Constructing a sense of commitment in ‘Living Apart Together’ (LAT) relationships: Interpretive agency and individualization

Abstract

LAT (Living Apart Together) relationships involve two people in a long-term intimate relationship who choose to live in separate households. Due to their tendency to lack structural commitments and rely on emotional bonds, LAT relationships can be viewed as a manifestation of individualization. Despite the increasing social acceptability of non-traditional partnerships, in many ways LAT relationships are still seen as deviant (and lacking commitment) by outsiders. This article draws on interpretive analyses of interviews with 28 LAT couples in two Canadian cities to explore how participants exercise agency and construct a sense of commitment in their relationships under these conditions (e.g. responding to generalized and particular others). In general, the LAT couples in this study described their commitments as strong, and as rooted in sexual fidelity, mutual exchanges of support, affection, with a long-term orientation, a willingness to work through difficulties and a shared history. Some ambivalence in discussing commitment can be explained with reference to participants’ strong desire to maintain independence within the relationship. This study represents one of the first in-depth examinations of LAT relationships undertaken in Canada.

Ambivalence and Living Apart Together in Later Life: A Critical Research Proposal

“…“It sounds nuts,” said one of Talbott's respondents (1998, p. 446) “for an old lady to have a boyfriend” (see also Benson, ; Benson & Coleman, ; Brothers, ; Carr, ; for Great Britain, see Coulter & Hu, ; Haskey, ). Similarly, LAT partners in a qualitative Canadian study (Kobayashi, Funk, & Khan, ) struggled to find a good term for their partner, disliking the terms boyfriend or girlfriend because of their failure to reflect the strength of their relationship.…”

“…Waiting to cohabit while in a LAT relationship creates its own contradictions, and couples must negotiate the ambivalence of their goal to live together with their current realities. Older persons too may be reluctant to engage openly in nonnormative romantic relationships such as LAT, but they are more likely to keep them secret or provide justifications for them (Koren & Eisikovits, ; Kobayashi et al, ) than to be deterred from LAT altogether. Here, the ambivalence created by engaging in a relationship that is not socially accepted is managed through accounts and secrecy.…”

“…In a U.S. study (Brothers, ) even sexually active older LAT couples viewed sex as a less significant component of their relationship than they did when in marriages earlier in their lives. The assumption of greater freedom coupled with monogamy between couples who do not live together requires an added degree of trust—another paradoxical element of LAT (Kobayashi et al, ).…”

“…Choice or agency refers to acting on one's own behalf in the context of available alternatives, that is, agency‐within‐structure (Connidis, , ; Settersten, ). LAT partners who defend their choice to LAT rather than marry because of their emotional commitment or financial, parental, or legal situations were described in a Canadian study as displaying interpretive agency (Kobayashi et al, ). Unveiling the fact that some women enter into LAT relationships because they feel constrained or vulnerable rather than doing so as a consequence of reflexive and strategic choices (Duncan, ) does not negate the fact that they have chosen to LAT as their best available alternative.…”

“…Circumstances that threaten the balance of intimacy and independence, such as the declining health of a partner, are likely to heighten ambivalence in LLAT relationships (see Connidis, ). Indeed, LAT partners themselves express ambivalence about the impact that future care needs may have on their relationship (Kobayashi et al, ). What happens if a partner's situation changes and more extensive support is needed?…”