Should Couples Live Together Before Marriage - Literature review Example

Should Couples Live Together Before Marriage? Introduction Couples living together before marriage or cohabitation is defined by Bruess and Schroeder as "Couples who are sexual partners, unmarried, and sharing a household" (130.). It is worth noting that this has become a common tendency in the modern world where two sexual partners have a joint household. In fact, Bruess and Schroeder (130) points out that the frequency of people living together before marriage has increased more than fifteen times in the last fifty years in the US. Methodical investigations as cited by Bruess and Schroeder have indicated that approximately sixty percent of individuals marrying for the first time in the US cohabited before marrying (130). This paper focuses on an argument whether couples should live together before marriage. Reasons why people cohabit Before elucidating whether couples should live together before marriage, it is important to delineate the reasons why people opt for this trend. Some of the reasons why people tend to cohabitate are outlined by Bruess and Schroeder and they include couples trying to find out whether they are a match for each other, to share the financial burdens in the contemporary world, and also to investigate whether a spouse has the preferred attributes for marriage (130). There are many misconception mainly among the younger generation that cohabitating is a sure way of averting a divorce after marriage. However, much of the perceptions among the young generation are misguided and not supported by research. A scrutiny on the National Survey of Families and Households data conducted in 1987 and 1988 and cited by Huang et-al indicated approximately fifty one percent and fifty six percent of respondents to have given approval and support to finding compatibility as one of the reasons why people live together before marriage (2). Approximately twenty seven percent of the respondents supported financial expediency in terms of sharing their financial needs as the reason they cohabited (Huang et-al 2). Other reasons for living together before marriage from the data included sexual satisfaction and that cohabitation does not mean that the spouses have to be faithful (Huang et-al 2). In laymans terms, fear of commitment drove the respondents to cohabitation. Other respondents who were found to be living together before marriage cited a lack of interest in marriage as their major reason for cohabiting (Huang et-al 3). Rates of divorce According to Greenberg and Conklin, there is a collective conviction that living together before marriage is one of the techniques that helps parties involved to evade a problematic union in marriage (438). A research conducted on fifteen thousand women cited by Benson posited that there are higher rates of separation among cohabiting couples as compared to officially married couples (56). Results from this study indicated a sixteen percent of separation among married couples and a twenty percent rate of separation among cohabiting couples (Benson 56). This shows that living together before marriage does not guarantee a happiness after marriage. Subsequently, Reinhold bases his postulation on pragmatic investigations and assert that marriages preceded by cohabitation are less stable in comparison to other families in the United States (719). As mentioned earlier, there is also a common perception in the public domain that living together before marriage is a way to find out the compatibility of the couple. As a result, people expect that since couples who have lived together before marriage have learnt and comprehended the character of their spouse, then their union ought to be more stable in comparison to individuals who marry devoid of cohabiting. Instability among families Data from the National Survey of Family Growth cited by Reinhold shows that individuals who started this trend of living together before marriage in the US were characterized by low levels of education and financial instability (719). He is however ardent to indicate that this trend has also been adopted by a part of the middle class individuals. This shows that the rich are less likely to cohabit as compared to less privileged individuals. People living together before marriage are therefore likely to experience interruptions in the course of their union as compared to married couples. Some of these interruptions include instabilities among families contributed by low levels of education and financial instability. It is worth indicating that couples in an unstable family as postulated by Reinhold are more likely to have lesser levels of devotion or loyalty to their union hence are more likely to separate (720). To support this insinuation, Smock and Manning asserts that approximately sixty percent of females between the age of nineteen and forty four in the year 1995 who were found to have lived together with a spouse preceding marriage merely had high school certificates. In contrast, those females with a college level certificate found to have lived together with a spouse preceding marriage were forty percent (7). Perceptions about cohabiting Methodical investigations have alluded to the fact that cohabiting is related to monetary expediency. In other words, these investigations have shown than