The Latin American Cohabitation Boom, 1970–2007

Abstract

The article describes the rise of unmarried cohabitation in Latin American countries during the last 30 years of the twentieth century, both at the national and regional levels. It documents that this major increase occurred in regions with and without traditional forms of cohabitation alike. In addition, the striking degree of catching up of cohabitation among the better‐educated population segments is illustrated. The connections between these trends and economic (periods of high inflation) and cultural (reduction of stigmas in ethical domains) factors are discussed. The conclusion is that the periods of inflation and hyperinflation may have been general catalysts, but no clear indications of correlation were found between such economic factors and the rise in cohabitation. The shift toward more tolerance for hitherto stigmatized forms of conduct (e.g., homosexuality, euthanasia, abortion, singleparent household) is in line with the rise of cohabitation in regions of Argentina, Chile, and Brazil where cohabitation used to be uncommon. Further rises in cohabitation during the first decade of the twenty‐first century are expected in a number of countries (e.g., mexico) despite conditions of much lower inflation.

Continuity and change of cohabitation in Mexico

“…It also became habitual in cities and highly developed regions of the country. The diffusion of cohabitation to higher status groups and urbanized settings fuels debate on whether it has taken on a new form related to changing values predicted by the second demographic transition (Esteve, Lesthaeghe, and López-Gay 2012;Quilodrán 2003) or rather to increasing economic uncertainty among all segments of the population (Solís and Ferraris 2014;García and Rojas 2004).…”

“…Discussions of the possible relevance of increased cohabitation in Mexico for second demographic transition theory have focused almost exclusively on its overall incidence and apparent spread to the highly educated (Esteve, Lesthaeghe, and López-Gay 2012;Quilodrán 2003), but if it is evolving from a stepping stone to marriage into more of a substitute to marriage or a trial marriage, that is clearly relevant for assessing the validity of second demographic transition theory, which maintains not only that cohabitation is becoming more common but also that it has begun to replace (that is, substitute for) marriage. We address precisely this issue by examining rates of transition from cohabitation to marriage and dissolution (and, correspondingly, rates of remaining in a cohabiting union) for different cohorts.…”

“…Cohabitation grew rapidly in many Latin American countries during the 1990s, but only moderately in Mexico, leading some to predict Mexico would catch up subsequently (Esteve, Lesthaeghe, and López-Gay 2012). The magnitude of the increase in the 2000s exceeded all expectations: nowadays, one third of young Mexican women cohabit.…”

Posūkis link naujo šeimos kūrimo ir gimstamumo modelio

“…Lotynų Amerikoje nuo XX a. aštuntojo dešimtmečio didėjo kohabitacijos rodikliai, kurie ypač išaugo įžengus į XXI a., o 2013 m. duomenimis, kohabitacijos rodiklių augimas ypač intensyvus 25-29 metų amžiaus moterų grupėje, taip pat stebimi ir kiti ADP raiškos bruožai: gimdymų atidė-jimas vyresniam amžiui, kuris heterogeniškas išsilavinimo, klasės ir rasės aspektu kaip ir santuokos atidėjimas vėlesniam amžiui (Esteve et al 2012;Esteve et al 2013). Lotynų Amerikoje kartu su kohabitacijos plitimo požy-miais pastebėti ir vertybiniai pokyčiai: liberalizmo, sekuliarizacijos, emancipacijos, ryškesnių egalitarinių lyčių santykių ir nekonformistinio, individualistinio elgesio plėtra (Esteve et al 2012).…”

“…Lotynų Amerikoje kartu su kohabitacijos plitimo požy-miais pastebėti ir vertybiniai pokyčiai: liberalizmo, sekuliarizacijos, emancipacijos, ryškesnių egalitarinių lyčių santykių ir nekonformistinio, individualistinio elgesio plėtra (Esteve et al 2012). Tiek paplitusi naujoji elgsena, tiek vertybiniai pokyčiai atspindi ADP teorijoje iškeltas idėjas, nors, kaip ir jau aptartais atvejais, kontekstinių ypatybių neišvengiama.…”