Cohabitation and Marriage in Sweden-Does Family form Matter?

Björnberg, Ulla

doi:10.1093/lawfam/15.3.350

Cited by 18 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Increasingly partnerships in Western societies begin as cohabitation rather than direct marriage (Sobotka and Toulemon 2008), but still there are few lifelong cohabitations, even in the Nordic context (Bernhardt 2002;Heuveline and Timberlake 2004). Marriage and cohabitation seems to increasingly be independently valued, suggesting that each may serve different purposes over the family life-course (Björnberg 2001;Wiik, Bernhardt, and Noack 2009). Finally, the timing and incidence of marriage relative to childbearing has also changed over the period.…”

Section: Cohort Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Love, marriage, then the baby carriage? Marriage timing and childbearing in Sweden

Holland¹

2013

DemRes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Cohort Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Love, marriage, then the baby carriage? Marriage timing and childbearing in Sweden

Holland¹

2013

DemRes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In "Divorcing children: roles for parents and the state," Richards (1994: 249) observes "that parental divorce often damages the life chances of children and the State could, and should, act more firmly to head off some of this damage." Reflecting on the Swedish case, Bjornberg (2001) observes that laws do not seek to protect "The Family," but 22 to protect the interest of the weaker parts within families, especially the children.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-National Comparisons

2001

Health Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prevalence of low income for children, especially for children in lone-parent families, varies considerably across countries. This paper considers five sets of hypotheses that may be relevant to the cross-national variability of child poverty. The tentative conclusion from this analysis in 20 countries is that reducing child poverty, and in lone-parent families in particular, requires several approaches. Provisions that would discourage teenage childbearing would have their importance, as would opportunities for lone mothers to work. More important is the generosity of social expenditure applying to individuals and especially to families. The present analysis also shows the advantages of encouraging joint custody, along with special provisions for lone parents, and child support through advance maintenance payments.Keywords: child poverty, lone parent, social assistance, custodyThe prevalence of low income among children, especially for children living in lone-parent families, varies considerably across countries. Many authors have pondered over the differences showing that the rates of low income for children in lone-parent families are under 10 percent in countries like Belgium, Finland, and Sweden, while the rates are over 40 percent in Australia, Austria, Canada, Germany, United Kingdom, and the United States. Several questions have been analysed in seeking to explain these differences: the extent to which mothers are considered 3 to be employable (Baker, 1996;Gornick et al., 1996;Millar, 1996;Lewis, 1993), the relative economic status of women (Kilkey and Bradshaw, 1999;Solera, 1998;Bianchi, 1996), the generosity of social assistance provisions (Phipps, 1999(Phipps, , 2001Kenworthy, 1998;Smeeding et al., 1997;Baker, 1996), or the extent of compliance to support obligations from non-resident parents (Kunz et al., 2001;Garfinkel et al., 1998). Many studies focus on lone motherhood rather than on children in lone-parent families (e.g. Kiernan et al., 1998).The purpose of this paper is to compare the relative importance of various possible factors in understanding the variation in these child poverty outcomes. While other studies make reference to the demographics (Nichols-Casebolt and Krysik, 1995;Rainwater and Smeeding, 1995;Gornick and Pavetti, 1990), we will systematically consider the demographics associated with the prevalence of lone parenthood, the teenage fertility rate or the percent male in loneparent families. After considering the average per capita income, the next second set of variables considers the generosity of social transfers, and the transfers toward families in particular. The next set of considerations relates to women's labour market status, particularly for lone parents.These explanatory factors are compared to three specific policy orientations: the extent of state involvement in ensuring child support, the extent of differential state support for lone parents, and the extent of joint custody. Theoretical context 4The broad theoretical context is that of the relative prio...

show abstract

“…On average, cohabiting relationships in Sweden last nearly as long as marriages, and they even display similar fertility patterns (Bracher and Santow 1998). However, researchers such as Björnberg (2001) argue that, even in Sweden, cohabiting couples are indeed very heterogeneous; and that, despite the relative importance of this arrangement in society, cohabitation has not replaced marriage as an institution. Björnberg portrays cohabitation among young people as a practical solution in romantic relationships of uncertain duration, or in relationships in a "trial phase," and concludes that many of these unions eventually convert into marriage or separation.…”

Section: Theoretical Perspectives: Marital Status Gender and Child mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to researchers such as Lesthaeghe and Surkyn (1988), Thomson and Colella (1992), Björnberg (2001), Martin and Théry (2001), Ostner (2001), Liefbroer and Dourleijn (2006), and Pasquini and Samoggia (2007), cohabiting individuals are less likely than married people to adhere to traditional ideas about gender roles, because they tend to assign more value to individual freedom within the partnership, basing their bond on egalitarian individualism rather than on the joint utility maximisation of married couples. Consensual unions are based on more individualised lifestyles, which reflect both a lower degree of commitment to their families, and a lower tolerance for poorly functioning relationships; while married men and women tend to embrace more traditional views on the family, as well as a gendered division of labour (Björnberg 2001). All in all, it is plausible to expect that men living in consensual unions will display more egalitarian gender behaviour, and that they have a greater willingness than married men to share equally in daily domestic and child care activities.…”

Section: Theoretical Perspectives: Marital Status Gender and Child mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The argument is based on the assumption that cohabiters tend to assign more value to egalitarian individualism, personal autonomy, and equity (Lesthaeghe and Surkin 1988, Thomson and Colella 1992, Brines and Joyner 1999, Björnberg 2001; attitudes which may influence the partner's contribution to the household. This assumption is also used to explain the short-lived nature of cohabitation, and the lower rate of marital success among couples who previously cohabited (Teachman and Polonko 1990, Murphy 2000, Smock and Manning 2004.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation