Cohabitation

Cohabitation

Family Issues Guide

"The energy which holds a society together is sexual in nature. When a man is devoted to one woman and one family, he is motivated to build, save, protect, plan, and prosper on their behalf. However, when his sexual interests are dispersed and generalized, his effort is invested in the gratification of sensual desires. Any human society is free to display great energy or to enjoy sexual license; but they cannot do both for more than one generation." - J .D. Unwin, Herald of Holiness, Oct.1, 1976, p. 23.

“Cohabitation — it's training for divorce.” -- Chuck Colson

Cohabitation

(Living Together Without Marriage)

Throughout the centuries marriage has been the institution that societies the world over have established as the fountain from which families spring. Legal marriage, a public contract between a man and woman, is a declaration that a couple has established a family, the fundamental unit of society. In most societies, married couples are entitled to special privileges as a way of acknowledging the value of their legal union to society. Marriage is not just a private or religious avowal of two people committed to each other. Marriage has been instituted to promote stable unions between men and women and to provide the context in which sexual relations occur.

Despite its growing frequency and acceptance, the practice of cohabitation among unmarried couples does not serve the best interests of adults, children, society, or governments. The evidence suggests that cohabitation is 1) an inferior alternative to the married, intact, two-parent family; 2) damaging to the social wellbeing of women and children; and 3) a considerable strain on the units of government that deal with social, correctional, and welfare issues. Cohabitation typically leaves in its wake a trail of broken relationships, unstable homes, children at risk, domestic violence, poverty, and thus a weakened society. United Families International encourages the establishment of laws, policies, and programs that promote legal marriage between a man and a woman and that discourage cohabitation.

Myth and Reality

Myth: To increase the chances of a successful marriage, couples should live together efore marrying to test their relationship and make sure they are compatible.

Reality: A review of social science research and empirical data reveals that cohabitation decreases a couple's propensity to marry and if they do marry, the chances are reduced that their marriages will be successful. Cohabitating partners tend to be less committed as married couples to the continuation of their relationship and are generally more oriented toward their own personal autonomy than to their marriage. The longer a couple lives together, the more likely it is that the low-commitment ethic of cohabitation will take hold -- the opposite of what is required for a successful marriage. Contrary to prevailing contemporary philosophy, people do not benefit from multiple cohabitation living arrangements. In fact, multiple cohabiting is a strong predictor of the failure of future relationships.

See Fast Facts and Commentary # 1-20, 21-29

Myth: At puberty, teens will inevitably become sexually active, but are not mature enough to marry for many years. Cohabitation provides a safe environment for pre-marital sex to occur.

Reality: There are many teens that choose not to be sexually active. There are also many mature adults that have the self discipline to delay sexual relations until they find the right partner to marry. Pre-marital sexual activity is not inevitable; it is a choice. One of the hallmarks of maturity is the ability to delay immediate gratification for a long term good. Those who have waited to have sex until they are married do not regret the decision while many who engage in premarital sexual activity regret that choice as they experience unwanted consequences such as out-of-wedlock pregnancy, disease, depression and failed relationships.

Although cohabitation may reduce the number of sexual partners prior to marriage, it does not ensure personal commitment and is not the best alternative. There is no “safe” environment for premarital sex. Abstinence before marriage is a viable option for youth and unmarried adults and should be promoted as the safest and most healthy choice.

See Fast Facts and Commentary # 27-38, 68-69, 72-75

Myth: Modern societies have become highly sexualized, and cohabitation is already widely accepted. It is futile to resist these trends.

Reality: Those who argue in favor of cohabitation recognize the social realities of highly sexualized societies, but fail to adequately answer this important question: If the goal is to have a committed, lifelong marriage, does cohabitation assist in that goal? Living together before marriage has a poor record for generating happy and long-lasting marriages. Cohabitation opens a proverbial Pandora's Box of problems. Whether or not highly sexualized cultures accept or condone cohabitation, governments and societies will continue to bear the high costs associated with cohabitation. It is incumbent upon governments and societies to educate people about the negative consequences of cohabitation and work to promote strong, stable marriages.

See Fast Facts and Commentary # 30-51, 61-75

Myth: Children are as well off with unmarried parents who love them as they are with married parents.

Reality: By almost every measure, children of cohabiting parents fare worse than do children in intact married families. Cohabitation leads to a highly disproportionate number of children who will experience family breakdown and be forced into one or more blended families. Parental breakup increases the likelihood of a myriad of personal and social difficulties for children.

Children who live in cohabiting unions with a stepfather or the mother's boyfriend are at higher risk of sexual abuse and physical violence--including lethal violence--than are children living with married biological parents. These children are subject to significantly higher rates of emotional and behavioral problems and live in households that experience higher rates of poverty.

See Fast Facts and Commentary # 1-20, 30-74

Myth: Couples that cohabit are similar in all respects to married couples.

Reality: Living together before marriage may seem like a harmless or even a progressive family trend until one takes a careful look at the evidence to the contrary. Cohabiting couples do not experience many of the well-documented benefits of traditional marriage. Cohabiting couples are more closely aligned statistically--in areas of health (physical and emotional), economics, and well being of children--with single people and single parents.The empirical data paints an overwhelmingly negative picture of the outcomes for both children and adults living in single-parent households.

Cohabitating relationships are often viewed differently by each sex. Women tend to see a cohabitating relationship as a step toward marriage, while men tend to regard their relationship more as a sexual opportunity without the ties of long-term commitment. Statistically, cohabiting individuals do not make the same commitment to their partner that a marriage partner makes to a spouse.

See Fast Facts and Commentary # 1-81

Myth: “Domestic partners” or cohabitating couples, as taxpayers and members of the community, are entitled to the same privileges and benefits as legally married couples and should not be discriminated against or be denied equal benefits.

Reality: Government has no obligation to validate or recognize domestic partnerships by providing institutionalized benefits as these relationships do not provide the same intrinsic value to society that marriage does. Those governments and private businesses that extend benefits, and thus approval, to “domestic partners” are in effect subsidizing the formation of fragile family forms. In addition, these governments and businesses are subsidizing family forms that create increased risks of economic hardship and violence to women and children. This must be viewed as regressive and self-defeating policy. Governments have the obligation and the right to promote what is best for society; not hand out benefits just because particular parties demand them.

If cohabiting couples were to receive institutionalized benefits, then the government must require some level of legal commitment on the part of the cohabiting pair. To presume that cohabiting couples want to be bound by the similar obligations as married couples is contrary to their choice to live in relationships without the obligations that come with a binding, legal license.

See Fast Facts and Commentary # 30-51, 52-75

Myth: Since divorce rates are so high and marriage as an institution is struggling, it is hypocritical to say that traditional marriage is the only way for people to join together in a loving relationship. Besides, how could affirming cohabitation, sanctioning domestic partnerships and recognizing committed loving relationships negatively impact traditional marriage?

Reality: Marriage, although not perfect, is society's most stable institution. It can produce superior personal, familial, and societal results. In spite of discouraging trends impacting marriage, 92 percent of people surveyed report that having a successful marriage is very important to them. Marriage has indisputable economic, physical, emotional and psychological benefits for men and women and their children that alternative relationships simply cannot match. The weakened state of marriage today is not a call to further dismantle it, but rather a call to strengthen traditional marriage.

Marriage is the vehicle in which every successful society works to channel the sex act and obtain for each child the permanent attention, love, and resources of a mother and a father. Children have a fundamental right to a mother and a father; to be born within the bonds of matrimony to parents who honor their marital vows with complete fidelity. When governments sanction alternative relationships they send the clear message that pre-marital sex and these types of relationships are acceptable. Our laws may reflect reality, but they can also affect reality.

Rather than settling for the low expectation of cohabitation with its inherent problems and costly price tag, government should develop policies and strategies aimed at encouraging and preserving the institution of traditional marriage. A wealth of social science evidence and the lessons of history show us that the health of our society and the future of our children depend on strong, traditional marriage.

See Fast Facts and Commentary # 1, 39-71

Fast Facts Index

Fast Facts and Commentary

Relationship Commitment

1. In spite of a high divorce rate, 92 percent of people surveyed report that having a successful marriage is very important to them. Wirthlin Worldwide, August 1996, as cited in “The Family, Marriage: Highly Valued,” Public Perspective February/March (1998): 17.

2. A study of divorce rates from 1950 to 1984 showed a long-term consistency in the probability of cohabitation increasing the likelihood of divorce, by about 35 percent, among those who engage in it before making wedding vows. Jay D. Teachmen, “Stability across Cohorts in Divorce Risk Factors,” Demography 39 (2002): 331-351.

3. Most cohabitating couples will maintain a relationship just 18 months. Janice Shaw Crouse, Ph.D., “Gaining Ground: A Profile of American Women in the Twentieth Century,” The Beverly LaHaye Institute, Washington, D.C. (2001): 38. www.cwfa.org/images/content/gg1-8.pdf.

4. Couples who cohabit before marriage have a 46 percent greater risk of divorce than couples that do not live together before marriage. Alfred DeMaris and K. Vaninadha Rao, “Premarital Cohabitation and Subsequent Marital Stability in the United States: A Reassessment,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 54 (1992): 178-190.

5. “Premarital cohabitors in Canada have over twice the risk of divorce in any year of marriage when compared with noncohabitors." David R. Hall, and John Z. Zhao, "Cohabitation and Divorce in Canada: Testing the Selectivity Hypothesis” Journal of Marriage and the Family 57 (1995): 421-427.

6. Research done jointly at Yale and Columbia universities found that "the dissolution rate for women who cohabit premaritally with their future spouse are, on average, nearly 80 percent higher than the rates of those who do not." Neil G. Bennettt, Ann Blanc Klimas and David E. Bloom, "Commitment and the Modern Union: Assessing the Link Between Premarital Cohabitation and Subsequent Marital Stability," American Sociological Review 53 (1988): 127-138.