people tend to live together in order to share their financial obligations. Results from empirical research touching on the National Survey of Families and Households conducted between 1987 and 1988 showed that only a quarter of individuals living together cited monetary expediency as a significant reason not to marry but cohabit (Rhoades, Stanley, and Markman 2).Therefore, cohabiting does not guarantee that the couple will be contented will sharing their financial obligations. The fact that there is an intuition that cohabitation is a sure way to measure the compatibility of the spouses is an assumption that cohabitation prepares a couple for marriage as it allows them to understand the character of their spouse. There is a risk that cohabiting may force people to end up in marriage unions they themselves had not intended and marriages that are not their choice (Rhoades, Stanley and Markman 3). Some of the reasons this may happen include restrictions in terms of finances and problems associated with splitting properties jointly owned by the cohabitating couple. Even if the cohabitation has proved that the couple is incompatible, the couple may end up settling in an unhappy marriage for "Fear of being alone and moral dimensions" (Rhoades, Stanley and Markman 3). Some societies view separation regardless of whether the parties had cohabitated or had legally married as immoral. Therefore, people may fear embarrassment and shame associated with separation and end up in an unhappy marriage. Increased likelihood of child abuse The increase in the rate of cohabitation especially in the US can lead to increased risks particularly in relation to child abuse. As mentioned earlier, cohabiting couples are more likely to be financially unstable and therefore children are likely to be affected. Smock and Manning points out that being brought up in a financially unstable family or household elevates the chances of a child to drop out of school or perform poorly, and elevates the chances of financial instability when the child attains adulthood (6). This shows that children in cohabited families are less privileged economically as compared to children brought up by married couples. Children brought up in married families are also more likely to develop better in terms of behaviors (Smock and Manning 6). An analysis of the National Survey of Families and Households statistical information outlined by Kohm and Groen shows a connection between living together before marriage and child molestation. This data shows that spouses living together devoid of marriage have higher chances of abusing their children as compared to married spouses (263). This abuse can even be in the form of sexual molestation and this data elucidated a higher prevalence among children whose parents are cohabiting (Kohm and Groen 264). This shows that living together before marriage has detrimental consequences on children. As much as the cohabiting couple suffer in terms of domestic violence, children are the most affected. Negative communication According to Rhoades, Stanley and Markman, couples who had previously lived together before they married have been proved to have harmful and depressing communication among them (2). Harmful communication may lead to domestic violence and hence the children suffers. Women who have cohabited with their spouse before marriage have also been found to have higher rates of infidelities as compared to those who did not go through cohabitation (Rhoades, Stanley and Markman 2). In the modern world, infidelity has the potential to affect every member of the family as well as the society. It is common knowledge that infidelity increases the risk of acquiring sexually transmitted diseases such as HIV/AIDS and hence risking passing the disease to the other spouse. Pragmatically proven notion that shows higher rates of infidelity among women who cohabited preceding marriage (Rhoades, Stanley and Markman 2) can therefore accelerate the spread of HIV/AIDS and other dangerous sexually transmitted diseases. Since infidelity is lower among married couples, then this current trend of couples living together is more of a risk to the health of the public. Diseases such as HIV/AIDS have a very high cost to both the family and the society in general in terms of treatment, management, caring for the infected individuals, and lost productivity. Conversely, children are also affected by the spread of HIV/AIDS since their parents who are their providers will be unable to provide for the family. This similarly shows that living together before marriage does not lead to a happy and stable marriage. Quality of relationship A study cited by Rhoades, Stanley and Markman additionally showed that "Married couples who lived together before engagement had more negative interaction, lower relationship quality, and lower relationship confidence than those who did not cohabit until after engagement or marriage" (3). There are a lot of negative implications associated with poor communication and relations among couples such as misunderstandings and divorce. Marriages whereby a spouse has low confidence is highly likely to result to separation or divorce. Rather than helping evade an appalling unions therefore, cohabiting exacerbates the marriage problems. The fact that cohabiting before marriage elevates the chances of