Will living together first screw up your marriage?

[crysede]

Alright, I know what you're thinking, here's yet another newbie question we've probably already discussed a million times on this board - but just give me a chance, I think this study might be a topic that actually hasn't been discussed yet! I just hope this isn't too serious a topic to inflict on you guys on a Friday night.

I read a sociology study a few years ago, and the results have always bothered me. The study looked at a group of several hundred recently married couples, in an attempt to relate the number of these marriages that had ended in divorce to whether or not the couple had lived together prior to getting married. The assumption was that couples who lived together first, having had a chance to ‘test out married life' as it were, would be much more likely to stay married.

Now it was no surprise that many of the couples were divorced within a few years of getting married, but what was surprising was that, those who had lived together first, were actually more than twice as likely to have divorced! The authors of the study suggested that, it was likely that people who would choose to live together prior to getting married, are not as committed to the idea of marriage, and therefore they are more likely to bail out when the going gets tough.

What do you think? Are people who would choose to live together, less likely to be committed to their relationship? Are there any people here on lit who've tried living together first and then married? If so, do you think it had a good or bad effect (if any) on the resulting marriage?

 

[sabbathstorm]

I've lived with my partner for almost eight years now and we really have no intention of getting married. We're both very committed to each other and really don't see the point in getting a piece of paper as "proof" of that commitment. We're quite content with the way things are and consider ourselves a married couple anyway.

 

[Allexus_TN]

Personal experience?

I lived with my husband for nearly a year before we married. This May we will celebrate 5 years. Sure, there have been bumps along the way, but I think that's true with most relationships...married or not. I think for us, it was best. We saw each other's living habits and what it was like to be together constantly on some days. It was better to know that before we married, so there were no surprises. I'm glad we did it.

 

[Wiggles]

What I don't understand is how someone could blindly agree to spend their entire life with someone, when they don't even know if they could live with each other.

Getting married without living together first is ubelievable, to me.

But the studies say it's true, who am I to disagree?

 

[Mischka]

Are there any people here on lit who've tried living together first and then married? If so, do you think it had a good or bad effect (if any) on the resulting marriage?

Mr. Mischka and I disobeyed all the "marriage success" theories. We slept together on our first date. We pretty much lived at each other's places right away. We started officially living together because we're extraordinarily compatible roommates, and it saved the expense of maintaining two places. We lived together for three years before we got married.

Everyone kept telling us that marriage would change our relationship, and it did. Everyone else started treating us as more of a "real" couple. There has been no discernible difference in how we treat each other, however.

I read those same statistics back when we were dating, but they never seemed to apply to our situation. Fear of commitment was never an issue; we just were too busy with other things - and too young - to want to get married right away. We're both terribly pragmatic people. Marriage was never a search for a perfect mate. We've been best friends since we met, and to us marriage is simply an expression of our commitment to each other. I really like and love Mr. Mischka, and I know he feels the same about me. *shrugs* Works for us.

 

[cherrylips_au]

I think it depends more on how well you know the other person. I've been with my husband for 12 yrs now, married 7 and lived together for 2 years before that. We didn't have many surprises as we had gotten to know each other really well and I guess weren't unrealistic with our expectations.

 

[Weevil]

Let's hope not at any rate.

 

[Svedish_Chef]

Let's hope not at any rate.

My thought exactly.

Re your study... did you happen to factor in just length of time living together in that... married or unmarried its probably the same.

unmarried/together for 8, then married for two

Unmarried not living together 0, married 10 ... still the same numbers.

 

[crysede]

I totally agree, what's a piece of paper got to do with commitment? And it just makes sense to live together for awhile first, to make sure you won't drive each other nuts, before getting married.

I'm still going to stick to my beliefs and live with someone first before any marriage plans will happen, I'm not the sort to just jump in without testing the water first. Which is why this study bothers me so much I guess: it makes it seem like the very things I feel I need to do to have a good long-term relationship, are actually going to lower my chances at having one - and that just sucks!