7. Half of all cohabiting couples either breakup or marry within two years, and after five years, only 10 percent of cohabiting couples stay together. In contrast, 55 percent of first marriages last a lifetime. Edward O. Laumann et al., The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994).

8. Those who live together before marriage are almost twice as likely to divorce than those who did not live together. Larry L. Bumpass et al., "The Changing Character of Stepfamilies: Implications of Cohabitation and Nonmarital Childbearing" NSFH 63 , Demography 32(1995):425-36, http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/cde/nsfhwp/nsfh63.pdf. Michael Bracher et al., "Marriage Dissolution in Australia : Models and Explanations." Population Studies 47 (1993): 403-425. Alfred DeMaris et al., "Premarital Cohabitation and Subsequent Marital Stability in the United States: A Reassessment." Journal of Marriage and the Family 54 (1992): 178-190. Norval D. Glenn, "Quantitative Research on Marital quality in the 1980's: A Critical Review," Journal of Marriage and the Family 52 (1990): 818-831. David R. Hall and John A. Zhoa, "Cohabitation and Divorce in Canada: Testing the Selectivity Hypothesis," Journal of Marriage and the Family 57 (1995): 421-427.

9. After 5 to 7 years, 39 percent of all cohabiting couples have broken their relationship, 40 percent have married (although the marriage might not have lasted), and only 21 percent are still cohabiting. Lynne N. Casper and Suzanne M. Bianchi, Continuity and Change in the American Family (Thousand Oaks,: Sage Publications, 2002).

10. Forty-six percent of all cohabitations in a given year are classified as precursors to marriage. Yet, only 52 percent of those classified as "precursors to marriage" had actually married after five to seven years and 31 percent had split up. Lynne N. Casper and Suzanne M. Bianchi, Continuity and Change in the American Family (Thousand Oaks,: Sage Publications, 2002).

11. According to 1997 data, 14.5 percent of first marriages of women who had never cohabited ended in separation, divorce, or annulment in the first five years, compared to 22.6 percent of first marriages of women who had cohabited (with anyone) before those marriages. David Popenoe & Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, Should We Live Together? What Young Adults Need to Know About Cohabitation Before Marriage, The National Marriage Project, 1999.

12. Cohabiting couples grew almost tenfold, from about 439,000 in 1960 to 4.24 million in 1998. Of those couples who choose to live together, only one in six will stay together three years, and only one in 10 will last 10 years or more. William J. Bennett, The Index of Leading Cultural Indicators (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001), 59.

13. Between 1965 and 1974, only 10 percent of marriages were preceded by cohabitation, compared to 56 percent between 1990 and 1994. Pamela Smock, “Cohabitation in the United States: An Appraisal of Research Themes, Findings, and Implications,” Annual Review of Sociology 26 (2000).

14. A British study reported that 70 percent of young people in “their first serious relationship” favor cohabiting over marriage. While three-quarters of these people say they plan to get married sometime in the future, only about 60 percent of the couples will ever take that step. John F. Ermisch, Marco Francesconi, ”Family Structure and Children's Achievements,” Journal of Population Economics 14 (2001), 249-270. John F. Ermisch, Marco Francesconi, “Family Matters: Impacts of Family Background on Educational Attainments” Economica, 68 (270): 137-156.

15. A 1997 longitudinal study conducted at Pennsylvania State University concluded that “cohabitation increased young people's acceptance of divorce, but other independent living experiences did not." The study went on to report “the more months of exposure to cohabitation that young people experienced, the less enthusiastic they were toward marriage and childbearing." William G. Axinn and Jennifer S. Barber, "Living Arrangements and Family Formation Attitudes in Early Adulthood," Journal of Marriage and the Family 59 (1997): 595-611. Marin Clarkberg, "Family Formation Experiences and Changing Values: The Effects of Cohabitation and Marriage on the Important Things in Life," in Ron Lesthaeghe, ed., Meaning and Choice: Value Orientations and Life Course Decisions, NIDI Monograph 38, (The Hague: Netherlands, Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute, forthcoming).

16. Couples with single and multiple cohabitation experiences displayed poorer communication skills compared to couples with no premarital cohabitation. Catherine L. Cohan and Stacey Kleinbaum, “Toward a Greater Understanding of the Cohabitation Effect: Pre-marital Cohabitation and Marital Communication,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 64 (2002): 180-192.

17. 1992 study found that couples who cohabited prior to marriage reported greater marital conflict, poorer communication, more individualistic views of marriage (wives only), less commitment to the institution of marriage, and a greater likelihood of divorce. Elizabeth Thomson and Ugo Colella, “Cohabitation and Marital Stability: Quality or Commitment,” Journal of Marriage and Family 54 (1992): 259-267.

18. Cohabitation is probably least harmful when it is prenuptial – when both partners are definitely planning to marry, have formally announced their engagement, and have picked a wedding date. David Popenoe and Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, “Should We Live Together? What Young Couples Need to Know about Cohabitation Before Marriage, The National Marriage Project, 1999, http://marriage.rutgers.edu/Publications/swlt2.pdf.

19. The reasons for cohabitating vary. Some see it as a prelude to marriage; some see it as an alternative to it, while for others it is simply an alternative to living alone. R. Rindfuss and A. VanDenHeuvel, "Cohabitation: A Precursor to Marriage or an Alternative to Being Single?" Population and Development Review 16 (1990): 703-726. Wendy D. Manning, "Marriage and Cohabitation Following Premarital Conception," Journal of Marriage and the Family 55 (1993): 839-850.

20. No positive contribution of cohabitation to marriage has been ever been found. Alfred DeMaris and William MacDonald, "Premarital Cohabitation and Marital Instability: A Test of the Unconventional Hypothesis." Journal of Marriage and the Family 55 (1993): 399-407. William J. Axinn and Arland Thornton, "The Relationship Between Cohabitation and Divorce: Selectivity or Causal Influence," Demography 29-3 (1992):357-374. Robert Schoen "First Unions and the Stability of First Marriages," Journal of Marriage and the Family 54 (1992):281-284. Elizabeth Thomson and Ugo Colella, "Cohabitation and Marital Stability: Quality or Commitment?" Journal of Marriage and the Family 54 (1992): 259-267. Lee A Lillard, Michael J. Brien, and Linda J. Waite, "Premarital Cohabitation and Subsequent Marital Dissolution: A Matter of Self-Selection?" Demography, 32-3 (1995):437-457. David R. Hall and John Z. Zhao, "Cohabitation and Divorce in Canada: Testing the Selectivity Hypothesis," Journal of Marriage and the Family 57 (1995): 421-427. Marin Clarkberg, Ross M. Stolzenberg, and Linda Waite, "Attitudes, Values, and Entrance into Cohabitational versus Marital Unions," Social Forces 74 (1995): 609-634. Stephen L. Nock, "Spouse Preferences of Never-Married, Divorced, and Cohabiting Americans," Journal of Divorce and Remarriage 24 (1995): 91-108.

Fidelity

21. Couples who cohabit prior to marriage are at 39 percent greater risk of marital infidelity. Judith Treas and Deirdre Giesen, “Sexual Infidelity Among Married and Cohabiting Americans,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 62 (2000): 48-60.

22. A 1996 study found that cohabiting women were more 3.3 times more likely than married women to cheat on their partners. The researchers stated: "cohabiting relationships appeared to be more similar to dating relationships than to marriage. " Renata Forste and Koray Tanfer, “Sexual Exclusivity Among Dating, Cohabiting, and Married Women,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 58 (1996): 33-47.

23. Twenty percent of cohabiting women have a secondary sex partner; this compares with only 4 percent of married women. Edward O. Laumann et al., The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994).

24. Compared to married peers, cohabiting men are almost twice as likely to cheat on their partners. Julie Pulerwita, Jose-Antonio Iszazola-Liecea, and Steven L. Gortmaker, “Extrarelational sex Among Mexican Men and Their Partners' Risk of HIV and Other Sexually Transmitted Diseases,” American Journal of Public Health 91 (2001): 1650-1652.

25. Those who had engaged in sex before marriage were more likely to commit adultery than those who had no premarital sexual experience. "Christianity Today Marriage and divorce Survey Report," CT Inc. Research Department, July, 1992.

26. Cohabitants are twice as likely to be unfaithful as are married people. Researchers concluded that the lower investments of cohabiting unions -- rather than their values -- accounted for the increased infidelity. Judith Treas and Deirdre Giesen, “Sexual Infidelity Among Married and Cohabiting Americans,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 62 (2000): 48-60.

27. A U.S. study found that compared to those who marry as virgins, men are 63 percent more likely and women 76 percent more likely to divorce if they have had sex before marriage. Edward O. Laumann et al., The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), 364.

28. Individuals who engage in premarital sexual activity are 50 percent more likely to divorce later in life than those who remained abstinent prior to their marriage. Joan R. Kahn and Kathryn A. London, "Premarital Sex and the Risk of Divorce," Journal of Marriage and the Family 53 (1991): 845-855.

29. Young men who father a child outside of marriage are twice as likely to cohabit and much less likely to marry than are those who do not. Steven Nock, “The Consequences of Premarital Fatherhood,” American Sociological Review 63 (1998): 250-263.

Domestic Violence

30. The Family Violence Research Program at the University of New Hampshire found that cohabitors are much more violent than marrieds, that the overall rates of violence among cohabiting couples was double that of married couples, and "severe" violence was five times as high for cohabitors. Kersti Yllo and Murray Straus, "Interpersonal Violence Among Married and Cohabiting Couples," Family Relations 30 (1981): 339-347.

