure of the committment - they keep track of "what's mine"
Separate bank accounts - his and her cars.
Someone's bank account is going to be cushier than the other's so there will be resentment if payment of bills is not split evenly.
When there are fights - each one eyes their "mine" inventory of the stuff.
There is less incentive to work through rough patches.
If this couple goes on to get married, they are often entrenched in this "mine" "yours" mentality, and the wedding won't neccessarily cure them of that.
In contrast it is more common for couples who get married before they move in together to consider themselves a team.
They pool their money into joint accounts, and both names appear on them. They pool their stuff together and it becomes "ours". The committment to success is stronger - there is more incentive to work together rather than plan an exit strategy.
This was the gist of the article - it rang true to me as family and friends who lived together seemed to be pretty caught up in keeping track of what money and items they brought into the relationship.
I detest articles like this from both sides of the spectrum because they are slanted. IMHO, it is no one's business if someone wants to live together without marriage. Being married instead of living together first does not guarantee a happy marriage. You might just find out that you cannot stand to live together.
After what my son has gone through, I would recommend living together because in his case they would never have gotten married. It has been a total disaster. I was perfectly happy to have them living together as one of his friends said because it wouldn't last two months but her parents stepped in and they got married instead. Not working out but fortunately there are no kids.
This is a great piece, frankly attacking the nonsense so many people (including a bunch of FReepers) use to justify their bad behavior. But it does not address the most important consequence of widespread cohabitation: the material poverty and psychological insecurity facing the children whose lives are caught up in their parents' unstable relationships. Our society pays a very high price for the selfish and short-sighted decisions of those who place their "freedom" above their responsibilities to their partners and their offspring.
We're coming up on 11 years next month. My first husband went and died on me, the rat. I then lived with my "Marry in Haste Repent at Leisure Husband" before marriage by about three months. I had a "ring and a date" as Dr. Laura suggests. He turned out to be a total nutcase, so that didn't last.
I stayed single for three years before I remarried for the last time. No premarital anything. It was the smartest thing I've ever done. :)
So, I guess from personal experience I'd agree with most of what the article says, but since the FemiNazis ruined relations between the sexes for the rest of we normal folk, it's a whole new ballgame these days.
Wow, where do I sign up for that?
The "Piece of Paper" is meaningless in the face of "No Fault Divorce".
I remember sharing with an older widow woman who had been married over sixty years that my wife and I had been married for thirty years. She said, "the best is yet to come."
I believe her.
>>>the divorce rates of women who cohabit are nearly 80% higher than those who do not>>>
As opposed to the divorce rates of men who cohabit? Huh?
That describes my first marriage :) He passed away last year - so he doesn't count anymore.
Hubby and I were together about 3 years before we moved in together, and I had the ring and the date - we just kept changing the date :)
We had bought a house together, and had a joint checking account, along with our own accounts......just like we maintained AFTER we got married.
It's no one's business until the live-in beats the crap out of a young child or worse yet, kills them. The news seems to be abundant with such stories in this day and age.
I was happily married for 7 years--7 out of 22 is not too bad.
Not by nature, no.
But living with a woman
will make you that way . . . ~ theFIRMbss
Yeah. What he said.
FL gov. signed a law last year which now provides that cohabiting with a boyfriend will stop the alimony.
We have to attack the divorce laws if we want to stop this game playing.
Should you ever choose to leave her, one can only imagine the emotional fallout experienced.
Yours is an exception to the rule, but "live-in" girlfriends tend to be frightened of what might happen should the man suddenly decide to "move on."
To many women, it is like walking around on eggshells.
Of course, the apologists for cohabitation will jump right in and claim that "this could happen to anybody" and so on, but the TRUTH is that widespread cohabitation has placed children at very serious and unprecedented risks.
Congratulations I guess.
My folks "celebrated" their 57th on Feb 14. Valentines Day, how romantic.
There is a steady seething undercurrent of hostility that one can feel the instant one steps in the front door.
I can't recall a time when they were more than minimally civil to each other. But then again I'm only 52...
Maybe.
However, I believe that some states automatically declare a couple "legally married" if they have a "let's just live together for now" scenario for a few years.
Seriously, I think that some states here in the southeast treat a "shack up" as a marriage after 3 years.
Is that true?
We lived together for over a year before marrying, and this year is our 20th anniversary. :)
True but the same thing goes for any marriage too. Where one partner leaves or says they want a divorce the emotional fallout is horrible. How many people have this so-called perfect marriage - say I love my wife and then you hear down the road that oops they got divorced. Everyting depends on the couple and how well they get along. Marriage is absolutely no guarantee that a couple will stay together. I am all for marriage if that is what you want. For me its NOT what I want.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.