I'm glad to hear that there are relationships that have benefitted from living together. In fact, looks like that's the norm here. Maybe there are certain people who would take commitment seriously whether or not they were ‘legally' a couple, and others who just use it as a way of getting out of real commitment and would thus never get married anyway?

 

[tigerjen]

my take

I think that if living with a person that you tend to spend
the rest of your life with, before marriage, can be a good
thing.....its a good opp to see beyond the "rose colored
glasses" of romance and see real life......for example,
if he's a slob and leaves everything all over the floor, or if
she takes too long in the bathroom getting ready......plus
each others eating habits (that can tell a lot about a person)
and hygiene.......


my 2 cents

tigerjen

 

[Azwed]

I have heard of this study several times but I have never read the whole study or seen the raw data.

I wouldn't give too much credit to a study without seeing the raw data and finding out who had funded the study. You would be surprised how easy it is to manipulate statistics.

 

[crysede]

My thought exactly.

Re your study... did you happen to factor in just length of time living together in that... married or unmarried its probably the same.

unmarried/together for 8, then married for two

Unmarried not living together 0, married 10 ... still the same numbers.

Good point! The authors did not add the length of time spent living together to the length of time spent married (in fact, they didn't even give this data for individual couples): they just looked at how many of the marriages broke up withing five years of being married.

 

[privy2u]

I wonder if it is actually a question of a successful marriage!
Is the proper question being asked and answered?

My wife and I moved in together almost immediately. After a few years we both had become each others best friends. Our parents and other relatives having spent every hour of their lives in the land of "Oral Roberts" hounded us to marry. Finally we gave in and were married at her parents home. It was a second marriage for both of us! After the witnesses signed the document we handed it to the brides maid who took it promptly to our house and put it in a picture frame behind the picture! I have never seen it again!

On July 10th we will have been together 30 years. Are we still married because we are commited to the institution of marriage, committed to the marriage we have, or are we still best friends.

I think the later. Unless one of my friends does something to me that is absolutely unforgivable we are still friends. My wife and I don't see eye to eye on everything and we do argue, but we have never had a fight!

Well that's my story anyway!


privy

 

[T.H. Oughts]

When I was 18 (I'm 38 now) I was engaged and liveing with a guy. If I had not lived with him first it would have ended in divorce.

When we were dating I didn't care that he went to the pub the nights I was not with him. But when living together he still wanted to go to the pub with his mates (that's fine) BUT he expected me to have a hot meal waiting for him on the table when he got home late eveing. I'm not there to be his mother.

I agree with couples having time out from each other, but not at the expence of one having to look after the other because of it.


My husband of 14 years and I lived together before getting married, it has made made no differance to the marriage realtionship. But I wanted to live together first because of my first experance......

 

[Lost Cause]

I try not to go by the findings of a bunch of eggheads.
My personal experience is; my first marriage was without living together..it lasted six years. It was new at first, but we grew apart in our interests....she also wasn't sexually experienced with anyone but me. That interest bloomed after six years..resulting in the divorce. My second marriage was a live together for about two years....it lasted four more, and ended in a similar fashion as the first. I'm taking the cosmic hint, either way, I'm not the marrying kind! I've lived with every girl since then, never had a problem, no committments, leave when you want. I am happy with this as I don't want to be accountable to anyone as to where I'm going..and when I'll return.
In my experience, marriage is a control protocol. The state registers you, your spouse is given legal title to you. It is the most utter bullshit when someone says that marriage is a committment. It is an enslavement of two people by law, who go their separate ways by law, and who profits?
You can always live commonlaw together if it's legal in your state. Being with any other human being is a committment in itself. Whether you spend a couple of grand to get married...then a couple of grand when you separate, or just live together because you want to be with them is up to you.

 

[meop79]

I don't think it matters....

I think that if the relationship has what it takes commitment honesty love, etc that it will work one way or the other.

Meop79@yahoo.com

 

[ksmybuttons]

I question the relevancy of that data today. What was true even a few years ago isn't true today.

