Skip to main content

Parent Trap? No, Cohabitation Trap!

And here I thought people were wising up to the fact that living together in sin before marriage wasn't leading to human fulfillment and bliss, and then to come across Mr. Johnston'e piece:

The Co-Habitation Trap

  • GEORGE SIM JOHNSTON
There's no such thing as a trial marriage.
co-habitationRecently, a college classmate told me that her 25-year-old son has a girlfriend about whom he can't make up his mind.  The couple have been going together for two years.  He is serious about the girl, thinks she'd make a good wife, but tells his mother that he's not sure about taking the plunge.  Should he propose?  Should he take more time to think about it?  Maybe date other girls to gain perspective?  The son is at a loss.
My friend is generally a sensible person, and she gave her son what she thinks is good advice: why not move in with her and see how it goes?  In other words, do a trial marriage.  If the sharing of bed and board goes smoothly, then tie the knot.  If it doesn't, you can go your separate ways and will have been spared what nobody wants: a broken marriage.
My friend unfortunately was steering her son into what might be called the "co-habitation trap."  It so happens — contrary to widespread belief — that the divorce rate among couples who live together before marriage is notably higher than the normal divorce rate — up to 40 percent higher, depending on which study you look at.
There are variations within this disquieting statistic.  Couples who get engaged before moving in together do better than couples who don't.  If it's the woman's first and only live-in situation, the divorce rate is lower.  Brief cohabitators are more likely to stay married than longer-term ones.  Whatever the nuances, however, all these categories produce higher divorce rates than that for couples who don't live together before marriage.
Why is this?  It seems counter-intuitive.  A young woman might say to her friends, "I wouldn't dream of marrying a man until first living with him for a couple of years."  And her friends would nod sagely.  It makes a certain kind of sense: take a test drive before committing to a model.
But this scenario doesn't always work in real life.  Years ago, a friend of mine moved in with his girlfriend.  They shared a loft in SoHo and seemed to have a marvelous time being a young Manhattan couple.  After two years, they married.  A year later, the marriage cracked up bitterly.  I said to him one day, "What happened?  The two of you seemed great together."  "I don't know," he replied.  "It's as though all of a sudden all the wrong buttons were pushed."
The point is that there's no such thing as a trial marriage.  As Barbara Dafoe Whitehead puts it, "Living together is not to marriage as spring training is to the baseball season."
Here are some problems with cohabitation:
  • When a couple move in together, they seldom ask the sort of questions one ought to ask about a partner with whom one is going to spend the rest of one's life.  Do I really share this person's values?  Do I want my children to have this person's values?  The worst scenario is sliding into cohabitation and then sliding into marriage.  Decide, don't slide, as the saying goes.
  • It has been well observed that in a good marriage, whenever a wife or husband uses the pronoun "I" he or she also means "we."  But when a cohabiting person uses the pronoun "I", he or she often means "I."  The couple have separate names, separate bank accounts; there's an implicit agreement that either can back out of the relationship.  In brief, they are rehearsing a low-intensity commitment.  But marriage involves a high-intensity commitment.
  • Besides, no happily married couple have ever looked at one another, slapped their foreheads, and exclaimed, "If only we had started having sex six months earlier!"
  • Sex can get in the way of the prudential judgments one should make about the person one is going to marry.  Sex and lucid judgment don't always go together, to say the least.  Sex releases hormones like oxytocin, which, among other things, act like a bonding agent, even when the couple in reality may not be suited to one another.  It is much harder to break up a bad relationship when sex is going on.  Abstaining couples, on the other hand, tend to look at one another with greater clarity.  The emotional growth of their relationship is not short-circuited by an act that presumes more commitment than is the case.
  • Men and women go into cohabitation with very different assumptions and expectations.  A woman will tend to regard living together as a dress rehearsal for marriage, while her partner has much looser ideas about the arrangement.  She will typically take less time than he does deciding in favor of marriage.  In fact, he's happy to postpone the decision for as long as possible.  This can lead to scenes.  She doesn't even have to utter the word "marriage" to make him defensive.  All she has to say is something like, "I don't see where this relationship is going," to set him off.  "You're putting pressure on me!"  "Things are fine the way they are!"  "I don't want to be pushed into anything!"  And so forth.
"We suspect, rightly," James Q. Wilson writes in The Marriage Problem, "that marriage differs from cohabitation.  Cohabitation means that two people agree to live together, sharing rooms, meals, and sex.  Marriage means that two people promise to live together until they die, sharing rooms, meals, sex, and a permanent obligation to care for one's spouse.  The promise is at the heart of the matter."
It's not easy to abstain from sex prior to marriage.  Especially when a couple are already engaged.  But to reserve sex for marriage is to affirm its meaning and ultimately strengthen the bond of marriage.  Sex is the consummation of a solemn promise; it doesn't work so well without it.
Besides, no happily married couple have ever looked at one another, slapped their foreheads, and exclaimed, "If only we had started having sex six months earlier!"  Instead, they can share a fond memory of waiting for the starting gun to go off.
dividertop