31. Three times as many cohabitors admitted "hitting, shoving, and throwing things at their partners in the past year," compared to married couples. Cohabitors are also more likely to exhibit depression and drunkenness than married couples. Jan E. Stets, "Cohabiting and Marital Aggression: The Role of Social Isolation," Journal of Marriage and the Family 53 (1991): 669-680.

32. Aggression is at least twice as common among cohabitors as it is among married partners. During a one-year period, about 35 out of every 100 cohabiting couples have experienced physical aggression, compared to 15 out of every 100 married couples. Jan E. Stets, “Cohabiting and Marital Aggression: The Role of Social Isolation," Journal of Marriage and the Family 53 (1991): 669-680.

33. Cohabiting couples reported rates of physical aggression in their relationship that were three times higher than those reported by married couples. Sonia Miner Salari and Bret M. Baldwin, “Verbal, Physical and Injurious Aggression Among Intimate Couples Over Time,” Journal of Family Issues 23 (May 2002): 523-550.

34. Mothers who have never married -- including those who are single or living either alone or with a boyfriend and those who are cohabitating with their child's father -- are nearly three times more likely to be victims of violent crime than are mothers who have ever married. Patrick Fagan and Kirk A. Johnson, “Marriage: The Safest place for Women and Children, The Heritage Foundation, Backgrounder Report No. 1535, 10 April, 2002, http://www.heritage.org/Research/Family/BG1535.cfm.

35. The U.S. Department of Justice's National Crime Victimization Survey found that violent behavior among men is strongly linked to marital status. From 1979-1987, about 57,000 women per year were violently assaulted by their husbands. But 200,000 women per year were assaulted by their boyfriends and 216,000 by ex-husbands. Of all the violent crimes against women committed by intimates during this period, about 65 percent were committed by either boyfriends or ex-husbands, compared with 9 percent by husbands. David Blankenhorn, “Fatherless America: Confronting our Most Urgent Social Problem,” Harper Perennial p. 35 as sourced from Carolyn Wolf Harlow, Female Victims of Violent Crime, Washington D.C. U.S. Department of Justice, 1991, 1-2.

36. Research has shown that aggression is at least twice as common among cohabiters as it is among married partners. Women in cohabiting relationships are more likely than married women to suffer physical and sexual abuse. Jan E. Stets, "Cohabiting and Marital Aggression: The Role of Social Isolation," Journal of Marriage and the Family 53 (1991): 669-680. Margo I. Wilson and Martin Daly, "Who Kills Whom in Spouse Killings? On the Exceptional Sex Ratio of Spousal Homicides in the United States," Criminology 30 (1992): 189-215.

37. A New Zealand study compared violence in dating and cohabiting relationships, finding that cohabitors were twice as likely to be physically abusive toward their partners after controlling statistically for selection factors. Lynn Magdol, T.E. Moffitt, A. Caspi, and P.A. Silva: "Hitting Without a License," Journal of Marriage and the Family 60 (1998): 41-55, as cited in David Popenoe and Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, “Should We Live Together? What Young Couples Need to Know about Cohabitation Before Marriage,” National Marriage Project, 1999.

38. U.S. and Canadian studies both showed that women in cohabiting relationships are about nine times more likely to be killed by their partner than are women in marital relationships. Todd K. Shackelford, "Cohabitation, Marriage and Murder," Aggressive Behavior 27 (2001): 284-291. Margo Wilson, M. Daly and C. Wright, "Uxoricide in Canada: Demographic Risk Patterns," Canadian Journal of Criminology 35 (1993): 263-291.

Child abuse

39. Rates for serious abuse of children are lowest in the intact family, six times higher in stepfamilies, 14 times higher in the always-single-mother family, 20 times higher in cohabiting biological parent families, and 33 times higher when the mother is cohabiting with a boyfriend. Patrick Fagan and Kirk A. Johnson, “Marriage: The Safest place for Women and Children,” The Heritage Foundation, Backgrounder Report No. 1535, 10 April, 2002. p. 3, http://www.heritage.org/Research/Family/BG1535.cfm.

40. Child abuse has dramatically increased in recent decades by more than 10 percent a year according to one estimate. Researchers suggest that this increase is related strongly to changing family forms. Andrea J. Sedlak and Diane Broadhurst, “ The Third National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect,” (Washington, DC : HHS-National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1996.

41. Evidence suggests that the least safe of all environments for children is that in which the mother is living with someone other than the child's biological father. This is the environment for the majority of children in cohabiting couple households. David Popenoe and Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, “Should We Live Together? What Young Couples Need to Know about Cohabitation Before Marriage,” National Marriage Project, 1999. http://marriage.rutgers.edu/publicat.htm.