Marriage was a very pragmatic thing for my husband and myself. He needed cheap health insurance, I had it. We wanted to buy a house. We wanted to have someone we trusted to make health care decisions. We wanted to have a child.

We formalized our relationship by marriage to ease the legal ramifications of being a couple and not being married. We did not need the formalized spiritual union as we already had one.

I would like to see the data if it were gathered today. I theorize the picture would be very different.

 

[crysede]

Azwed - I read the study, but they didn't give the raw data, and that bothered me too - I've never really trusted statistics either.

privy and meop - I really like what you've said, that's exactly the kind of relationship I want!

T.H. Oughts - Your first experience describes why I've always thought living together first was a good idea, you cannot know what is like to live with someone unless you actually try living with them.

Lost Cause - Enslavement? I have never been married, so I guess I can't speak from experience here, but that seems rather an extreme term to use - I can't imagine thinking of a husband as a possession.

ksmybuttons - So you think that marriage today has lost the deeper meaning of a few years ago, and is now basically just a pragmatic legal consideration? If I've understood you correctly, then I think you are probably right: marriage does seem to be being recognized for the mere legal formalization it is, rather than something that truly defines a relationship.

So basically, the general lit opinion is screw the eggheads - cool, I can live with that!

 

[privy2u]

wow - some heavy shit here!

I know this is actually a serious topic and I make no light of it or those that have posted. However I would like to clarify my point of view on a few things.

First is when Lost Cause said, "...I don't want to be accountable to anyone as to where I'm going..and when I'll return..." Not as a criticizm of LC in any way, but this is exactly why he isn't the marrying kind. It shouldn't take a marriage license to create a sense of mutual respect for each other. Without that he shouldn't marry and has made the perfect choice for his and others happiness. In my experience.

----------------------------------------

ksmybuttons said, "We formalized our relationship by marriage to ease the legal ramifications of being a couple and not being married. We did not need the formalized spiritual union as we already had one."

meop79 said, "I think that if the relationship has what it takes commitment honesty love, etc that it will work one way or the other."

It sounds to me as though we are all on the same page - It's not the paper that makes what you have worth having - how we describe what we have is as diverse as the sum total of us all!

KEWL

privy

 

[ksmybuttons]

ksmybuttons - So you think that marriage today has lost the deeper meaning of a few years ago, and is now basically just a pragmatic legal consideration? If I've understood you correctly, then I think you are probably right: marriage does seem to be being recognized for the mere legal formalization it is, rather than something that truly defines a relationship.

So basically, the general lit opinion is screw the eggheads - cool, I can live with that!

No, what I was saying is that we did not need marriage for the spiritual, deeper meaning to our relationship. We had already made that connection with each other. My husband and I are not religious people but we are spiritual. The recognition of our spiritual relationship did not need marriage. We did feel the need to marry for legal recognition.

 

[Jacqline]

I feel that couples are not going to love each other any less from living together first....After having been in a long marriage, I feel a bit like I would need to live with that other person first to make sure we are compatible and complimentary to each other. Love, communication, compassion, being a good listener, sense of humor, etc. are important in either case.

Jacqline

 

[meop79]

Bealzubub's Attorney

Ok, but also there can be times when all that is not true some people react verry differently to "Marriage" than living together... and it is sometimes hard to tell if that is true of your partner... I don't think anyone who did that would be a good pick because they aren't being honest with you and probably not even with themselves, but that doesn't mean it isn't a fact and anyway...

You HAVE to admit that this group is a Verry different one from a normal sample group off the street...

That's why I like it here at lit so much, there are alot more honest, open, intelligent people here than average...

Meop79@yahoo.com

 

[crysede]

Well, just to be safe, perhaps I'd better stick to dating people from lit then. Good advice I think meop - and not that hard to take either! And my answer is not quite as flippant as it sounds, I agree with you that the people you meet on lit are very different from whom one would normally meet in life, everything you said is very true. Have I mentioned that I love it here?!

 

[meop79]

you have now!

Meop79@yahoo.com