Changes and Inequalities in Latin American Families

Consensual Unions in Central America: Historical Continuities and New Emerging Patterns

“…Formal marriage was the rule for the upper social class, whereas consensual unions functioned as a kind of surrogate marriage for those social groups with low education, few economic resources and poor economic expectations (Arriagada 2002 ). This socioeconomic divide in family formation patterns had led to symbolically associate cohabitation in the region with poverty, gender inequality, and distrust of legal processes.…”

Traditional and modern cohabitation in Latin America

“…The control over female sexuality was intensified by ethnic and class differences. Historically, while women from the upper classes needed to submit themselves to arranged marriages, men were allowed to have relationships with women from different social and ethnic groups, following different rationalities and moral codes (Arriagada 2002). Traditionally, women from the same (upper) social class and ethnicity (white) were 'to be married to', although extra-marital relationships (concubinage) with women from lower social classes and different ethnic groups were common (Caulfield 2001;Fernández-Aceves 2007).…”

“…The problem with this 'solution' is that in most cases it does not improve the socioeconomic situation of these women. Contrarily, in cases of separation, women are often responsible not only for their livelihood but also for the care for their children (Arriagada 2002). This situation contributes to the incidence of households headed by women in Latin America.…”

“…This situation contributes to the incidence of households headed by women in Latin America. These types of household have been related to the feminization of poverty in the region (Arriagada 2002;García and de Oliveira 2011). Greene and Rao (1995) used Brazilian data beginning in the 1960s and going into the 1980s to analyze the increasing incidence of cohabitation, the chances of living in cohabitation instead of being married, and the likelihood of choosing marriage or cohabitation instead of remaining single.…”

“…Thus cohabitation is not considered a 'choice', but a constraint imposed upon women who have relatively little bargaining power compared to men (Greene and Rao 1995;Parrado and Tienda 1997). As an alternative to marriage, this type of cohabitation could be considered a strategy for women to cope with the problems related to poverty, such as the need to take care of younger brothers and sisters and single (and adolescent) motherhood (Arriagada 2002).…”