Should Cohabitation Before Marriage Be Encouraged

Hey, Mom I just want you to know that Bob and I are going to live together. I know that you and dad do not agree with it, nonetheless, I am an adult and I am going to move into his place tomorrow. How can a parent see a child go through with a decision like this and know that he or she is making a wrong choice? Sometimes a young adult may make a choice that a parent does not like. As a result, a young adult has now plunged into cohabitation. Does it really matter if you cohabitate before marriage? In finding the answer to this problem, I have come across two articles which help explain the pros and the cons of the question, “Should couples cohabitate or get married?” The first article is Sliding Versus Deciding: Inertia, the Premarital Cohabitation Effect. When a couple has “dedication commitment” (Stanley, Rhoades, and Markmann, 503) with each other, cohabitation works for partners. It is likely your partner will stay in the relationship and want to work it out no matter what happens. The second article is The Verdict on Cohabitation vs. Marriage. While many people think that cohabiting is really the in thing with life today. Marriage trumps over cohabitation. Some marriage may not have the “happily ever after” it still has a better start to their life as a couple.

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.

In Andrew J. Cherlin’s essay “American Marriage In Transition”, he discusses how marriage in America is evolving from the universal marriage. Cherlin’s definition of the universal marriage in his essay is the man is the breadwinner of the household and the woman is the homemaker. In the 20th century according to Cherlin, the meaning of marriage has been altered such as the changing division of labor, childbearing outside of marriage, cohabitation, gay marriage and the result of long- term cultural and material trends (1154). During the first transition of marriage, Cherlin discusses how in America, Europe, and Canada the only socially accepted way to have sexual relations with a person and to have children is to be married (1154). The second change in marriage occurred in 2000, where the median age of marriage in the United States for men is 27 and women is 25 (1155). Many young adults stayed single during this time and focused on their education and starting their careers. During the second change, the role of law increasingly changed, especially in the role of law in divorce (1155). It is proven in today’s research marriage has a different definition than what it did back in the 1950’s. Today marriage can be defined as getting married to the same gender or getting remarried to someone who already has kids. The roles in a marriage are evolving to be a little more flexible and negotiable. However, women still do a lot of the basic household chores and taking care of the

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.

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.

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.

　　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

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.

It is said that every two marriages end in divorce. Even though this estimate seems to be pretty high, there is no question that in today’s society the biggest cause of divorce is people getting married way too soon. The question is “Should Couples Live Together before Marriage?” Some may agree that it is a good idea to cohabitating before marriage but some may not. Their decision may be based on their parents’ standards and strong belief background. From personal experience, couples (those who are actually planning to start a life together) should live together before marriage. For many reasons: to see how your spouse lives, it helps finically, and it is practice before the real thing. You always want to know you are ready before you need up with someone you are not compatible with.

I hate you! People who loved each other and shared everything can’t take it anymore. They decide to divorce and forget everything. huffingtonpost.com claimed that 50 percent of marriages in the U.S. end in divorce. What’s wrong? Why they didn’t make it? Couples who live together before marriage appear to have a much higher chance of divorce if they marry, said Kamp Dush in the book ‘’Journal of Marriage and Family’’. Some people would agree that couples should live together before marriage, some would not. Their decisions may be based on their strong beliefs, backgrounds, their parents ' standards or the statistics of marriage versus divorce. The question of, ˜Should Couples Live Together Before Marriage? ' I strongly believe they should not, and today I want to show you reasons why.

Therefore, living together will ensure the couple whether or not they can get along in the future. Those people consider pre-cohabitation as an effective way to prepare themselves for being a family. According to Popenoe David, “in case the relationship goes sour, they can avoid the trouble, expense and emotional trauma” (4). It is a good idea to live together because if the couples have troubles they can just move out and continue with their separate lives without being obliged to undergo the different procedures of divorce. In the end, perhaps after living with various people, a person will finally find their appropriate partner for marriage and be happy. Popenoe points out that, “living together helps you see past romanticized notions and clue in to what marriage will really be like”(8). Accordingly, choosing reality as a primary factor to determine the result of cohabitation is a wise decision. People who cohabitate get a clue to see whether or not they will be able to share their lives with the partners they have chosen and what kind of disagreements might proceed within the relationship. Overall, the best opportunity of living up to one-another’s assumptions is to apprehend what they really are in advance and know what they care about.

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

In todays’ world, with increased incidence of unsuccessful relationship or marriages, there are some people who want/prefer to live together before marriage so that they can understand each other and they don’t have to experience a painful divorce. In my point of view, this is another option/type of marriage. Because if the relationship won’t work successfully then they can separate their ways easily and live happily. By living together before marriage, they have time to know about each other's living style and behavior and their relation get even stronger than before but if it does not work then they can move ahead in their lives before taking a wrong step of living together for the whole life but sometimes living together is against to some family principles, ethics of society, religious point of view. Sometimes these types of relationships are very successful without any regret in life and on the other hand it comes out as an unsuccessful and worst relationship. But I think advantages are more powerful than disadvantages.

together in the early 1980's were between 25 and 34 years old, and an additional

For today’s young adults, the first generation to come of age during the divorce revolution, living together seems like a good way to achieve some of the benefits of marriage and avoid the risk of divorce. Couples who live together can share expenses and learn more about each other. They can find out if their partner has what it takes to be married. If things don’t work out, breaking up is easy to do. Cohabiting couples do not have to seek