Acknowledgement

johnstonGeorge Sim Johnston. "The Co-Habitation Trap." The Catholic Thing (August 1, 2015).
Reprinted by permission of The Catholic Thing.

The Author

johnstonGeorge Sim Johnston is a writer living in New York City. He graduated from Harvard with a B. A. in English literature and was an investment banker with Salomon Brothers in the seventies and early eighties. Since then he has been a free-lance writer, publishing with The Wall Street Journal, Harper's, Commentary, Harvard Business Review, National Catholic Register, World Catholic Report, and other publications. He is a three-time winner of the Journalism Award from the Catholic Press Association. He teaches marriage preparation and CCD for the Archdiocese of New York and is the author of Did Darwin Get it Right?: Catholics and the Theory of Evolution.
Copyright © 2015 The Catholic Thing

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Dancing With Mr. D: Grooming the Little Children

A former pro-transgender activist said she regretted her previous work in pro-transgender activism, adding she felt she was "indoctrinated" on gender ideology in an interview with  Fox News Digital.  "I started to realize that what I had been doing at my job at the LGBT Center, it was grooming," Kay Yang, a former employee of a location in New York, said. Grooming in this context means "to get into readiness for a specific objective." Kay works as a 'deprogrammer' to help parents and children who have been 'indoctrinated' by the 'cult-like' transgender agenda. Yang herself previously went by they/them and worked as a 'trans educator' in schools for years.  Listen to her testimony.    

Homosexual Marriage

The urgency of the issue of gay marriage at this time and the compelling arguments raised against it here, make this paper an important resource: Answering Advocates of Gay Marriage KATHERINE YOUNG AND PAUL NATHANSON Claim 1 : Marriage is an institution designed to foster the love between two people. Gay people can love each other just as straight people can. Ergo, marriage should be open to gay people. Claim 2 : Not all straight couples have children, but no one argues that their marriages are unacceptable Claim 3 : Some gay couples do have children and therefore need marriage to provide the appropriate context. Claim 4 : Marriage and the family are always changing anyway, so why not allow this change? Claim 5 : Marriage and the family have already changed, so why not acknowledge the reality? Claim 6 : Children would be no worse off with happily married gay parents than they are with unhappily married straight ones. Claim 7 : Given global overpopulation, why w...

This video of a young boy twerking at Pride has homophobes outraged | Gay Star News

DANCING WITH MR. D:   This video of a young boy twerking at Pride has homophobes outraged | Gay Star News : 'via Blog this'

On the Contemporary U.S. Scene

M ichael Flynn made a lot of enemies inside the government during his career. When he exposed himself as vulnerable these pounced. How?? Anonymous and possibly illegal leaks of private conversations with a foreign national. Now, we aren't supposed to spy on Americans without probable cause, nor disclose the results of our spying in the pages of the  Washington Post   because it suits a partisan or personal agenda (overturning the results of an election). Current and former national security officials used their position, their sources, and their methods to destroy a political enemy. Why aren’t all Americans upset by this? Mr. Flynn is not the only recent occurrence of such. The  New York Times reports that civil servants at the EPA lobbied Congress to reject Donald Trump's nominee to run the agency because Pruitt was critical of the way the EPA was run during the Obama years.  Traditionally, civil servants follow the direction of the political ap...