42. A British study found that children living with cohabiting biological parents who are unmarried are 20 times more likely to be abused and children whose mother lives with a boyfriend who is not the biological father are 33 times more likely to be abused than children living with married biological parents. Patrick Fagan and Kirk A. Johnson, “Marriage: The Safest place for Women and Children,” The Heritage Foundation, Backgrounder Report No. 1535, 10 April, 2002. p. 3, http://www.heritage.org/Research/Family/BG1535.cfm.

Impact on Children's Education

43. Children who live in cohabiting households are less inclined to care about school and homework performance, and their academic performance is poorer than that of children living with their married biological parents. Susan L. Brown, "Child Well-being in Cohabiting Families," in Alan Booth and Ann C. Crouter, eds., Just Living Together: Implications of Cohabitation on Families, Children, and Social Policy ( New Jersey : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2002), 173-187. Elizabeth Thomson et al., “Family Structure and Child Well-Being: Economic Resources vs. Parental Behaviors,” Social Forces 73 (1994): 221-242.

44. Children whose parents are married are healthier, have higher educational attainment, and are less likely to be on welfare, or involved in crimes and drugs. Patrick F. Fagan, “ Perception Correction for Congress: New Study Indicates Poor Parents Want to Marry,” Heritage Foundation, October 2001, http://www.heritage.org/Research/Family/BG1497.cfm.

45. Children in cohabiting households tend to have more emotional and behavioral problems, such as not getting along with peers, experiencing difficulty in concentrating, and feeling sad or depressed. Among adolescents ages 12-17, the percentage of those exhibiting emotional and behavioral problems was six times greater in cohabiting stepfamilies than in married biological-parent families. Susan L. Brown, "Child Well-being in Cohabiting Families," in Alan Booth and Ann C. Crouter, eds., Just Living Together: Implications of Cohabitation on Families, Children, and Social Policy ( New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2002), 173-187 .

46. Studies find that children currently living with a mother and her unmarried partner have significantly more behavior problems and lower academic performance than children in intact families. Elizabeth Thompson, T. L. Hanson and S. S. McLanahan, "Family Structure and Child Well-Being: Economic Resources versus Parental Behaviors," Social Forces 73 (1994): 221-242. Rachel Dunifon and Lori Kowaleski-Jones, "Who's in the House? Effects of Family Structure on Children's Home Environments and Cognitive Outcomes," Child Development, forthcoming. Susan L. Brown, "Parental Cohabitation and Child Well-Being," unpublished manuscript, Department of Sociology, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH.

Adolescent Crime

47. In 1998, a study of adolescents convicted of homicide in adult court found that at the time of the crimes 43 percent of their parents had never been married, 30 percent were divorced and nine percent were separated. Patrick J. Darby et al., “Analysis of 112 uveniles Who Committed Homicide: Characteristics and a Closer Look at Family Abuse,” Journal of Family Violence 13 (1998): 365-374.

48. The vast majority of juvenile delinquents in Wisconsin were either born out of wedlock or the product of broken homes. Only 13 percent of delinquents came from families in which the biological mother and father were married to each other. By contrast, 33 percent had parents who were either divorced or separated and 44 percent had parents who were never married. “Family Status of Delinquents in Juvenile Correction Facilities in Wisconsin.” Wisconsin Department of Health and Social Services, Division of Youth Services, April 1994.

Economic Impact on Children

49. Compared to children with married parents, four times as many children in cohabiting homes live in poverty. Susan L. Brown, "Child Well-being in Cohabiting Families," in Alan Booth and Ann C. Crouter, eds., Just Living Together: Implications of Cohabitation on Families, Children, and Social Policy (New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2002), 173-187.

50. In 1996, the poverty rate for children living in cohabiting households was more than five times the poverty rate of married-couple households, 31 percent to 6 percent. David Popenoe and Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, “Should We Live Together? What Young Couples Need to Know about Cohabitation Before Marriage,” National Marriage Project, 1999, http://marriage.rutgers.edu/publicat.htm.

51. Cohabiting couples with children in the household have only about two-thirds of the income of married couples with children. This can be attributed to the fact that the average income of male cohabiting partners is only about half that of male married partners. Wendy D. Manning and Daniel T. Lichter, "Parental Cohabitation and Children's Economic Well-Being," Journal of Marriage and the Family 58 (1996): 998-1010.

Cohabitation and Parenting

52. In the 1990s, 40 percent of out-of-wedlock births occurred in cohabiting unions. Amara Bachu,” Trends in Premarital Childbearing: 1930-1994,” U.S. Census Bureau, Washington D.C., (1999): 23-197, http://www.census.gov/prod/99pubs/p23-197.pdf.

53. Cohabiting couples with children have lower levels of education and income than do married parents. Wendy D. Manning and Daniel T. Lichter, "Parental Cohabitation and Children's Economic Well-Being," Journal of Marriage and the Family 58 (1996): 998-1010.