a divorce and instability or volatility may have harmful consequences on the part of a child. According to Smock and Manning, results from studies focusing on the welfare and security of children have shown that volatility within families in white households speeds up the commencement of sexual behaviors among children (5). In other words, a child in a volatile white household is more likely to engage in sexual behaviors at a younger age as compared to children in stable households. Reasons why marriages lead to lower rates of divorce as compared to cohabitations We cannot argue against couples living together before marriage without mentioning the reasons why couples living together for the first time after they have married are more likely to succeed in their marriage as compared to those who preceded their marriage with cohabiting. An example of an outstanding reason is brought forward by Brinig and Nock as because these couples are experiencing sexual intimacy for the first time (424). It has been proved through methodical investigations that "Sixteen and three-tenths percent of men, and twenty and one-tenth percent of women are virgins at the time of their first marriage" (Brinig and Nock 424). Therefore, a couple marrying as virgins is more likely to remain married longer as they explore their intimacy. Secondly, marriage assures the commitment of each of the parties involved as compared to cohabitation where there is no loyalty (Brinig and Nock 424). In assuring commitment, a marriage therefore gives the couple the feeling of stability absent in a cohabiting couple. In other words, marriage is considered a covenant or pledge between the couple and they vow to consider the needs of the other party in all endeavors. Religious perspective on cohabitation In this light, it would be important to illuminate the religious view of cohabitation and marriage. Sex before marriage is considered immoral by many religious outfits. Similarly, living together before marriage in a religious perspective contradicts the innate Biblical perspectives relating to sex (Loveless and Holman 29). Loveless and Holman further accept the fact it is widely and collectively viewed that religious outfits are the main source of support in the form of counseling to the married couple (29). This means that religious outfits are more likely to denounce couples living together before marriage and hence distance themselves from them. This translates to lack of support for the couple. There are fears within the religious outfits that encouraging cohabitations could erode the meaning of marriage (Loveless and Holman 29). This is in regard to the fact that many people consider cohabitation as a replication of marriage with necessarily solemnizing the union. In this perspective therefore, living together before marriage ought to be discouraged at all costs. What happens after a cohabiting couple separates? It is similarly of significance to consider spouses who separate after cohabiting with a spouse. Most of them remarry after such a separation. According to Demo and Fine, an individual who have cohabited in a previous relationship is also more likely to cohabit again in successive relationships (64). Therefore, it is more likely that an individual will form a habit of cohabiting as indicated by this postulation. In addition, divorcees in a married union are more likely to shun marriage in subsequent relationships (Demo and Fine 64). The reason to why a once married individual is likely to engage in a cohabitation is in regard to the stress associated with divorce or separation (Demo and Fine 54). Since marriage gives spouses a sense of belonging, commitment, and loyalty to each other, most belongings are jointly owned as mentioned earlier and hence the divorce process is long and stressful for the couple. This shows that the availability of the cohabiting option gives a leeway for people to live together without marrying. Conclusion In conclusion, the evidence presented in this paper clearly argues against spouses living together before marriage. Cohabitation has a lot of disadvantages and hence it should not be allowed. For instance, divorce rate is higher for couples who lived together before marrying and the quality of their marriage is low since cohabiting elevates the probability of negative communication and association. This as evidence has alluded may lead to domestic violence and child molestation or abuse. Cohabiting before marriage is mainly seen among individuals with low levels of education and financial stability. Since there is lack of commitment and loyalty in a cohabiting union, then the family is likely to be unstable and hence heightening the probability of children becoming delinquents as a result of being brought up in unstable households. In comparison, married households are more stable and hence the children are more likely to be more successful in life after attaining adulthood. Works cited (Annotated Bibliography) Benson, Harry. "Back off of Fire Back? Negative relationship behaviors amongst postnatal married and cohabiting couples." Bristol Community Family Trust (n.d): 55-66. Web. 5 Nov. 2014. In this book, Benson conducts a methodical analysis aimed at explicating the frequency and relationship of divergent factors that are used to foretell relationships. This source was selected because