Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
premarital cohabitation
disadvantages to cohabitation
positive and negative effects of cohabitation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: premarital cohabitation
Premarital Cohabitation is a rapidly growing phenomenon in our society today. Cohabitation is defined as two people living in the same household who are unrelated, and of the opposite sex (Kunz, 2012). There are many studies that state disadvantages to cohabitating, before marriage, but at the same time there are many studies stating little to no difference in cohabitating couples and couples who did not cohabitate before marriage.
There are quite of few different types of cohabitation before marriage that Kunz (2012) lists her book. A very common type is the “trail marriage,” the opportunity for couples to test out their compatibility in a long-term mindset. This is more typical of college students and graduates rather than that of people with high school diplomas or less (Copen, 2013). Another type that relates to trail marriage is the prelude to marriage cohabitation. This type of premarital cohabitation has the expectation of marriage; the couple is just testing out the relationship. Similar to that in the stage in marriage process cohabitation, this type of couple tend to achieve other opportunities in their lives before getting married. It is also common for this type of couple to have children before marriage.
Unlike the above listed premarital cohabitations, there are some couples who cohabitate without any intention of getting married. This type is call alternative to singlehood cohabitation, rather than being single these couples prefer to live together. Another cohabitation with no intention of getting married would be the alternative to marriage cohabitation. These couples generally have children and families; they just have a preference to not be married. Also there is in indistinguishable from marriage which are...
... middle of paper ...
...ht. Cohabitation with out intention of marriage is risky and probably full of emotional ups and downs that is not good for a persons overall health.
Although there has been a major change in attitude towards cohabitating before marriage, it is still a diverse issue with many sides to it. People either choose to focus on the positives of testing a marriage out before actually being married or focus on the negative effects such as divorce and depression.
Works Cited
Copen, C., Daniels, K., & Mosher, W. (2013, April 4). National Health Statistics Report. www.cdc.gov. Retrieved November 18, 2013.
Gordon, A. (2012, August 19). The Potential Perils of Premarital Cohabitation and How to Avoid Them. Psychologytoday.com. Retrieved November 18, 2013
Kunz, J. (2012). THINK marriages and families, 2nd edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Retrieved November 18, 2013.
DeVault, C., Cohen, T., & Strong, B. (2011). The marriage and family experience: Intimate relationships in a changing society. (11th ed., pgs. 400-426). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth cengage learning.
Cohabitation, over the last two decades has gone from being a relatively uncommon social phenomenon to a commonplace one and has achieved this prominence quite quickly. A few sets of numbers convey both the change and its rapidity. The percentage of marriages preceded by cohabitation rose from about 10% for those marrying between 1965 and 1974 to over 50% for those marrying between 1990 and 1994 (Bumpass and Lu 1999, Bumpass & Sweet 1989); the percentage is even higher for remarriages. Secondly, the percentage of women in their late 30s who report having cohabited at least once rose from 30% in 1987 to 48% in 1995. Given a mere eight year tome window, this is a striking increase. Finally, the proportion of all first unions (including both marriages and cohabitation) that begin as cohabitations rose from 46% for unions formed between 1980 and 1984 to almost 60% for those formed between 1990 and 1994 (Bumpass and Lu 1999).
This societal acceptance has made it easier for couples to live together without being married. Many of these men and women decide to live together because they consider the cohabitation a "trial marriage." They fe...
In her text, she states that cohabitation has become very famous in the United States. Jay also reports that young adults in their twenties see cohabitation as a preventive way to avoid divorce. The perception that she contradicts by pointing out that people who cohabit before marriage are more at risk of divorce because once they are married they become unsatisfied of their marriage, she calls this phenomenon the cohabitation effect. The author also punctuates that the problem of the cohabitation effect is that lovers do not really discuss their personal perception of cohabitation or what it will mean for them. Instead, they slide into cohabitation, get married, and divorce after realizing that they made a mistake. She proves her point by presenting a research which shows that women and men have a different interpretation of cohabitating prior marriage. Furthermore, the author emphasizes her argument by saying that the problem is not starting a cohabiting relationship but leaving that relationship which can be the real issue after all the time and money invested. Finally, Jay indicates that American’s mindset about their romantic relationship is changing and can be illustrated by the fact that more Americans started to see cohabitation as a commitment before
It is not a new thought that today’s young Americans are facing issues, problems and difficult decisions that past generations never had to question. In a world of technology, media, and a rough economy, many young adults in America are influenced by a tidal wave of opinions and life choices without much relevant advice from older generations. The Generation Y, or Millennial, group are coming of age in a confusing and mixed-message society. One of these messages that bombard young Americans is the choice of premarital cohabitation. Premarital cohabitation, or living together without being married (Jose, O’Leary & Moyer, 2010), has increased significantly in the past couple of decades and is now a “natural” life choice before taking the plunge into marriage. Kennedy and Bumpass (2008) state that, “The increase in cohabitation is well documented,such that nearly two thirds of newlyweds have cohabited prior to their first marriage”(as cited in Harvey, 2011, p. 10), this is a striking contrast compared with statistics of our grandparents, or even parents, generations. It is such an increasing social behavior that people in society consider cohabitation “necessary” before entering into marriage. Even more, young Americans who choose not to cohabitate, for many different reasons, are looked upon as being “old-fashioned”, “naive”, or “unintelligent”. This pressure for young people to cohabitate before marriage is a serious “modern-day” challenge; especially when given research that states, “... most empirical studies find that couples who cohabited prior to marriage experience significantly higher odds of marital dissolution than their counterparts who did not cohabit before marriage”, stated by Jose (2010) and colleagues (as c...
In the article “Grounds for Marriage: How Relationships Succeed or Fail” by Arlene Skolnick talks a lot about how the attitudes towards marriages now a days is much different then what peoples attitudes have been in the past. The article talks about how there are two parts of every marriage “the husband’s and the wife’s”. This article touches on the affects cohabitation, and how cohabitation is more likely to happen among younger adults. This article talks about how the younger adults are more inclined to cohabitate before marriage, and that currently the majority of couples that are interring in to marriage have previously lived together. The article stats that some of the Possible reasons for couples to live together before marriage might include shifting norms
Hanson, Richard R. "Optimizing Marital Success: The Conscious Couple Uniting Process." Humboldt Journal of Social Relations 32.1, TRANSLATIONAL APPLIED SOCIOLOGY (2009): 158-83. JSTOR.Web. 11 May 2014.
In this study, researchers wanted to know young adults’ views of marriage in the United States. In order to do so, they asked simple questions about marriage and commitment to 424 people ages 21 to 38 from various socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds. The results showed that there are two major types of marital constructs, and two major arguments in the debate of marriage’s current state. The two categories of people who think of marriage are called the marriage naturalists and the marriage planners. Both groups of people have nearly opposite views on the idea of what is needed to be able to have a good, healthy marriage. The major arguments about the current state of marriage in the U.S are the marriage decline and the marriage resilience perspectives. These are also polarized, naturally.
Works Cited Kunz, Jenifer. Think Marriages & Families. Boston: Pearson, 2011. http://www.prs Print. The. Laquer, Estin, Ann.
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 partners. Some of them think about it as an effective way to have a chance to get to know a potential husband/spouse. Meanwhile, others completely deny the idea due to their disagreements with certain religious beliefs. Wydick suggested that, “the increase in premarital cohabitation is a product of a general movement within western society away from traditional ideas about marriage, divorce, birth control, abortion, women’s rights, and a host of other related issues” (4). Consequently, now people are more open-minded, meaning that they accept the idea of pre-cohabitation mainly as a social institution. People should live together before they get married because they have a chance to test their partnership and avoid the problems that may arise in the future.
There are many advantages and disadvantages in living together before marriage. Today there are many couples living together before marriage. Sometimes these kinds of relationships 'living together before marriage' end up with success and sometimes they are unsuccessful. Some of the advantages of living together before marriage are such as getting to know your partner, learning about one's abilities if he/she can satisfy your expectations and more. Also, there are some disadvantages in living together before marriage and they are such as religious and family values, parenting problems and more. I think there are more advantages then disadvantages in living together before marriage, because sometimes disadvantages in this kind of relationship are avoidable.
The divorce statistics and couples living together paint an interesting picture. More than half the couples that decided to marry lived together before hand.
They move in together to learn each others way to compromise and to see if living with each other becomes a successful process to a healthy lifestyle. When moving in together there’s a big question of commitment that takes place. I think that when you move in with someone you know your committed to one another, but are you so committed as to getting married with each other? I understand that a person can be scared that living together will be completely different than expected. When this happens a person already has a negative mindset that thing won’t work out and that’s exactly what happens. Negativity has a great impact on our daily lives, because if you don’t believe than you don’t
Marriage is traditionally defined as a social institution uniting men and women in special forms of mutual dependence for the purpose of founding and maintaining families (Polomeno). At the age of 16, with parental consent, a majority of states will allow marriage. For the couples that marry between the ages of 14 and 17 years of age they are twice as likely to divorce as couples who wait until their twenties (Kecskes). Today the average age of first marriage is 27 for women and 29 for men, but fewer than 8% of women and 13% of men married for the first time at the age of 30 or older (Avins) (Pattern 1A). Couples who marry when they are 18, 19, and 20 tend to be blindsided by many problems that take place during marriage such as unemployment, abuse, unexpected pregnancy, in-laws, affairs and many more (Kecskes.) Youthful marriages are a higher risk factor to divorce instead of couples who wait till they are older because of low income, poverty, and cohabitation before marriage. Around two thirds of couples who marry today are already live together and are known to be less committed in marriage (Koontz).
The debate on whether to get married or stay single has been raging for a long while, with both sides of the coin having their own pros and cons regarding the matter. Many proponents of either marriage or single life have strong individual convictions, and it is difficult to reach a definitive objective conclusion. Is the married individual happier than his/her single counterpart, or is getting married just a comfort seeking ritual that people believe they have to fulfill at some point in their lives? It is necessary to dissect this issue in the light of four factors: health and other medical factors, the economic and finance front, mental and emotional wellbeing and lastly, the social factor.