54. Fully three-quarters of children born to cohabiting parents will see their parents split up before they reach age 16; whereas only about a third of children born to married parents face a similar fate. One reason is that marriage rates for cohabiting couples have been plummeting. In the last decade, the proportion of cohabiting mothers who eventually married the child's father declined from 57 percent to 44 percent. David Popenoe and Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, “Should We Live Together? What Young Couples Need to Know about Cohabitation Before Marriage,” National Marriage Project, 1999, http://marriage.rutgers.edu/publicat.htm.

55. More than 50 percent of cohabiting couples break up within five years of having a child; only 8 percent of married couples split after a child. Centre for Policy Studies, United Kingdom, February 11, 2002. http://www.cps.org.uk/jillkirby.htm.

56. Nearly half the mothers who give birth outside marriage are cohabiting with the child's father at the time of the birth. Both the father and mother are typically in their early twenties. Sara McLanahan, et.al., “The Fragile Families and Child Well being Study,” The National Report, Revised March 2003, http://crcw.princeton.edu/fragilefamilies/nationalreport.pdf.

57. Daughters of single parents are 164 percent more likely to have a premarital birth of their own, 111 percent more likely to give birth as teenagers and 92 percent more likely to divorce than daughters of married parents. William J. Bennett, The Index of Leading Cultural Indicators (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001), 55.

58. A survey taken in 1999 showed that 86 percent of people worldwide agreed that “[a]ll things being equal, it is better for children to be raised in a household that has a married mother and father.” Wirthlin Worldwide for The Howard Center and Brigham Young University , World Congress of Families II, November, 1999.

59. The more months of exposure to cohabitation that young people experienced, the less enthusiastic they were toward marriage and childbearing. William Axinn and Jennifer Barber, “Living Arrangements and Family Formation in Early Adulthood,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 59 (1997): 595-611.

60. More than 70 percent of Americans agree that it is always best for children to be raised in a home with a married man and woman as parents. Los Angeles Times poll, April 13-16, 1996 as cited in “Families: A Strong Yes to the ‘Traditional' Structure,” Public Perspective (February/March 1998): 20.

Economic Impact

61. According to data from the Federal Reserve Board's Survey of Consumer Finance, a widowed family experiences a poverty rate 3.9 times higher than the poverty rate of the always intact married family; the cohabitating-couple's household poverty is 3.7 times higher; the rate of divorced single-parent families is 4.2 times higher; and the rate for always-single-parent families is 7.7 times higher. Patrick F. Fagan and Robert Rector, “The Effects of Divorce on America,” The Heritage Foundation, Backgrounder No 1373, 5 June (2000): 14, http://www.heritage.org/Research/Family/BG1373.cfm.

62. Individuals who are not continuously married have significantly lower wealth than those who remain married throughout the course of life. Overall, unmarried adults experience a 63 percent reduction in total wealth relative to those who are married. Breaking it down further, researchers reported the following wealth reductions: 77 percent for those who were separated, 75 percent for those never married, 73 percent for those divorced, 58 percent for those cohabiting, and 48 percent for those who were widowed. Janet Wilmoth and Gregor Koso, “Does Marital History Matter? Marital Status and Wealth Outcomes Among Preretirement Adults,” Journal of Marriage and Family 64 (2002): 254-268.

63. Cohabitors are more likely to have separate bank accounts and less likely than married people to support or be financially responsible for their partner. Jeffry H. Larson, Should we stay together? A scientifically proven method for evaluating your relationship and improving its chances for long-term success (San Francisco : Jossey-Bass, 2000).

64. In 1998, the median family income for two-parent families was more than four times that of families in which the mother never married. William J. Bennettt, The Index of Leading Cultural Indicators, (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001), 54.

65. Family members are more willing to transfer wealth to "in-laws" than to cohabiting boyfriends or girlfriends. David Popenoe and Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, “Should We Live Together? What Young Couples Need to Know about Cohabitation Before Marriage,” National Marriage Project, 1999. Lingxin Hao, "Family Structure, Private Transfers, and the Economic Well-Being of Families with Children," Social Forces 75 (1996): 269-292.

Mental Health and Well-Being

66. Compared to married couples, cohabitants report more frequent disagreements, more violence, and less happiness with their relationships. Susan L. Brown and Alan Booth, “Cohabitation Versus Marriage; A Comparison of Relationship Quality,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 58 (1996): 668-678.

67. “Married mothers have lower rates of depression than do single or co-habiting mothers.” Susan L. Brown, “The Effect of Union Type on Psychological Well-Being: Depression Among Cohabitors versus Marrieds,” Journal of Health and Social Behavior 41 (2000): 241-255.

68. Annual rates of depression among cohabiting couples are more than three times what they are among married couples. Lee Robins and Darrel Reiger, Psychiatric Disorders in America. (New York: Free Press, 1990) 72. Susan L. Brown, "The Effect of Union Type on Psychological Well-Being: Depression among Cohabitors versus Marrieds," Journal of Health and Social Behavior 41 (2000).

