Some facts about "shacking up."

[olger]

I have no axe to grind here, just to present some facts that might be helpful for us and our children to consider.

Before 1970 it was illegal for a man & woman to live together if they were not married. Several decades have passed and let's look at what the facts reveal about "living together" outside of marriage.

In 1970

523,000 11%

1980 1,589,000

1990 2,856,000

2000 5,500,000 50%

With children:

1980 27%

1990 31%

2000 35%

50% were previously married

34% have never been married

16% had children while living together

There are five reasons that people commonly give for living together (shacking up). They are:

We want to find out if we are compatible with each other.

We do it because it makes good sense financially.

We don’t like to live alone (companionship).

Everyone else is doing it (rationalization).

We’re going to get married eventually. We’re in love.

Welcome to the real world;

1. far greater chance for divorce. 49% of all couples that marry end up getting divorced. 75% of couples that shack up end up getting divorced. (Alan Booth and David Johnson, Premarital Cohabitation and Marital Success, pp.261-270).

2. Greater odds for conflict. Living together outside of marriage increases the risk of emotional & physical abuse. Pennsylvania State University study. According to the U.S. Justice Department, women are 62 times more likely to be assaulted if living with a man unmarried than if they were married. The Family Violence Research Program at the University of New Hampshire found that the overall rate for “severe” violence is nearly 6-times as high for cohabitating couples than it is for married couples (Journal of Family violence vol. 41).

3. Less chance for happiness. It is hard for a person to be happy if his or her relationship is built on the need to prove himself or herself. In a shack up arrangement, commitment is day-to-day and month-to-month. “If you make me happy. If we are sexually compatible..” People who marry “til death do us part” have quite a different level of commitment, and therefore quite a different level of security, thus a quite a different level of freedom, and as a result a quite different level of happiness. A recent study of 6,023 couples reported significantly higher levels of happiness in married partners than did cohabitating partners. The married couples report less depression, less anxiety, and lower levels of psychological distress. And, according to the National Institute for Mental Health, women who ‘cohabit” with men have rates of depression three times higher than married women.

4. Greater risk of adultery. Sexual faithfulness is one of the many areas that is negatively impacted for couples who shack up. This pattern continues into their marriage if they wed. A Michigan study shows that couples who waited to cohabit until after they were married (the correct way) were more likely to rate those relationships stronger than those who lived together before marriage. If a woman lives with a man prior to marriage she is more likely to cheat on him once they are married. 3.3 times more likely. Contrary to popular belief, the best sex is experienced by married people (The National Sex Survey of 3500 people, and then 1,000 people).

5. Reason number 5. Less likelihood of saying “I do.” A common reason couples give for shacking up is that they are going to get married anyway. According to Brown & Booth, only about half of couples who cohabit eventually marry. Other studies have shown similar or worse findings. Living together before marriage actually decreases the chances that a couple will marry. The odds are greater that they will not. Shacking up is a high-risk – low reward option.

Summary:

If you and your girlfriend “cohabit” your chances for

Divorce are 50% greater

Aggresion (domestic violence) is 50% greater

Of not Marrying is 50% greater.

Would you parachute out of an airplane if you knew one of every two parachutes would fail? Probably not. Adding an unnecessary 50 percent failure rate would probably make the bravest of us say “No thanks.” The wise choice is to marry first and then live together.

Here is a testimony hot off the griddle. "I am in a cohabitation relationship going on a year now and I love the person dearly but living together is just not enough for me anymore. I want marriage, but in a way, I think that he is just comfortable the way things are now and I feel as if he could make me wait forever. I will never do this again should my boyfriend and I break up. I just feel like I am doing all that a wife does and more and I don't get anything out of it. The stats scare me considering that we are currently engaged and I am just frightened. I don't even want to marry him now. I just want to move out and start over." tears... (used with permission).

regards,

`oG

[Taylor]

Very interesting and excellent points Olger. Thanks for posting this.

[Amelia]

Quote:

If a woman lives with a man prior to marriage she is more likely to cheat on him once they are married. 3.3 times more likely.

Where is the data for men?

[Taylor]

Ya, that would be interesting.

[Dr. Shane]

I learned this in a family life class I took in college and it was a state university. This is all commonly known information among academics in the family counseling field of study.

[Tom Wetmore]

It struck me as oddly ironic that as the ever increasing trend toward living together without the benefits of marriage among heterosexuals, the movement and efforts of homosexuals is in the exact opposite direction of seeking the benefit of marriage.

