Examine the Reasons for Changes in the Patterns of Marriage, Cohabitation and Divorce Essay

Examine the evidences for dislodges in the word bes of conjugal union, split up and cohabitation e actuallyplace the past 40 commodious quantify. The patterns of unification, break and cohabitation over the past 40 years has varied considerably. In 1972, over 480,000 spans got married later making this the high schoolest amount of marriages within a year ever since the Second creation War. According to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) this was rectify to the baby boom generation of the 1950s r individuallying the age of marriage. However, after this period, the spot of marriages in England went into compensate.Recently, marriages r apieceed an alin concert- measure low in 2005 when only 244,701 couples got married. Less than half of what it was in 1972. Some heap accuse troupe of rejecting marriage and be no nightlong bo at that placed about it plainly, statistics prove early(a)wise. These statistics grass that lot ar, in fact, delaying marriag e. It is said that plenty closely citizenry testawork forcet splice later in look, most possible after a period of cohabitation. Reasons for this whitethorn be that couples atomic bout 18 being untrusting before making whatever sedate commit workforcets.Proof that yields the marrying later in life idea is that the median(a) age of a bride in 2003 was 29 and exclusively grooms 31 years hoary comp ard with 22 for wowork force and 24 for men in 1971. Specifically, women may extremity to delay marriage for originators such as advancing in their c ber prospects. non only is in that location a spue in the total number of marriages tho also a decline in marriage rates (the number of concourse marrying per 1000 of the population aged 16 and over). Marriage rates argon at their lowest since the 1920s and further plummeting. In 1994, the marriage rate was 11. 4 tho this had declined to 10. by 2004.The male rate declined from 36. 3 in 1994 to 27. 8 in 2004 whilst the female rate declined from 30. 6 to 24. 6. Once more than, surveys fierceness that most nation, whether iodineness, disseverd or cohabitating take over inflict marriage as a desirable life-goal and thitherfore forget engage married eventually especially if they argon having children as they see this as the soil of family life. A nonher change in the pattern of marriage is that two fifths of all marriages atomic number 18 remarriages. These stack atomic number 18 clearly sheep pen to the macrocosm of marriage in contuse of their previous negative experience of it.The reason for this switch off could possibly be imputable to their first marriages, which were empty-shell marriages. This is where there is no revel or intimacy between them, but the marriage persists for the sake of the children until they are old enough. They might and then decide to commence a upstart life, including getting remarried. such options are available to civilization for several(pren ominal) reasons. Changes to the attitude of marriage has ensured that there is little(prenominal) pressure to marry and that there is more relaxdom to choose what type of kin people indigence to live in. The average that every genius ought to get married has greatly weakened.This is panoptic by the decline in brand attached to marriage cohabitation, re master(prenominal)ing single and having children outside of marriage is straight off all regarded as acceptable. Giddens (1993) and Goode (1963) both cope that there is a trend towards adopting Westernised forms of marriage and family structure. They cerebrate that we are slowly moving towards having the innocuous choice of choosing our collaborator, that there is a decline in arrange marriage and an enlarge towards egalitarian marriage and the notion of no sexual experience prior to marriage seems to be changing.Coleman and Salt (1992) also support this get wind as they believe that handed-downistic views are being ch allenged by new idea, new economic roles for women, new laws and family planning. Dennis (19840 also suggests the same idea claiming that modern marriages are fragile and are only held together by emotional ties. He thinks that if these ties fail, then there is little reason for a couple to remain together. Regardless of the simplification in the overall number of people marrying, married couples are s coin bank the main type of social occasionnership for men and women in the UK.In 2005, seven in hug drug families were headed by a married couple. In the terms of separate the legal limit of marriage, this has increased immensely since 1971 due to the change in legislation that had liberalized disunite, made it cheaper and easier to obtain. The Divorce Reform operate of 1971 was the most crucial because prior to 1971, one partner had to succeed evidence that they had been wronged by the significant other (matrimonial offence). Due to the change of the law, it allowed people to carve up on the basis of irretrievable segmentation.In comeition, since 1984, the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act reduced the time limit for come apart for a minimum of 3 years of marriage to only one year. afterward this act, the divorce rate shot up again, as it did in 1971. Now, people were eventually able to legally to end all connections, as previously when divorce was every too expensive or problematic to obtain, separation was very common, which was when a couple decided to live a elbow room from separately other. To go into more detail of the trend of increased divorces, in 1993, the number of divorces peaked(p) at 180,000. By 2000, this figure had travel to 154,000, lthough the years 2001 2004 extradite seen a slow climb up to 167,100.There is presently nearly as many another(prenominal) divorces as there is marriages and if recent trends continues, almost 40% of marriages forget end in divorce. An adequate reason for this increased style of div orcing is that it is no yearner linked with stigma and shame. The British finishing is hugely based on Christian beliefs and one of these beliefs is that marriage is for life (till death do us part). Nevertheless, over the years secularisation and a change in attitudes has emerged and the view that divorce can lead to greater pleasure for the individual is more acceptable.Wilson (1966) agrees with this as he believes that the Christian ideal of lifelong marriage is taken less seriously as less than half of marriages ceremonies are promptly religious and few couple are regular churchgoers. Another view is that people now fox a high standard of marriage and increased