Beyond the trailing spouse: the commuter partnership as an alternative to family migration

Abstract

Combining commitments in the domains of work, family, and residence has become a complex puzzle for the contemporary (dual-earner) family, especially when these choices concern family migration. For some families, non-standard alternatives to family migration, such as a commuter partnership in which one partner lives near work part of the time, might provide the best solution in matching both individual and family commitments. Through in-depth interviews with both partners in commuter partnerships, this paper explores the commitments that form the basis underlying the choice for a commuter partnership as an alternative to family migration or not migrating. It further describes how the balance in partners' individual and their common interests, as well as the gender ideologies the couple holds, influence the choice for a commuter partnership. Our findings suggest that the commuter partnership is regarded as a suitable compromise between several commitments not only for partners who are both oriented towards their employment careers, but also for couples who have distinct commitments in their private lives. Partners in egalitarian partnerships were found to view the commuter partnership as a household arrangement that fitted their approach of reinforcing each other's interests and commitments. For couples with non-symmetrical gender beliefs we found that in order for one (usually male) partner to pursue a choice biography through the commuter partnership, substantial sacrifices were demanded from the (usually female) spouse.

Partnership patterns and homeownership: a cross-country comparison of Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom

“…The dependent variable in our model is binary in nature, where y = 1 indicates that the respondent (or if applicable their partner) owns (either outright or with a mortgage) the home they are currently living in. Whilst we accept that some partnerships are neither fully co-residential, nor fully LAT, for instance commuter partnerships (Van der Klis & Mulder, 2008), the independent variable of interest, the respondent's partner relationship status, categorises the respondent into one of five partner relationships: married with partner; no partner, never married; no partner, previously married; partner, but living apart together; and unmarried cohabiting with partner. Moreover, beyond these key analytical variables, age, gender, socio-economic status (educational attainment and occupational class) and settlement type (urban/rural area) are included as controls.…”

Love Will Keep Us Apart? Understanding Living Apart Together Partnerships in the Post-state-socialist Czech Republic

“…Rabušic 2001] explain the changes in socio-demographic behaviour as the result of a deep value transformation and the growth of opportunities leading in turn to the second demographic transition [van de Kaa 1987] already identifi ed in Western European countries, where it occurred earlier. Other scholars describe the changes in fertility rates and marriage behaviours as a reaction to the corrosion of social security and economic decline [e.g.…”

The Voice of Trailing Women in the Decision to Relocate: Is it Really a Choice?

“…Rather, societal factors, mainly gender, significantly lower the actual choice options available to them [26,27]. In fact, in a way that resembles other family arrangements, such as commuter partnership [37], substantial sacrifices are demanded of women in order for their partner to pursue a real choice.…”

“…There is evidence to suggest that when the labor incomes from husbands and wives are more equal, the probability of migration falls dramatically [52]. Moreover, partners in egalitarian partnerships are more inclined to consider other arrangements to relocation (e.g., commuter partnership), which fit their approach of reinforcing each other's interests and commitments [37]. Another limitation is related to the snowball sampling strategy.…”