Committing Before Cohabiting: Pathways to Marriage Among Middle-Class Couples

Abstract

This study investigates why cohabitation is so common even among those most committed to marriage. To understand the variety of meanings to co-residence, this study interviewed each member of 23 heterosexual, middle-class couples, totaling 46 interviews. Research categorizes cohabitations as extensions of dating, alternatives to marriage, or trial marriages, but interviews highlight the prevalence and importance of a fourth, under-researched category, cohabitation as a precursor to marriage. Before cohabitation, these couples expressed marriage intentions and viewed cohabitation as a promise to marry in the future. Why do couples committed to marriage still decide to cohabit? The data show that cohabitation as a precursor to marriage is explicitly connected to increasing marriage requirements in that couples cohabit instead of marry to meet the rising bar to marriage. While research has shown financial security and stability impact low-income couples, this study illustrates how these barriers have similar effects for middle-class couples.

Assessing the deinstitutionalization of marriage thesis: Changes in the meaning of cohabitation over the relationship life course

“…The sample is not representative of all cohabitors, and our middle‐class sample is not especially racially diverse. Cohabitation may progress differently for older respondents, same‐sex couples, racially or educationally heterogamous couples, or those residing in other regions (e.g., Harris, 2021; Lamont, 2020). Our data relies on respondents' retrospective reports, and as we note, couples do not always agree on either their past or their future; nonetheless, utilizing partner disagreement also provides useful information.…”

“…Since we conducted our interviews, the Great Recession and Coronavirus pandemic have further challenged the ability of emerging adults in the United States to form marital unions; cohabitation has become even more prevalent, especially among the college educated (Manning, 2020), and cohabiting unions are lasting longer (Lamidi et al, 2019). Evidence is accumulating about increased challenges to the hegemony of marriage even among the most advantaged, as seen in cohabitation among religiously conservative adults and rising levels of non‐marital childbearing among college educated women (Cherlin, 2021; Harris, 2021). Our findings reflect the challenges reshaping the institution of marriage in the early 21st century.…”

“…Rapid transitions into cohabitation are associated with lower odds of marriage (Sassler et al, 2018), perhaps because those who defer shared living have more time to assess their relationship quality and compatibility. Qualitative research has found that discussions of marriage become more frequent after about a year to a year and a half of shared living, suggesting the development of a new “courtship script” for cohabitors (Harris, 2021; Lamont, 2020; Sassler, 2004). Others have found that cohabitors' ages when they move in together explains union outcomes such as divorce (Kuperberg, 2014); more mature, economically established cohabitors may be better prepared to move a relationship forward.…”

African American Women’s Marital Attitudes: A Qualitative Study on Never Married Women

“…One study found a link between children's mental and physical health, as evidenced by the behaviors of married parents being more likely to engage in positive parenting behaviors: breastfeeding, monitoring, supervising, and building social capital to benefit children's biospsychosocial and emotional functioning compared to non-married parents (Harknett, 2009). Like other empirical studies in this area (e.g., Harris, 2020;Van Eeden-Moorefield et al, 2007), participants suggested marriage provided women with emotional and financial security and companionship and provided children with psychosocial structures, financial stability, and resources available from parent's combined social capital. Women viewed this as an advantage and desired getting married for themselves and for their future and existing children.…”

Transition into marriage: A test of relational uncertainty, turbulence, dyadic synchrony, and cohabitation in newlyweds

“…Premarital cohabiters may face relational stress when competing visions for the future, especially regarding commitment and relationship trajectory, are not discussed (Steuber et al, 2014). Couples may “slide” into cohabitation without discussing what the transition means to the relationship (Harris, 2021; Priem & Surra, 2012). As such, these couples become susceptible to inertia, wherein they continue to go through the relational development stages of engagement and marriage, because the costs of leaving the relationship are too high rather than because they are committed to the relationship long term (Brown & Booth, 1996; Owen et al, 2013).…”