expectation. Fletcher (1966) make dos that couples are less likely to put up with doomed empty-shell marriages, thus making divorce more common. However, at the same times, most divorcees remarry, suggesting that they do not reject the institution of marriage but expect more from the relationship.Another reason whic h contributes to the increase of divorce rates is down to women wanting to alter educational and career opportunities. Increase to women employments has ensured for women to be economically and financially independent. So women who were previously stuck in empty-shell marriages because of their inability to support themselves now do not take to. Fletcher greatly agreed with this argument but womens earnings are still less than 755 of mens. many an(prenominal) women are in low paid and part time work, so their opportunities for financial independence are limited.Feminist sociologists note that women expectations of marriage have changed radically over the years. Evidence of this is that 75% of divorce petitions are made by women, indicating dissatisfaction among women with their marriages and their husbands. This can support Thornes and Collards (1979) view that women expect more from marriage than men and the value friendship and emotional cheer more than men do. If the male sp ouse fails to live up to these expectations, women may come up the need to search elsewhere.Lastly, Functionalist sociologists advocate that high divorce rates indicate that marriage is progressively valued and that people are demanding higher standards from their partners. They believe that couples are not refusing to put up with hopeless, empty-shell marriages as people now want emotionally and sexually compatibility, and equality as well as companionship. It is a fact that well-nigh exit even go through unhomogeneous people on the button to search for the one and if they marry every time they equalize a new partner, then they are obviously going to contributing to the emergent divorce rates.Cohabitation is a trend that has been on the rise for the digest decade. The proportion of non-married people cohabiting has risen sharply in the last 20 years from 11% of men and 13% of women in 1986 to 24% and 25% respectively. In 2007, the Office for Nation Statistics (ONS) suggest ed that cohabitating couples are the fastest growing type of family in Britain. For instance, there are around 2. 2 million cohabiting couples with or without children and about a quarter of all unmarried adults to a lower place 60 are now cohabiting retroflex the number in 1986.This specific form of relationship has increased by 65% since 1997. In addition, the ONS data suggested that a tertiary of teenagers in 2007 were destined to cohabit sooner than marry compared with one in cristal of their grandparents. As gathered, the trend is on the rise, nurture a few questions from researchers as to why this is happening. One reason would be that people like to cohabit to test the pissing. Dudoughnut this period, they (the couple) will assess and analyse each other to see if they are well-matched and whether they will be able to live with one another before making any serious commitments.After all, cohabitation on average lasts 5 years, which from then on 60% of cohabitees will th en join in matrimony. Another reason for the increase of cohabitation is that there are a significant number of people who live together whilst in the swear out of divorce. For example, in 2005, 23% of cohabiting men were separated from former partners while 36% were divorced. So granting a person may be married, they have separated and move into another can to live with as person they have met. This will be then considered as a cohabitee.A third reason contributing to the rise of cohabitation is that people are baffled by the cost of marriages. According to Wedding use up UK, the average cost of a traditional wedding in the UK is around ? 11,000. To add to this, some people are putting off by the religious watching of marriage. Britain has over time grown to pop off a secular society. Both these factors will make people refrain from marrying because in their eyes they see it as long as they are happily together, they do not need a ring or a piece of root word to prove anyth ing else. Women do not want to marry as much anymore with increased career opportunities.Most women nip that there is less need to go throw the hassle for the financial protective cover of marriage as they are free to opt for cohabitation. However many argue that the relationship between cohabitation and marriage is not clear cut since for some couples, cohabitation is just a step on the way of getting married, whereas for others it is a permanent utility(a) to marriage. Chester (1985) argues that for most people cohabitation is part of the process of getting married. For example, according to Ernestina Coast (2006) 75% of cohabiting couples say they expect to marry each other.On the other hand, some couples see cohabitation as permanent substitute to marriage. Andre Bejin (1985) argues that cohabitation among some young people represents a advised attempt to create a more personally negotiated and equal relationship than stodgy patriarchal for example Shelton and John (1993) set up that women who cohabit do less raise work than married women This would appeal to women as it relieves them of the worry of balancing both house work and their daily jobs which women of marriages do have to worry about. Many sociologists are now claiming that marital breakdown is the norm of todays society.Beck and Beck-Gernsheim (1995) argue rising divorce rates are the products of a rapidly changing introduction in which the traditional rules, rituals and tradition of love, dally and relationships no longer apply. Whereas Functionalist Robert Chester (1985) insists that even though there are new ship canal of living, the nuclear family will not snuff it out but instead adjust to the new traditions of todays society. Morgan (1996) and Giddens (1991) both similarly argue that divorce may have sensual harm to each individual yet it brings freedom and opportunity to pityingity.Morgan claims that the more divorce and re-marriages increase, the more we find ourselves part of many different families at the same time and this effects who we think we are. Giddens, once again, shadows Morgans views by saying that divorce offers people the feel to reassess who they are. In conclusion, there have many changes in the institution of marriage. Many argue that society will no longer be the same. This is considered to be very realistic as all human actions change over time.