Four Myths About Living Together Without Marriage

Human Events ^ | Mar 01, 2006 | Janice Shaw Crouse

[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.

[Hildy]

So what? Every year the same story gets written. It's not going to change anything and alot of successful marriages started as living together. Mine included.

[HamiltonJay]

I would say generally this article is spot on.. I only co-habitated once... and did marry her, and still am married to her. But when I moved in, it was more about mutual convience than another step toward being married.

Fortunately it all worked out in the end, but the arguments are absolutely spot on. I asked guys all the time if they plan on marrying the person they are living with... way more often than not, they say "No.".. of course rarely will they say that if the gal is in earshot.

A friend of my wife has been living with a guy for over 3 years, he finally gave her a ring, but still hasn't set a date, she's basically been his made and built in day care provider for his kids from his previous marriage when he has custody... She has definately carried him financially, they are building a house together on land that she bought and has paid for herself... and still no date.

And to top it all off, the guys a 2 pump chump... I can't figure it out, she's an attractive and nice gal... and she's being taken for a ride... I am betting she's going to wind up having to sell this house to pay him off when he splits losing all that planning and effort and money she spent.... but what are you going to do?

[Paraclete]

Fair enough, not all live-in's are losers. But, I think it's also a fair statement that live-in's have contributed greatly to an epidemic of child abuse. The selfishness that can contribute to the desire to "live-in" can contribute to an attitude that a child (not their own) is "in the way" of their satisfaction.

[Emmet Fitzhume]

Your friend has no self esteem.

Until she gains a sense of self-importance, she is going to remain in the emotional swamp of being used.

As for the guys you ask about their "shackettes:"

Of course they are not going to marry them. They are going to stay with them until the "free sex" lifestyle is no longer fun, and then ditch them to search for another woman.

[BJClinton]

LOL. Bitter much? I assure you I never thought once about divorce when I got married. No matter how pissed-off we may get at each other divorce isn't considered. But then we're just old-fashioned and think everything is secondary to family. Funny thing, in our extended family of some 40-odd married couples there are only 2 divorces.

[not2worry]

I guess because I'm tired of everyone feeling it's the other guy's job to provide them with not only food, shelter and clothing, but two cars, spring, summer and Christmas vacations, cable TV, Xbox, liposuction, sex change surgery and a gizzion other government enforced entitlements.

Where did taking responsibility for one's self disappear to in this Country?

[Diana in Wisconsin]

"I think that her being more important to me than I am to me is the key to a successful relationship."

That is an excellent way to look at it. More marriages would have a fighting chance if that reality dawned on people more often! :)

[linda_22003]

That's what my husband and I say --- divorce is never a consideration. Murder, sometimes! but never divorce. :)

[Diana in Wisconsin]

Thanks! You made my day. :)

[SouthernBoyupNorth]

Count yourself fortunate and extremely lucky.

[T. Buzzard Trueblood]

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.

IMHO the sexual revolution has left women more degraded, more subservient to men than ever before - and in the case of cohabitators in particular, to the most no-account, good-for-nothing kind of men.

[HamiltonJay]

You aren't telling me anything I don't already know.. believe me.

[John O]

Ah yes, the "marriage won't be saved until it costs less to divorce" argument. Can you ~really~ get that house of cards to stand up?

The truth is, marriage ~should~ be expensive to divorce from when kids are involved.

I think the point 70times7 was making is that men routinely get raped in the divorce courts. We are more likely to lose our kids, our homes, and half our income for life even if we are the wronged partner. All the result of no-fault divorce

So now it's senseless for a young man to get married. You can live together, get the sex for free, have her cook and do laundry etc without ever having to make a committment and without the risk that you'll lose everything

(At least that's how I read 70's post)

[absolootezer0]

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.
Which, if they had married before moving in, would mean divorce. Kinda hurts that point.

nah. if you're married, its a lot harder to get out of, and you'll typically try harder to make it work. in cohabitation, you can say "f*** you, i'm leaving." then pack your stuff and be gone that day, never having to see that person again. a marriage is a lot more complicated and expensive to get out of.
i've done both. my first marriage i tried a lot harder to hold together. i suffered thru and tried to work out a lot of things i prolly woulda just thrown a live-in out for.

[HairOfTheDog]

That's how I read his post too, but it's wrong. Just flat out wrong.

I know real divorced people, not the imagined victims used in online debate about the awful state of divorce. True, they end up with child support and custody issues, they had to split the community property accumulated in the marriage, but that's the way it should be.

[Aquinasfan]

The author said the average length of cohabitation is 18 months. If they'd been married instead of cohabitating, that would mean they'd be divorced instead of simply going their own ways.

Yes, but they weren't married. That's the whole point.

[John O]

We both agree that divorce is something that is not an option.

This is an extremely important point. My wife and I agreed even before the wedding that divorce wasn't an option. We even refrained from mentioning the word. She was a wonderful woman. (She passed away in September after 16 happy years and two years of illness)

Now I find myself soon to be looking for a new wife. I'm kind of leaning toward a pre-nup that states that divorce is not allowed except in the case of adultery, abuse, abandonment or mutual agreement. Since I do not believe in divorce we'll never mutually agree and I won't do the other three so we should be in good shape.

The other important part of marriage, perhaps the most important, is make God the focus of it. As we each draw closer to God we cannot but help drawing closer to each other.

[John O]

why would any woman want to be with a man who thinks of her as a cow?

Exactly. Why would a woman give her body away to a man who won't even commit to her? So it seems that the woman who chooses to shack up doesn't mind being treated (or thought of) that way.

[70times7]

(At least that's how I read 70's post)

Dead on.

[linda_22003]

I lived with my husband for a year or so before we got married, and we've been married for 20 years this coming September. He never made any bovine references. :)