SC2205 Tutorial 3

Against Cohabitation
1. State as social agent which mainly has public policies that are pro-family for family
formation
a. Counter: Family is just a social construct definition of family should change
b. Vs. fundamental values (incest)
Marriage - Relationship between two people of opposite sexes that adheres to legal, moral,
social rules, a social institution that rests upon common values and shared expectations for
appropriate behavior within the partnership.
Problem:
-

Kindergarten, childcare, maternity leave, Housing

Legal separation and divorce
Function of cohabitation does not fulfil

2. Cohabitation has negative implication on children born out of wedlock

a. cohabitating unions tend to weaken the institution of marriage and pose clear
and present dangers to women and children
b. Greater societal; acceptance of marriage compared to ambivalence about
cohabitation (as a desirable adult relationship for rearing children)
-

Children born to unmarried couples have a higher risk of experience their parentss
separation
The ties that bind fathers to their children may also be weaker in cohabiting vs marital
relationships
After separation, children whose parents never married tend to see their fathers less
often and are less likely to be financially supported by their fathers.

3. Marriage unlike cohabitation is definitive it is the giving of our all to another human,
stepping up and declaring it to the community around us
The commitment to marriage is what establishes a lifetime together
4. Cohabitation: Lacks a widely recognized social blueprint for appropriate behavior of
cohabitors
Society enforces and upholds appropriate marital behavior both formally and informally
Societal pressures? Societys disapproval?

Cohabitation increases possibility of pre-marital sex and children born out of wedlock

Note: some people do not see cohabitation with any less commitment than marriage
Marriage enforces commitment spoils the ideal of relationship? Can trust be enforced?

Cohabitation threatens institution of marriage; focuses on self instead of family. Marriage

brings out more altruistic values

FOR COHABITATION arguments:

1. Cohabitation as a form of dating process engage in it before marriage, its okay; foster
greater mutual understanding. As long as they intend to get married, its acceptable.
Theres an end in mind. In SG context; different in more liberal societies like US.
2. Encourages social integration (societal level) less expectations in cohabitation eg diff
race, get to know, less social stigma.
3. Cohabitation as a litmus test to see reliability of living together marriage in future put
in less commitment (whats the point of cohabiting when you put in less?) in
cohabitation. Gendered division. Symbolic Interactionism focus on meanings diff
meanings men and women attribute to marriage.

In soci,
1) Multi-level (eg SI Theory)
2) Structure vs Agency

Stigma of Cohabitation vs Inter-racial marriage cohabitation > inter-racial marriage > cohabit
with diff race partner (double stigma)

Whos to say cohabitation neglects family values? Marriage destroyed by cohabitation? Do we

condemn one form? Can still go through marital vows in cohabitation? Cohabitation
disadvantaging female (gendered assumptions) more? Stigmatization by state policy
justifiable? What about single parents?