Living together: The best way to divorce-proof a marriage?

Aug 19, 2009
Living together: The best way to divorce-proof a marriage?

(PhysOrg.com) -- Young adults see living together as the best way to protect against divorce, not as an alternative to marriage, a University of Michigan researcher says.

"For a long time, cohabitation has been viewed as a challenge to the institution of marriage," said U-M sociologist Pamela Smock. "But young adults we interviewed are more likely to see living together as a good way to protect against ."

Smock, a research scientist at the U-M Institute for Social Research (ISR), is the co-author of an article in the current issue of the newsletter of the National Council of Family Relations. In the article, Smock and Bowling Green State University sociologist Wendy Manning review findings from a recent qualitative study of more than 350 young adults in the Midwest.

"Our participants come from diverse social classes and racial and ethnic backgrounds," Smock said. "They are Latino, white, and African American. They are social workers, waiters, truck drivers, electricians, teachers, home health care aides, prison guards, part-time students, sales clerks, and paralegals. And they are unemployed."

Most study participants were either living with someone at the time of the interview, or had been living with someone in the recent past. When asked about their relationships, many brought up the subject of divorce.

"Everyone had a divorce story," Smock said. "Either their , their relatives, their friends, or all of these, had been divorced." Roughly half of the participants in the study did not grow up with both biological parents.

"Based on experience, young adults are well aware that marriage can be fragile and they want to do whatever they can to avoid a failed marriage," Smock said. "For many, that means living with someone before they consider getting married."

According to Smock and Manning, three themes emerged when the young adults explained why cohabitation is a good way to "divorce-proof" a marriage:

--Socks and toothpaste: Living together is the best way to discover the "real" person and decide whether you are compatible over the long haul.

--The test drive: Living together is a smart way to gain information to decide whether you want to get married.

--A sure-fire antidote to divorce: Not getting married in the first place is the only way to guarantee you won't wind up getting divorced.

According to Smock and Manning, cohabitation serves to weed out marriages least likely to succeed. The value of these "premarital divorces," they point out, was first identified by University of Wisconsin-Madison social scientists Larry Bumpass and Jim Sweet.

"This idea lost currency for some time, with the debate about cohabitation centering on whether it was eroding the institution of ," Smock said. "But it's an idea that we're hearing loud and clear in the voices of the young adults we've interviewed, many of whom are convinced that living together is the best way to keep divorce at bay."

Provided by University of Michigan (news : web)

Explore further: Researchers urge early help for kindergarten students with low self-regulation

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Divorce reduces chance of new, successful relationship

Sep 07, 2007

After a separation or divorce the chances of marrying or cohabiting again decrease. In particular, a previous marriage or children from a previous relationship, reduce the chances of a new relationship. Moreover, the prospects ...

Rebound Marriages No More Likely to End in Divorce

Mar 28, 2006

Many self-help books and well-meaning friends and relatives offer this advice to newly divorced friends: Don't marry on the rebound. Don't rush into or commit to a serious relationship prematurely. Wait until you are good an ...

Divorce begets divorce -- but not genetically

Jul 11, 2007

The first study to examine genetics as a culprit in the higher-than-usual divorce rate among children of divorced parents found that the parents' divorce itself, not genes or even problems such as parental substance abuse ...

Recommended for you

World population likely to peak by 2070

Oct 23, 2014

World population will likely peak at around 9.4 billion around 2070 and then decline to around 9 billion by 2100, according to new population projections from IIASA researchers, published in a new book, World Population and ...

Bullying in schools is still prevalent, national report says

Oct 23, 2014

Despite a dramatic increase in public awareness and anti-bullying legislation nationwide, the prevalence of bullying is still one of the most pressing issues facing our nation's youth, according to a report by researchers ...

Study examines effects of credentialing, personalization

Oct 23, 2014

Chris Gamrat, a doctoral student in learning, design and technology, recently had his study—completed alongside Heather Zimmerman, associate professor of education; Jaclyn Dudek, a doctoral student studying learning, design ...

User comments : 2

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Adam
5 / 5 (1) Aug 19, 2009
I think there's a lot of baggage that the lawyers of the last 3,000 years have tacked on to marriage. No wonder people aren't keen on it. "Cohabitation" is really a 'no thrills' marriage and maybe we'd have less problems if that was enough.
zilqarneyn
not rated yet Aug 20, 2009
So, is that living-to-get-her (if she likes how he keeps his socks, during their premarital honeymoon), or else, permanent hopelessness about the stability of marriages?




How is a checklist not sufficient? Psychologists/counselors might list all of the foul issues (caprices, quirks, illnesses, hobbies, etc.) they know. Prospective couples (and their prospective in-laws) might honestly checkmark what they (selves, and children/parents) have in that list. (That is, self-report, as well as witnesses.)

That would help mostly, unless there is a scare of anticipating "the next big one." That is, unless the prospective-spouse might have something foul yet-unknown throughout entire history.

Having biographies accessible [publicly], might help in weighing, too.




I agree with @Adam, mostly. Co-habitation is a (secular) type of marriage.

The lawyers's baggage that most people might abhor, is the court process (toward divorce), probably. (That is mostly the last century, or two, I guess.) Seeing love turn to hostility/negotiations, is not probably the loveliest thing they had in their lives.

But, as a fair-play system for marriage, having laws is valuable. (I had written, http://www.zilqar..._sex.htm about the Islamic style.) Law adds a few standard values to marriage. Such as parental consent, as well as the girl's (& boy's) right to choose (or, veto). Not to mention the public-knowledge of who might sleep with whom. (Thus, punish the rapist, more trivially.) Persons are not all marvelous negotiators of rights. Having standards, helps the less-able people. Freedom flourishes with fair laws.