Oremus

Catholic World News  - October 23, 2015  The Synod of Bishops spent Friday, October 23, discussing a proposed final statement, which will come up for a vote, paragraph by paragraph, on Saturday. The statement was presented to the bishops on Thursday evening, with Cardinal Peter Erdo, the relator general of the Synod, introducing the text. Because the statement was available only in Italian, some Synod participant were unable to read it, and there was an angry outcry when they were told-- by Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, the secretary-general of the Synod-- that no copies of the sensitive document could be taken out of the Synod Hall. Eventually Cardinal Baldiserri relented, and allowed bishops to take the text home, but insisted that they could not show the document to outside translators. For a summary:

The Body of Christ and the City of Men

      The “Statement of Principles” issued by select Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives on June 18, disapproving of Bishops in the United States for allegedly “politicizing the Eucharist” is an example of deceitful equivocation. Essentially, the Statement maintains that the Bishops should not “politicize” the Eucharist. On this the insight of Flannery O’Connor proves enlightening: Those whose lives are not ordered by, around, and toward the Eucharist, therefore, are those whose lives are defined by some love other than love of the Christ who is present there. Rather, their lives are ordered by the earthly city, manifest in this case, by, variously, partisan political identity or individual, radially sovereign conscience. This applies across the American political spectrum, to those who deny human dignity of the unborn, the immigrant, and the person on death row. In Catholic teaching the Eucharist creates St. Augustine’s City of God, the definit...

Enlightenment thinking and "the Spirit of Vatican II"

Present in an analysis of the Enlightenment are the three themes which played an integral part in the disintegration of the liturgy: the denial of the transcendent, the resulting apostasy, and the exaltation of the community. That the movement was hostile to revealed Christianity is beyond debate. At bottom, the Enlightenment was hostile to Christian revelation for its teaching that salvation comes through Jesus Christ alone. In its stead, the Philosophes substituted a rational religion which emphasized the universal moral law shared by all men by virtue of their reason, not what they regarded as the untrustworthy historicity of the life message of Jesus. They saw this rational religion as a refining of, not a repudiation of Christian moral teaching. For example, the Mass, which celebrates the revelation that Christ’s sacrificial death reconciles us to the Father and each other, making present to the believer the same sacrifice of the Cross, was reduced to the mere celebration ...

Bishop Barron on Martin Luther

Bishop Robert Barron, in his June 13   article   titled "Looking at Luther With Fresh Eyes," describes Martin Luther as "a mystic of grace, someone who had fallen completely in love." Fr. describes Luther as the "undisputed father of the Reformation" and as "cantankerous, pious, very funny, shockingly anti-Semitic, deeply insightful and utterly exasperating." While admiring of Luther, Fr. adds: "I disagree with lots and lots of his ideas," without clarifications. Barron summarizes: "For at the core of Luther's life and theology was an overwhelming experience of grace. After years of trying in vain to please God through heroic moral and spiritual effort, Luther realized that, despite his unworthiness, he was loved by a God who had died to save him," adding, "Luther was an ecstatic, and the religious movement he launched [Protestantism] was 'a love affair.'" Was Dr. Luther in love with God...

Libido Redux: The Pill Circa 2014

If I were a female, and I am not, but if I were, and were Catholic, I would take seriously this read  concerning what happens when the rights of God are violated. I have written of these violations before, here . Let us pray that this snare of the prince of this world may not celebrate the 60th birthday of "the pill."

Libido Redux: California's Proposition 60

T he Catholic Church, founded by Jesus Christ, remains the great exception to the sexual revolution.  Facilitated technologically by the oral contraceptive and culturally by rapid secularization, this revolution successfully separated sex from babies, and, in short order, sex from marriage, sex from love, and even love from marriage, if love is understood to have a sacrificial, enduring character (think “no –fault” divorce). The sexual revolution has crushed everything in its path, including most, (not ALL) Christian churches in the West, which it rendered both impotent and sterile.  The Catholic Church has been the lone institutional holdout, earning for itself puzzlement from her friends and ferocious hostility from enemies.  Catholic teaching has insisted that both natural reason and biblical revelation teach that sex, love, marriage and children all belong together in the complementarity of men and women made in the image and likeness of God.  For both h...