69. The National Institute of Mental Health found that women in cohabiting relationships had much greater rates of depression than women in married relationships, as seen below (annual rate of incident of depression per 100):

Lee Robins and Darrel Regier, Psychiatric Disorders in America: The Epidemiologic Catchment Area Study (New York: Free Press, 1991), 64.

70. Married couples reported more commitment and happiness in their unions and better relationships with their parents than did cohabiting couples. Steven L. Nock, “A Comparison of Marriages and Cohabiting Relationships,” Journal of Family Issues 16 (1995): 53-76.

71. A 1998 study of 17 nations found that married men and women reported higher levels of happiness than cohabiting couples. Steven Stack and Ross Eshleman, “Marital Status and Happiness: A 17-Nation Study,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 60 (1998): 527-530.

Substance Abuse

72. Research conducted at UCLA found that marriages preceded by cohabitation were more prone to problems like drug and alcohol use, more permissive sexual relationships, and an abhorrence of dependence than were relationships not preceded by cohabitation. Michael D. Newcomb and P.M. Bentler, "Assessment of Personality and Demographic Aspects of Cohabitation and Marital Success," Journal of Personality Assessment 44 (1980):11-24.

73. A 1998 study found that cohabitants reported nearly three times more alcohol problems than did married people. Allan V. Horowitz et al., “The Relationship of Cohabitation and Mental Health: A Study of a Young Adult Cohort,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 60 (1998): 505-514.

74. Cohabitors drink more and use more marijuana and cocaine than those who made the choice either to marry or to live single. Jerald G. Bachman et al., "Smoking, Drinking, and Drug Use in Young Adulthood," (Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1997) 173-174.

Sexual Relations

75. Female partners of unfaithful men are at great risk for sexually transmitted disease because of the behavior of their male partners. Julie Pulerwita, Jose-Antonio Iszazola-Liecea, and Steven L. Gortmaker, “Extrarelational sex Among Mexican Men and Their Partners' Risk of HIV and Other Sexually Transmitted Diseases,” American Journal of Public Health 91 (2001): 1650-1652.

76. The rate of women experiencing an accidental pregnancy from condom failure increases from 17.2 percentfor married women to 34.2 percent for cohabiting women (25.5 percent for those not in a union). Ranjit, Bankole, Darroch and Singh, “Contraceptive Failure in the First Two Years of Use: Differences Across Socioeconomic Subgroups,” Family Planning Perspectives, 33 (2001): 25.

77. Of all sexually active people, married couples who are sexually faithful to one another experience the most physical pleasure and emotional satisfaction with their sex lives. Edward O. Laumann et al., The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994) 364.

78. Cohabiting couples report lower levels of happiness, lower levels of sexual exclusivity and sexual satisfaction, and poorer relationships with their parents. Linda J. Waite & K. Joyner, "Emotional and Physical Satisfaction in Married, Cohabiting, and Dating Sexual Unions: Do Men and Women Differ?" In Studies on Sex, Edward O. Laumann and Robert T. Michaels, eds., Sex, Love, and Health in America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001) 239-269. Judith Treas and Deirdre Giesen, "Sexual Infidelity Among Married and Cohabiting Americans" Journal of Marriage and the Family 62 (2000): 48-60. Renate Forste and Koray Tanfer, "Sexual Exclusivity Among Dating, Cohabiting, and Married Women," Journal of Marriage and the Family 58 (1996): 33-47. Paul R. Amato and Alan Booth, A Generation at Risk (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997) Table 4-2, p. 258.

79. Married couples who practice fidelity report the most positive feelings about sex; they felt “taken care of,” “loved,” “satisfied,” and “wanted.” They were the least likely to experience “sadness,” “being anxious or worried,” “afraid or scared,” or feel “guilt” about sex. Edward O. Laumann et al., The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994) 368.

80. Cohabitants are typically less religious than their peers. Barbara Dafoe Whitehead and David Popenoe, “The State of Our Unions 2001: The Social Health of Marriage in America," National Marriage Project, June (2001): 22, http://marriage.rutgers.edu/publicat.htm.

81. A 1992 study found that cohabitation has a negative effect on young people's religious participation, while marriage has a positive effect. Arland Thornton et al., “Reciprocal Effects of Religiosity, Cohabitation and Marriage,” American Journal of Sociology 98 (1992).

 

Where Do I Get More Information?

 

Appendix

Number of Cohabiting, Unmarried, Adult Couples of the Opposite Sex, by Year, United States

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P20-537, America's Families and Living Arrangements: March 2000 and earlier reports. (Numbers in thousands.)

  Total No child under age 15 One child or more under age 15
1960 439 242 197
1970 523 327 196
1980 1589 1159 431
1990 2856 1966 891
2000 4736 3061 1675

National Marriage Project, Rutgers University

"Stay Alive" trademark exclusively licensed by United Families International from its owner, the Arizona Chapter of the National Safety Council
 
©2001 - 2006 United Families International. All rights reserved. No content, images, or other information may be used from this site without prior written consent of United Families International or original authors.