it compares factors that predict relationships among married and cohabiting couples. Therefore, I will use this source to show statistical information to show the differences in divorce or separation rate between married and cohabiting couples. Brinig, Margaret F, and Nock Steven L. "Marry Me, Bill: Should Cohabitation Be the (Legal) Default Option?." Louisiana Law Review 64.3 (2004): 403-442. Web. 6 Nov. 2014. < http://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6040&context=lalrev> Brigin and Nock in this scholarly article provides an analysis of relationships with the main objective of proving whether cohabitation is an alternative for marriage. This source was selected because it elucidates the reasons why couple cohabit as opposed to marrying. I will use information in this article to prove that marriage has a higher success rate in comparison with cohabitation. Bruess, Clint E, and Schroeder Elizabeth. Sexuality Education Theory and Practice. Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Learning, 2013. Print. In this book, Bruess and Schroeder provide approaches to train people on issues relating to sex across cultures. This source was selected as it provides an array of ideas relating to why couples cohabit. I will use these ideas on why couple cohabit to prove my thesis that cohabiting is less successful as compared to marriage hence ought to be avoided. Demo, David H, and Fine Mark A. Beyond the Average Divorce. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2010. Print. This book focuses on the outcomes of separation and divorce and its impact on the couple and their children. This source was chosen because it provides information on differences and unpredictability of divorce. I will use this book to show currents trends in divorce and separation. Greenberg, Jerrold S, Bruess Clint E, and Conklin Sarah C. Exploring the Dimensions of Human Sexuality. London: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2010. Print. In this book, the authors expounds on various viewpoints of sexuality particularly biological, religious, psychosomatic, and sociocultural perspectives. This source was selected because it offers data on how cohabitation affects peoples relationships and hence I will use it to support my thesis that people should not cohabit before marriage. Huang, Penelope M, Smock Pamela J, Manning Wendy D, and Bergstrom Cara A. "He Says, She Says: Gender and Cohabitation." Journal of Family Issues 32.7 (2011): 876-905. Web. 6 Nov. 2014. The authors of this article uses data from research to portray or illustrate the reasons behind cohabitation and how cohabitation is viewed differently among men and women. This article is used in this paper to show the reasons why people cohabit. Kohm, Lynne M, and Groen Karen M. "Cohabitation and The Future of Marriage." Regent University Law Review 17.261 (2005): 261-277. Web. 6 Nov. 2014. Kohm and Groens article presents a thorough examination on the demographic frameworks and legal perspectives of marriage. This article was selected because it appraises the advantages and disadvantages of cohabitation Vis-a-Vis marriage. I will therefore use this article to show that the disadvantages of cohabitation outweigh the advantages and therefore ought not to be allowed. Loveless, Scott, and Holman Thomas B. Eds. The Family in the New Millennium: World Voices Supporting the Natural Clan. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2006. Print. Loveless and Holman in this book examines how marriages have evolved over the years. In doing so, they offer a religious perspective to cohabitation and marriage. I will use this book to show that cohabitation contravenes Biblical teachings and therefore should not be allowed. Reinhold, Steffen. "Reassessing the Link Between Premarital Cohabitation and Marital Instability." NCBI 47.3 (2010): 719-733. Web. 5 Nov. 2014. Reinhold in this article uses statistical evidence to show the relationship between cohabitation and divorce and marriage instability. I will use this article to show that rates of separation are higher among couples who cohabit prior to marriage as compared to couples who do not cohabit before marriage. Rhoades, Galena K, Stanley Scott M, and Markman Howard J. "Working with Cohabitation in Relationship Education and Therapy." National Institute of Health 8.2 (2009): 95-112. Web. 5 Nov. 2014. < http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2897720/pdf/nihms-216066.pdf> The authors of this article examines results from past studies focusing on effects of cohabitation and also examines how results from past studies shapes relationship education today. In examining the effects of cohabitation, this article shows the relationship between cohabitation and marital instability. This is the reason why this article was selected and used to support my thesis. Smock, Pamela J, and Manning Wendy D. Living Together Unmarried in the United States: Demographic Perspectives and Implications for Family Policy. Michigan: University of Michigan, 2004. Print. In this report, Smock and Manning conducts methodical investigations to illustrate the rates of cohabitation in different geographical areas in the US as well as the effects of cohabitation. Information in this report is used in this paper to show how cohabitation affects the wellbeing of children. Read More