Cohabitation and the Law

178

205

Using 1994 International Social Survey Program (ISSP) data, we examine the effect that cohabitation versus marriage has on couples' income organization approaches in Sweden and the United States, two legally and normatively different contexts. Previous research on this topic has focused almost exclusively on married couples, so our inclusion of both married and cohabiting couples helps fill a gap in the literature. The effects of ever having been divorced, socioeconomic homogamy, and traditional gender ideology also are explored. Type of relationship and ever having been divorced are the only variables that predict income organization approach in both countries, suggesting that relationship experiences are more important than socioeconomic or ideological factors.

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cohabiting and Married Couples' Income Organization: Approaches in Sweden and the United States

Heimdal

Houseknecht

2003

178

205

“…This security is based, in part, on exchanging and sharing various forms of property. Modern family law regulates the terms for the establishment, continuation, and termination of economic exchanges for formal, as well as common law, marriage (Glendon, 1989; Seff, 1995). Similar to other types of laws, these marriage laws are a mechanism of social control that shape the distribution of power and privilege within a society by providing protection to certain status groups and penalizing others for violating social norms.…”

Section: Marriage and Wealth Accumulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Marital History Matter? Marital Status and Wealth Outcomes Among Preretirement Adults

Wilmoth

Koso

2002

183

199

ࡗ Does Marital History Matter? Marital Status and Wealth Outcomes Among Preretirement Adults Data from the 1992 Health and Retirement Survey are used to specify ordinary least squares (OLS) regression models predicting wealth. Separate models are estimated for men and women. The results indicate that individuals who are not continuously married have significantly lower wealth than those who remain married throughout the life course. Remarriage offsets the negative effect of a marital dissolution. There are significant gender differences in these effects. The results demonstrate that accounting for the sequence of marital events provides a detailed picture of the life paths that lead to wealth heterogeneity among the older population.

“…Prior to the 19th century, couples who lived together as a more or less permanent alternative to marriage engaged in what is known as common‐law marriage (the origins of which may be traced to English common law; Crawley, 1998; Seff, 1995), in which a heterosexual couple lived as husband and wife and presented themselves to others as if legally married (Seff). In the United States, this form of marriage was practiced largely on the unsettled western frontier, because many couples desirous of marriage were too geographically distant from where marriage licenses could be obtained, as well as from an individual who had the authority to conduct a marriage ceremony (Wiersma, 1983; Worsnop, 1992).…”

Section: Comparisons To Other Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This lack of legal recognition was particularly problematic for cohabiting women when their unions dissolved and they and their partners disagreed on matters pertaining to property division and support (popularly referred to as palimony ; see Marvin v. Marvin and Hewitt v. Hewitt as discussed by Ettelbrick, 2001; Mitchelson, 1980). More recently, courts have felt compelled to resolve such disputes (see Renshaw v. Heckler and Watts v. Watts as discussed by Kingdom, 1990; Wisensale & Heckart, 1993), and have more frequently ruled that cohabiting partners have some rights (Seff, 1995). Thus when Berkeley, California in 1984 became the first city to enact an ordinance, it responded to this need by extending eligibility to both heterosexual and homosexual couples.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Exploratory Investigation of Heterosexual Licensed Domestic Partners

Willetts

2003

In‐depth telephone interviews were conducted in four cities in an exploratory study of 23 licensed cohabitors to determine why they have chosen to legitimize their intimate unions through domestic partnership ordinances, rather than through legal marriage. The cohabitors in this sample are pursuing these licensed partnerships to obtain an economic benefit (e.g., health insurance coverage for a partner); as a substitute for legal remarriage; to legitimize their unions in a way other than through legal marriage; or as an ideological alternative to legal marriage. Regardless of motivations to pursue domestic partnership certificates, these respondents are divided over whether they should have the same rights and responsibilities as the married.