I am not too sure how to interpret that, but it does suggest to me that the campaign by conservatives against gay marriage as something that is bad for family values and an erosion of hetero-marriage is seriously misplaced, a fundamental non sequitur. The errosion of family values and marriage is within heterosexual relationships quite apart from anything to do with homosexuality. If every gay couple got married and lived happily ever after, would it change the fundametal problem with hetero-marriage suggested above? Would it mean that more hetero non-married couples would pack it in and choose to go with a more stable homosexual union? I think not.

[Taylor]

I learned this in a family life class I took in college and it was a state university. This is all commonly known information among academics in the family counseling field of study.

Yes, I've read these statistics too. But I still think it is interesting information when put out there in a flow of statistical numbers. To me it just proves again that Biblical morality is the way to go and society could save itself a lot of heartache if they just followed the Bible teachings on this topic.

[Woody]

I learned this in a family life class I took in college and it was a state university. This is all commonly known information among academics in the family counseling field of study.

Yes. This is very well known info ... but the question is ... what is being done about it?

[Woody]

[Liz]

Alright here is a question. Say you know a guy that is shacking up with a woman, and has been for a couple of years. This guy "knows about Jesus", but isn't a regular church goer.

What would you say to him? How would you actively point him back to Jesus, when you really aren't sure what his relationship with Jesus is?

[Neil D]

HEY LIZ

knowing about JESUS and knowing JESUS is two different things.

but getting to your question..... I would ask this man

if he thought what he was doing was moral??? if is said no

then I would ask him about the commandments...

if this man said yes to the moral question I would ask him

why he thinks it is moral...

these are just a few things for starters

dgrimm60

Oh, so by telling him that what he is doing wrong, and making the man feel guilty, you think that is gonna make him do the right thing?.....Hmmmmm....right doing by guilt....Hey, let's get church members in thru that 'new' evanglistic endevor....

How about approaching it a bit differently..? how about telling him what he is doing right? He loves the little woman...He obviously like living with her....why not get married? What's the reason for not commiting to the woman?

Who knows? You might find out that it's the woman that refuses to get married. A former brother in law was in that sort of situation...He was living with a woman and had proposed a couple of times but she wouldn't committe to him....And yeah, they eventually did get married....but it was a couple of years before it happened...

[Woody]

I think that both of your approaches are from a good heart ... dgrimm60 and Neil. But I have to say that I was inspired by Neil's approach. Build up the positive. Talk about how good their relationship is. Talk about how spiritual and moral the couple is. Then at some point you might have the opportunity to discuss the positive advantages or (disadvantages?? from HIS perspective) about marriage. It would not have to start on the religious or spiritual perspective but might end up there in a nonthreatening manner.

[Neil D]

I understand, Doug...

Too often we create barriers between ourselves when all we have to do is point out that there is a better way...a better relationship that is fair for both partners....

Instead, we guilt people into thinking that thier way is the wrong way and set ourselves up as THE ONLY WAY to happiness...Trouble is, it isn't our way...it's God's way...any deviation ffrom that way is not as good as God's way. So, instead of saying "How come, Mister, you ain't marrying that woman that you are shacked up with?" Why not say say something about the love that both you AND your wife have that is better than shacking up? IE, there is security because of the promise that you both have made to each other...there is a freedom that with that secruity that shacked up people don't have.

[Bravus]

We've just celebrated our 21st wedding anniversary, and are deliriously happy together, so I'm definitely and strongly pro-marriage, and pro- not living together before marriage. In general I thought the article olger quoted was strong and valuable, although I'm not sure that some of the points made strictly belonged under the heading of 'facts'.

There were a couple of things that gave me pause:

Quote:

According to the U.S. Justice Department, women are 62 times more likely to be assaulted if living with a man unmarried than if they were married.

Really? 62 times? 6200%? Would love to see that report.

Quote:

"I am in a cohabitation relationship going on a year now and I love the person dearly but living together is just not enough for me anymore. I want marriage, but in a way, I think that he is just comfortable the way things are now and I feel as if he could make me wait forever. I will never do this again should my boyfriend and I break up. I just feel like I am doing all that a wife does and more and I don't get anything out of it. The stats scare me considering that we are currently engaged and I am just frightened. I don't even want to marry him now. I just want to move out and start over."

Huh? What is it that this woman thinks she will 'get out of it' as a married person that she's not as a cohabitating person?

[Woody]

Good Points Bravus.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

security perhaps?

[Bravus]

Just chasing down the '62 times' claim at the moment. Googling it led me to a blog post by olger, which was cool in itself.

The reference I have found so far for this claim is 'Colson, 1995'. Can't find any academic papers that are relevant on Google Scholar with that search, but it could be a book by Chuck Colson... still searching.

[Bravus]

All roads lead back to Colson, who seems to be citing himself. Still searching.

[Bravus]

OK, still haven't found the Colson piece, though the title is "Cohabitation - It's Training for Divorce". Seems as though it was an opinion piece, possibly published by Focus on the Family, but if it's available on the web I can't find it. Doesn't mean he didn't have a specific Justice Department report as a reference for the 62 times claim, it just means I can't track it down.

Did find this Justice Department report from 2000, which does bear out the finding that violence occurs at a greater rate among cohabitating than among married couples, but at nothing like 62 times as great a rate. Page 33 and forward is the relevant section. That report cites these 3 other reports:

Yllo, K., and M. Straus, “Interpersonal Violence Among Married and Cohabiting Couples,” Family Relations 30 (1981): 339–347

Stets, J.E., and M.A. Straus, “The Marriage License as a Hitting License: A Comparison of Assaults in Dating, Cohabiting, and Married Couples,” Journal of Family Violence 4 (2) (1989): 161–180

Ellis, L., Theories of Rape: Inquiries Into the Causes of Sexual Aggression, New York: Hemisphere Books, 1989.

Still searching, but I realised I should clarify: I don't doubt the fact that there is likely to be more violence in cohabiting relationships than in married relationships, for a large number of reasons, including correlation of cohabitation with other risk factors like socioeconomic status. I just think the 62 times claim is massively exaggerated and reflects on the credibility of the rest of the claims made.

[Bravus]

Here's a link to that 1989 Stets and Strauss study:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/q00h4356547p3382/fulltext.pdf

Figure 1 shows that the incidence of violence for cohabiting couples as an aggregate was 35 per 100 and for married couples was 20 per hundred. So that's a factor of 1.75 times, not 62 times.

[Woody]

Perhaps the 62 was just a healthy exaggeration.

(All for a good cause mind you ...)

[Dottie]

Just my little comment:

My Dad used to say, "Why buy the cow when the milk is free?"

[olger]

The 62 multiplier comes from Colson's "Trial Marriages on Trial." He researched it at the US Justice Department for his 1998 book. You can argue with Chuck all you like; I would guess that he knows his way around DC archives pretty well. If anything, the number could be inflated by feminism.

Other statistics are:

The Family Violence Research Program at the University of New hampshire found that the overall rate for severe violence is nearly 6-times higher for shacking couples as it is for married couples. (Jan E. Strets and Murray Strouse - JFV, vol 41, page 39).

The National Crime Victimization Survey revealed that between 1979 and 1987, 65 percent of violent crimes against women were comitted by boyfriends (or ex-husbands), while only 9% were comitted by a husband (April 4, 2003).

Regards,

g

[Dr. Rich]

olger, like I said before, I really like your posts! At the time this came out I was not posting but wanted to mention something here.

I believe the same issue is going on with God and His bride. God does not shack up. God therefore can't be your God if you do not abide by the covenant, (the marriage covenant is the ten commandments---all of them), no matter how many times you pray and go to church.

Almost 100% of the people who now call themselves Christian believe all they need is a 'personal relationship' with God. They refuse to abide by the marriage covenant thinking that it is ok for them to shack up with God. These people say; "This is being legalistic”. Sadly, I believe that they have been mislead by the writer of Romans into falsely believing that obeying this ‘marriage covenant’ can’t be done or that it need not be kept. They also say; “I know God loves me and I love Him and I have faith that His grace is sufficient for me.” But—did Jesus teach this? I don’t think so.

Being on the narrow and lonely road can cause those passing by on the wide freeway to laugh at you--just as being married and not shacking up is now laughable.

[cardw]

Quote:

If anything, the number could be inflated by feminism.

What?

How is that related? LOL

Look there are successful relationships in both situations so obviously the fact that someone is married or not may have nothing to do with it. That's the problem with applying statistics to solving specific problems. Each relationship is unique.

I would also note that Joseph and Mary never had a wedding. And trust me it was not acceptable then.