Cohabitation in the United States

Cohabitation in the United States is illegal in five states but a total of 4.85 million couples live together.

Statistics

In most parts of the United States, there is no legal registration or definition of cohabitation, so demographers have developed various methods of identifying cohabitation and measuring its prevalence. The most important of these is the Census Bureau, which currently describes an "unmarried partner" as a "person age 15 years and over, who is not related to the householder, who shares living quarters, and who has a close personal relationship with the householder."^[1] Before 1995, the Bureau euphemistically identified any "unrelated" opposite-sex couple living with no other adults as POSSLQs, or Persons of Opposite Sex Sharing Living Quarters.,^[2] and they still report these numbers to show historical trends. However, such measures should be taken loosely, as researchers report that cohabitation often does not have clear start and end dates, as people move in and out of each other's homes and sometimes do not agree on the definition of their living arrangement at a particular moment.^[3]

In 2001, in the United States 8.2% of couples were calculated to be cohabiting, the majority of them in the West Coast and New England/Northeastern United States areas.^[4]

In 2005, the U.S. Census Bureau reported 4.85 million cohabiting couples, up more than ten times from 1960, when there were 439,000 such couples. The 2002 National Survey of Family Growth found that more than half of all women aged 15 to 44 have lived with an unmarried partner, and that 65% of American couples who did cohabitate got married within 5 years.^[5]

The cohabiting population is inclusive of all ages, but the average cohabiting age group is between 25-34.^[6]

Stability

A study was made of premarital cohabitation of women who are in a monogamous relationship.^[7] The study showed "women who are committed to one relationship, who have both premarital sex and cohabit only with the man they eventually marry, have no higher incidence of divorce than women who abstain from premarital sex and cohabitation. For women in this category, premarital sex and cohabitation with their eventual husband are just two more steps in developing a committed, long-term relationship." Teachman's findings report instead that "It is only women who have more than one intimate premarital relationship who have an elevated risk of marital disruption. This effect is strongest for women who have multiple premarital coresidental unions."^[8]

A scientific survey of over 1,000 married men and women in the United States of America found those who moved in with a lover before engagement or marriage reported significantly lower quality marriages and a greater possibility for splitting up than other couples. About 20 percent of those who cohabited before getting engaged had since suggested divorce - compared with only 12 percent of those who only moved in together after getting engaged and 10 percent who did not cohabit prior to the wedding bells.^[9]

Psychologist Dr Galena Rhoades said: "There might be a subset of people who live together before they got engaged who might have decided to get married really based on other things in their relationship - because they were already living together and less because they really wanted and had decided they wanted a future together. We think some couples who move in together without a clear commitment to marriage may wind up sliding into marriage partly because they are already cohabiting."^[9]

Some people have claimed that those who live together before marriage can report having less satisfying marriages and have a higher chance of separating. A possible explanation for this trend could be that people who cohabit prior to marriage did so because of apprehension towards commitment, and when, following marriage, marital problems arose (or, for that matter, before marriage, when relationship problems arose during the cohabitation arrangement), this apprehension was more likely to translate into an eventual separation. It should be noted this model cites antecedent apprehension concerning commitment as the cause of increased break-ups and cohabitation only as an indicator of such apprehension. Another explanation is that those who choose not to cohabit prior to marriage are often more conservative in their religious views and may hold more traditional views on gender roles, a mindset that might prevent them from divorcing for religious reasons or confronting crisis in relationships despite experiencing marital problems no less severe than those encountered by former cohabitants.^{[citation needed]}

In addition, the very act of living together may lead to attitudes that make happy marriages more difficult. The findings of one recent study, for example, suggest "there may be less motivation for cohabiting partners to develop their conflict resolution and support skills." (One important exception: cohabiting couples who are already planning to marry each other in the near future have just as good a chance at staying together as couples who don’t live together before marriage).^[10]

A 2001 study indicated that people who cohabited experienced a divorce rate 50% higher after marriage than those who did not, though this may be correlation and not cause-and-effect.^[11]

Legal status

Some places, including the state of California, have laws that recognize cohabiting couples as "domestic partners". In California, such couples are defined as people who "have chosen to share one another's lives in an intimate and committed relationship of mutual caring," including having a "common residence, and are the same sex or persons of opposite sex if one or both of the persons are over the age of 62"^[12] This recognition led to the creation of a Domestic Partners Registry,^[13] granting them limited legal recognition and some rights similar to those of married couples.

Half a century ago, it was illegal in every state for adult lovers to live together without being married. Today, on the other hand, just four states (Mississippi, Virginia, Florida, and Michigan) still criminalize cohabitation by opposite-sex couples, although anti-cohabitation laws are generally not enforced.^[14] Many legal scholars believe that in light of in Lawrence v. Texas, such laws making cohabitation illegal are unconstitutional (North Carolina Superior Court judge Benjamin Alford struck down the North Carolina law on that basis, although the law remains on the books and potentially can still be enforced).^[15] In view of the decision of the Supreme Court of Virginia finding the commonwealth's (unenforced) law making fornication (sex between unmarried persons) unconstitutional in Martin v. Ziherl, it is likely that a challenge to the law in Virginia, at least, would also be struck down.

The charge of "unlawful cohabitation" was used in the late nineteenth century to enforce the Edmunds Act, and other federal anti-polygamy laws against the Mormons in the Utah Territory, imprisoning more than 1,300 men.^[16] However, incidents of cohabitation by non-polygamists were not charged in that territory at that time. Some modern scholarship suggests the Edmunds Act may be unconstitutional for being in violation of the Free Exercise Clause,^[17] although the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that neutral laws that happen to impinge on some religious practices are constitutional.^[18]

See also

• American family structure
• Divorce in the United States
• Marriage in the United States
• Society of the United States

References

1. ^ See "Household Type and Relationship".
2. ^ See "Current Population Survey (CPS) - Definitions and Explanations"
3. ^ Manning, Wendy D. and Pamela J. Smock. 2005. "Measuring and Modeling Cohabitation: New Perspectives from Qualitative Data." Journal of Marriage and Family 67(4):989-1002.
4. ^ Anne-Marie Ambert: Cohabitation and Marriage: How Are They Related?. The Vanier Institute of the Family, Fall 2005)
5. ^ "Report: Most Couples Living Together Marry". http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124248325. Retrieved 2010-03-11. 
6. ^ Cohabitation is replacing dating USA Today 7/17/2005
7. ^ Jay Teachman (2003), Premarital Sex, Premarital Cohabitation, and the Risk of Subsequent Marital Dissolution Among Women, Journal of Marriage and Family 65 (2), 444–455.
8. ^ "Premarital Sex, Cohabitation, and Divorce: the Broken Link" (Press release). National Council on Family Relations. 2003. http://www.ncfr.org/pdf/press_releases/PRESS%20RELEAS2.pdf. 
9. ^ ^{a b} "Couples who live together before marriage more likely to get divorced". The Daily Telegraph (London). 2009-07-16. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5840263/Couples-who-live-together-before-marriage-more-likely-to-get-divorced.html. 
10. ^ "The Top Ten Myths of Marriage" (Press release). National Marriage Project. 2002. http://marriage.rutgers.edu/Publications/pubmyths%20of%20marriage.htm#text%204. 
11. ^ Martin, Paige D. (Fall 2001). "Adolescent Premarital Sexual Activity, Cohabitation, and Attitudes Toward Marriage". BNET. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2248/is_143_36/ai_82535330/. Retrieved 3 May 2009. 
12. ^ http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/fam/297.html
13. ^ Domestic Partners Registry
14. ^ Miss. Code 97-29-1, Va. Code 18.2-345, Fl. St. 798.02, Mi. St. 750.335
15. ^ See "Judge strikes down law banning cohabitation" and "N.C. law banning cohabitation struck down".
16. ^ U.S.History.com, Edmunds Anti-Polygamy Act of 1882.
17. ^ "The Practice of Polygamy: Legitimate Free Exercise of Religion or Legitimate Public Menace? Revisiting Reynolds in Light of Modern Constitutional Jurisprudence". http://www.law.nyu.edu/journals/legislation/articles/vol5num1/vazquez.pdf. Retrieved 2008-02-04. 
18. ^ E.g., Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990).

External links

• Domestic Partners Registry - California Secretary of State
• Alternatives to Marriage Project
• National Survey of Family Growth - federal statistics